This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Please explain the need for a "Reactions" section in this article as introduced with this edit. In addition, the White House statement (the only component in that section) is quite clearly the expected statement of concern and sympathy for the family, and not of any encyclopedic value concerning the subject event. Please see WP:NOTNEWS and WP:10YEARS. General Ization Talk 04:57, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
@ NDNSWMI: Please stop reintroducing the content and discuss its purpose here. See WP:BRD. General Ization Talk 05:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Here are a few details that the extensive coverage of this event has not definitively disclosed: 1. What did the script, stage directions, etc. have Baldwin and the other actors doing in this scene? Was Baldwin to fire the weapon, and if so in which direction? 2. Did Baldwin intend to follow the script or were there any ad libs? Some sources indicate that he fumbled the weapon when drawing if from a holster; is that true, and if so is that a departure from the script? 3. What is the exact make and model of the firearm? Since Rust was to be a western, set in 1880 (or thereabouts), one would assume that it is a revolver, but I have seen no other details on this. 4. Most sources suggest that only a single round was fired, has this been confirmed? 5. If it was a revolver, were other cartridges in the cylinder? 6. Since there are conflicting reports, was it a blank round or one containing a bullet. 7. And (the ultimate question) if it contained a bullet, what the heck was a "live round" doing on the set? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 22:44, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
This is interesting: "Halls said that he only recalled seeing three rounds in the chamber ahead of passing the gun over to Baldwin." https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/rust-assistant-director-who-gave-alec-baldwin-gun-didn-t-check-all-rounds-before-fatal-shooting-warrant-reveals/ar-AAQ1ytF?rt=0&ocid=Win10NewsApp&item=flights%3Aprg-mobileappview Halls saw three "rounds" in the "chamber" (I assume he means the cylinder). If so, why did he tell Baldwin it was a "cold gun"; did he think only the round under the hammer counts? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 21:04, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Not sure if it's a WP:BLP violation yet or not, but here's a source with some allegations about Dave Hall's safety record on previous films. To include or not to include? Kire1975 ( talk) 08:54, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
More generally, this article is ripe for BLP issues, and editors should be vigilant for them and remember that an unsourced or poorly-sourced negative statement about a living person should be removed immediately. I've commented out a poorly-sourced claim about Gutierrez-Reed (commented rather than removed since it may well be true; it's just that one publication quoting an unnamed source without independently verifying isn't enough), and have added {{ BLP editintro}} as an editnotice for this page. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 21:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Please don't permit content on the incident to be added to the film article, since this article has been excerpted there per WP:SYNC. This is to prevent duplicate and incongruent coverage ( WP:CONTENTFORKING). If something good is added there and not here, just move it here (remove from there), and add the obligatory copying note to summary. — Alalch Emis ( talk) 15:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't the incident meet the definition of manslaughter? Why do we need a source to say its manslaughter before we can count it as manslaughter? Unless it doesnt meet the requirements for Manslaughter, in that case, tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ATrainLoadedWithDynamite ( talk • contribs) 22:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Should we continue to use "upcoming film" when describing Rust? Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 22:11, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Has there been an announcement that the movie won't be released? In the past, movies have been released (even though tragedy occurred during filming), see the 1983 movie Twilight Zone: The Movie, as an example. GoodDay ( talk) 23:42, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
The article tells about one person, "and was noted for instances of inappropriate sexual behavior". I think that should be removed - I am not convinced of justification for keeping it. (If a person had stolen chocolate as an adult, or been caught for speeding, then I am not sure that we should have mentioned that. Disclaimer: the one type of crime is by many standards, more serious than the other.) 89.8.155.66 ( talk) 17:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
To add to this article: the gun that killed Hutchins had been used earlier that day by members of the film crew, with live ammunition, to do target shooting at a location near the film set. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 04:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Questions to find out the answers to: which crew members were doing the target shooting, and why did Hannah Gutierrez-Reed allow the gun to be used in this manner? Had she allowed guns used in the filming to be used for similar target practice (using live ammunition) on previous days, and is such behavior normal and ethical? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 04:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Photos of those involved could be added to the article. Aside from the existing photo of Alec Baldwin (who shot the gun); those that may be added would be Joel Souza (director, who was shot), Halyna Hutchins (DP, who was shot and killed)), Hannah Gutierrez Reed (film set armorer), Dave Halls (1AD who provided the gun). -- 64.229.90.53 ( talk) 20:46, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
An affidavit released on October 27 says the camera crew walkout happened the day before the incident. This goes against this article from October 22, which says the walkout happened on the same day and six hours before the incident took place. Should we add it? Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 03:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
For some reason, the current title (Rust shooting incident) seems inadequate and/or lacking. Shouldn't the title be something more along the lines of "Killing of Halyna Hutchins" or "Death of Halyna Hutchins" or "Shooting of Halyna Hutchins" ... or some such? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 04:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
We have sources saying that Dave Halls (who handed Baldwin the gun) shouted cold gun
But I noticed another source indicates that multiple crew members (perhaps Halls at at least one other?) said this:
Do we have any indication of the name(s) of other crew members besides Halls who said cold gun? WakandaQT ( talk) 22:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Present text:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-bullet-gun-fired-alec-baldwin-fatal-movie/story?id=80813700:
So is it "FD" or "F.LLI" ?
