Jump to content

Things Not Going Well for Alec Baldwin


ousuxndallas

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Those aren't criticisms made in good faith - they just need ammo for their culture war

Yeah, I suspect his position is not to ban all firearms but to have some regulatory limits on ownership, which was the NRA's previous position decades ago, but I honestly don't know. Just weird to think where Lynyrd freakin Skynyrd's position in Saturday Night Special would fall on the political spectrum in the current Overton Window. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

How is this a CR topic ?  He was using an alleged prop gun on a movie set, and did something that violated 2 of the absolute rules of gun safety: always verify it's unloaded when you're handling it, and don't ever point a gun at another person, loaded or not.

He's a stupid, prick, who put the safety of everyone on the set in potential danger to save money, and he's got to live with the fact his actions led directly to the death of another person.

You bring up a point that I find interesting so if y'all would humor me for a moment....the section I bolded--I wonder if the Bluebell execs who saved money by delaying the recall of their contaminated ice cream think about their actions that led to the deaths of 3 people and sickened others. Do they think more about those three people or the $17.25 million they paid in penalties for knowingly shipping the ice cream from their dirty facility? Or the Sackler family, that won immunity regarding their pharma company that distributed opioids?

It was said in one of the coronavirus threads that humans are not very good at evaluating risk sometimes. But when money is the reward, human life seems to be negotiable. Labor has been walking off the job, not just in this instance, but coast to coast due to evaluating their own risk versus reward. In the case of this movie set, they found replacements. It reminded me of a different movie, appropriately titled as you can imagine--*The Replacements--but in that case, the strikebreakers are hailed as underdogs and heroes and the pro football players on strike are the prima donnas and depicted as rather unlikeable and entitled. The movie wouldn't have worked so well if they had been striking for better health care, or concussion protocol, or some such particular, but it does or at least it should, make us reflect upon the nature and history of labor and product in this country and the way it is trending. For better? Or for worse?

Gun deaths on movie sets are rare, but perhaps what ought to be talked about is not just the violation of gun safety that Onboard 2.0 mentions (which is vital) but also the choices we as a society make when turning away from what seems to be disregard for the human condition trying to make ends meet.

 

*I enjoyed this movie on the surface, and watch it whenever it's on, but have seen it so many times that I dig a little deeper into the unintentional (?) perspectives it offers....

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

How is this a CR topic ?  He was using an alleged prop gun on a movie set, and did something that violated 2 of the absolute rules of gun safety: always verify it's unloaded when you're handling it, and don't ever point a gun at another person, loaded or not.

He's a stupid, prick, who put the safety of everyone on the set in potential danger to save money, and he's got to live with the fact his actions led directly to the death of another person.

Tell me that you know jack shit about movie production without telling me that you know jack shit about movie production.

"Hey Ms. 22 year old Hollywood starlet, it's actually YOUR job to triple-check that the gun you've been handed only contains a blank and not a real bullet. You can tell the difference, right? Oh, and when the camera moves in for the head-on close up, point the gun away. It will ruin the shot, but we can't ever violate the 'don't point a gun at someone' rule."

 

Edited by aggie08
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

Tell me that you know jack shit about movie production without telling me that you know jack shit about movie production.

"Hey Mrs. 22 year old Hollywood starlet, it's actually YOUR job to triple-check that the gun you've been handed only contains a blank and not a real bullet. You can tell the difference, right? Oh, and when the camera moves in for the head-on close up, point the gun away. It will ruin the shot, but we can't ever violate the 'don't point a gun at someone' rule."

 

For sake of discussion, I wouldn't expect the actor/actress to be as knowledgeable although on days when weapons are used, isn't it protocol to have some safety run downs (regarding your statement about the weapon's chamber)? However, if Baldwin was both actor and producer, isn't it the producer role in which many of the criticisms (on here, aside from the trolls) are being targeted? I think I understand @RomaVicta's explanation in that regard, but since Baldwin was wearing more than one hat and was physically present, perhaps it makes it difficult to complain to him? 

The don't point a gun at someone rule--didn't they used to do that when filming movies? They showed a close up of the weapon instead of the shooter, and then in the pull away shot, the weapon is pointed slightly away from the intended target but the camera doesn't show that? It still puts crew in the line of fire, but just how realistic do our movies need to be?

