Alec Baldwin
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
I wonder if this was an exception or if sets are accidents waiting to happen? So many movies made with big stunts, guns ammo and explosions and so few fatalities. I remember when John Landis got taken to court for wrongful deaths on the set of Twilight Zone. Can't recall if he was found guilty
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
i get what youre saying, no confusion, but i was saying i thought (past tense) that because they use the term "prop gun" it was different, perhaps with some sort of additional safety measures to stop the use of live ammo
that blanks AND live ammo could be used in a "gun" but that ONLY blanks (not live ammo) could be used in a "prop gun", i have obviously learnt differently, and ive seen loads of articles with similar headlines i i have faith i was not the only one under this misunderstanding
I guess this explains why there were those guidelines about never bringing live ammo onto set
-
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
-
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
i get what youre saying, no confusion, but i was saying i thought (past tense) that because they use the term "prop gun" it was different, perhaps with some sort of additional safety measures to stop the use of live ammo
that blanks AND live ammo could be used in a "gun" but that ONLY blanks (not live ammo) could be used in a "prop gun", i have obviously learnt differently, and ive seen loads of articles with similar headlines i i have faith i was not the only one under this misunderstanding
I guess this explains why there were those guidelines about never bringing live ammo onto set
I think it's the usual poor journalism. "Prop gun"has appeared everywhere. If someone had accidentally been stabbed or hurt by a knife on set would it be referred to as a "prop knife"?
-
@rancid-schnitzel yeah, its so hard to know, i mean there are prop swords/knives, rubber, retracting, blunt etc which i guess propagates the idea that that there would be have the equivalent for guns
-
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
That red thing is called a flash suppressor that essentially screws in the end of the barrel and makes them safer to fire blanks as it exits around that a bit more dissipating the energy. You need to take that off for live ammo or you get an "inconvenience"
-
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
Yes. Blank firing attachments either come in something you add to a live barrel or are replacement barrels. Not the entire weapon system (receiver, etc.) You can still fire live ammunition through a barrel designed for blanks only. It's incredibly dangerous and hence why anyone remotely competent never creates a situation where the two can be mixed.
I still recall verbatim the warning issued to participants when leaving a range prior to their declaration and inspection.
If what we read is true about this incident, she was grossly blasé and incompetent.
-
one of the big things working on rail projects thats stuck with me is hearing from drivers about when theyve hit someone, its almost completely out of their control (cant just stop a train) and how it ruins their life, you can imagine baldwin feeling similar
-
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
That red thing is called a flash suppressor that essentially screws in the end of the barrel and makes them safer to fire blanks as it exits around that a bit more dissipating the energy. You need to take that off for live ammo or you get an "inconvenience"
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
That red thing is called a flash suppressor that essentially screws in the end of the barrel and makes them safer to fire blanks as it exits around that a bit more dissipating the energy. You need to take that off for live ammo or you get an "inconvenience"
Flash supressors are permanent. You are thinking of the blank firing adaptor, I think.
From memory, the BFA retains some of the gasses so that the weapon operates as an automatic / semi automatic. Otherwise too much of the energy would dissipate out of the barrell to load the next round. This may be wrong, and I can't be arsed googling it ....
For Kiwiwomble. Obviously in film sets, they don't use BFAs. Coz they don't look real.
-
@rapido said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
That red thing is called a flash suppressor that essentially screws in the end of the barrel and makes them safer to fire blanks as it exits around that a bit more dissipating the energy. You need to take that off for live ammo or you get an "inconvenience"
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@hooroo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Alec Baldwin:
When you think about all the millions of films, TV shows, skits, videos etc etc made that involve people shooting or killing each other it must take a special level of incompetence for this to happen. If even the cheapest, shittiest independent films can keep people safe then this should never happen on a decent budget Hollywood production. I mean it's a Western ffs. It's like them not having climbing safety experts involved in the making of Cliffhanger.
i think thats largely why i assumed films would only use prop guns (not real ones as i have learnt) and blanks, i felt people were too stupid to have real guns and ammo around and for this to mot be more common
A gun that can fire blanks can fire live ammunition. Blanks can kill - they have a minimum safe distance.
