You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The sad truth
CGI could solve a lot of problems: For instance, we could get rid of Alec Baldwin and just use his fake double!
CGI could solve a lot of problems: For instance, we could get rid of Alec Baldwin and just use his fake double!
Talking about Baldwin - I just read some statements he made. He said, he didn't pull the trigger but pulled the hammer half way back and then let it flip. That made the gun fire. Which is weird, since revolvers normally have a half cock notch to allow the cylinder to rotate freely and as a safety to prevent just that from happening. So that may have been manipulated, too.
Someone made a video about it now:
Thats strange, but doesn't really change the fundamental issue - that he didn't check if it was loaded or not. And he also said, his career as a actor is probably over. So you don't have to wait until CGI replaces him...
Yeah, I messed with my revolver too, just to be sure of that (unloaded, of course). The short answer is, he's lying. My understanding is that this movie was basically his production, meaning he's ultimately responsible for everything that happens. Having said that, he's hated enough that I suppose someone could try to sabotage him.
As for his career being over--don't be so sure. The liberal Hollywood elite protect their own as much as they can. He'll probably lay low for awhile and then make a return, unless someone accuses him of sexual misconduct.
Yes, normally this should not happen with a revolver, just as the video explains. On the other hand.... movie prop guns are usually rented from professional prop gun suppliers. And they have different categories of quality guns, going from proper fully functional guns, converted blank firing guns, to non funktional guns and even dummy guns made of plastic or wood. I watched a video about a Canadian company that does that. They have everything from a Derringer to a 40mm Bofors AA cannon, and from 17th century to the most modern stuff. And not only one each, they have thousands of guns.
But I digress... it could happen that some guns - that are not meant to be fired - have malfunctions. Like the hammer half notch safety not working or so.
However. Its not really important if Baldwin just played around with the hammer and it fired, as he claims, or if he did pull the trigger. The gun should not have fired in any case - since there was no live rounds meant to be in it. So the real culprid is the person who loaded the gun and gave it to Baldwin.
That career end thing was said by Baldwin himself. But sure, he may get away with it and come back once gras has grown over the case. If that doesn't take too long, since he is not a spring chicken anymore.
I have a couple of replicas myself--they can be amazingly realistic.
Yes I know, I also have a Colt Peacemaker replica. And for movies its not so critical anyway. Often its only for extras who march along or stand guard, who are never shown closely. For that they have those plastic or wood replicas. That way the extras also cannot steal real guns or break them, since they are really expensive. The plastic ones are fairly cheap, and they can always make some more if needed. This canadian firm has literally warehouses full of that stuff. All the different rifles from the old days like the independence war, civil war, WW1, WW2 and whatever, and from the relevant countries like Britain, France, American, German ect.
The real guns are only used if it actually is seen firing in the scene. That takes much more effort then. And it cost much more, too. Especially, if the customer wants a lot of unusual stuff, or even modifications. Do you know that a original working Thompson machine gun from WW2 in good condition can cost 40-50,000$ ? So if you break one in a film production you probably have to deal with some very unhappy people... :)
Also its quiete difficult to make automatic guns fire blanks. In a standard automatic or semi automatic gun it doesn't work at all. Well, it will fire one shot, but not cycle as its supposed to do. So to make that work they have developed certain tricks, like narrowing the barrel diameter, use lighter springs and other workarounds. Its a whole science by itself. But they do have tons of experience from many years. The guy was talking about the movies they fitted out with guns - just about every action blockbuster in the past 30 or so years.
Don't forget the rubber guns they sometimes produce so the actors don't get hurt! Every now and then you can see one bounce on screen.
Don't get me started on the Thompson machine guns--that's my favorite weapon, and I've always wanted one of my own. If it happens at all, I'll have to settle for a replica.
The Thompson is certainly a very iconic weapon. I`m not sure if I understood all the different gun laws in the US, but from what I heard, its very complicated - and in any case expensive - to buy a functioning machine gun. As a semi auto only version it may be easier. But a Thompson is always somewhat expensive, just because of the way its built. It was a expensive gun from day one, thats why they didn't sell very well for 20 years. The vast number of those guns was only then made for WW2, when they agreed to build them cheaper for "patriotic" reasons. And still it was soon replaced then by the "Grease Gun". That was much cheaper and faster to produce, which is really of importance for the military - not that it lasts forever.
And there are probably better sub-machine guns, objectively seen. Like the H&K MP5 for example. Which is also a iconic classic by now, and much cheaper to buy. Ok, its a 9mm, but thats no disadvantage, rather the opposite.
And some people would definatly be better off with a bounce rubber gun... :)
Ouch!
Yeah, grease guns were stamped metal, much less expensive. Here you have to get a federal permit to own an automatic weapon, but it is possible--it's a lot easier to get the same weapon modified so it can only fire semi-auto. I'd probably just put it in a display case, so there's no particular reason for mine to be operational. Although having said that, a burglar would probably think twice if he saw one trained on him!
Well, thats another option - and perhaps one that may soon come. But that would be the beginning of the end of actual actors. And also it would mean, that we never get rid of some characters. Then we would get Rambo XXXVIII in 2065, and Stallone still looks the same as in the 80s. It would be bad news for cosmetic surgeons, though.
It's already been done pretty well in some of the Star Wars properties--at the end of The Mandalorian there's a cameo by a huge character that couldn't have been done without the CGI de-aging process. Still, I'm not thrilled at the idea.
It would certainly be a loss if there are no real actors anymore. At least with some actors.
Some actors I would miss more than others!