Fewer than three weeks before actor Alec Baldwin is due to go on trial in Santa Fe, New Mexico, prosecutors have said that he “engaged in horseplay with the revolver”, including firing a blank round at a crew member on the set of Rust before the tragic accident occurred.

Baldwin is facing involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

In new court documents, prosecutors said they plan to bring new evidence to support their case that the 66-year-old actor and producer was reckless with firearms while filming on the set and displayed “erratic and aggressive behavior during the filming” that created potential safety concerns.

Prosecutors in the case, which is due to go to trial on 10 July, have previously alleged that to watch Baldwin’s conduct on the set of Rust “is to witness a man who has absolutely no control of his own emotions and absolutely no concern for how his conduct affects those around him”.

In the latest filing, special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Erlinda Johnson allege that Baldwin pointed his gun and fired “a blank round at a crew member while using that crew member as a line of site as his perceived target”.

  • catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    5 months ago

    Actors miming shooting looks ridiculous. Like laser tag guns. Actual recoil looks much more realistic.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      ❌When the recoil looks fake

      ✔️Action hero only ever gets shot in shoulder despite thousands of rounds shot at them, bullets used by bad guys never hollow point

      • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s like a bad accent.

        Some people won’t notice, but for those who can see/hear the difference it takes the suspension of disbelief away immediately

    • Fillicia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      The must be a way to create “false” gun in the sense that they only takes blanks and have nonfunctional barrels. Or I’m I too optimistic?

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        5 months ago

        Unfortunately, guns are deceptively simple. Just about anything that can detonate a realistic looking blank is capable of firing an actual bullet. And even if it’s just a blank, any obstruction in the barrel can end up becoming an ad-hoc projectile by the force. Every once in a while, you have that happen in Civil War re-enactments.

        • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          Thats also how Brandon Lee died. Iirc there was a squib malfunction that they didn’t notice so when they shot a blank, the round was pushed out and killed him.

        • Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          We could get around this by having specific calibers that only come in blanks.

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Ok but that’s a separate issue and something that can happen with a regular gun loaded with a regular caliber blank, what they’re saying is fake guns for movies should use a caliber for which no bullets exist, solving the main part of the issue, i.e. the fact that someone can load a normal bullet in a gun that is to be used as a prop.

              • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                5 months ago

                This would help avoid this specific death, but not most others where the projectile wasn’t an actual bullet from a live round, but something stuck in the barrel, like the other person says.

                This situation was unusual in the sense that an incompetent armorer had live rounds on set, and the gun was loaded with one.

                What I mean is that the main part of the issue is exactly not this.

                • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Did anybody ask about most others, or were we having a highly specific conversation about a very real and somewhat recent event?

                  • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    First,

                    Did anybody ask about most others,

                    … doesn’t seem relevant, since saying something doesn’t require you personally asking about it at all, second,

                    what they’re saying is fake guns for movies should use a caliber for which no bullets exist, solving the main part of the issue, i.e. the fact that someone can load a normal bullet in a gun that is to be used as a prop.

                    … answers your question, and that quote is most of the original comment, I could even have quoted the whole of it.

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  “most others”

                  Maybe I’m not paying enough attention to that, but is it really something that happens that often on movie sets where it’s something stuck in the barrel?

              • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                It’s not a separate issue. It’s exactly how Brandon Lee died. It was just a piece of a bullet, not even a complete one. Lots of hard objects that can get lodged in there that instantly become a lethal projectile.

                Besides this person wants “realistic recoil.” That requires a lot of force. So it’s always a risk.

                  • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    That is exactly what we are saying. They should not use firearms that are capable of launching projectiles. Which is exactly what happened on the set of Rust.

                    As a camera operator I have no desire to die for somebody else’s art. Especially not just because they want a more realistic looking firearm/recoil.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        If the armorer wasn’t willfully negligent it wouldn’t be a problem. Not a problem for the vast majority of film sets. Just pure lack of professionalism from the armorer whose sole core responsibility is to ensure safety.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          5 months ago

          if Baldwin wasn’t waiving a gun around like a moron, a negligent armorer wouldn’t have been a problem, either.

          the armorer being negligent (and she was), doesn’t mean that Baldwin wasn’t also being negligent. and lets be perfectly clear: the reason Gutierrez-Reed was hired over other more professional armorers is precisely because she was “less professional”- or more bluntly, because she was willing to not insist on proper safety protocols that caused delays in shooting.

          • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

            If an actor is given a prop pipe bomb, and he throws it at a cast member in jest and it explodes…because the explosive expert gave him a live explosive why the fuck is that the actors fault?

