Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   New push to not use real guns in movies. Someone could get shot   (yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Firearm, Cannon, Gun, Weapon, Post-production, Filmmaking, Los Angeles, use of real firearms  
•       •       •

2161 clicks; posted to Main » and Entertainment » on 24 Oct 2021 at 7:35 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



436 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-10-24 5:54:36 PM  
Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution
 
2021-10-24 6:00:42 PM  
Or we could....you know.... Stop making shiatty movies about tough guys with guns.
 
2021-10-24 6:14:18 PM  
Just replace them with walkie talkies
 
2021-10-24 6:58:27 PM  

FightDirector: Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.


Also, it seems to me that the big budget productions aren't the ones with the problems. It's the smaller, indie, production on small budgets that have the person in charge of guns being a 24 year old who's only done one movie before and where, according to an article I read, crew were using the same guns to do live practise shooting off set before putting the guns back into the props.

What next? Ban all stunts with cars because someone could get run over?
 
2021-10-24 7:30:30 PM  

blastoh: Or we could....you know.... Stop making shiatty movies about tough guys with guns.


This! I came here to say something similar. No one can tell an interesting story without gun violence? How lazy. The glorification of violence--and in particular, gun violence--has ruined this country.

And, yes, I do think Squid Games could have been made without showing people getting shot. It would take some creativity and it would take letting the audience use their imaginations.

I'm really sick of guns. I'm really sick of hearing about shootings. I'm sick of it all.
 
2021-10-24 7:38:25 PM  
s.yimg.comView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:40:10 PM  
The trick is to not use real bullets.  Looking at you Alec.
 
2021-10-24 7:42:49 PM  
What I don't get is why there were live bullets on set.

Also always treat a gun as if it were loaded.
 
2021-10-24 7:44:25 PM  

FightDirector: I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.


I had every intention of coming into this thread to suggest that guns in films should be replaced by giving the actors dildos to hold while making 'pew pew pew' sounds. So I have no problem admitting that you know more than I do on this topic.
 
2021-10-24 7:44:27 PM  
I'd watch action movies where they just did finger-guns and said "bang", but kept the squibs and blood packs.
 
2021-10-24 7:44:28 PM  
What if we got rid of all the real guns instead? That way movies would be true to life.
 
2021-10-24 7:45:21 PM  
FightDirector:

I agree that hard cases make bad law, and the reduction in risk to studios (legal, financial and reputational) that results from not using real weapons from cinema may not always exceed the cost of doing so.

In many cases, though, it will be (e.g. the case of guns used in routine cop shows). We seen to agree that's a no-brainer.
 
2021-10-24 7:45:45 PM  
with a nod to kbronsito
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:46:06 PM  
Why not ban humans?  Use CGI for the humans.  As a bonus you would not have actors thinking I give a f what they have to say about anything other than acting.  Also those pretentious award ceremonies would go away.
 
2021-10-24 7:46:19 PM  

sprgrss: What I don't get is why there were live bullets on set.

Also always treat a gun as if it were loaded.


external-content.duckduckgo.comView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:46:26 PM  
JFC, this happens so goddamned rarely and people are freaking out over it.  Just stop!

There are actually other practices that can be used if you are going to use blanks to move from 99.99% assurance to 100% assurance and that is having as many people as possible out of the line of fire and for anyone who is in the line of fire you put up a shield.  Simple, double level of protection beyond the almost completely effective safety practices already used on set.
 
2021-10-24 7:48:12 PM  

Arkkuss: The trick is to not use real bullets.  Looking at you Alec.


JFC, I hope this is a joke.  I've seen enough absolute bottom-feeder bullshiat about this from Fox News and their ilk, so it's impossible to tell.
 
2021-10-24 7:48:22 PM  

FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution


There was a really nice statement by someone I can't remember after the Titanic sunk and congress was scrambling to pass new shipping rules that basically boiled down to letting people who don't know about something pass new regulations after an accident when they don't know the industry or the  old regulations is unwise.

If the old rules would have prevented the accident, we don't need new rules, just better adherence.
 
2021-10-24 7:48:25 PM  
Not that there's any possibility that I would ever be an actor, but we're I one I wouldn't let anyone ever point a functional gun at me, loaded with blanks, unloaded, locked open with an empty magazine well, whatever. The rules of gun safety exist for a reason.

But hey, that's what people want to see and money talks. Not my problem.
 
2021-10-24 7:49:23 PM  
All they should really need is a replica that looks realistic on the outside. Is it really that difficult to add the sound of a gunshot during post production?
 
2021-10-24 7:49:36 PM  

vrax: JFC, this happens so goddamned rarely and people are freaking out over it.  Just stop!


New rule: anybody making this argument volunteers to stand down-range.
 
2021-10-24 7:49:42 PM  
CGI muzzle flash and blood spatter both look like shiat.
 
2021-10-24 7:50:08 PM  

sprgrss: What I don't get is why there were live bullets on set.

Also always treat a gun as if it were loaded.


i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size


Today, I followed up on the story of what happened.

