Your description of a training round is exactly what a blank is. If it’s fired and gasses blow out the barrel but there is no projectile, that’s a blank. The only way gasses come out of the barrel of a gun is from gas generated from a primer or gun powder being ignited. I mean come on, that’s exactly how bullets work. The expanding gasses force the bullet out of the barrel.
Nope, you can do it with a revolver, although the one we are talking about here would need to be partially disassembled to do a thorough job. Most revolvers you just swing out the cylinder and you are good to go.
Yep, and he was supposed to be the last safety check. IIRC the armorer didn’t know how many rounds were in the gun either. Just a total failure all around. Getting down to stuff like how a gun would look on camera is just adding excuse after excuse to the simple fact that the armorer fucked up rule number one. No live rounds near your prop guns.
And if I’m thinking right, four rounds in the gun is going to leave an empty chamber to the camera either before or after the gun was cocked. Like I said, I don’t think realism was a goal on this movie set. Apparently, neither was professionalism.
I’m old enough that my first assigned weapon as aircrew on a helicopter was a .38 revolver. Through a lot of my career my assigned weapon was a pistol. It’s easiest to do with a rifle but easily adaptable to other weapons.
I’ve seen movies where the plane the person took off in was different than the plane that landed.
Anybody who notices an empty gun on screen should be sent a thank you letter and a dime to call someone who cares. And yes I know it costs more than a dime.
Baldwin had to rehearse the scene in order to make it look realistic. And it being a rehearsal, it should not have been loaded with any blanks, only prop ammo. In fact, AD Halls erroneously called out “Cold gun,” so that all within earshot were led to believe that the gun was, indeed, empty.
I don’t know where @mordecaiB is getting that information. I am aware that the AD did not ensure that he visually checked every round as he did not recall the armorer spinning the chamber, meaning he only saw 3 or 4 rounds. That doesn’t mean he thought the gun only held 3 or 4 rounds. That means he (probably) glanced down at the gun and saw that all 3 or 4 of the rounds visible at the time were dummies, and (my inference here) deduced, improperly, that if all the rounds he could see were dummies, then the gun must be loaded with dummies.
Let’s be clear. Calling out “cold gun” didn’t meant it was empty—at least not necessarily—only that it was loaded with fully inert “prop ammo” as you call it.
And yet some of the most popular threads in CS are the ones where people mention when their suspension of disbelief gets broken or when certain things take them out of a movie. There is a term for movies that don’t do a good job of building a believable world. They are called bad movies. I mean why have guns at all if they are just pretending stuff? Just make finger guns and say pow.
Bad movies come from bad acting, bad scripts and crappy directing and visual production. the type of bullet visible in a gun is very far removed from the reality of what makes a good movie.
Very few movie goers are weapons experts and could tell in a fleeting glimpse
of a gun it has the wrong bullets in it. If someone doesn’t understand that they don’t use real bullets in a movie and a great deal of the sound is dubbed in then I don’t know what to tell you.
but by all means, make it a hill to die on in a thread about gun safety in the movie industry.
By all means continue to believe that realism doesn’t matter in movies. Moviegoers will disagree with you. As hundreds of posts have pointed out it’s not difficult to have realism and safety as long as the proper procedures are followed.
Completely inert. Less dangerous than blanks, as the fate of Brandon Lee and Jon-Erik Hexum demonstrate.
And they look like real bullets. A plus for realism in using an apparently-loaded revolver, but a minus because the realistic looks means it’s possible to miss a live round loaded along with them.
Actually, Hexum was killed by a blank because he sealed the end of the barrel with his head.
Lee was killed because the moron who converted the rounds left the primer intact, leaving the bullet stuck in the barrel for the next firing which was a blank.
No, safety often “slips” (nicely bland euphemism for “doesn’t exist” that you’ve used there) because some “villian” has ordered there to be no or lax safety procedures. That’s why we have OSHA in my country, after all. ( OSHA is the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.)
Oh so now, just a few sentences later you agree that there sometimes are mustachio’d villians. No one said they are willing to kill people for money. But they are willing to have other people get hurt or killed or sickened for money.
Well, yeah. They kinda are, if they assert that it was the inaccuracy itself that pulled them out. People put up with things they know are inaccurate all the time. What matters is the engagement level, and at what level of disbelief the viewer has chosen to suspend.
If we can put up with people being blown back by gun shots, way too much blood, guns that are too quiet, and other basic things everyone knows, it stands to reason that we could put up with period-inaccurate guns or bullets that just look nice on camera.
One thing about the suspension of disbelief is that more exposure makes it easier. The more you see a trope that isn’t actually like real life, the easier it is to not be pulled out.
I will also note that those threads encourage a sort of confirmation bias. We’re here to have fun, and not having something to talk about that fits the topic is no fun. It’s natural to take something that pulled you out once and explain it in a way that makes it seem like you’re always nitpicking movies to death. But I very seriously doubt most people do that.
Finally, it’s not like being “pulled out” is this horrible, irreversible thing. I get pulled out of things at times, but a good movie will capture my attention again as soon as something else important happens. All I have to do is not distract myself.
I see no reason we couldn’t come up with unrealistic tropes about guns that we all just accept, even knowing they are inaccurate. We could have, say, fake bullets that don’t actually look like the real thing, but close enough that most people wouldn’t notice. It’s an interesting out-of-the-box idea.
Our obsession with realism over verisimilitude in movies could be part of the problem.