            Why is is Alec’s fault he was horsing around with what effectively should have been a toy. It should have been a fancy cap gun at worst.

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              5 months ago

              Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

              because it’s a fucking weapon. he knew it was a weapon.

              secondly, it was Hall (another producer) that gave him the weapon, not HGR.

              thirdly, you don’t fuck around with even the non-firing propguns precisely because of how easy it is to mistake them. He fucked around, and Alyna Hutchins found out. Ergo, it’s negligent homicide

              • Tyfud@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                Hate to say it, but I agree here.

                This is the price paid for not treating real guns with respect. Prop bullets or otherwise.

          • The Octonaut@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Wouldn’t the live round have shot someone no matter what? The point of a blank round is so you can aim a gun at someone and not kill them.

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Uhm.

              That’s not how Blanks work

              And even if there is some how no wadding They can still be lethal

              You cannot render a functional weapon (blank firing or “real” or whatever you want to call it,) totally safe.

              Which is why you should always treat them as something that will kill you given half the chance. (It was literally made to do just that.)

              And you should always treat look alikes as if they were real because a) they’re easy to mistake for real ones and vice versa and b) the other people may not realize it’s a prop. (On a movie set, unlikely, but you never know who’s around and how they will respond. Or where an active shooter is going to appear.)

              As for the cartridges, usually there’s tell tales of one sort or another. For dummy rounds it’s common to press the otherwise empty cartridge with a ball bearing or two so they rattle when shaken. Sometimes they also have a small hole on the wall of the casing

              Blanks are, by their nature, lacking the bullet and the top is simply crimped to hold the wadding.

              All it would have taken was a proper inspection to verify that it was unloaded/loaded with dummy rounds. Or, alternatively, Baldwin not pointing it at people.

              Which leads me to the final thing you should always do: check the damn weapon. Don’t trust armorers. They’re people, too. They make mistakes, they fuck up.

              • The Octonaut@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 months ago

                Can I ask what the point of this screed was? I’m aware blanks are dangerous. That’s irrelevant. There was a real bullet in the chamber. At some point, even if it was a blank, it would have been pointed at someone and the trigger pulled.

                The point appears to be “check the damn weapon”, which of course you could have said without ‘educating’ me, and wouldn’t have been undercut with going on endlessly about wadding.

                That point is a terrible one because the armourer is the expert, and is the one who should be signing the gun off as safe every time it is opened, not an actor who neither is required to have qualifications nor skills in clearing a gun as safe. If an actor interferes with the weapon, the armourer has to check it again.

                • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  It’s stupidly easy to check a firearm. You don’t have to be an expert to do it. For most fire arms it takes 5-10 seconds.

                  A large part of the “experts” job is to know what is and is not safe protocol, and to enforce it. Part of that includes teaching everyone who’s handling a weapon how to…. Handle a weapon safely.

                  no question, the armorer fucked up. She’s human. Humans make mistakes. Which is why you check the damn weapon, too. An expert doesn’t mean they don’t make mistakes. An expert means they’ve made enough they should know better. (Or have learned from an older expert.)

                • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Frist off, it is also the actors’ job to ensure the gun is safe. He should have been there when the gun was checked and verified it for himself especially when he purposely hired a fuck around and find out armourer.

                  Secondly, how were they supposed to know your level of knowledge about firearms and ammunition? With them explaining stuff in a simple and quick manner, we are all now operating on the same level of basic knowledge about this, so there should not be any miscommunications going on.

        • FireTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          HGR definitely didn’t do right here but a lot more went wrong. This was a perfect storm of negligence. Multiple people could have taken minor stands to have prevented this tragic tale. So many people spoke out and zero action was taken to address their concerns.

          A layered safety approach is a great idea. But it only works when at least one person in a position to do so does what’s right.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Multiple people could have taken minor stands to have prevented this tragic tale

            Hutchins took one of those stands filing a union complaint about the safety violations, how tinfoily you wanna get?

      • ArgentRaven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        In Blade Runner 2049, Weta Workshop had their laser pistols set up with a solenoid that moved back and forth with a trigger pull. Adam Savage looked at them in a Tested video. I don’t know if it’s cost prohibitive, but it sure seemed like the right way to do it.

        However, you don’t get smoke with that. You can definitely rig something up as they did it with a knock off nerf blaster in the 80’s or even a cap gun, but at some point I assume the level of complexity makes modifying a real gun cheaper.