I don't believe anyone on the set was playing around with the weapon or joking about it. It seems more an act of familiarity with objects leading to perhaps complacency. Tragic consequences all around. It isn't political, or at least it shouldn't be, but it will be made that way because we can't seem to help ourselves these days.

Edited by Mrs Whiggins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

For sake of discussion, I wouldn't expect the actor/actress to be as knowledgeable although on days when weapons are used, isn't it protocol to have some safety run downs (regarding your statement about the weapon's chamber)? However, if Baldwin was both actor and producer, isn't it the producer role in which many of the criticisms (on here, aside from the trolls) are being targeted? I think I understand @RomaVicta's explanation in that regard, but since Baldwin was wearing more than one hat and was physically present, perhaps it makes it difficult to complain to him? 

The don't point a gun at someone rule--didn't they used to do that when filming movies? They showed a close up of the weapon instead of the shooter, and then in the pull away shot, the weapon is pointed slightly away from the intended target but the camera doesn't show that? It still puts crew in the line of fire, but just how realistic do our movies need to be?

I don't believe anyone on the set was playing around with the weapon or joking about it. It seems more an act of familiarity with objects leading to perhaps complacency. Tragic consequences all around. It isn't political, or at least it shouldn't be, but it will be made that way because we can't seem to help ourselves these days.

1) Since movies started pointing guns away from the actors it has been noticeable, and that illusion doesn't really work all that well.   

2) We are talking about less than 1 person per 10 years over the last 50 years.   If the average is 400 movies/yr* over that course,  that works out to 0.025%.    Which sounds to me like the industry standards and procedures are effective.   The incidents which we have heard about all sound like violations of those procedures.    

*Using the year 2000 average which was about 400 movies released that year, recently that number has nearly doubled.

3) It was always going to shift to something political because the right is populated by TMZ watching vultures.   Hell, there are people that know his private conversations with his daughter.  A fucking pandemic, and simple obvious well established protocols and science for fighting disease became political because a group of right wing morons are mentally weak and susceptible to FWD FWD weapons grade bullshit.    If the earth was invaded by murderous aliens from Mars and it was reported on CNN, 40% of the country would believe it was fake even as they were being Ooh-lahed** to death.

**Farewell thunderchild...  (See if you uncultured hippies can understand reference)

 

Edited by Nivek
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Walser said:

His complicated distributed TV setup had the main TV stuck on Fox and he couldn't change the channel. He just left it on to have something on.

I have never understood the just-leaving-on of a TV to have something rattling in the background. When I'd stay with my dad, he'd have the damn thing going all day and night with nobody ever watching it. Loving child that I am, I'd turn it off so he could hear his inner demons scream.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You’re talking about 2 very different sets of circumstances. 

Baldwin fucking around on a set and pointing a weapon at people that he doesn’t even know if it’s loaded or not is for damn sure a prick move.

Cops pointing their weapons at 13 year olds in many circumstances could be considered pricks.  Still not a political topic in my opinion.

"...doesn't know if it's loaded..."

Come the fuck on.  The assistant director handed him the gun and shouted "cold gun".  That's a pretty good reason for a non-gun guy to believe that it was unloaded. 

Would I trust somebody else in that situation?  Yeah, my Dad up until about 10 years ago (he's slowing down) and my son for about the last 10 years or so.  I wouldn't trust anybody else, but I've had gun safety rules beaten into me.  I don't know Baldwin's entire history, but I doubt that his NYC ass got a .22 for his 7th birthday, like I did (the very same .22 that my kid got on his 7th birthday).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

yall it's pretty basic. alec baldwin spent four years making fun of trump and is a total liberal. it's not about the gun or the poor deceased woman. those are means to an end in order to politically gloat that baldwin finally has his comeuppance. 

Yep, and that is to be expected.  Baldwin put himself in this position to be gloated over.  As has Trump, Rush, etc...  Its when the same individuals gloat over a tragedy on one side, then clutch their pearls on the other that it gets ridiculous.  So I’m not going to pretend that I have any moral high ground to condescend to the gloaters in this case.  I’ve done what they are doing now when Rush died.  I’ll do it again when Trump and others of his ilk have a bad tragedy that befalls them.  We all love a nice big serving of poetic justice, even if we don’t agree on who should be the recipients.

