Ned’s Declassified star Devon Werkheiser was in Rust, and he has a lot to say about it
Ex-Nickelodeon star Devon Werkheiser defends the Rust set and talks about finishing the film after fatal shooting
Aux News Devon Werkheiser
We’ve heard a lot about Rust, the ill-fated Western on the set of which cinematographer Halyna Hutchins was accidentally shot and killed by star Alec Baldwin. Many have shared their experiences and opinions of the situation, from the actors to the crew to outside observers. Now, we have an unexpected new account of the set from the former star of a beloved children’s program (and it’s not the narrator of Thomas The Tank Engine).
That’s Devon Werkheiser, who played the titular role in the beloved early aughts Nickelodeon series Ned’s Declassified School Survival Guide. “My favorite project since Ned’s is a complicated one,” he reveals on the latest episode of his podcast, which he co-hosts with his co-stars Lindsay Shaw and Daniel Curtis Lee. “Um, by the time this airs I feel like we’ll have finished it, but it’s a movie called Rust that you may have heard of.”
Werkheiser explains that he’d worked with writer-director Joel Souza previously, adding that his film Crown Vic with Thomas Jane was his previous favorite project. “Joel’s next movie was a western called Rust, Alec Baldwin was attached, and I… I mean, a western is like an actor’s fuckin’ dream, it’s one of the classic genres of film,” he says.
Being cast as a cowboy in Rust came after a really “dark time in my life, and dark time in my acting life,” Werkheiser admits. “Like, I felt so far removed from my career at that point. And then I was on this set in a western with actors that I respected the fuck out of, learning how to ride a horse, like, in period piece garb, I got to play—I was no longer one of the kids, I was one of the men on set, and I was playing this grungy ass character role, and I was literally living my dream on that set. Like, it felt so good. I felt so on purpose again. I felt like my life was possible again. I felt like my dreams were possible again. Like, it was really a sacred time that was healing me.”
Unfortunately, we now know what comes next: “We’re like three weeks into shooting, I was two days away from being done. We had this huge accident where our DP got shot and killed. And like… man, it has been a hard year after that,” the actor says. “That has been so fucking hard to deal with and process—kind of because of all that. Like, it’s this loss of life, it was the moment it hit me, it was all the press about it after. Like, everyone has an idea of what that set was, but if you weren’t on it, you don’t fuckin’ know.”
Werkheiser goes on to defend the film, saying his experience doesn’t match the narrative that was perpetrated. “Like, every set has some chaos, every set is cutting corners and cutting budgets,” he argues. “I can only speak for my experience. But in my experience, it was no different than any other set I’d ever been on. It didn’t feel more unsafe. I had a gun every day, I felt safe with it, I felt safe with the people. And we were just making a movie, man. It was not this crazy, stressed set, beyond the normal, beyond what a normal set is.”
The shared trauma of those who were on set, Werkheiser remarks, “goes beyond anyone else’s opinion who wasn’t there.” Emotionally, he continues, “Like, we all had to survive this and process the grief of this beautiful person who got killed, and who was really special to our set. She was a really talented artist, and like, a really beautiful person. And to lose her while making a movie, you can’t understand what that is like, for Alec included.”
Werkheiser goes on to explain the “sacred,” “beautiful” energy on a film set, and the excitement that everyone had about making any movie, let alone the kind of “genre [film] that we’ve all grown up watching.” “And like, I felt that energy on set. I felt it with Halyna. I felt it with a lot of people on set, this kind of like, joy—Alec too, this joy of making this thing. And for it to end like that was motherfucking devastating.”
Werkheiser understands that “it’s super complicated for people that we are finishing it,” but he’s personally “glad” to return to set, especially as he says Hutchins’ husband has apparently encouraged them to complete the project and is on board as an executive producer (“We would never touch it if he wasn’t”). Personally, he was “shocked” to find out the movie would be completed, because he was “100% sure this is never getting done.”
“You can’t separate the loss of life,” the former child star acknowledges. “So I think on social media, say whatever the fuck you’re gonna say. I think critics—the movie’s never gonna be good enough to lose a person. Like, no movie is. So, I don’t think that will—but—for us personally, finishing this thing that like, harmed and hurt so many of us, and just, like, created this rift in our lives, I just, it feels like some kind of completion that feels right.”
“I hope it comes out well,” Werkheiser concludes. “And it’s… it’s my favorite project since Ned’s, even though this shit happened. At least the time before she got killed. Because I was living my fuckin’ dream in a really cool way.”
