• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News Alec Baldwin Accidentally Shoots & Kills Cinematographer, Wounds Director with Prop Gun

What I don't get is why is their any real bullets around to even be loaded in such a gun? Shouldn't all bullets basically be blanks on the sets. Why have any live ammo around?
There should never be real bullets on set. They have blanks or dummy rounds never actual bullets.There are so many mistakes happening on this set from what I have read and heard from people close to the set. The location filming started in early October. Many of the union local 44 people who walked off, had not been paid for 3 weeks. Their hotels were not being covered, they had safety concerns.......I heard from one friend that they had already had multiple incidents or "misfires" on set. The AD should NOT have been the one taking the firearm from the armerors cart and handing it to the actor.......

While Baldwin most likely is clear of wrongdoing, since he was handed the gun and the AD announced it was "cold" I believe it is HIS production company "El Dorado Pictures" which will be ultimately liable for failing to insure procedures were followed.
 
^ just curious but it seems from the post from the armorer and others I’ve seen that the 1st AD is the one who should be overseeing safety and liaising between the armorer.. Is that not the case?
 
Just saw this nugget which should NEVER EVER happen...........'It was revealed yesterday that the revolver was used by other members on the set for target practice and had likely fired live rounds prior to the shooting of Halyna and director Souza."
 
^ just curious but it seems from the post from the armorer and others I’ve seen that the 1st AD is the one who should be overseeing safety and liaising between the armorer.. Is that not the case?
Every time I have filmed in the UK it is the property master or the armorer that handed me the firearm.......the AD would call for them to bring the prop gun to the set to replace the rubber or resin guns with the real ones for the close ups and action shots. They would be checked 3 times before the actor got them.
 
While Baldwin most likely is clear of wrongdoing, since he was handed the gun and the AD announced it was "cold" I believe it is HIS production company "El Dorado Pictures" which will be ultimately liable for failing to insure procedures were followed.

Hollywood is ahead of you on that one - the legal entity making the film is "Rust Movie Productions, LLC" which will fold into bankruptcy...
 
A very informative thread by a film armorer
https://twitter.com/sl_huang/status/1451797888158375937


A thread by SL Huang 黄士芬
A lot of people are messaging me about yesterday's tragedy that was an on-set firearms death (because I am a film armorer, for those who don't know).

As both a human and a professional, it is extremely upsetting. My thoughts are with Halyna Hutchins' loved ones

I am not going to share backchannel rumors or speculation I'm hearing but I will answer a few things about movies and guns that people are asking (thread)

One is: "how are there not safety measures to prevent this?" The answer is: There are. There are very, very many

Qualified armorers have many, many safety precautions and redundancies.

Honestly I keep trying to come up with a scenario where it's possible for this to happen under standard gun safety procedures on film sets and I am so horribly stumped

(and horrified that I am stumped because it means this was likely so bad, and the failures here likely so unfathomably huge and many)

Our procedures plan in mistakes, actor error, etc. There should never be any single fail point; if anyone makes a mistake there are many multiple other things backing up the safety

Safety is always #1. Nothing can compromise it. There are other parts of the job (e.g. helping the director get the shots they want) but nothing can ever interfere with safety

In fact even in helping the director get their shots -- it's all about advising them on ways to do it SAFELY that will still look cool and get the effect they want.

I would tell directors "no" all the time (and provide them with a safe alternative). I can think of so many things I would do on every film set as standard, any one of which would have prevented something like this.

We plan for that redundancy, we plan for things to go wrong and for actors to mess up

Of course, I am talking as -- I would hope to say -- a good armorer. These are all things me and my colleagues do as standard.

Yes there are a handful of bad armorers out there... and production companies also cut corners and that's getting worse

What I mean by that is that they will hire someone unqualified for cheap, or they will try to do gunfire without any qualified person on the set, and production will allow it

...and other people on the crew who should put a stop to it (like the 1st AD (= 1st Assistant Director), who is the final word on safety) do not shut it down

Or the 1st AD etc may not have the experience to shut it down if production cut too many corners and has, for example, a green 1st AD for cheap also. This is devastating and I suspect has played into other non-firearms film set tragedies

There are positions where it is very, very important to have qualified people for safety reasons. 1st AD. Armorer, SFX, rigging, stunts. You need people who know exactly what they're doing. Now I do not know what happened here. But I want to convey to you, as someone who has worked firearms on probably hundreds of film sets, that this is both deeply, deeply upsetting and also deeply shocking

A tragedy happening in this particular way defies everything I know about how we treat guns on film sets. It implies to me that something was likely very, very wrong here. My colleagues and I have been trying to figure out how this could happen when following our basic safety procedures and we keep ending at a loss. We keep ending at "but how is that possible?"