As for this event, I’ll just shrug, wonder how it happened and hope that the victim’s family can have some peace as their tragedy is politicized.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...doesn't know if it's loaded..."
Come the fuck on.  The assistant director handed him the gun and shouted "cold gun".  That's a pretty good reason for a non-gun guy to believe that it was unloaded. 
Would I trust somebody else in that situation?  Yeah, my Dad up until about 10 years ago (he's slowing down) and my son for about the last 10 years or so.  I wouldn't trust anybody else, but I've had gun safety rules beaten into me.  I don't know Baldwin's entire history, but I doubt that his NYC ass got a .22 for his 7th birthday, like I did (the very same .22 that my kid got on his 7th birthday).
I doubt he got a .22 for his 7th birthday but he didn't grow up in the city.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

yall it's pretty basic. alec baldwin spent four years making fun of trump and is a total liberal. it's not about the gun or the poor deceased woman. those are means to an end in order to politically gloat that baldwin finally has his comeuppance. 

Yep. He mockingly impersonated Trump on SNL (and nailed it) so he must pay.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Yeah, I suspect his position is not to ban all firearms but to have some regulatory limits on ownership, which was the NRA's previous position decades ago, but I honestly don't know. Just weird to think where Lynyrd freakin Skynyrd's position in Saturday Night Special would fall on the political spectrum in the current Overton Window. 

TIL Lynyrd Skynyrd wrote an actual anti-handgun song 😮

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

For sake of discussion, I wouldn't expect the actor/actress to be as knowledgeable although on days when weapons are used, isn't it protocol to have some safety run downs (regarding your statement about the weapon's chamber)? However, if Baldwin was both actor and producer, isn't it the producer role in which many of the criticisms (on here, aside from the trolls) are being targeted? I think I understand @RomaVicta's explanation in that regard, but since Baldwin was wearing more than one hat and was physically present, perhaps it makes it difficult to complain to him? 

The don't point a gun at someone rule--didn't they used to do that when filming movies? They showed a close up of the weapon instead of the shooter, and then in the pull away shot, the weapon is pointed slightly away from the intended target but the camera doesn't show that? It still puts crew in the line of fire, but just how realistic do our movies need to be?

I don't believe anyone on the set was playing around with the weapon or joking about it. It seems more an act of familiarity with objects leading to perhaps complacency. Tragic consequences all around. It isn't political, or at least it shouldn't be, but it will be made that way because we can't seem to help ourselves these days.

There is an exacting protocol for weapons on a set. That's why they have an armorer. The gun is a prop in a movie and never needs to be loaded with real ammunition. I don't know what projectile came out of the gun, but if it was a bullet, there's a whole slew of things that had to go wrong before it got to Baldwin's hand.

People have basic notions of what producer's do. In movies, you can get a producer credit for being the one who brought the script to the attention of a prominent actor, movie producer, or studio. Other people, like Baldwin, get a producer credit because it's likely the movie could not have found funding without a big player.

In movies, the producers you see in the credits generally are connected to the creative process in some way or funding the movie. They don't aggregately run the set or oversee anything happening with the crew.

The line producer is the person in charge of the whole production. This person arranges for crew, craft services, and manages costs. On the set, the first assistant director is the head administrator of what is going on. This person makes sure everything is ready for the planned scenes, that the crew is in order, and that the actors know their schedules. He or she is the person you go to with problems. 

The first AD will consult with the line producer where necessary about logistics or other issues. If there is a shortage of money, then the line producer might go to the company that owns the movie to discuss budget. Line producers look bad doing this, so they hate doing this.

Nobody on that set would ask Baldwin about working hours, crew housing or payroll. They know that the creative team including the cast are concerned with creative elements. The whole engine of production is set up to keep any material responsibilities off the shoulders of the creative team. The director, DP, actor/producer likely couldn't even tell you about how the movie is being administrated.