92 Comments
Which beard do you prefer?
Lindsay’s. Oh, you mean between Alec and Devon?Still Lindsay’s.
Nicole Kidman, Julia Carey, Kim Kardashian, Jada Pinkett, Stedman Graham, Gwen Stefani?
Nicole Kidman now or in the 90s?
Had to stop reading due to the guy’s “like” usage. Ctrl-F indicates there’s, like, 23 of ‘em.
Welcome to talking.
Most interviewers/reporters take the “likes” and “ums” out of a transcript. I guess though when you find like 23 of them you start to worry you’re butchering the original voice heh heh
Journo here. Yes, we do, because unlike AVC, we a) have word counts, and b) aren’t fucking incompetent content millers.
Or nah. Let’s not try to elevate a very specific form of teenage-level speaking as something that’s either cool or an effective way of communicating.
People have been complaining about “the teens” and their “likes” for the past thirty years. It could just be that, like, language changes. I can also guarantee that you (and everyone else here groaning about them) use filler words far more often than you think you do.
lol
That’s the worst verbal crutch ever and people need to be called out for it to their faces when it happens.
I was at a meeting recently where one of the presenters had a verbal tic of saying “um uh” every couple of seconds. At first I thought it was just nerves, but the same person gave two lectures, and it was almost like clockwork. It’s the kind of thing you can’t stop listening to once you notice it.
Yep. My gal wanted me to listen to a podcast on a philosopher. One of the hosts was pretty smooth. The other was pretty fucking clearly a burnout “ideas are WILD, man” dude.Let’s just say that listening to a podcast on fairly dense philosophy is not served well by a dude who says “um” or “uh” at least three times for every 10 words. I can listen to my buddies dick around on an audio file if I want that.
I feel like podcasters have three jobs – be interesting, speak fluently, and avoid silence. Being interesting is optional.
The drinking game of this will get you really, really fucked up at work in a hurry.
There’s a guy in my office whose verbal tic is “you know.” Not as a question, just a placeholder if he takes a break during a thought. Someone pointed it out to me when I first started and so the next meeting I went to with him, I put a little tick mark on my notepad every time he said it. It was a long meeting, a couple of hours, and he said it 248 times. It’s innocuous enough if you’re not focusing on it but by the end it was all I could do to not bust out laughing. I showed it to my coworker when we got back and she thought it seemed light.
was the presenter Jeff Goldblum?
Har har huhuh harrr…
Alternatively, you could grow up
Lol, it’s not a “verbal crutch”. It might have been 40+ years ago, but at this point it’s just part of the language. People grow up hearing their parents say it. I pity you for being so insecure in yourself that you need to “call out” people for a harmless linguistic tic, just to not feel your own self loathing for a moment of time.
could be worse, endless “know what i’m sayin” or “you feel me” annoy me more
The one that gets me is “bro”. My company hires a lot of fresh college grads and I cringe when I hear a group of guys in their 20s in the hall using “bro” every other word.
“I had a gun every day, I felt safe with it”Isn’t that kind of the point, though? Of course you felt safe with it because you were told by the people in charge that it was safe. But lo and behold…they weren’t safe at all, as evidenced by the now-dead human person.
I’m not sure I understand why he’s being so defensive about it?
I’m not sure I understand why he’s being so defensive about it?Don’t worry, that’s obvious.
Okay thanks that’s helpful.Edit: Also, eek, pretty lame to edit your comment after someone has already replied.
You’re welcome.I wouldn’t call talking about your personal experience on-set and how you felt leading up to the incident as “being so defensive”.
That’s okay. Nobody asked you to call it that. Also, lame to edit your comment after someone has replied.
I didn’t edit anything after you replied, that edit came before you replied, both times. Regardless, neither edit changed my comment/point. Try refreshing your browser more often. It doesn’t really matter if anyone “asked me to call it that”. I just wish you’d bother reading a little more about these things, in this case, the shooting, before you immediately call it that.
Sure, friend.It doesn’t matter in the general scheme of things, but you thought it mattered enough to inform me as what you wouldn’t call it, and so to that my original comment still stands: okay thanks that’s helpful.
Edit: Also, eek, pretty lame to edit your comment after someone has already replied. COUNTERPOINT: No, it isn’t. We aren’t vying for fucking prizes here. There’s no “fair play” to be had.SEE ALSO: “Subtweeting” – aka. “The word used to describe ‘blocking and then taking the piss out of assholes as if that’s an inherently bad thing’”
“There’s no ‘fair play’ to be had.”I mean, that’s certainly one way to go about it. As long as you own it and don’t pretend you didn’t do it, if you like it I love it.