I think it would also be useful to mention details like the type of action this gun had. For example, has anyone reported on whether it had a rear loading gate (usually on the right side on colts), a top-break cylinder, or a swing-out cylinder? This would influence how easy it would be to check the cylinder contents. WakandaQT ( talk) 06:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Having read that the cameraman wasn't sure if the gun had been safety-checked (something about him taking a five-minute break) and something about there being a lunch break makes me wonder: do we have some specific hour/minute mark that the gun went off, and other key times, like when police arrived, maybe when there was a lunch break?
This all seems useful for a timeline of events (understanding time passing between events) yet the article only presently mentions the date but not the hours aside from 1:50pm. WakandaQT ( talk) 06:57, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
To be fair, LA Times reported about Rust producers too, on November 7. Flipping Switches ( talk) 21:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Rust shooting incident has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is the costume designer Terese Davis' account barely mentioned in this article? It seems to directly contradict multiple of the assertions made (hotels were provided, the set was safe, multiple safety meetings were held, the union backed production's hotel proposal, the non-union members hired were recommended by the union, etc.) and has been published in multiple other publications. Leaving out a primary source like this seems to display bias.
https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-news/alec-baldwin-instagram-rust-denial-1252454/ Whitegreenblueyellow ( talk) 05:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
The claim "In the film industry, a "live round" usually refers to a gun loaded with any material, most commonly a blank." is suspect as again, cites anonymous source in the union, and industry safety bulletins define Blanks and Live Ammunition separately ( SB1, SB2.) In addition the union that originally made the statement knows the difference between blanks and live ammo, and I doubt they'd make the statement without meaning projectile ammo. I think it should be removed but open to discussion since it is from a RS Strangerpete ( talk) 15:10, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Here's what you need to know:
What Baldwin shot was a live round. If he was falsely told "cold gun", it was mistakenly thought the gun either had "dummy rounds" or no rounds in it.
I don't think "blank" is the right terminology here, whether describing what should have happened or what went wrong.
Per RS interview with Steve Wolf, weapons expert, and maybe some other sources... Here is one such: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/videos/us/2021/12/03/alec-baldwin-abc-interview-safety-expert-reaction-sot-newday-vpx.cnn 2600:1012:B065:F8DB:31E4:61E0:EE11:128B ( talk) 04:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Per the below article, much of the background statements have been directly contradicted or disputed.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/rust-cast-crew-letter-alec-baldwin-1235059967/
Almost all of the background statements are written to clearly frame the set as unsafe per anonymous sources. However, 24 crew members have signed a letter with their actual names (unlike these "sources") directly attacking that narrative. For example, below are a few excepts.