On TV, a series may have numerous producers; they're just about all writers. They don't know a thing about how the show will be shot or what anything costs.

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

There is an exacting protocol for weapons on a set. That's why they have an armorer. The gun is a prop in a movie and never needs to be loaded with real ammunition. I don't know what projectile came out of the gun, but if it was a bullet, there's a whole slew of things that had to go wrong before it got to Baldwin's hand.

People have basic notions of what producer's do. In movies, you can get a producer credit for being the one who brought the script to the attention of a prominent actor, movie producer, or studio. Other people, like Baldwin, get a producer credit because it's likely the movie could not have found funding without a big player.

In movies, the producers you see in the credits generally are connected to the creative process in some way or funding the movie. They don't aggregately run the set or oversee anything happening with the crew.

The line producer is the person in charge of the whole production. This person arranges for crew, craft services, and manages costs. On the set, the first assistant director is the head administrator of what is going on. This person makes sure everything is ready for the planned scenes, that the crew is in order, and that the actors know their schedules. He or she is the person you go to with problems. 

The first AD will consult with the line producer where necessary about logistics or other issues. If there is a shortage of money, then the line producer might go to the company that owns the movie to discuss budget. Line producers look bad doing this, so they hate doing this.

Nobody on that set would ask Baldwin about working hours, crew housing or payroll. They know that the creative team including the cast are concerned with creative elements. The whole engine of production is set up to keep any material responsibilities off the shoulders of the creative team. The director, DP, actor/producer likely couldn't even tell you about how the movie is being administrated.

On TV, a series may have numerous producers; they're just about all writers. They don't know a thing about how the show will be shot or what anything costs.

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I was (and still am) more interested in the background than the original poster's intent and hopefully I wasn't coming across as the just asking questions schtick simply for giving a layperson's POV. I didn't read anything about a bullet being in the weapon just that it was 'live' (as was explained earlier that could've been the blank which is still dangerous). Anyone who sits through the credits (which we usually do just because I hate the mad rush for the exit and also because I enjoy the tidbits sometimes) can see there are a lot of individuals involved in making a movie but you are spot on regarding my naivete because I have no clue as to what some most of those titles mean. Pretty crazy, huh? Can you imagine listing every employee that was involved in making the computer at which I am sitting prior to it ending up on the desk? Actually, that's kind of cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

Maybe @Onboard 2.0 can tell us how this is all really Hillary’s fault

Maybe you can tell your mom I left the $50 under the lamp on the bedstsand.  I’m curious where I’ve laid blame for this anywhere than where it should be.
 

He pulled the trigger of a gun he thought was unloaded, but didn’t know and the armorer or prop master didn’t do their job by showing him it was empty.


 He should have checked himself but has no clue what the rules of gun safety are obviously.

Not sure where Hillary would play into this, but you do you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Maybe you can tell your mom I left the $50 under the lamp on the bedstsand.  I’m curious where I’ve laid blame for this anywhere than where it should be.
 

He pulled the trigger of a gun he thought was unloaded, but didn’t know and the armorer or prop master didn’t do their job by showing him it was empty.


 He should have checked himself but has no clue what the rules of gun safety are obviously.

Not sure where Hillary would play into this, but you do you.

Good one big guy. Your reasoning skills continue to be exemplary 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I was (and still am) more interested in the background than the original poster's intent and hopefully I wasn't coming across as the just asking questions schtick simply for giving a layperson's POV. I didn't read anything about a bullet being in the weapon just that it was 'live' (as was explained earlier that could've been the blank which is still dangerous). Anyone who sits through the credits (which we usually do just because I hate the mad rush for the exit and also because I enjoy the tidbits sometimes) can see there are a lot of individuals involved in making a movie but you are spot on regarding my naivete because I have no clue as to what some most of those titles mean. Pretty crazy, huh? Can you imagine listing every employee that was involved in making the computer at which I am sitting prior to it ending up on the desk? Actually, that's kind of cool.

It's a world I've worked in. I just took this opportunity to clarify a process since the conservos are malignantly speculating about what happened. Now they have no excuse to be obtuse.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

He should have checked himself but has no clue what the rules of gun safety are obviously.