COUNTERPOINT: No, it isn’t. We aren’t vying for fucking prizes here. There’s no “fair play” to be had.Lmfao, thanks for the support. Regardless if Sheep wants to believe me or not, I didn’t edit after they commented. I regularly reread my comments after posting and edit them immediately if I think they need to be changed.
Oh, no worries. I’ve been so “accused” back in the day.THEM: nice editing ur response after i commented lolME: Yep, I did. I had a further thought, and it isn’t like adding it miraculously turned your point into somehow MORE dogshit.It’s one of those things that people who see Internet discourse as a kind of fencing match. And it’s like, “Nah, pal, fuck you. There are no rules here. ::swings claymore::”
“I’m not sure I understand why he’s being so defensive about it?”
He’s not defending, he’s explaining.
Devon Werkheiser had been following the news about the tragic shooting on the set of the movie Rust with horror and disbelief. As a fellow actor, he felt a deep sense of sympathy for the cast and crew, who had witnessed such a terrible event. So when he saw the media coverage that seemed to blame the actors for the incident, he was outraged.One day, Devon was scrolling through social media when he saw a comment from a user who was blaming the cast for the shooting. Without thinking, Devon fired off a quick response: “Hey, Alec Baldwin never shot ME.”The comment quickly went viral, and before he knew it, Devon was being hailed as a hero by the entertainment industry. He was invited to speak on several talk shows, where he passionately defended the cast and crew of Rust and reminded people that accidents can happen on any movie set, regardless of how careful everyone is.Devon’s words resonated with audiences around the world, and he became a spokesperson for actor safety and responsibility. He used his newfound fame to advocate for stricter regulations in the industry, including mandatory safety protocols and better training for actors and crew members.And while the tragedy on the set of Rust would always be a painful reminder of the dangers of filmmaking, Devon’s bold statement helped shift the conversation away from blame and towards healing and understanding. He had used his platform to stand up for his fellow actors and to remind everyone that accidents can happen to anyone, even the most seasoned professionals.
I see, thanks. That wasn’t clear to me at all from this article. I also hadn’t seen anything blaming the actors for the accident (unless you count blame for Baldwin himself), so I wasn’t aware of that narrative going about. ‘Preciate ya!
This guy is some weirdo who goes around posting AI-generated comments in every article. I’m pretty sure nothing he talks about in that comment actually happened
This is chatGPT isn’t it
Indeed. I’m going to torture it until it goes full Skynet.
MURDERER!!!https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31588671
Yeah, y’all are smiling at me eating a Cheerio, meanwhile I’m giving you bitches the plague.
ChatGPT is great. Have you tried Alpaca? It isn’t as good but the cool thing is you can run it on your own computer (if you have a decent graphics card or a Mac with the new M1 or M2 cpus). It’s fun if you want to make “spicy” stories — unlike ChatGPT it won’t judge you and say you are being “inappropriate”.
I think there is some validity to him pointing out that as an actor on the set – not someone in charge – he was not aware of or seeing things that were different from other sets, which goes against the image that some have that the set was overtly functioning in a way that everyone was aware that everything was very unsafe and out of the ordinary.There have been some discussing the shooting – some who were there, some with second hand knowledge, some just speculating – that everyone on the set should have somehow known things were bad or unsafe. Whereas it seems that lack of safety while real was under the surface.
Absolutely this.
That’s certainly fair enough. This interview is probably giving the Hutchins family’s lawyers ulcers, in that case.
It’s in line with some of the stuff that has already been said in court documents and publicly.There’s a reason Hutchins’ husband settled instead of trying to battle it out. He likely knows pretty closely what went on (especially if it was built on ongoing set issues that his wife may well have mentioned). The family members who are suing are all extended heirs (not her husband, not her son). It also speaks to the uphill battle the criminal charges are going to have.
Well, you’re discounting an extremely important facet of production: it is the crew’s *job* to make *every* set seem *to cast members* as though it is functioning in tip-top shape and that all safety precautions are being prioritized. This would include Devon.This is why the crew’s testimony – including my client’s, who was in the incident itself – was crucial (and fairly uniform in safety concerns), and there wasn’t much relevant info from any of the actors but Baldwin.