“Unfortunately, in the film industry, it is common to work on unprofessional or hectic productions to gain experience and credits. Many of us have worked on those types of productions. Rust was not one of them. Rust was professional. We do acknowledge that no set is perfect, and like any production, Rust had areas of brilliance and areas that were more challenging. While we stand firmly with our unions and strongly support the fight for better working conditions across our industry, we do not feel that this set was a representation of the kind of conditions our unions are fighting against,”
They go on to write "the disgruntled few do not represent all of us. On Rust, our working hours were fair and consistent with expectations. Twelve-hour days and turnarounds were standard... Housing was provided as required by the Union. Payments were made, generally on time, and amounts were as agreed upon, per individual or department deals."
What is currently written is below. Furthemore, Terese Davis (signatory to the letter) directly disputes the lack of safety meetings, the lack of hotels (also rejected in the letter), etc.
The absence of a medic during the construction of the film's sets was an early concern.[5] Firearms safety protocols were not distributed with the call sheets and were not strictly followed on the set; only three safety meetings for the crew were held during filming, including one on October 21.[a][5][4][19][20] From the start, the production assured crew members that it would cover hotel room expenses. However, at the start of the second week of filming, hotel rooms were no longer provided and crew members were mocked for wanting to avoid a one-hour drive from Albuquerque.[5] Several crew members also cited that they were not being paid and began advocating for safer work conditions.[4][5] A crew member added, "We cited everything from lack of payment for three weeks, taking our hotels away despite asking for them in our deals, lack of COVID safety, and on top of that, poor gun safety! Poor on-set safety period!"[21] Furthermore, before the incident occurred, two prop guns had previously fired a total of three times unintentionally (Baldwin's stunt double had accidentally fired two blanks when he was told a prop gun was "cold", and a young woman had shot herself in the foot with a blank round).[5][4][22] However, the production did not launch an investigation into the negligent discharges and later claimed they "were not made aware of any official complaints concerning weapon or prop safety on set".[23][24] Costume designer Terese Magpale David later said that claims of "unsafe, chaotic conditions are bullshit".[25] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:3520:11D0:A8DC:DA27:9BB0:EACE ( talk) 21:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I've heard that there's a discussion about if the article about the movie should be merged into the article about the shooting incident. But, I feel like it should be the other way. For one, I think there would be a lot of people wanting to look at the article to the movie itself. And an article about a shooting incident that tells about the entire movie seems weird. I think the incident article should be merged into one section of the movie article. What do you think of this? Thanks. Sincerely, CertifiedAmazing2 ( talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Agreed If they are merged, this article should be moved into the other one. This would be consistent with the death of Sarah Jones in Midnight Rider (film), where information on the incident along with all subsequent lawsuits are discussed in the article about the non-canceled movie. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 09:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
It seems that Baldwin told Stephanopolis that Baldwin did not pull the trigger. Should this be added? (
FairNPOV (
talk)
04:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC))
Everybody I know uses the phrase "prop gun" in a way that excludes "real gun". A "prop gun", in the usage of everyone I know, wouldn't be capable of shooting real ammunition with bullets. A "prop gun", to them, is a "fake gun" that meets a movie's or play's requirements. (So, "prop gun" excludes a fake gun carved out of black clay to be used in a bluff.) So, we are at first bewildered when told that someone was fatally shot with a "prop gun". It is apparent to me as I read this talk-page that that is not how industry insiders use the phrase, but Wikipedia isn't being written for industry insiders. I would change "prop gun" to something like
With production having been indefinitely suspended on Rust, it's no longer clear that the film actually needs a standalone article as a separate topic from the shooting incident anymore. A separate article about the film can always be restored in the future if the film ever actually resumes production and gets released (which is highly unlikely, but I won't say never) — but we really only need one article here, covering the film and the shooting incident as a single topic, rather than two articles treating them as two distinct topics. Bearcat ( talk) 16:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
I think it should be the other way, with this article being merged into the movie article, rather than the latter being merged into the former. My reasoning is because it would be weird to have an article that is presumably about the incident to have all the info on the movie itself as well. Rather, it would make more sense to merge it that way so the article title matches the content of the article better. I think either that, or just no merger at all. Thank you for hearing me out. P.S. I just realized someone else said this, so I agree with @ Super Goku V:. Sincerely, CertifiedAmazing2 ( talk) 19:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Support there's no need for two articles with lots of overlap regarding the controversy. If production ever resumes, then I have no prejudice against later restoring the film's page. SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 04:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Strongly Oppose. Even if they share a lot of the same information, they are about two different things, and some details could be lost. It’s totally unnecessary to merge these articles. The Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany articles share a lot of information, The Pripyat and Pripyat Amusement Park articles do as well, but they are separate for a reason and merging them would lose a lot of information. It’s also easier to find information relevant specifically to what you’re looking for. I wanted to find the budget and premise of the movie, this article was more focused and relevant to that information. This is honestly a silly request and I really wish people could go 5 minutes without requesting to merge every article because they want to brag to their uninterested date about how they’re some sort of “major contributor” to Wikipedia. Redundant details are ALWAYS better than missing details, especially for a bloody encyclopaedia. George Shardell ( talk) 10:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
The article says that "On January 23, 2022, Baldwin and other producers filed a memorandum that asked a California judge to dismiss the November 17, 2021 lawsuit by Mitchell".
