Alec Baldwin fires prop gun on movie set, killing cinematographer

[Elegiac]

Capitalism, ho!

I hate it.

Everytime you peel back a layer on any given social blight it's always either capitalism or just good old fashioned bigotry. Neil Gaiman was not wrong when he wrote that capitalism has become a modern religion and "acceptable losses" in accidents like these constitute modern human sacrifice.

[Edge-]

Everytime you peel back a layer on any given social blight it's always either capitalism or just good old fashioned bigotry. Neil Gaiman was not wrong when he wrote that capitalism has become a modern religion and "acceptable losses" in accidents like these constitute modern human sacrifice.

Yeah, but imagine how EXPENSIVE fixing all those things would be! We don't have the fictional money to pay for all that!

[PhaelixWW]

I hate it.

Everytime you peel back a layer on any given social blight it's always either capitalism or just good old fashioned bigotry. Neil Gaiman was not wrong when he wrote that capitalism has become a modern religion and "acceptable losses" in accidents like these constitute modern human sacrifice.

Yeah, but imagine how EXPENSIVE fixing all those things would be! We don't have the fictional money to pay for all that!

Sorry, but no.

This was an exception, and not the rule. In fact, this is an exceedingly rare problem in the industry. You guys don't get to make sweeping generalizations from this incident.

You need to be cognizant of the difference between a) the system being broken, and b) a few fucktards ignoring the rules. This is the latter, not the former.

[s_bushido]

This was an exception, and not the rule. In fact, this is an exceedingly rare problem in the industry. You guys don't get to make sweeping generalizations from this incident.

You need to be cognizant of the difference between a) the system being broken, and b) a few fucktards ignoring the rules. This is the latter, not the former.

There's nothing exceedingly rare about cutting corners to keep costs and time to a minimum. Sorry.

[Edge-]

Sorry, but no.

But yes. We can acknowledge that this is BEYOND rare (last time I can think of is in the 90's with Crow 2) and still blame capitalism. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[Endus]

Sorry, but no.

This was an exception, and not the rule. In fact, this is an exceedingly rare problem in the industry. You guys don't get to make sweeping generalizations from this incident.

You need to be cognizant of the difference between a) the system being broken, and b) a few fucktards ignoring the rules. This is the latter, not the former.

You're missing the point; why did these fucktards ignore these particular rules?

The answer, of course, is "capitalist economics".

Yes, capitalist principles are so egregiously inhumane there's a lot of regulations and ethical practices that limit how far you can go, within legal limits, but that's kind of making the point, too.

[PhaelixWW]

There's nothing exceedingly rare about cutting corners to keep costs and time to a minimum. Sorry.

But yes. We can acknowledge that this is BEYOND rare (last time I can think of is in the 90's with Crow 2) and still blame capitalism. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Sure, go ahead and grandstand and selectively define capitalism as only the bad parts and not the good parts. Capitalism is not defined as "anything for a buck". People who espouse that abuse capitalism, they don't embody it.

The reality is that unions are a vital part of capitalism, one that the US in particular under-utilizes. The problem in this case occurred in large part because the union workers' issues were ignored and they were replaced. The producers failed capitalism, not the other way around.

This type of mentality just entirely misses the mark.

[Endus]

Sure, go ahead and grandstand and selectively define capitalism as only the bad parts and not the good parts. Capitalism is not defined as "anything for a buck". People who espouse that abuse capitalism, they don't embody it.

You don't get to skip out on the negative aspects of capitalist theory by declaring all bad outcomes to be "abuses of capitalism". They're abuses of people, but that does not mean they are abuses of capitalism. Capitalism loves abusing people. Capitalism is totally fine with slavery, and with forcing children to work dangerous jobs in factories. We know this, because that happened, due to capitalist principles.

They were expressions of capitalism, not abuses of capitalism.

That they were abuses of people does not change that, it just demonstrates that capitalism will freely abuse the worker class as long as doing so benefits the capitalist class.

[Edge-]

Sure, go ahead and grandstand and selectively define capitalism as only the bad parts and not the good parts. Capitalism is not defined as "anything for a buck". People who espouse that abuse capitalism, they don't embody it.

The reality is that unions are a vital part of capitalism, one that the US in particular under-utilizes. The problem in this case occurred in large part because the union workers' issues were ignored and they were replaced. The producers failed capitalism, not the other way around.

