Severe allergies to foregrips?
 

I like that the line in the "Under Siege 2" entry here, saying how a "million-dollar mercenary hasn't yet figured out the wonders of the vertical foregrip!" on this wiki, but after doing some poking around with some other movies and television shows, I find that "severe cases of foregrip allergy" ignore things like movie budgets or even the overall fame of the production. The most famous case of this problem I've seen on this wiki is Tom Cruise from Mission Impossible 3 and his poor unused foregrip on his MP5K-PDW.

Recently I've taken to watching the SWAT cop drama "Flashpoint," and it's not pleasant to see people who are supposed to be crack cops simply ignoring one of the better ergonomic advances on their weapons. Were the show's technical or police advisors simply not doing their jobs there?

I thought that since the iconic image of an early-20th-century gangster blazing away with a Tommy Gun equipped with a drum magazine and a forward pistol grip is so well-known, most actors would immediately recognize that the vertical foregrip on a two-handed firearm is supposed to help you hold the gun more easily. Even so, that doesn't explain why so many actors don't do so--is it a directorial decision, or just the people on set not telling the actors proper gun handling?

Edit: Okay, it seems I posted this in the wrong section--this was supposed to go into the guns and movies section rather than the imfdb section. Any chance a moderator could move it to the guns and movies section?

Moved as per request.

I wrote that (quite a while ago now), and I should edit it. A few months ago, we declared a moratorium on any comments which critique actors' gun handling. The reason being that we found out some of the actors whose gun handling has been mocked on IMFDB have actually looked at the site, and they weren't happy about it.

As for the reasons that actors handle guns in ways that seem ridiculous to us, several of the armorers on this site have explained it. They've told us that sometimes, when they come on set, they don't have time to train the actors in proper use of the weapons. Or, they do train them quickly, but the actors are so over-worked and focused on other things that, after multiple takes, they forget what the armorer taught them. In some of the most extreme cases, the actors never do anything except pull the trigger when the director yells "Action!" - the armorer actually reloads the weapon for them in between takes because they never even learn how to do that. It seems ridiculous to us, but remember, these are actors, and sometimes they've never even handled a gun before that particular show.

There are many explanations, but the bottom line is this: Unless the director is someone like Michael Mann who cares a lot about guns, or unless the actor happens to be a gun enthusiast (which we all know is rarely the case), proper gun handling is usually just not something that actors spend a lot of time worrying about when preparing for their role.

That being said, I think that the quality of gun handling on many movies and TV shows has improved a lot in the last 10 years. In the 1990s, movies like "Heat" were the exception when it came to gun handling. Compare movies and TV shows that have guns today to those made in the 1990s, and I think the difference is often pretty striking. I've seen so many shows from the '90s where actors fire semi-automatic pistols with the thumb of their supporting hand wrapped around the knuckle of their strong hand - which we all know is a recipe for slide bite. Yet it seems to be getting a lot less common in recent movies.

In the past decade, a lot of movies with pretty decent budgets that have a lot of shooting scenes even have behind the scenes of the actors being trained by police and ex-military. SWAT, Transformers, obviously any Micheal Mann movies, even Transformers had a military training for the actors. Punisher, and Punisher Warzone had a lot of commentaries of how the actors were properly trained.

Why aren't they happy? They really have no one but themselves to blame. No one is forcing them to perform incorrectly, and their mistake is right there for everyone who knows better to see. Actors are paid to learn how to portray a character and then do so on camera to the director's satisfaction and budgetary/time limits. If they do it wrong, why are they upset with this site? Unmodified screenshots displaying their gaffes aren't libel or slander.

I'm surprised that the foregrips aren't then removed by the armourers so as "keep the actors from being a disgrace to the weapons." Of course, this wouldn't stop other gaffes like the slide-bite-prone grip you mentioned, or inappropriate trigger discipline, but it would reduce this "head, meet desk" inducing problem of not knowing what a simple handle is for. I mean, it's a handle, like the handles on a bike, there for you to hold and put your hands on.

The more I think about this, the more I think something like a "Guide to Guns for Actors, Background or Otherwise" composed by people like you would be useful, explaining proper stance, grip, and common functions of gun features. Would certainly help to inform people who could do more to look more convincing with film firearms.

That's what I said, but I'm guessing it's partially because in some cases, the particular critiques were extremely sarcastic and said things like, "(name here)'s technique in this image is HORRIBLE!", exactly as I've written it.

Also, we'd rather not be blacklisted in the business or gain a reputation for sarcasm, so we try to stay as neutral as possible.

