Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
CMU School of Drama
Thursday, February 01, 2024
Alec Baldwin pleads not guilty to new ‘Rust’ set shooting charge
National | Globalnews.ca: Actor Alec Baldwin has pleaded not guilty to a charge of involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer during a rehearsal on a Western movie set in New Mexico.
5 comments:
Julia Adilman
said...
It is upsetting to learn that so many of the people that were involved with this shooting have pleaded not guilty to their charges. It seems quite clear to me that at least someone has to be responsible and guilty for the shooting, and based on this case, I feel like this shooting involves multiple people. They need to be held accountable for their actions because a life was lost and this needs to set a precedent for future film sets with revolvers and other weapons. People’s lives on set need to be protected. There also seems to be a lot of evidence proving that Baldwin and others are quite guilty in this incident. There is no reason as to why the revolver should have ever been possible to shoot and hurt anyone in any way. That is the fault of pretty much anyone on the set that had anything to do with the revolver. When it comes to having dangerous props or weapons on set, it is a lot of people’s responsibilities to keep everyone safe and protected.
I cannot believe that I am reading another article about this. And I cannot believe that there are still debates going on about who is at fault for the shooting. I understand there is some gray area and it is difficult to say who is at fault but someone is. And I can only think about the family waiting for answers and ready to be done hearing about their family member or friend who was shot and yet no one is accepting blame for it. I continue to be frustrated that I am reading articles on this topic and they all say the same thing. No progress is being made and no answers are coming out. Someone is at fault yet everyone continues to plead not guilty and the whole thing is drug on. There is no reason the gun should have been able to be fired much less kill someones and the reason it was it on someone.
I'll be very transparent and admit that I don't remember all of the details of the situation, as it has been going on for quite some time. However, it is still incredibly shocking to me that so many people handled or were aware of the careless handling of a firearm. First things first, I'm assuming that the gun had to be loaded because of a scene in which it is shot. In this case, why are you fooling around with it at all? I don't know a lot about sex, but if I had a loaded firearm, as soon as it was not in use, as soon as we're not rolling, I would get that thing locked up. If you need to rehearse with something, get another fake gun that isn't loaded with something that can kill someone. Having just looked up the definition for involuntary manslaughter, I don't understand how you can argue that you're not guilty of this. involuntary manslaughter means that someone was killed due to the actions of another person in a negligent or careless manner. How can you argue that what you were doing here wasn't negligent or careless?
I’ve heard of Eric Grilly because I live in Nevada with Vegas nearby. I always think it’s interesting when a president steps down because it’s usually a sign the company is not doing well. This seems to be the case with Cirque du Soleil because after the pandemic their company has not been doing well with the combination of lost audiences to Covid, and also the fact the commodity is dying off from the wonder it once was. Theatre in general has suffered from the online age of zoom, but I can’t imagine what it has done to the show that involves human contrition to replace the zoo. I think what Cirque du Soleil does is innovative and exciting, but it seems like a testy business to get into. If Grilly is leaving, I can’t imagine trusting going to work for the company at least within the next few years.
The fact that justice has yet to be decided in the Rust case is shocking to me. Additionally, the focus on Baldwin as opposed to the weapons handlers and props people working behind the scenes is quite striking to me. While actors, and frankly, anyone holding a gun are ultimately responsible for it, the main responsibility must fall on those specifically tasked with handling weapons safety. There seems to be more nuance in this case as it is my understanding that Baldwin was also a producer on the film. The whole incident seems quite shady, as multiple production people walked off the set before the incident because of poor working conditions. It just seems so silly to me that film leaders viewed entertainment as so imperative that it caused someone’s death. While I know the work we do is important to us as artists, it is entertainment at the end of the day, and the tension and lack of safety on that set for a movie seems so irresponsible to me. I’m curious to see how this pans out and have so many more logistical questions. Who hired the weapons supervisor? And what “checks” system existed in weapon management?
5 comments:
It is upsetting to learn that so many of the people that were involved with this shooting have pleaded not guilty to their charges. It seems quite clear to me that at least someone has to be responsible and guilty for the shooting, and based on this case, I feel like this shooting involves multiple people. They need to be held accountable for their actions because a life was lost and this needs to set a precedent for future film sets with revolvers and other weapons. People’s lives on set need to be protected. There also seems to be a lot of evidence proving that Baldwin and others are quite guilty in this incident. There is no reason as to why the revolver should have ever been possible to shoot and hurt anyone in any way. That is the fault of pretty much anyone on the set that had anything to do with the revolver. When it comes to having dangerous props or weapons on set, it is a lot of people’s responsibilities to keep everyone safe and protected.
I cannot believe that I am reading another article about this. And I cannot believe that there are still debates going on about who is at fault for the shooting. I understand there is some gray area and it is difficult to say who is at fault but someone is. And I can only think about the family waiting for answers and ready to be done hearing about their family member or friend who was shot and yet no one is accepting blame for it. I continue to be frustrated that I am reading articles on this topic and they all say the same thing. No progress is being made and no answers are coming out. Someone is at fault yet everyone continues to plead not guilty and the whole thing is drug on. There is no reason the gun should have been able to be fired much less kill someones and the reason it was it on someone.
I'll be very transparent and admit that I don't remember all of the details of the situation, as it has been going on for quite some time. However, it is still incredibly shocking to me that so many people handled or were aware of the careless handling of a firearm. First things first, I'm assuming that the gun had to be loaded because of a scene in which it is shot. In this case, why are you fooling around with it at all? I don't know a lot about sex, but if I had a loaded firearm, as soon as it was not in use, as soon as we're not rolling, I would get that thing locked up. If you need to rehearse with something, get another fake gun that isn't loaded with something that can kill someone. Having just looked up the definition for involuntary manslaughter, I don't understand how you can argue that you're not guilty of this. involuntary manslaughter means that someone was killed due to the actions of another person in a negligent or careless manner. How can you argue that what you were doing here wasn't negligent or careless?
I’ve heard of Eric Grilly because I live in Nevada with Vegas nearby. I always think it’s interesting when a president steps down because it’s usually a sign the company is not doing well. This seems to be the case with Cirque du Soleil because after the pandemic their company has not been doing well with the combination of lost audiences to Covid, and also the fact the commodity is dying off from the wonder it once was. Theatre in general has suffered from the online age of zoom, but I can’t imagine what it has done to the show that involves human contrition to replace the zoo. I think what Cirque du Soleil does is innovative and exciting, but it seems like a testy business to get into. If Grilly is leaving, I can’t imagine trusting going to work for the company at least within the next few years.
The fact that justice has yet to be decided in the Rust case is shocking to me. Additionally, the focus on Baldwin as opposed to the weapons handlers and props people working behind the scenes is quite striking to me. While actors, and frankly, anyone holding a gun are ultimately responsible for it, the main responsibility must fall on those specifically tasked with handling weapons safety. There seems to be more nuance in this case as it is my understanding that Baldwin was also a producer on the film. The whole incident seems quite shady, as multiple production people walked off the set before the incident because of poor working conditions. It just seems so silly to me that film leaders viewed entertainment as so imperative that it caused someone’s death. While I know the work we do is important to us as artists, it is entertainment at the end of the day, and the tension and lack of safety on that set for a movie seems so irresponsible to me. I’m curious to see how this pans out and have so many more logistical questions. Who hired the weapons supervisor? And what “checks” system existed in weapon management?
Post a Comment