WHY THE HELL DID ALEC BALDWIN POINT THE WEAPON AT THE CREW AND PULL THE TRIGGER?

There is a lot of blame and a lot of failure in the overall process, but his actions are inexcusable.
 
2021-10-24 7:51:05 PM  

FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution


Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?
 
2021-10-24 7:53:06 PM  

cyberspacedout: All they should really need is a replica that looks realistic on the outside. Is it really that difficult to add the sound of a gunshot during post production?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:53:17 PM  

Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?


Check out the username.  He actually is a professional film maker who deals with weaponry on stage and screen.
 
2021-10-24 7:54:13 PM  
Just use toy guns. If the cops can't tell the difference (judging by how many kids with toys get shot by them) then movie gowers shouldn't catch on. Just paint orange tip black!
/sarcasm.
//some of you don't catch that.
 
2021-10-24 7:54:17 PM  

FightDirector: I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:54:29 PM  

leeksfromchichis: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

There was a really nice statement by someone I can't remember after the Titanic sunk and congress was scrambling to pass new shipping rules that basically boiled down to letting people who don't know about something pass new regulations after an accident when they don't know the industry or the  old regulations is unwise.

If the old rules would have prevented the accident, we don't need new rules, just better adherence.


But the important thing is that our handsomest politicians have done something
 
2021-10-24 7:54:47 PM  

Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?


He actually knows what he's talking about...
 
2021-10-24 7:55:11 PM  

Chief Superintendent Lookout: WHY THE HELL DID ALEC BALDWIN POINT THE WEAPON AT THE CREW AND PULL THE TRIGGER?


He pointed at the camera, more or less. We don't know how good his aim is, nor why they didn't start the camera running and move out of the way.
 
2021-10-24 7:55:38 PM  

Anderson's Pooper: Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?

Check out the username.  He actually is a professional film maker who deals with weaponry on stage and screen.


Yeah I doubt that.
 
2021-10-24 7:55:42 PM  

vrax: JFC, this happens so goddamned rarely and people are freaking out over it.  Just stop!


How can I stop if I never started?
 
2021-10-24 7:56:27 PM  

Axeofjudgement: Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?

He actually knows what he's talking about...


So what? No one asked.
 
2021-10-24 7:56:46 PM  

vrax: Arkkuss: The trick is to not use real bullets.  Looking at you Alec.

JFC, I hope this is a joke.  I've seen enough absolute bottom-feeder bullshiat about this from Fox News and their ilk, so it's impossible to tell.


Gosh, I'm sure hoping the family of Halyna Hutchins send their condolences and apologies to you for being so inconvenienced.
 
2021-10-24 7:57:42 PM  

cyberspacedout: All they should really need is a replica that looks realistic on the outside. Is it really that difficult to add the sound of a gunshot during post production?


Gunshots sounds are added post production.

That's why it makes no sense to have fully functional firearms on set.
 
2021-10-24 7:58:12 PM  

blastoh: Or we could....you know.... Stop making shiatty movies about tough guys with guns.


s.abcnews.comView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:58:13 PM  

FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you do ...


Well, at least there's one intelligent comment in here.
 
2021-10-24 7:58:28 PM  
Unfortunately, this isn't the first time a prop gun has killed someone on set. Brandon Lee was shot with a prop gun that had a bullet stuck in the barrel and was killed on the set of The Crow in 1993.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-10-24 7:58:42 PM  
I get that during a camera test a cinematographer wants to be in the thick of if it to find the most interesting camera angles possible but staring down the barrel of even a prop gun is never going to happen without a certain level of risk. Perhaps this unfortunate event will put the kybosh on that practice but I doubt it. Alec Baldwin pointed that gun directly at her to give her the best possible view of what she would have to work with when they finally rolled the cameras for a screen-worthy take and now he has to live with the fact that the quest for an entertaining level of realism has taken a life.
 
2021-10-24 8:00:33 PM  

Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA? ...



Someone who actually knows what they are talking about and have shown that time and time again on Fark. Discussions and topics like in the FA impact his work directly. Its it literally his job,  maybe instead of knee jerkoff reacting you can pay attention, you might learn something.
 
2021-10-24 8:01:08 PM  

Nick-c137: Axeofjudgement: Nick-c137: FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution

Jesus, do you jerk off holding a gun at night? You need to go outside more I think. Who types ten pages about guns for a comment section?

He actually knows what he's talking about...

So what? No one asked.


Hey, I have a five thousand word essay on Windows XP all queued up to cut and paste into a comments section once the appropriate story comes along.
 
2021-10-24 8:01:28 PM  
I demand full realism in my gunfights. That's why I'm not producing my Star Wars sequel until we have fully-functional laser blasters available to film with.
 
2021-10-24 8:01:31 PM  
What am I reading?
 
2021-10-24 8:01:38 PM  

Nick-c137: So what? No one asked.