Right, but blanks have almost no recoil, so it's not like the actors need to use the foregrip to control the weapon while firing. Also, when it comes to vertical foregrips specifically, are there any other movies besides "Under Siege 2" and "Mission Impossible III" where we've seen actors who don't use their MP5Ks properly? Those seem to be the exceptions, not the rule. And at least in Tom Cruise's case, it's probably due in part to the fact that he's a small guy, so grasping the magazine may diminish the distance he has to stretch his arms.

And you'd really be surprised how much people who have little experience with guns (and again, that's probably true of most actors) tend to find controls difficult to use. Like the people who can't figure out the difference between the slide release and the decocker on my SIG 226 when I let them try it.

The purpose of this site is to identify guns in movies, not critique the technique of the actors firing them. We are an encyclopedia and a "history of guns in movies" type of site, nothing more.

Besides, as Excalibur pointed out, it is becoming a lot more common for actors to work with experts nowadays. They are definitely getting better. Notice that it is mostly in movies made before 2000 that we see a lot of the most egregious errors in technique. I don't think they need our help.

Not an MP5K...

http://www.imfdb.org/images/c/ca/Tea..._LT_Waters.jpg

But I don't recall Willis, in Tears of the Sun, using the broomstick on his M4 anywhere during the ending firefight except at the start of phase 2 (when the team is hunkered behind the downed tree). And that's opposed to Cole Hauser, who holds the grip during his entire usage of the same weapon.

http://www.imfdb.org/images/c/cc/TOTS_M4-7.jpg

Though it can be argued that it was second nature for him since he carried an M60E4, with a built-in foregrip, throughout the movie.

Point taken on "Tears of the Sun", I forgot about that. I'm sure it's happened elsewhere, too, though I dunno if it's "epidemic", exactly.

That being said, what you guys are doing makes the whole criticism about IMFDB members having Asperger Syndrome start to sound valid. I think you guys are taking this a bit too seriously. Steve has always pointed out that if you're spending too much time focusing on the guns (or the gun handling), it means the movie sucks, and I agree with him. And the bottom line is, it really isn't our job to critique gun handling in movies.

I noticed in Modern Warfare 2, IW made some of the characters with M4s NOT hold it by the foregrips.

That may be due to technical limitations within the game engine. I used to make weapons skins for "Counter-Strike" (and other "Half-Life" mods), and I remember how difficult it was to make the character models properly hold my weapons. I would make weapons models where, every time I tried them in game, the player model's hands would be going through the "world view" gun model. I could spend hours tweaking it and it still wouldn't come out right.

Of course, the "MW2" engine is far more powerful than the "Half-Life" engine, but the same problem may still apply. And professional game dev teams work under extremely stressful deadlines, which means they don't always get to work out bugs in the game.

I also mentioned cases of "severe foregrip allergy" that are highly visible within the recent TV series Flashpoint. What makes this especially "head, meet desk" worthy is how some of the characters on the show actually DO use their foregrips, and most of the cast are supposed to be high-flying SWAT-style cops, capable of scoring no less than 48 out of 50 bullseyes under various adverse conditions (last I heard that was the standard for continuing marksmanship qualification). The gun handling technique on the show is definitely not a recipe for believability.

As for games featuring foregrips, I think it depends on the engine. Two of the games I've helped contribute large amounts of info to on this wiki make use of foregrips, SWAT 4 and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2. The latter will even change your character's grip to accomodate the foregrip when you equip or unequip one.

Sadly, in GRAW2's PC version the foregrips don't actually decrease the muzzle rise or make the gun more accurate, which is something I've tested myself, and the foregrip on the M4A1 in SWAT 4 doesn't seem to help with the muzzle climb at all. Maybe it was to make it so that the M4A1 doesn't completely outclass the other two assault rifles in the game's multiplayer.

It's still better than in old stuff like Operation Flashpoint, where your guy sticks his open hand through the "gap" between the M16 hand guard and the M203.

Sometimes don't movies use ex-cops as extras though? I thought I read/heard that on T2 the swat guys in the Cyberdyne building were all ex-cops that worked for a special casting company.

Sometimes movies and show are able to get real SWAT or military or even ex military to join in.

In MW2, your looking in first person and you see yourself holding the foregrip, but looking at the NPC next to you, he isn't. And if the game engine has conflicts in making a character model hold the foregrips but still have conflicts with the environment, then why keep the foregrips?

In a 3rd person shooter like Metal Gear Solid 4, where Snake's M4 does have a foregrip attachment option, you can see he grabs the foregrip when equipped.