Which implies something even more appalling -- that very basic, very standard safety procedures may not have been followed. And that nobody shut the production down when they weren't.

My heart is breaking to imagine this

Second thing people are asking. "Was this a real gun? why are real guns on set? how could a prop gun fire?"

The media reports are muddling things a bit here so I don't blame people for being confused. First of all, blank guns are real guns. Semi-autos are what we call "blank adapted" but that is purely for the function of the gun, not for safety (a projectile could still exit). Revolvers, shotguns, etc we use unmodified

In other words, you can take a revolver from a movie set and load live ammo into it. (We sometimes have demilled props and other variations but blank fire would almost always be real guns)

So it's very very important to know what is being loaded into the gun. It's also very important to know when a gun IS loaded at all

Our safety procedures are built around this

No one on a film set should ever have any question in their mind about what's going on with the guns. When I am keying a set I am very, very clear on everything to everybody at all times

When we say a "prop gun" on a film set we mean a rubber or a replica that does not fire. We do not mean a blank firing gun. We call blank fire guns real guns because as I said, they are real. Sometimes real guns are used "cold" (unloaded) if either there's no matching prop gun or if they want a closeup (the props are usually not as nice looking in detail), but for wide shots props are fine

Actors can feel & see that a prop is not something that can fire. Also props can be thrown/dropped without damaging the firearm. So lots of reasons to use rubbers/replicas where you can

Real guns are always -- always -- in my possession unless they're being used for a scene, in which case I'm right there watching. We treat real guns very seriously whether they're loaded or not

If we're using the real guns, cold (unloaded) guns are always used outside of gunfire scenes. If the ammo has to be visible we use dummies. These are always carefully checked. Dummies are visibly different from live ammo in that the primer in the back is punched. You can also "click through" by pulling the trigger pointed at the ground to show that they do not fire. When I am using a cold gun or a cold gun with dummies in it, I am VERY clear with the cast and crew about it. I physically open and show that the weapon is cold to the actors, the crew

That's at minimum. Comfort levels differ -- I worked with one cinematographer who wanted to be shown every few minutes that the gun was still cold because he was right next to the actor, even though the gun hadn't left his sight. No problem. I showed him every single take

This is part of the job. Nobody should EVER feel their safety is being compromised on a film set. I always considered it part of my job -- and an important part of my job -- to make sure people felt safe

Of course being safe is #1. But no one should ever have to doubt that that's true. So making sure to communicate with everyone on the set so they know they are in fact safe is also important

Before going "hot" for a gunfire scene, we always choreograph & rehearse everything carefully with the director, crew, actors, stunt people

Everyone needs to know exactly what they're doing before any guns are loaded. Where they're standing, where they're moving, where they're aiming. If anything violates one of our safety redundancies, we change it. If anyone's uncomfortable, we figure out another way. When we "go hot" that means we are loading the guns with blanks and doing blank gunfire. Everyone is very, very clear on this. Very loud notifications, announced and repeated, announced over radio and very loud on set.

It is treated very seriously. We only load the exact amount of blank ammunition needed for the scene. We only have hot guns on set for exactly the amount of time it takes to film the gunfire

I am always right there watching the scene extremely closely and making sure the actors and stunt people are exactly where they should be, doing exactly what they should be

And yes, actors screw up sometimes. Miss their mark, or turn the wrong way, etc. That's why we have so many redundant safety protocols.

No one's life or safety should ever depend solely on the actor hitting their mark correctly. Gunfire scenes are usually very, very short. Sometimes only a few seconds. Very often less than a minute. Remember, films are cut together from lots of shots.