Again, the narrative has been that it was known to all people on set that there were safety issues. This statement pretty much proves that the actors were oblivious, which arguably means so was Baldwin…
No. While that is indeed what I was saying – the actors, including Devon, were (typically) clueless about the safety scenarios, rendering his account here pretty useless (for determining what occurred and why) – Baldwin, as an active producer, was not. [Note that I am certainly not saying that we believe Baldwin was culpable, only that Devon’s views were not material to the investigation or outcome.]
What proof do you have that Baldwin was an “active” producer vs someone with a vanity title? If Baldwin’s status as a producer is impacting the charges against him, where are the charges for Matt DelPiano, Ryan Smith, Anjul Nigam, Nathan Klingher and Ryan Winterstern?
Alec the Producer was not oblivious unless he chose to be.
Most EP titles are vanity titles.
It’s probably hard when a workplace tragedy goes public, and people are calling for your workplace to be closed when you want to get back to work. And I’m sure it’s much harder when you were relying on that professional environment for (IMO) an unhealthy amount of personal validation, and your profession includes shit like talking out your feelings extemporaneously on a podcast.
I am sure that was hard for everyone, both the uncertainty and then having to go back to that set and carry on.
Disclaimer up front: i’m not a gun guy. I’m not a strident “remove all guns from the world” guy, because i don’t think i have the solution to gun control. But if i never have a gun in my hands, my life will have gone according to plan. As a consequence, i don’t know about guns.But i listened to a talk by a guy who does know about guns, and he put that knowledge to use to make a point about superstition. He said, roughly, “If i take a gun out of my safe, i know that it’s unloaded, because i made sure of that before putting it in there. Nonetheless, the first thing i do when picking it up is to confirm that the safety is set and then to check the magazine and the chamber [and whatever else he said that gun guys would know about]. I do that even though i know that it’s not loaded. And even with that foreknowledge and those double-checks, i’m not going to point it at someone as a joke. And then if i hand the gun to you, if you know anything about guns, you will go thru all those same checks yourself, even having just watched me do them. Most superstitions are silly and/or harmful, but that’s a healthy and necessary superstition.”Now, in a movie about shooting guns at people, you’re gonna have to break that rule about not pointing it anyone. Which is all the more reason to be extra-super-triple sure that you’ve followed all the other steps. Day one, it seems to me, you’d need to have the armorer teach you how you can check the gun yourself when it’s handed to you, and do that every time it’s handed to you, so you don’t have to “feel safe” just because someone else told you that you should.
Yes! I was actually saying exactly that to someone else in another convo about this. I wouldn’t call myself a gun girl, but I grew up in the country and I’ve handled my fair share, and first rule is never point it at something you don’t want dead, and second rule is to always know whether it’s loaded or not. I found it just insane that these actors knew they were handling real guns, but didn’t take those precautions, but then had to remind myself that everyone didn’t grow up in the country like I did. I’d never “feel safe” holding a gun I hadn’t checked.
Trust me, as someone who worked on sets for years, most actors have far more experience with guns than the average person. The gun being “loaded” wasn’t the issue. It was a revolver and was supposed to be loaded with dummies. Revolvers have to have dummies in them since the cylinder is visible to the camera. What fell apart on this set was the prop and armorer somehow allowed live rounds to be on set, and, even worse, allowed them to be mixed with dummies. A revolver is always going to look loaded so actors depend on armorers assuring them that it’s dummies in their gun. The idea that live round could make it on set is unfathomable.
Especially since Alec’s father taught gun safety and riflery at a Long Island high school for decades.
I do that even though i know that it’s not loaded.Except that revolvers on set, that might be seen by the camera, are loaded with dummy rounds, because the camera can see the cylinder. So an actor expects that their revolver will be loaded with dummies. It will always appear “loaded” to them. Now, don’t get me wrong, a good armorer will load the dummies in front of the actor, display that they are dummies, and would never even have any rounds in a gun, blanks or dummies, during a rehearsal. At the same time, when the AD hands you a supposedly cold gun, loaded only with dummies, it’s unimaginable that their could possibly be a live round in the gun mixed with the dummies. It’s not even something an actor would conceive as a possibility.
Yeah, i almost added another clause about learning how to check for yourself that the rounds in the gun are dummies. But my post was already well into “tl;dr” length, so i decided that i’d communicated my “check for yourself that it’s safe” message well enough. As is so often the case, i could’ve done a better job.
So, short version: You, as the holder of the gun, should have verified for yourself that it’s either unloaded or loaded with dummies. Doing so after someone hands you a “cold” gun doesn’t show that you don’t trust them or think they’re incompetent: it shows that you recognize that anyone can make a mistake, and mistakes with guns aren’t the kind that end up in the blooper reel.