Yeah it would get a bit expensy in the military if they needed an whole duplicate blanks weapons armoury for training exercises.
I have to say once again i thought they did, always see some sort of coloured end to the barrels, at least thought they were a modified "real" weapon
That red thing is called a flash suppressor that essentially screws in the end of the barrel and makes them safer to fire blanks as it exits around that a bit more dissipating the energy. You need to take that off for live ammo or you get an "inconvenience"
Flash supressors are permanent. You are thinking of the blank firing adaptor, I think.
From memory, the BFA retains some of the gasses so that the weapon operates as an automatic / semi automatic. Otherwise too much of the energy would dissipate out of the barrell to load the next round. This may be wrong, and I can't be arsed googling it ....
For Kiwiwomble. Obviously in film sets, they don't use BFAs. Coz they don't look real.
Yeah I was thinking about how I was wrong even when typing it but couldn't think of the real name. I only recall using them on the Styers though, if I remember correctly we didn't use on C9.
You are right about the compression thing too. It's all coming back
-
@rapido yeah, clicked on how unrealistic that would look, thought that might have just been the cost effective option for the military
for anyone that may have watched the Starship Troopers sequels...theyre amazing, their weapons actually have a red light at the end that flashes when they shoot...like a kids toy
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
-
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
It's not like these movies are realistic anyway.
-
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
The bangy thing of course!
Anyway, as all kids know, guns actually go peeowwww, peeowwww!
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
Something without a projectile?
I seem to recall holding double happys back in the day. They went bang. No projectile.
Someone clever enough to make props for a The Movies with an unlimited budget ...
-
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
Something without a projectile?
I seem to recall holding double happys back in the day. They went bang. No projectile.
Someone clever enough to make props for a The Movies with an unlimited budget ...
Cap guns don't make the right noise. And given the cheapness of weapons in the US, expending vast sums for limited benefit seems to me rather unlikely.
-
CO2-powered BB gun with thundercaps FTW!
-
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
Something without a projectile?
I seem to recall holding double happys back in the day. They went bang. No projectile.
Someone clever enough to make props for a The Movies with an unlimited budget ...
Cap guns don't make the right noise. And given the cheapness of weapons in the US, expending vast sums for limited benefit seems to me rather unlikely.
What's betteer/cheaper? Inventing a fake gun you can enhance with sound effects*, or risk killing some one?
- it's not as if that's hard. We've all seen how they do footsteps, and door creaks and stuff. "Bang!" should be easy.
-
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@booboo said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean said in Alec Baldwin:
@kiwiwomble said in Alec Baldwin:
@antipodean as ive said, i was under the impression a prop gun was different to a real gun...hense the use of the name prop gun rather than...gun
of course they can still kill, as i have read about, but no projectile definitely makes the minimum safe distance smaller
Perhaps I wasn't clear. In order to fire blanks they need real firearms. Even blanks can kill. There is definitely a safe distance to ammunition, live or blank. Blank ammunition doesn't go very far.
At the risk of #me surely in the greater film industry in the US, with all the money involved, the could make a prop that looks like a gun, that goes bang, that doesn't fire any sort of ammunition.
What makes it go bang?
Something without a projectile?
I seem to recall holding double happys back in the day. They went bang. No projectile.
Someone clever enough to make props for a The Movies with an unlimited budget ...
Cap guns don't make the right noise. And given the cheapness of weapons in the US, expending vast sums for limited benefit seems to me rather unlikely.
What's betteer/cheaper? Inventing a fake gun you can enhance with sound effects*, or risk killing some one?
- it's not as if that's hard. We've all seen how they do footsteps, and door creaks and stuff. "Bang!" should be easy.
Yes, they only need to look at Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Who needs real horses when we have coconuts.