We only go hot for the specific shots that have guns firing in them -- not any of the adjacent ones. As soon as the scene is over, we go in and clear the guns. Nobody moves on until we finish. The set is still hot -- the guns are still considered hot, even if (since we only loaded what they're supposed to fire) they fired all the blanks. We clear the guns and announce them clear and then it's announced and re-announced over the set and over the radio -- we announce it, 1st AD announces it, PAs pick up & repeat. Again, it's very important that everyone on set knows the status of the guns. No guessing games

Only after the guns are announced clear does everything start moving on. At least, this is the way it should work on a properly-run set. This is certainly how it works on my sets. Are there sets that are improperly run? Yes. There shouldn't be, but there are. I don't think there are many -- it's why tragedies like this are thankfully rare. It would honestly be a shock for me to step onto a film set and have to fight for these procedures to be followed

In general I arrive expecting that this will be everyone else's expectations / procedures as well.

Most importantly, I expect people to always listen to / respect me on all of the safety protocols (if not, I would walk away and take the guns with me)

And if proper gun safety is not being followed? If the armorer or propmaster is endangering people?

For immediate safety purposes, in that case there are other people who should step in to shut things down

The 1st AD / production stepping in and shutting things down is what we would want/expect to happen if things aren't being run safely, and it's another thing that has to fail for things to go really, really bad. Experienced 1st ADs absolutely know how gunfire scenes should work. They know how to run them in conjunction with an armorer. They know if proper safety is being followed.

(You never, ever want to lack a good 1st AD. This is only one of many reasons.)

(In fact there are rumors that other (non-gun) tragedies happened because the 1st AD was not allowed to do their job in re: safety & walked off set.)

It is so, so important for all these safety-related positions to hire qualified, experienced people and then to listen to them. Next question I see -- "how could blanks hurt someone? Do blanks still spit out paper or another projectile? What was a film gun doing firing live ammo???"

The last question is one of mine as well (if that's what happened, which I've seen rumored but not confirmed). Live ammo should never, ever, ever be mixed in on a film set. There are live ammo shows like Top Shot and they have entirely different safety protocols. If live ammo was mixed in on this set that is unfathomably bad. It is a tremendous problem and not even slightly understandable or okay. But yes, blanks are still dangerous. Except for shotguns I always used "crimped" blanks -- that is, no wad (nothing coming out of the gun)

Some blanks do have paper wads & are more dangerous bc that is a projectile. I would not use those for films. So in that case, no projectile

But even without that, the air becomes concussive. What is coming out of the gun is air, concussion, powder, flame.

The concussive force dissipates at 15 feet or so for small caliber rounds

We have different size blanks as well -- full load, half load, quarter load (referring to the amount of gunpowder)

There are logistics / permitting / aesthetic / functional / safety reasons that go into load size choice. Not all firearms work with any load size, permitting can be specific to load size, etc. The tl;dr is that there are various considerations that go into this question. Finally, yes, if there is anything stuck in the gun and a blank is put behind it -- yes, that stuck thing can become a projectile, functioning like a bullet

That's why one of the things we always do every single time is check the guns all the way down the barrel.

That's also why one of the basic safety protocols is that blank firing guns are never pointed directly at someone else -- not at other actors, not at crew

I will emphasize -- I never set up actors aiming at a person. Even though blanks dissipate at 15ft -- no. We don't do it. Even though if everything went as expected it would be fine -- no. There are plenty of camera angles to make it look like guns are pointed where they're not.

And if the camera crew wants to film from near the line of fire we can also barrier by putting up lexan or the like as an additional safety protocol

(Remember also that that's still redundant with other safety -- we're not ever doing something like firing live ammo at a camera operator and trusting lexan to save them -- DEFINITELY not)

So that's blanks -- yes they are dangerous, yes we plan for that, yes we check the guns always.

NO there should never be live ammo mixed in (!). NO blanks should never be fired directly at another person even from a "safe" distance. I meant to add more questions I've seen to this but this has gotten very long already, and it is very late and I am very tired and heartsick about this. I may try to come back later if people find this helpful (I hope people do)

Just know that there is a lot of misinformation going around right now on how movie guns work. Please do not take anything you see on Twitter at face value. (A lot of media articles are getting some industry things factually wrong too.)

And please know that when very basic, very standard safety protocols for movie gun safety are followed, this sequence of events is not something we expect to be possible. Not ever, not even rarely.

So it's very important that we find out what happened here and why.

Thanks for posting that - fascinating read.

What an utter clusterfuck.
 
Just saw this nugget which should NEVER EVER happen...........'It was revealed yesterday that the revolver was used by other members on the set for target practice and had likely fired live rounds prior to the shooting of Halyna and director Souza."
Source?
 