Yes they did.  About 5000 people have asked, that's why we keep having all these threads.  Do you prefer just blithering on about something we know very little about, or would you like to have some actual facts before we turn the thread into another train wreck?
 
2021-10-24 8:01:51 PM  

FightDirector: Goddammit, this went green.  This'll be a shiatshow.

OK, look, here's the thing.  The alternatives to using hot guns (either a blank-firing gun, or a blank-adapted gun) pretty much only help you with modern firearms, and really mostly only popular modern firearms at that.  If you want to use airsoft or electric non-gun Glocks or Sigs for your police procedural show?  Hey, no problem.  Glocks are all over the place and it's easy to source alternatives. I generally support that and you. You've got loads of options.

But what happens when you need a Colt Dragoon or LeMat revolver for a period western?  What happens when you give your scary Prussian a Bergmann 1894 No1 (Pascal's gun in The Mandalorean), or what happens when you want a Calico M100 to be your sci-fi rifle (as it was in Spaceballs)?  The airsoft and electric non-gun alternatives for those do not exist, and are frankly never going to exist in any meaningful capacity.  So if you need those guns to fire in your show, your choices are to use a totally non-functional cold prop (a 3d-printed shell, or something similar) and either contract with a VFX house to CGI in a lot of stuff - ejecting brass in particular is shocking difficult and expensive to add in - or you get a real weapon and adapt it to fire blanks, safely.  The latter choice is, for the tremendous majority of film and TV made in the US, by far the easier, and cheaper, solution.  As long as film and TV continue to generate a need for firearms which aren't modern and popular, and as long as film and TV continue to make productions which don't have large CG budgets, then there will be a requirement to have blank-firing and blank-adapted firearms available for use.

Now, If just Hollywood AAA-list productions want to move to non-live firearms which are solely assisted by CGI, then fine.  They generally have the budget to do that.  Something like 90% of the films and TV in the US don't have the budget to do that.  And this quote from TFA?  "...if you don't have the budget for the CGI, then don't shoot the scene." That's both incredibly ignorant and privileged.  Ignorant because of the attitude it displays towards everything that came before it in regards to budget and creativity (ie, "lack of budget and a story to tell" is how filmmaking creativity happens). and privileged as fark by telling everyone else who doesn't have a multimillion dollar budget for their film that "sorry, but there's certain stories that you don't get to tell because you don't have the connections/producers/money that *I* get to play with."  Fark that and fark her.

Finally, I conclude with an issue that nobody else in TFA, or here, is likely to raise.  The laws which govern filmmaking also tend to cover live theatrical productions as well.  I would very much like to see the law requiring that CGI assistance be used to make sure "firearms are safe" be applied to live stage productions.  Go ahead, I want to see a live production of The Lieutenant of Inishmore - a show which requires the use of a fully-automatic weapon and it's ejecting brass, and therefore blanks, to be accompanied by 600 extras rapidly running in front of the muzzle, each holding a slightly different picture of muzzle flash to create live animation, and throwing a pocketful of brass on the stage when they're done.

/I'm sorry, but I know more than you on this topic. I just do.
//this is a feel-good idea that sounds nice if you don't know what you're talking about or know about any of the half-a-hundred edge cases that it impacts which really only present themselves to people who do this for a living, and it is going to be awful in any sort of actual execution


Apparently you DON'T know more than me because I know with the widespread availability of 3D printers manufacturing any gun you want is not all that difficult.
 
2021-10-24 8:02:03 PM  

Boojum2k: vrax: Arkkuss: The trick is to not use real bullets.  Looking at you Alec.

JFC, I hope this is a joke.  I've seen enough absolute bottom-feeder bullshiat about this from Fox News and their ilk, so it's impossible to tell.

Gosh, I'm sure hoping the family of Halyna Hutchins send their condolences and apologies to you for being so inconvenienced.


The point is that Alec Baldwin surely didn't load the weapon, it was handed to him by the person whose job it is to ensure it works as intended for the movie. Alec Baldwin did what the director told him to do. There's a decent chance he knows nothing about guns, and even so that's not something you can check without undoing what the prop man set up so putting it on him isn't even remotely fair.

And that's the problem. When it comes to guns you should NEVER take someone else's word for it, but as an actor you have to.
 
2021-10-24 8:02:08 PM  
Movie set shootings have finally outpaced school shootings?  Finally something we can all agree on and take action to curtail the one on-set shooting each decade.
 
2021-10-24 8:03:12 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Not that there's any possibility that I would ever be an actor, but we're I one I wouldn't let anyone ever point a functional gun at me, loaded with blanks, unloaded, locked open with an empty magazine well, whatever. The rules of gun safety exist for a reason.

But hey, that's what people want to see and money talks. Not my problem.


What if they drove a dump truck full of money up to your house? I'll even throw in a Klondike bar.
 
2021-10-24 8:03:43 PM  

sprgrss: What I don't get is why there were live bullets on set.

Also always treat a gun as if it were loaded.


That is the big question for me. There is zero need for live ammunition on the set.
 
Displayed 50 of 436 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.