Maybe the article should explain why that lawsuit is in California.--I am guessing that a production company has its address in California.
89.8.150.53 (
talk)
20:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Note that the italics in Rust don't show up in all contexts. Without them, the article sounds like it's talking about shooting rust. Even with them, it still kind of sounds like it's about shooting rust and that the italics are just misplaced; it's not clear at all that they refer to a film. Complicating the issue, the shooting happened while they were shooting Rust, for a different meaning of the word "shooting".
I don't have a clear candidate for what to rename it, but surely there's something better. Maybe "Fatal firearms incident during Rust filming"? -- Trovatore ( talk) 20:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Most people don't know about the movie Rust, or at least not by name.- it is at least known for this, so as well- or more known than Hutchins' name. Kingsif ( talk) 21:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
I have just reassessed the article to C-class in all WPs; I intend to do a review for B-class shortly to make sure there are no major issues; if someone wants to go ahead and to that, please feel free. The article is in good shape overall. Ppt91 ( talk) 16:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Please explain the need for a "Reactions" section in this article as introduced with this edit. In addition, the White House statement (the only component in that section) is quite clearly the expected statement of concern and sympathy for the family, and not of any encyclopedic value concerning the subject event. Please see WP:NOTNEWS and WP:10YEARS. General Ization Talk 04:57, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
@ NDNSWMI: Please stop reintroducing the content and discuss its purpose here. See WP:BRD. General Ization Talk 05:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
Here are a few details that the extensive coverage of this event has not definitively disclosed: 1. What did the script, stage directions, etc. have Baldwin and the other actors doing in this scene? Was Baldwin to fire the weapon, and if so in which direction? 2. Did Baldwin intend to follow the script or were there any ad libs? Some sources indicate that he fumbled the weapon when drawing if from a holster; is that true, and if so is that a departure from the script? 3. What is the exact make and model of the firearm? Since Rust was to be a western, set in 1880 (or thereabouts), one would assume that it is a revolver, but I have seen no other details on this. 4. Most sources suggest that only a single round was fired, has this been confirmed? 5. If it was a revolver, were other cartridges in the cylinder? 6. Since there are conflicting reports, was it a blank round or one containing a bullet. 7. And (the ultimate question) if it contained a bullet, what the heck was a "live round" doing on the set? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 22:44, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
This is interesting: "Halls said that he only recalled seeing three rounds in the chamber ahead of passing the gun over to Baldwin." https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/rust-assistant-director-who-gave-alec-baldwin-gun-didn-t-check-all-rounds-before-fatal-shooting-warrant-reveals/ar-AAQ1ytF?rt=0&ocid=Win10NewsApp&item=flights%3Aprg-mobileappview Halls saw three "rounds" in the "chamber" (I assume he means the cylinder). If so, why did he tell Baldwin it was a "cold gun"; did he think only the round under the hammer counts? Terry Thorgaard ( talk) 21:04, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Not sure if it's a WP:BLP violation yet or not, but here's a source with some allegations about Dave Hall's safety record on previous films. To include or not to include? Kire1975 ( talk) 08:54, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
More generally, this article is ripe for BLP issues, and editors should be vigilant for them and remember that an unsourced or poorly-sourced negative statement about a living person should be removed immediately. I've commented out a poorly-sourced claim about Gutierrez-Reed (commented rather than removed since it may well be true; it's just that one publication quoting an unnamed source without independently verifying isn't enough), and have added {{ BLP editintro}} as an editnotice for this page. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 21:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Please don't permit content on the incident to be added to the film article, since this article has been excerpted there per WP:SYNC. This is to prevent duplicate and incongruent coverage ( WP:CONTENTFORKING). If something good is added there and not here, just move it here (remove from there), and add the obligatory copying note to summary. — Alalch Emis ( talk) 15:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't the incident meet the definition of manslaughter? Why do we need a source to say its manslaughter before we can count it as manslaughter? Unless it doesnt meet the requirements for Manslaughter, in that case, tell me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ATrainLoadedWithDynamite ( talk • contribs) 22:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Should we continue to use "upcoming film" when describing Rust? Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 22:11, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Has there been an announcement that the movie won't be released? In the past, movies have been released (even though tragedy occurred during filming), see the 1983 movie Twilight Zone: The Movie, as an example. GoodDay ( talk) 23:42, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
The article tells about one person, "and was noted for instances of inappropriate sexual behavior". I think that should be removed - I am not convinced of justification for keeping it. (If a person had stolen chocolate as an adult, or been caught for speeding, then I am not sure that we should have mentioned that. Disclaimer: the one type of crime is by many standards, more serious than the other.) 89.8.155.66 ( talk) 17:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
To add to this article: the gun that killed Hutchins had been used earlier that day by members of the film crew, with live ammunition, to do target shooting at a location near the film set. 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 04:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Questions to find out the answers to: which crew members were doing the target shooting, and why did Hannah Gutierrez-Reed allow the gun to be used in this manner? Had she allowed guns used in the filming to be used for similar target practice (using live ammunition) on previous days, and is such behavior normal and ethical? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 04:09, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Photos of those involved could be added to the article. Aside from the existing photo of Alec Baldwin (who shot the gun); those that may be added would be Joel Souza (director, who was shot), Halyna Hutchins (DP, who was shot and killed)), Hannah Gutierrez Reed (film set armorer), Dave Halls (1AD who provided the gun). -- 64.229.90.53 ( talk) 20:46, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
An affidavit released on October 27 says the camera crew walkout happened the day before the incident. This goes against this article from October 22, which says the walkout happened on the same day and six hours before the incident took place. Should we add it? Some Dude From North Carolina ( talk) 03:30, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
For some reason, the current title (Rust shooting incident) seems inadequate and/or lacking. Shouldn't the title be something more along the lines of "Killing of Halyna Hutchins" or "Death of Halyna Hutchins" or "Shooting of Halyna Hutchins" ... or some such? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro ( talk) 04:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
We have sources saying that Dave Halls (who handed Baldwin the gun) shouted cold gun
But I noticed another source indicates that multiple crew members (perhaps Halls at at least one other?) said this:
Do we have any indication of the name(s) of other crew members besides Halls who said cold gun? WakandaQT ( talk) 22:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Present text:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/live-bullet-gun-fired-alec-baldwin-fatal-movie/story?id=80813700:
So is it "FD" or "F.LLI" ?
I think it would also be useful to mention details like the type of action this gun had. For example, has anyone reported on whether it had a rear loading gate (usually on the right side on colts), a top-break cylinder, or a swing-out cylinder? This would influence how easy it would be to check the cylinder contents. WakandaQT ( talk) 06:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Having read that the cameraman wasn't sure if the gun had been safety-checked (something about him taking a five-minute break) and something about there being a lunch break makes me wonder: do we have some specific hour/minute mark that the gun went off, and other key times, like when police arrived, maybe when there was a lunch break?