I'm hearing talk that Baldiwin could actually face criminal charges - not because he held the gun, but because he was executive producer and thus was responsible (at least to the courts) for what happened on the set.

Although even if he was charged, they'd probably settle out of court anyway.
 
I'd say that's fairly thin argument.

Executive producers on movies are typical "strategic" management who focus on "big picture" elements like funding and publicity.

Directors are typically responsible for what goes on on set at an "operational" level.
 
I'm hearing talk that Baldiwin could actually face criminal charges - not because he held the gun, but because he was executive producer and thus was responsible (at least to the courts) for what happened on the set.

Although even if he was charged, they'd probably settle out of court anyway.
Baldwin was listed as one of six producers. There was also one co-producer and five executive producers.
 
A very informative thread by a film armorer
https://twitter.com/sl_huang/status/1451797888158375937


A thread by SL Huang 黄士芬
A lot of people are messaging me about yesterday's tragedy that was an on-set firearms death (because I am a film armorer, for those who don't know).

As both a human and a professional, it is extremely upsetting. My thoughts are with Halyna Hutchins' loved ones

I am not going to share backchannel rumors or speculation I'm hearing but I will answer a few things about movies and guns that people are asking (thread)

One is: "how are there not safety measures to prevent this?" The answer is: There are. There are very, very many

Qualified armorers have many, many safety precautions and redundancies.

Honestly I keep trying to come up with a scenario where it's possible for this to happen under standard gun safety procedures on film sets and I am so horribly stumped

(and horrified that I am stumped because it means this was likely so bad, and the failures here likely so unfathomably huge and many)

Our procedures plan in mistakes, actor error, etc. There should never be any single fail point; if anyone makes a mistake there are many multiple other things backing up the safety

Safety is always #1. Nothing can compromise it. There are other parts of the job (e.g. helping the director get the shots they want) but nothing can ever interfere with safety

In fact even in helping the director get their shots -- it's all about advising them on ways to do it SAFELY that will still look cool and get the effect they want.

I would tell directors "no" all the time (and provide them with a safe alternative). I can think of so many things I would do on every film set as standard, any one of which would have prevented something like this.

We plan for that redundancy, we plan for things to go wrong and for actors to mess up

Of course, I am talking as -- I would hope to say -- a good armorer. These are all things me and my colleagues do as standard.

Yes there are a handful of bad armorers out there... and production companies also cut corners and that's getting worse

What I mean by that is that they will hire someone unqualified for cheap, or they will try to do gunfire without any qualified person on the set, and production will allow it

...and other people on the crew who should put a stop to it (like the 1st AD (= 1st Assistant Director), who is the final word on safety) do not shut it down

Or the 1st AD etc may not have the experience to shut it down if production cut too many corners and has, for example, a green 1st AD for cheap also. This is devastating and I suspect has played into other non-firearms film set tragedies

There are positions where it is very, very important to have qualified people for safety reasons. 1st AD. Armorer, SFX, rigging, stunts. You need people who know exactly what they're doing. Now I do not know what happened here. But I want to convey to you, as someone who has worked firearms on probably hundreds of film sets, that this is both deeply, deeply upsetting and also deeply shocking

A tragedy happening in this particular way defies everything I know about how we treat guns on film sets. It implies to me that something was likely very, very wrong here. My colleagues and I have been trying to figure out how this could happen when following our basic safety procedures and we keep ending at a loss. We keep ending at "but how is that possible?"

Which implies something even more appalling -- that very basic, very standard safety procedures may not have been followed. And that nobody shut the production down when they weren't.

My heart is breaking to imagine this

Second thing people are asking. "Was this a real gun? why are real guns on set? how could a prop gun fire?"