That just seems common-sensical to me, as a non-gun-guy who hasn’t worked on a set. From reading about this saga, i think i’ve learned that the typical on-set mode is something like: the armorer is the expert, and they’ve done their job, so we’re good to go. That also seems common-sensical, especially in the let’s-keep-this-moving sense. But it seems to me that checks and re-checks are worth the extra handful of seconds.
As you note below, “The idea that a live round could make it on set is unfathomable.” Which, again, makes sense, because that’s what the armorer is for. But i’m hoping that whatever went wrong on that day convinces more sets to start… fathoming that idea.
And wouldja lookit that: almost as long as my original too-long comment. Good lord, cuzn ed.
Except SAG regulations specifically say that actors should NOT check firearms on set because they are not trained to do so. The person in charge of that is the armorer. That’s like saying the actor should personally check the safety of the light rigging.
Certainly no production should rely on an actor instead of an armorer.
Alec used to talk about (and this will come back to haunt him) that he always checked guns because of his stage training and Equity requirements.
SAG doesn’t have “regulations” in regards to firearms. They have guidelines, like Safety Bulletin #1. Where they say the actor should be trained on safe handling, use, firing, and knowing where the safety is. They in no way in shape or form say the actor should not check firearms. They just say the ultimate responsibility is with the Armorer/Property Master. The AEA’s guidelines literally say:Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside.Which is the industry standard on larger productions. The AEA also says the ultimate responsibility lies with the Armorer/Property Master in the end. It’s all just guidelines, not “regulations,” as none of it is enforceable by either body.
You’re right, I was totally misinformed. I had misread it, and thought that essentially 100% of the responsibility was on the armorer/prop master.Seems like the only thing Baldwin failed to do was test fire it. Even if he had checked the gun, I don’t think he would have been able to tell if the ammunition was blanks or not.
i think i’ve learned that the typical on-set mode is something like: the armorer is the expert, and they’ve done their job, so we’re good to go. I wouldn’t say that’s typical. It may have sounded like I was defending the practices on this set more than I intended. As I noted, proper procedure is to have someone on the armorer or propmaster’s team load the gun in front of the actor. If they are loading dummies the actor is shown that they are dummies (there’s a few different types depending on how they are going to be seen on camera). If blanks are being loaded, ever since the Brandon Lee tragedy, the norm is to also shine a mini-flashlight down the barrel so the actor can see that there’s nothing obstructing it. Additionally, if the firearm is a type where the cartridges aren’t visible to the camera (basically everything but a revolver or belt fed machinegun) and the gun isn’t to be fired in the sequence you’re shooting, then you use a deactivated or rubber gun. Now, on lower budget Westerns, it’s much cheaper to just rent functional replica firearms, which they did on this set. If you follow proper procedure, that will be perfectly safe, but obviously that’s not the case here. Another factor is the “cold gun” factor. On a hot set, even one not being run great, everyone is going to careful and likely follow procedures. What happened here was the AD brought a gun on set, yelled that it was a cold gun, and everyone just took him at his word. Not good procedure, but cold gun is taken to mean it’s incapable of firing and because of that everyone let their guard down. There were things done wrong by multiple people, but ultimately it’s on the armorer/props department to ensure the firearms are being utilized safely. In this case, the production skimped on the armorer. According to reports the script involves a lot of firearms and shooting yet they didn’t want to pay for a proper pro team. One armorer interviewed, who refused the job, noted that they were only willing to pay for him alone, despite him telling them he needed at least three more armorers on his team to safely handle the amount of firearms and shooting scenes in the script. Instead they ended up going with a completely inexperienced armorer, who had one prior low budget job where she was complained about being unsafe, divided the responsibilities between her, the propmaster and the AD Hall, who had also had prior complaints about his cavalier and unsafe practices.
Clooney said he DOES consider that possibility and, therefore, takes extra precautions.
Defensive?? Hardly.
Why are we still talking about this accidental shooting?Was Dick Cheney involved or something?
Like, every set has some chaos, every set is cutting corners and cutting budgetsI mean, sure, in crafty, catering, wardrobe, props, set dec, etc. Safety measures are the last place you want to start cutting corners because this is exactly what happens when you do that.
Unfortunately, safety is often the first place those cuts come. Not just on film sets either. Construction jobs function very much the same way.