This all seems useful for a timeline of events (understanding time passing between events) yet the article only presently mentions the date but not the hours aside from 1:50pm. WakandaQT ( talk) 06:57, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
To be fair, LA Times reported about Rust producers too, on November 7. Flipping Switches ( talk) 21:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Rust shooting incident has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Why is the costume designer Terese Davis' account barely mentioned in this article? It seems to directly contradict multiple of the assertions made (hotels were provided, the set was safe, multiple safety meetings were held, the union backed production's hotel proposal, the non-union members hired were recommended by the union, etc.) and has been published in multiple other publications. Leaving out a primary source like this seems to display bias.
https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-news/alec-baldwin-instagram-rust-denial-1252454/ Whitegreenblueyellow ( talk) 05:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
The claim "In the film industry, a "live round" usually refers to a gun loaded with any material, most commonly a blank." is suspect as again, cites anonymous source in the union, and industry safety bulletins define Blanks and Live Ammunition separately ( SB1, SB2.) In addition the union that originally made the statement knows the difference between blanks and live ammo, and I doubt they'd make the statement without meaning projectile ammo. I think it should be removed but open to discussion since it is from a RS Strangerpete ( talk) 15:10, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Here's what you need to know:
What Baldwin shot was a live round. If he was falsely told "cold gun", it was mistakenly thought the gun either had "dummy rounds" or no rounds in it.
I don't think "blank" is the right terminology here, whether describing what should have happened or what went wrong.
Per RS interview with Steve Wolf, weapons expert, and maybe some other sources... Here is one such: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/videos/us/2021/12/03/alec-baldwin-abc-interview-safety-expert-reaction-sot-newday-vpx.cnn 2600:1012:B065:F8DB:31E4:61E0:EE11:128B ( talk) 04:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Per the below article, much of the background statements have been directly contradicted or disputed.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/rust-cast-crew-letter-alec-baldwin-1235059967/
Almost all of the background statements are written to clearly frame the set as unsafe per anonymous sources. However, 24 crew members have signed a letter with their actual names (unlike these "sources") directly attacking that narrative. For example, below are a few excepts.
“Unfortunately, in the film industry, it is common to work on unprofessional or hectic productions to gain experience and credits. Many of us have worked on those types of productions. Rust was not one of them. Rust was professional. We do acknowledge that no set is perfect, and like any production, Rust had areas of brilliance and areas that were more challenging. While we stand firmly with our unions and strongly support the fight for better working conditions across our industry, we do not feel that this set was a representation of the kind of conditions our unions are fighting against,”
They go on to write "the disgruntled few do not represent all of us. On Rust, our working hours were fair and consistent with expectations. Twelve-hour days and turnarounds were standard... Housing was provided as required by the Union. Payments were made, generally on time, and amounts were as agreed upon, per individual or department deals."
What is currently written is below. Furthemore, Terese Davis (signatory to the letter) directly disputes the lack of safety meetings, the lack of hotels (also rejected in the letter), etc.
The absence of a medic during the construction of the film's sets was an early concern.[5] Firearms safety protocols were not distributed with the call sheets and were not strictly followed on the set; only three safety meetings for the crew were held during filming, including one on October 21.[a][5][4][19][20] From the start, the production assured crew members that it would cover hotel room expenses. However, at the start of the second week of filming, hotel rooms were no longer provided and crew members were mocked for wanting to avoid a one-hour drive from Albuquerque.[5] Several crew members also cited that they were not being paid and began advocating for safer work conditions.[4][5] A crew member added, "We cited everything from lack of payment for three weeks, taking our hotels away despite asking for them in our deals, lack of COVID safety, and on top of that, poor gun safety! Poor on-set safety period!"[21] Furthermore, before the incident occurred, two prop guns had previously fired a total of three times unintentionally (Baldwin's stunt double had accidentally fired two blanks when he was told a prop gun was "cold", and a young woman had shot herself in the foot with a blank round).[5][4][22] However, the production did not launch an investigation into the negligent discharges and later claimed they "were not made aware of any official complaints concerning weapon or prop safety on set".[23][24] Costume designer Terese Magpale David later said that claims of "unsafe, chaotic conditions are bullshit".[25] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:3520:11D0:A8DC:DA27:9BB0:EACE ( talk) 21:16, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I've heard that there's a discussion about if the article about the movie should be merged into the article about the shooting incident. But, I feel like it should be the other way. For one, I think there would be a lot of people wanting to look at the article to the movie itself. And an article about a shooting incident that tells about the entire movie seems weird. I think the incident article should be merged into one section of the movie article. What do you think of this? Thanks. Sincerely, CertifiedAmazing2 ( talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Agreed If they are merged, this article should be moved into the other one. This would be consistent with the death of Sarah Jones in Midnight Rider (film), where information on the incident along with all subsequent lawsuits are discussed in the article about the non-canceled movie. Epluribusunumyall ( talk) 09:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