The media reports are muddling things a bit here so I don't blame people for being confused. First of all, blank guns are real guns. Semi-autos are what we call "blank adapted" but that is purely for the function of the gun, not for safety (a projectile could still exit). Revolvers, shotguns, etc we use unmodified

In other words, you can take a revolver from a movie set and load live ammo into it. (We sometimes have demilled props and other variations but blank fire would almost always be real guns)

So it's very very important to know what is being loaded into the gun. It's also very important to know when a gun IS loaded at all

Our safety procedures are built around this

No one on a film set should ever have any question in their mind about what's going on with the guns. When I am keying a set I am very, very clear on everything to everybody at all times

When we say a "prop gun" on a film set we mean a rubber or a replica that does not fire. We do not mean a blank firing gun. We call blank fire guns real guns because as I said, they are real. Sometimes real guns are used "cold" (unloaded) if either there's no matching prop gun or if they want a closeup (the props are usually not as nice looking in detail), but for wide shots props are fine

Actors can feel & see that a prop is not something that can fire. Also props can be thrown/dropped without damaging the firearm. So lots of reasons to use rubbers/replicas where you can

Real guns are always -- always -- in my possession unless they're being used for a scene, in which case I'm right there watching. We treat real guns very seriously whether they're loaded or not

If we're using the real guns, cold (unloaded) guns are always used outside of gunfire scenes. If the ammo has to be visible we use dummies. These are always carefully checked. Dummies are visibly different from live ammo in that the primer in the back is punched. You can also "click through" by pulling the trigger pointed at the ground to show that they do not fire. When I am using a cold gun or a cold gun with dummies in it, I am VERY clear with the cast and crew about it. I physically open and show that the weapon is cold to the actors, the crew

That's at minimum. Comfort levels differ -- I worked with one cinematographer who wanted to be shown every few minutes that the gun was still cold because he was right next to the actor, even though the gun hadn't left his sight. No problem. I showed him every single take

This is part of the job. Nobody should EVER feel their safety is being compromised on a film set. I always considered it part of my job -- and an important part of my job -- to make sure people felt safe

Of course being safe is #1. But no one should ever have to doubt that that's true. So making sure to communicate with everyone on the set so they know they are in fact safe is also important

Before going "hot" for a gunfire scene, we always choreograph & rehearse everything carefully with the director, crew, actors, stunt people

Everyone needs to know exactly what they're doing before any guns are loaded. Where they're standing, where they're moving, where they're aiming. If anything violates one of our safety redundancies, we change it. If anyone's uncomfortable, we figure out another way. When we "go hot" that means we are loading the guns with blanks and doing blank gunfire. Everyone is very, very clear on this. Very loud notifications, announced and repeated, announced over radio and very loud on set.

It is treated very seriously. We only load the exact amount of blank ammunition needed for the scene. We only have hot guns on set for exactly the amount of time it takes to film the gunfire

I am always right there watching the scene extremely closely and making sure the actors and stunt people are exactly where they should be, doing exactly what they should be

And yes, actors screw up sometimes. Miss their mark, or turn the wrong way, etc. That's why we have so many redundant safety protocols.

No one's life or safety should ever depend solely on the actor hitting their mark correctly. Gunfire scenes are usually very, very short. Sometimes only a few seconds. Very often less than a minute. Remember, films are cut together from lots of shots.

We only go hot for the specific shots that have guns firing in them -- not any of the adjacent ones. As soon as the scene is over, we go in and clear the guns. Nobody moves on until we finish. The set is still hot -- the guns are still considered hot, even if (since we only loaded what they're supposed to fire) they fired all the blanks. We clear the guns and announce them clear and then it's announced and re-announced over the set and over the radio -- we announce it, 1st AD announces it, PAs pick up & repeat. Again, it's very important that everyone on set knows the status of the guns. No guessing games

Only after the guns are announced clear does everything start moving on. At least, this is the way it should work on a properly-run set. This is certainly how it works on my sets. Are there sets that are improperly run? Yes. There shouldn't be, but there are. I don't think there are many -- it's why tragedies like this are thankfully rare. It would honestly be a shock for me to step onto a film set and have to fight for these procedures to be followed

In general I arrive expecting that this will be everyone else's expectations / procedures as well.

Most importantly, I expect people to always listen to / respect me on all of the safety protocols (if not, I would walk away and take the guns with me)

And if proper gun safety is not being followed? If the armorer or propmaster is endangering people?

For immediate safety purposes, in that case there are other people who should step in to shut things down

The 1st AD / production stepping in and shutting things down is what we would want/expect to happen if things aren't being run safely, and it's another thing that has to fail for things to go really, really bad. Experienced 1st ADs absolutely know how gunfire scenes should work. They know how to run them in conjunction with an armorer. They know if proper safety is being followed.

(You never, ever want to lack a good 1st AD. This is only one of many reasons.)