Did the scene call for blanks to be used and if so, are blanks easily distinguishable from live ammunition when they are in the cylinder? Honest question as I've never dealt with blank cartridges before. Or does the presence of any cartridge negate it being a cold gun?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And your attempt at a troll was lame beyond belief

I wasn’t trolling. You come in here and blame Alec Baldwin because he has different political views than you do. You then double down and prove how uninformed you are about how any of this works, which is pretty standard for you. I just figured somewhere in there Hillary would be your next target since she’s been your boogeyman for years and you weren’t factual anyway. 

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Genco said:

Did the scene call for blanks to be used and if so, are blanks easily distinguishable from live ammunition when they are in the cylinder? Honest question as I've never dealt with blank cartridges before. Or does the presence of any cartridge negate it being a cold gun?

 

I couldn’t tell you, but someone hands me a gun and either I see the person handing it to me has checked the chamber or I do.  

 

on a movie set that person has that responsible for  that should be someone who takes it fucking seriously 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Alec Baldwin is a psychologically unbalanced person with violent tendencies who wasn't being responsible with a single-shot prop revolver?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I wasn’t trolling. You come in here and blame Alec Baldwin because he has different political views than you do. You then double down and prove how uninformed you are about how any of this works, which is pretty standard for you. I just figured somewhere in there Hillary would be your next target since she’s been your boogeyman for years and you weren’t factual anyway. 

I blamed him for shooting that woman for damn sure because he violated cardinal gun safety rules . I said nothing about his politics or talked about politics .

 

he’s a Dick, but I love his acting and separate it out.  Show me where I made a single political statement about him or his politics sparky.

 

I question this being a political issue at all and stated that quite clearly  in my OP on the topic 

tell yer mom I said hey.

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I blamed him fir shooting that woman fir damn sure because he violated cardinal gun safety  rules . I’d aid nothing about his politics or talked about politics .

 

he’s a Dick, but I love his acting and separate it out.  Show me where I made a single political statement about him or his politics sparky.

 

I question this being a political issue at all and stated that quote clearly .

 

tell yer mom I said hey.

Actually you claimed he was a “ a stupid, prick, who put the safety of everyone on the set in potential danger to save money, and he's got to live with the fact his actions led directly to the death of another person”.

 

Which isn’t true. It’s based on completely unproven bullshit but it helps fuel your hate brigade. But wait there’s more…

Baldwin fucking around on a set and pointing a weapon at people that he doesn’t even know if it’s loaded or not is for damn sure a prick move.
 

So here’s something else that’s bullshit from you. He wasn’t fucking around on set, he wasn’t being a prick. He was doing his job. Someone else didn’t do theirs and because it he has now killed someone. It’s awful for those injured, those dead, and for him. But you for some reason needed to blame Alec Baldwin. I wonder why that is? 
 

I’ll let my moms know that a grown man on the internet is making mom jokes because he is mad at being uninformed.

Edited by hobbes2702
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I blamed him fir shooting that woman fir damn sure because he violated cardinal gun safety  rules . I’d aid nothing about his politics or talked about politics .

 

he’s a Dick, but I love his acting and separate it out.  Show me where I made a single political statement about him or his politics sparky.

 

I question this being a political issue at all and stated that quote clearly .

 

tell yer mom I said hey.

Good ol drunk on a Sunday at 5

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things aren’t actually going well for him, but not for the dumbass political reason OP is making.
Not only is he a producer, but he also owns the production company behind the movie. 

He was in charge while union workers walked off the job due to safety concerns and scabs were brought on to continue work. 

He literally owns and operated the company that promoted a culture of ignoring safety protocols in order to speed up production at less cost.

So Alec Baldwin owned the company at fault. He held a title of producer, who is ultimately responsible for the safety of the cast and crew, crew that have been walking off set due to unsafe conditions. And he literally fired the shot that killed one of his staff, and it was the third negligent gun discharge of the production.


After doing a Google search, I see zero sources claiming that Baldwin owns Rust Movie Production, LLC, despite the various sources indicating they are doing an internal investigation and even a FoxNews article that says the company is likely covered by insurance. LA Times indicate it was financed by BondIt Media Capital and CAA Media Finance.