It seems that Baldwin told Stephanopolis that Baldwin did not pull the trigger. Should this be added? (
FairNPOV (
talk)
04:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC))
Everybody I know uses the phrase "prop gun" in a way that excludes "real gun". A "prop gun", in the usage of everyone I know, wouldn't be capable of shooting real ammunition with bullets. A "prop gun", to them, is a "fake gun" that meets a movie's or play's requirements. (So, "prop gun" excludes a fake gun carved out of black clay to be used in a bluff.) So, we are at first bewildered when told that someone was fatally shot with a "prop gun". It is apparent to me as I read this talk-page that that is not how industry insiders use the phrase, but Wikipedia isn't being written for industry insiders. I would change "prop gun" to something like
With production having been indefinitely suspended on Rust, it's no longer clear that the film actually needs a standalone article as a separate topic from the shooting incident anymore. A separate article about the film can always be restored in the future if the film ever actually resumes production and gets released (which is highly unlikely, but I won't say never) — but we really only need one article here, covering the film and the shooting incident as a single topic, rather than two articles treating them as two distinct topics. Bearcat ( talk) 16:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
I think it should be the other way, with this article being merged into the movie article, rather than the latter being merged into the former. My reasoning is because it would be weird to have an article that is presumably about the incident to have all the info on the movie itself as well. Rather, it would make more sense to merge it that way so the article title matches the content of the article better. I think either that, or just no merger at all. Thank you for hearing me out. P.S. I just realized someone else said this, so I agree with @ Super Goku V:. Sincerely, CertifiedAmazing2 ( talk) 19:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Support there's no need for two articles with lots of overlap regarding the controversy. If production ever resumes, then I have no prejudice against later restoring the film's page. SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 04:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Strongly Oppose. Even if they share a lot of the same information, they are about two different things, and some details could be lost. It’s totally unnecessary to merge these articles. The Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany articles share a lot of information, The Pripyat and Pripyat Amusement Park articles do as well, but they are separate for a reason and merging them would lose a lot of information. It’s also easier to find information relevant specifically to what you’re looking for. I wanted to find the budget and premise of the movie, this article was more focused and relevant to that information. This is honestly a silly request and I really wish people could go 5 minutes without requesting to merge every article because they want to brag to their uninterested date about how they’re some sort of “major contributor” to Wikipedia. Redundant details are ALWAYS better than missing details, especially for a bloody encyclopaedia. George Shardell ( talk) 10:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
The article says that "On January 23, 2022, Baldwin and other producers filed a memorandum that asked a California judge to dismiss the November 17, 2021 lawsuit by Mitchell".
Maybe the article should explain why that lawsuit is in California.--I am guessing that a production company has its address in California.
89.8.150.53 (
talk)
20:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Note that the italics in Rust don't show up in all contexts. Without them, the article sounds like it's talking about shooting rust. Even with them, it still kind of sounds like it's about shooting rust and that the italics are just misplaced; it's not clear at all that they refer to a film. Complicating the issue, the shooting happened while they were shooting Rust, for a different meaning of the word "shooting".
I don't have a clear candidate for what to rename it, but surely there's something better. Maybe "Fatal firearms incident during Rust filming"? -- Trovatore ( talk) 20:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Most people don't know about the movie Rust, or at least not by name.- it is at least known for this, so as well- or more known than Hutchins' name. Kingsif ( talk) 21:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
I have just reassessed the article to C-class in all WPs; I intend to do a review for B-class shortly to make sure there are no major issues; if someone wants to go ahead and to that, please feel free. The article is in good shape overall. Ppt91 ( talk) 16:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)