(In fact there are rumors that other (non-gun) tragedies happened because the 1st AD was not allowed to do their job in re: safety & walked off set.)

It is so, so important for all these safety-related positions to hire qualified, experienced people and then to listen to them. Next question I see -- "how could blanks hurt someone? Do blanks still spit out paper or another projectile? What was a film gun doing firing live ammo???"

The last question is one of mine as well (if that's what happened, which I've seen rumored but not confirmed). Live ammo should never, ever, ever be mixed in on a film set. There are live ammo shows like Top Shot and they have entirely different safety protocols. If live ammo was mixed in on this set that is unfathomably bad. It is a tremendous problem and not even slightly understandable or okay. But yes, blanks are still dangerous. Except for shotguns I always used "crimped" blanks -- that is, no wad (nothing coming out of the gun)

Some blanks do have paper wads & are more dangerous bc that is a projectile. I would not use those for films. So in that case, no projectile

But even without that, the air becomes concussive. What is coming out of the gun is air, concussion, powder, flame.

The concussive force dissipates at 15 feet or so for small caliber rounds

We have different size blanks as well -- full load, half load, quarter load (referring to the amount of gunpowder)

There are logistics / permitting / aesthetic / functional / safety reasons that go into load size choice. Not all firearms work with any load size, permitting can be specific to load size, etc. The tl;dr is that there are various considerations that go into this question. Finally, yes, if there is anything stuck in the gun and a blank is put behind it -- yes, that stuck thing can become a projectile, functioning like a bullet

That's why one of the things we always do every single time is check the guns all the way down the barrel.

That's also why one of the basic safety protocols is that blank firing guns are never pointed directly at someone else -- not at other actors, not at crew

I will emphasize -- I never set up actors aiming at a person. Even though blanks dissipate at 15ft -- no. We don't do it. Even though if everything went as expected it would be fine -- no. There are plenty of camera angles to make it look like guns are pointed where they're not.

And if the camera crew wants to film from near the line of fire we can also barrier by putting up lexan or the like as an additional safety protocol

(Remember also that that's still redundant with other safety -- we're not ever doing something like firing live ammo at a camera operator and trusting lexan to save them -- DEFINITELY not)

So that's blanks -- yes they are dangerous, yes we plan for that, yes we check the guns always.

NO there should never be live ammo mixed in (!). NO blanks should never be fired directly at another person even from a "safe" distance. I meant to add more questions I've seen to this but this has gotten very long already, and it is very late and I am very tired and heartsick about this. I may try to come back later if people find this helpful (I hope people do)

Just know that there is a lot of misinformation going around right now on how movie guns work. Please do not take anything you see on Twitter at face value. (A lot of media articles are getting some industry things factually wrong too.)

And please know that when very basic, very standard safety protocols for movie gun safety are followed, this sequence of events is not something we expect to be possible. Not ever, not even rarely.

So it's very important that we find out what happened here and why.

Great post. I’ve been on plenty of sets, but nothing with simulated gunfire. Film sets have lots of moving and dangerous bits. I’ve seen plenty of drone crashes in my day that have scared me to death (red cameras are big)

On the sets with car stunts , I can attest that safety is just as paramount. A few thousand pounds of car flying thru the air can kill anyone easily.

You want to gain the unwelcome attention of an ad? Violate safety rules.

I also haven’t seen the details, but this was something that should have been avoided have safety protocols been followed.
 
Everything that contains a certain amount of gunpowder is dangerous. I know someone who lost a finger with a firecracker, and not a big one at that. Even a severed finger can be sewed back if done on time but his was too damaged and they had to amputate. It happened when he was a kid and he since learned to live with it, fortunately.
 
Does anyone think this movie will be shut down? How in the world could they every finish filming it. Has their ever been anything like is happen before in making a movie since maybe the Twilight Zone movie and The Crow movie? Production company is going to close. People might go to jail and frankly some of these people will likely never be hired again and with good reason.
 
Does anyone think this movie will be shut down? How in the world could they every finish filming it. Has their ever been anything like is happen before in making a movie since maybe the Twilight Zone movie and The Crow movie? Production company is going to close. People might go to jail and frankly some of these people will likely never be hired again and with good reason.

I don't know. Not far from where I live there is a bridge that cost five lives, they didn't stop building the bridge after any of these losses, which happened separately.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top