• Professorozone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    11 months ago

    So I get that the armored is chiefly responsible but I have to wonder… why was he pointing the gun in that direction at all? When I heard that someone was shot, my first thought was, why wasn’t it another actor? You know, like the person he was shooting at in the movie? The media never seems to answer the questions I have.

    • Schlomocucumber@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      If I recall correctly, they were filming a shot “down the barrel of the gun” kinda thing. So he was pointing it in the direction of the camera

    • CapraObscura@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      “The media” isn’t responsible for spoonfeeding you everything.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_shooting_incident

      “While the trio behind the monitor were repositioning the camera to remove a shadow, Baldwin began explaining to the crew how he planned to draw the firearm.[7] He said, “So, I guess I’m gonna take this out, pull it, and go, ‘Bang!’”[9] When he removed it from the holster, the gun was fired a single time.”

      The person was standing there because they needed to be for one reason or another. They were not in the middle of shooting, they were rehearsing and blocking out the shot.

      With a competent armorer Baldwin would not have even had a real firearm in his hand until the armorer handed it to him moments before actually firing the shot.

      • Professorozone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        I never said they were responsible for spoonfeeding me everything. Thanks for patronizing me by blowing the statement out of proportion.