Even if he did, the whole point of a single purpose LLC is to protect the owners from financial liability.

Care to cite your sources? Or just admit you’re making up bullshit on the intrawebs.
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Tuco said:


After doing a Google search, I see zero sources claiming that Baldwin owns Rust Movie Production, LLC, despite the various sources indicating they are doing an internal investigation and even a FoxNews article that says the company is likely covered by insurance. LA Times indicate it was financed by BondIt Media Capital and CAA Media Finance.

Even if he did, the whole point of a single purpose LLC is to protect the owners from financial liability.

Care to cite your sources? Or just admit you’re making up bullshit on the intrawebs.

lol. You aren’t good at the googles, are you?  I mean the first production company listed on the Wikipedia page is el dorado pictures.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Let the record show Gil Bang is a re-gifter. 

I am indeed.  But, if you're gonna re-gift, a Marlin Glenfield Mod. 25 is a hell of a thing to re-gift.  And yeah, my kid already has plans to join the re-gift club, in a few short years.

That's, IMHO, the coolest thing about guns; passing them down generations. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several hundred children in the United States are killed each year in accidental firearm deaths because gun owners violate cardinal rules of gun safety: never leave a firearm and ammunition in a place where a child can gain access. 
 

I can only assume the folks who think Alec Baldwin is responsible and who argue that actors shouldn’t point guns at people on set also support measures like mandatory child locks with each purchase, mandatory storage requirements in homes where there are children, and strict liability for violators. Gun safety really has to come first, above all other concerns including concerns about efficiency of use. 
 

If anything, those people are far more liable and culpable. It’s reasonable for an actor to think there are no live rounds on a movie set. It’s absolutely unreasonable to think that a child can’t get access to a weapon and ammunition you buy and keep yourself. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Xian said:

lol. You aren’t good at the googles, are you?  I mean the first production company listed on the Wikipedia page is el dorado pictures.  

To clarify, are you stating you still believe that Alec Baldwin's production company controlled the production for the movie, or that Wikipedia confused you?  

I am always curious how much the delusional will double-down on stupid shit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/23/2021 at 4:41 PM, Xian said:

Things aren’t actually going well for him, but not for the dumbass political reason OP is making.

Not only is he a producer, but he also owns the production company behind the movie. 

He was in charge while union workers walked off the job due to safety concerns and scabs were brought on to continue work. 

He literally owns and operated the company that promoted a culture of ignoring safety protocols in order to speed up production at less cost.

So Alec Baldwin owned the company at fault. He held a title of producer, who is ultimately responsible for the safety of the cast and crew, crew that have been walking off set due to unsafe conditions. And he literally fired the shot that killed one of his staff, and it was the third negligent gun discharge of the production.

I'm going to go ahead and neg this for willful distortion. Your desire to paint Baldwin as the head spider has caused you lie about his role in the issues you mention. See my earlier posts. 

I don't think you can merely claim ignorance. You plunge along to defame a person quite comfortable in not doing a thing to grasp how a movie set works.

All for a political gotcha founded on the illogic that this has something to do with the gun culture issue we have going here in the land of the free (-fire zone).

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tuco said:

To clarify, are you stating you still believe that Alec Baldwin's production company controlled the production for the movie, or that Wikipedia confused you?  

I am always curious how much the delusional will double-down on stupid shit.  

I have no idea what you are talking about. Are you trying to say that AB doesn’t own El Dorado pictures?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I'm going to go ahead and neg this for willful distortion. Your desire to paint Baldwin as the head spider has caused you lie about his role in the issues you mention. See my earlier posts. 

I don't think you can merely claim ignorance. You plunge along to defame a person quite comfortable in not doing a thing to grasp how a movie set works.

All for a political gotcha founded on the illogic that this has something to do with the gun culture issue we have going here in the land of the free (-fire zone).

What are you talking about?

what in my post was incorrect?  Did he fire the gun? Is he a producer? Does he own el dorado pictures?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.494048f041b4f6cbd642b0909ef5d3ec.png

Surrender accepted. Even your response to my latest post ignores everything but this one little fact from which you claim all sorts of untruths. It's a familiar style of argument sophistry from the right: grab the ignorance of a single aspect and claim a larger truth. Then never recognize any other fact or analysis that easily overturns your position.