This type of mentality just entirely misses the mark.

Which is...the conflict between labor and those that own the means of production (producers and the money backing the project, in this instance), and with a uniquely American flavor to it given our countries overt hostility towards labor and desire to bend over backwards for the monied capitalists.

The "abuse" of capitalism is indeed peek capitalism. It's capitalism unrestrained by the burdens of government meddling in the affairs of the market with things like those pesky regulations.

Miss me with this r/enlightenedcentrism shit though, for reals.

[PhaelixWW]

The "abuse" of capitalism is indeed peek capitalism. It's capitalism unrestrained by the burdens of government meddling in the affairs of the market with things like those pesky regulations.

TIL that unions are government regulations. /s

But sure, don't let me stop you grandstanding rather than engaging in critical thinking. It's like a page right out of the GoP playbook. Have fun with that.

[Iliena]

Actors can’t act? Fuck this ridiculous opinion. Go safe with airsoft and add some basic cgi gun effects. Nobody’s life is worth having someone flinch when a blank goes off.

They have been using blanks in movies and TV since the first talking movies came out, do you think the insures and money men would still carry on using them if they considered it to much of a risk? ...when you consider how much a big budget movies costs and the value of potentially an A list star getting hurt or killed?

The issue with this appears to be (with what we know so far) was hiring somebody who wasn't qualified/experienced enough to do the job safely and didn't have the common sense to keep live rounds away from the set.

[Elegiac]

I get all the Capitalism Bad arguments and I don't disagree, but can we not try quite SO hard to turn one absurdly rare event of negligence and carelessness into a whole diatribe about how capitalism is out there hunting down cinematographers in the streets and shit?

Then you're in luck, because no one has made that argument.

Put the strawman away. There is nothing unreasonable about pointing out how normalized treating production crews like shit is, and that it has a much higher chance of resulting in accidents like this one.

[Endus]

TIL that unions are government regulations. /s

But sure, don't let me stop you grandstanding rather than engaging in critical thinking. It's like a page right out of the GoP playbook. Have fun with that.

Unions without government support are irrelevant. Companies can, and will, just hire non-union workers and cut the union out. Or shut down operations wholesale and move to a new location. They can and will fire staff who raise any possibility of unionization. The only way around this is government regulations protecting workers and supporting the unions.

Where ever did you get the idea that capitalism was good for workers? Its exploitative and harmful nature has been well-understood for like 150 years. Marxist critiques of capitalism ain't new, and weren't even the first.

[Breccia]

NBC News reports that...well, it's what you expect, if you were thinking about it even a little bit.

The assistant director who handed Alec Baldwin the gun that killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins on a movie set last week had been fired from a film in 2019 after a gun unexpectedly discharged on the set, injuring a crew member, a producer for that film said Monday.

The previous incident occurred in New Mexico during the filming of "Freedom's Path," said the producer, who worked on the movie. The assistant director, Dave Halls, was removed from the set immediately and was fired later, according to the producer.

I do not expect every actor in every movie to check on every technical assistant on that same movie when handed a prop gun, a car, makeup, etc. When Baldwin was handed a prop gun, I don't think he said "Wait a minute, maybe I should check this guy's work history..."

Not sure if it was an accident.

Have you changed your mind yet?

[Specialka]

The ability of this forum to turn just about everything into politics never seizes to amaze me.

It's an accident, there is no need to turn this into another Blue vs Red shitfest.

Some people just can't refrain themselves.

[Machismo]

Some people just can't refrain themselves.

I'm guessing you don't see the irony of this comment of yours. You've had so many bad takes in this thread, it's honestly hard to keep track of them all.

[Specialka]

I'm guessing you don't see the irony of this comment of yours. You've had so many bad takes in this thread, it's honestly hard to keep track of them all.

Keep up with the strawman. Typical of you to leave out the rest of the quote.

[Machismo]

Keep up with the strawman. Typical of you to leave out the rest of the quote.

I didn't leave anything out, I simply replied to your comment. if you typed more after, that's not really my fault.

[Specialka]

I didn't leave anything out, I simply replied to your comment. if you typed more after, that's not really my fault.

Nah, you just chose to take it out of context and leave out the message to whom I was responding.

[Machismo]

Nah, you just chose to take it out of context and leave out the message to whom I was responding.

That's what replying does...

Your literal comment:

Some people just can't refrain themselves.