        You could weld shut the barrel of a gun, which is what a lot of them do, but it seems like it’s a cost cutting measure when they used real guns that would retain their value. Alec (as a producer) used a cheap setup with a cheap armorer that didn’t know what they were doing. It’s both of their faults.

        • modifier@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          5 months ago

          Man, I am a cinema buff and I just really don’t think I care if the smoke is there at all, much less just right. Obviously botched attempts at realism are another matter entirely but this just seems like an area ripe for creativity and artistic reinterpretation.

          Point is, we cede ground to the theater of the mind all the time, I don’t know why realistic gunfire can’t be treated similarly, and I think the lack of verisimilitude itself could be approached many different ways and that’s even kind of exciting.

        • efstajas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Smoke is easy to add in post. Muzzle flash is a little bit harder but also of course very possible.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Having seen Furiosa last night and finding out that they actually digitally manipulated the two actress’ faces playing her so that one aged into the other… there’s nothing not possible for CG at this point.

      • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you shot a blank in a gun with a plugged barrel the gun would explode. A blank is just a round minus the projectile, it has just as much “push” from the powder as a real round does.

          • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Brandon Lee died because in a previous scene they used bullets without a casing so the revolver wouldnt look empty facing the camera. One of them got stuck in the barrel, and in the next scene where they were using blanks it was propelled out and struck him. A blank with a bullet in front of it is essntially just a live round with extra steps. Idk what you think I’m incorrect about. That doesn’t mean filling in the barrel would be safer, it wouldn’t, the gun would explode. The energy released by igniting gunpowder has to go somewhere.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, you would think you could just change the chambers and bullets so only a certain standard of blanks would fit in it, although I guess those guns would become more expensive than the real mass produced ones.

        Either way, this is all the result of Baldwin as executive producer cheaping out on every aspect of this shoot, causing this to happen.

      • ours@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Some guns are modified in that way for movies. They are still potentially dangerous. Blanks can harm someone close enough or accidentally propel something lodged in the barrel.

      • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I know some pistols have a co2 blow back system that you can install on your gun so you can practice drawing and dry firing without fear of damaging the gun or hurting people. The only one I know of is for glocks but I’m sure a company could make them for more models.

        • justaderp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          At that point one should should buy the gas blowback replica that the manufacturer licensed for airsoft. It’ll have identical wright and balance, the trigger can usually be tuned to match, and it’ll dry fire with about half recoil. It’ll plink on target at 40’ once the hop-up is calibrated. Should be a modest $150-250 for common Glock, Sig, etc.

      • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I know there at least used to be gas powered airsoft guns that had minor ‘recoil.’ I don’t know if there’s anything particular about them that makes them bad for filming, maybe just the lack of real force on the shooters wrist/shoulder.

        • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yeah the recoil is much weaker on those and there’s no muzzle flash, and certain cinematic shots just can’t be done with them like they could with an actual gun.

    • x4740N@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      There are airsoft GBB (gas blow back) guns that can replicate recoil from my short online research

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      What recoil? They are shooting blanks. There is no mass leaving the gun. If you want to cycle the gun on trigger pull in a realistic yet safe way, compressed CO2 can be used. Some movie guns are even electrically/magnetically actuated.

      • Cort@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I mean 5-10 grams of vaporized gunpowder leaves the barrel at fairly high speed. It’s not a lead round but it’s not nothing. Also the spent brass being ejected is not easy to CGI convincingly.

        • ours@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Good points. The gun would have to cycle with CO2 or magnets and feed from a magazine empty casings so that the ejector continues to do its job.

          Yet so many movies just add the sound of casings hitting the ground so I wonder if the hassle is worth it except for some specific shots. I enjoy the realism but I’d rather people not put their lives needlessly at risk.

      • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 months ago

        You do know how physics works, right? There is an explosion in the chamber that moves the slide/bolt backward to rack another round of course there will be recoil. Have you ever fired a black powder gun with no bullet in it? There is still a recoil.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’ve fired a lot of blanks in my life. The recoil is nowhere near a live round.

              • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I agree. Anything that can be done to make it safer while also being a practical effect that looks good should be done. I get that as an actor, they sometimes want to feel the weight of a gun to get into the role, but safety should always be the number 1 priority.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      You can only get that with real rounds though. Blanks are not causing that recoil effect.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Downvoted but correct.

        Here’s the first link I’ve found explaining the concept of recoil, and the section relating to blanks and the fact that since bullet weight is a major factor blanks have virtually no recoil conveniently uses movies to illustrate that point.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      We gotta sometimes kill a bunch of people on set, because americans need their religion represented correctly

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’m more than willing to sacrifice some moviepeople if it means we get more realistic action scenes