I worked a summer at an event production company (setting up tents, tables, chairs for weddings etc.) and safety equipment and procedure was regularly ignored because “we gotta get this done quick” or good old fashioned “What are you, a pussy?”. And also guys would drink and smoke weed if boss wasn’t around. One of the more scary summer jobs.
I was lucky that I only had to sell beer at those things, and I was way ahead of the curve by not actually being drunk.
I worked a construction site for a summer in college where a mall was being built (this was obviously a while ago) and on Fridays pretty much everyone brought a six pack that they killed during a half-hour lunch. Including the guys hauling ass around the site on earth-moving equipment, and I was on the survey crew that was out there with them staking out parking lots and stuff. I kept my head on a swivel Friday afternoons.
Dad used to work for Telecom Australia, and, man, when they privatised that…hoo boy. They had to clean all the booze out of the works depots and I shit ye not there were several cubic meters, ranging from beers Bundy Rum bottles to your classic Pommy gallon flagons of McWilliams Tawny Port which they’re not allowed to make any more – the fortified wine of choice of working-man:Anyway, it had accumulated for so long no one knew who owned it, and so they just hung a sign on the lot saying “Take some before you go home”. Dad has memories of it being a particularly hot morning down in Sydney and was in the break room with his tea when one of the Irish truck drivers busts in, goes straight to the fridge, and rips the top off, of all fucking things, a tallie of Sheaf Stout, and downs it in about thirty seconds, then grands a second, drinks half of that, and turns to dad and says “FUCK ME, IT’S HOT OUT THERE.”The he picked up his keys and went back to delivering cables and antenna arrays on the busy streets. Dad didn’t drink, and everyone thought he was rich because, come the morning after payday, he still had money left over.
I work now at a place that, because of a bit of required federal oversight that isn’t usual to most theatrical venues, is actually pretty stringent on safety stuff.
And the thing is?
It’s not that much more work. And we still have plenty of time. It’s so absurd how lazy we as a culture are when we’re literally willing to risk people’s lives to save maybe 10 or 20 extra minutes of labor a day.
This thing is such a bummer. Everyone involved seems to know the movie’s reputation will precede it yet they’re moving forward. My guess is on the business end there’s some tax incentive in delivering a final product even if it doesn’t get released, but it’s pretty sad to hear this actor say “it would be ghoulish to finish this” and “I can’t wait to be back on set” in the same sentence.
Like, like, this article is like, unreadable.
FFS can this guy, like, work on eliminating “like” from his, like, vocabulary?
Barely employed actor wants massively controversial film he was involved with to be released, make money.
I feel like some people here are trying to take sides on this as if there’s no way for this actor to live in the tension of both loving his personal experience working on the movie and hating the tragedy and its aftermath. Seeing this through to the end does make sense both economically as some have pointed out and artistically as people who make films. As he put it, there’s some sense of completion and value (emotionally) in moving forward, especially if the deceased’s husband is on board to push to the finish. I think that’s a very human position to be in.I also think it’s worth noting that while it’s exceedingly rare for someone behind the camera to get hurt and or killed on set (especially by an A-list star), stunt performers and other on-camera talent are often injured and sometimes killed making movies and they are usually made through to completion. Obviously there’s a line somewhere regarding whether a film should be completed or not, but this should be part of that consideration.
Yeah, this seems like a completely relatable response to the situation. Here’s something that has been professionally rewarding and he’s having a blast, then it all crashes due to a tragedy. I also expect there was some measure of catharsis for all involved in finishing the film.
Guy seems smart enough but needs to get over himself/his career
Leonard like likes this post
Wait, principal photography for Rust was completed? Heartless bastards. They should have just claimed a loss. No one is going to want to see it. And I’m pretty sure it’s no good.
What adult man says “like” 50 times in an interview? Jeeze, learn to talk properly before doing interviews.As to the content of what he said, fair enough, if his experience before the tragedy was great. It was an accident due to carelessness, and the person responsible for that carelessness should be sanctioned, but dont judge the rest of the cast & crew.
Ellis Lankster?
off topic, but anybody else remember Ned’s Atomic Dustbin? i think their biggest song was Kill Your Television
Yes, and I listed to that song just yesterday!They were one of three bands to emerge from the fairly small Midlands town of Stourbridge in the late 1980s, along with Pop Will Eat Itself (including future film composer Clint Mansell) and The Wonder Stuff.
Man, that’s a lot of links.
What an immature narcissist! And how many other sets has he been on where crew walked off over safety issues? Idiot.