Makes you something of a liar. Your fight against reality is killing the country you probably think you love.

You are right about a malign element in this story. Or should I say in the response to this story?

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Xian said:

What are you talking about?

what in my post was incorrect?  Did he fire the gun? Is he a producer? Does he own el dorado pictures?  

Quote

Things aren’t actually going well for him, but not for the dumbass political reason OP is making.

Not only is he a producer, but he also owns the production company behind the movie. 

He was in charge while union workers walked off the job due to safety concerns and scabs were brought on to continue work. 

He literally owns and operated the company that promoted a culture of ignoring safety protocols in order to speed up production at less cost.

So Alec Baldwin owned the company at fault. He held a title of producer, who is ultimately responsible for the safety of the cast and crew, crew that have been walking off set due to unsafe conditions. And he literally fired the shot that killed one of his staff, and it was the third negligent gun discharge of the production.

You don't know shit and you don't want to know it. How many production companies were involved in this movie? I'm sure you know the answer, but I've spoilered it for those who don't. From ImDB (a movie data base you surely searched to inform your claims, no?)

Spoiler

image.png.d20dcbb0cf5c085d3cc34c35116d20b7.png

You conclude that Baldwin, as owner of El Dorado, which I'll take your word for, was ultimately responsible. How do you conclude that? Show your work. 

No, you decided to see what you're looking for, apply just the correct amount of gross ignorance, and then score big points at an actor who you despise for purely political reasons.

Respond to my posts instead of sticking by the inanity of your own. 

Or neg me and continue the third-rate sophistry.

In case you don't want to know anything about that word because you'd have to take it into whatever you deem to be "consideration," I'll help you:

image.png.842f708e8ea7b4e11d92028dc3c7b5e2.png

Edited by RomaVicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

You don't know shit and you don't want to know it. How many production companies were involved in this movie? I'm sure you know the answer, but I've spoilered it for those who don't. From ImDB (a movie data base you surely searched to inform your claims, no?)

  Reveal hidden contents

image.png.d20dcbb0cf5c085d3cc34c35116d20b7.png

You conclude that Baldwin, as owner of El Doradow which I'll take your word for, was ultimately responsible. How do you conclude that? Show your work. 

No, you decided to see what you're looking for, apply just the correct amount of gross ignorance, and then score big points at an actor who you despise for purely political reasons.

Respond to my posts instead of sticking by the inanity of your own. 

Or neg me and continue the third-rate sophistry.

In case you don't want to know anything about that word because you'd have to take it into whatever you deem to be "consideration," I'll help you:

image.png.842f708e8ea7b4e11d92028dc3c7b5e2.png

Lulz is Alec your uncle? 
typically the owner of a company is responsible for the what happens under his watch. Especially when said owner is on location and actively involved. 
 

And what makes you think I despise AB?!?  I’ve never met him personally, so I can’t attest to his character, but I love his roles.  
I also agree with him politically. Are you under the impression I’m some sort of gun nut or something?   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See my predictive post above. 

I find your claim about your feeling about Baldwin to be incredibly credible. I'm sure there is another reason for your jijad.

No, I don't include Baldwin in my family. I suppose it seemed clever to turn my observation about your apparent ill-disposition into a facile riposte about some imagined familial connection.

My affection is for honest debate and discourse. Don't expect another response from me if you merely parrot your earlier, refuted points.

Edited by RomaVicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

I am waiting to see if Russian agents snuck in and chambered some live rounds knowing Baldwin would point the gun at a Ukrainian.

There were scabs on set, right?  Have we blamed a Union worker yet?  That seems totally plausible. 

A completely reliable anonymous source told me that this one time at band camp, a union worker.....

 

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Xian said:

Lulz is Alec your uncle? 
typically the owner of a company is responsible for the what happens under his watch. Especially when said owner is on location and actively involved. 
 

And what makes you think I despise AB?!?  I’ve never met him personally, so I can’t attest to his character, but I love his roles.  
I also agree with him politically. Are you under the impression I’m some sort of gun nut or something?   

 

What exactly do think production companies do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...