In my opinion, it seems that using a foregrip would be sort of awkward

After spending 18 yrs in the military, I've learned to roll my eye's on the inside.

If the actor doesn't want to use the K grip then they don't have too.
I always coach them to be comfy, because if they try to look like they know what they are doing they will fail.
They have a lot to worry about like lines and hitting the mark blah blah.

We are make a movie not saving the world.

Thanks for the reply, Al, good to hear from you again. How's showbiz been going lately?

Done any awesome movies with good shootouts? I know as the guy with the guns, it can be frustrating working with actors and directors that might not always listen

A good movie CAN save the world!
So keep at it, whatever you're doing.

Just finished "Red", look for the belt feed machine gun and guess what it is.;)
Finished RE4 afterlife in 3D end of last year, working on a few more right now.

Actors are like everybody else, they put pants on the same way we do.:cool:

Just so everyone knows, Al has worked on "Flashpoint" (since that's one of the examples of "foregrip allergy" that has been cited in this topic). His IMDB credits are here:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1214249/

IMDB says you got to work on something w/ Spielberg, too. How did that go?

I'm just so envious that you got to work on "Boondock Saints II" (dunno if you're a fan of the first one or not).

Think you can tell us some of the guns you got for Resident Evil Afterlife?

I still can't believe they are continuously making these bad RE movies.

I'm wondering, how did you get the jennings to cycle in boondock saints 2? Those guns choke on real ammo let alone blanks.

That's what that gun was? It was starting to bother me since I can't ID it

I'm surprised that you didn't remove the foregrips from the guns used by the actors who don't want to use them. That would give them SOME plausibility. I think there's even accessories for certain firearms that allow for a better and safer grip on the magwell!

And here I was thinking that proper gun stance and gun grip techniques were crucial to convincingly displaying these actors as crack cops in Flashpoint. Extensive firearms training is essential with SWAT type units, after all.

I really think you are obsessing over this a little too much. Actually, "little" might be an under-statement. If the failure of actors to use foregrips is impeding you from enjoying the show, then go watch another show.

As for the armorers, there's only so much they can do. Their first and foremost concern is safety, not realism (lack of safety is what gets people hurt...and brings lawsuits). It's difficult enough for armorers just to ensure safety on a big show with dozens of guns being used on-set. And the director is the one who decides if another take is necessary, not the armorer. If the director decides that an actor must use the foregrip on an M4 or MP5K at all times (as I'm sure Michael Mann would insist), then the actor is of course going to do what the director says. But most directors aren't like that. So if the director doesn't care, and the actor doesn't care, and the director doesn't care that the actor doesn't care...the armorer can't do anything about it, no matter how they might feel.

:D Its' called 'being argumentative' with a dose of Asperger Syndrome. I hate to say this, but if you were on a movie set and continued to press this issue to the extent that you have on the forum, Mazryonh, you would have been kicked off the set long ago.

I would just politely tell the actors to hold the foregrip when you run because it'll feel better or just remove the foregrips all together

Would it bother people to say that i have seen several images out of Iraq and Afganistan of US soldiers using the VFG of their rifle as a handstop and not a grip. Really people you are makeing a big deal out of nothing and I'll admit that I am a diagnosed Aspie.

With what time? It's literally seconds between you telling them and them doing 'the takes'. Are you going yell 'CUT", to run into the shot and stop the filming and remove the foregrips because the actor didn't grab them the first time? Guys, get real. It takes TIME to remove grips, also you have to store the grips, plus the gun was checked out of inventory with the grips ON, so you have to monitor that the grips were removed and where they were stored. Unless the director stops the shot himself and ASKS for the grips to be removed, no one will do it. It's a pain in the ass.

Here's a few reasons to make it clear.

1. We are Canadians

2. I told the cast about you and they are going out of their way to avoid the "grip" :rolleyes:

3. We Canadians put cheese and gravy on our fries

4. The liberal government at the time could not afford "K"grips so I was never trained on the characteristics, use and maintenance of the vertical forward grip MkI

It's straight blowback.....well, we really screamed threats at it.

I am laughing my ass off right now

You can't scare me, I work for James Cameron/Stanley Kubrick/Steven Spielberg/etc.!
 

I beg your pardon if I was being argumentative earlier.

It's just that I've seen productions with wildly differing budgets have wildly differing gun techniques. I used to believe that a more highly budgeted production would have better gun technique, but as I've seen on the wiki, that's obviously far from a sure bet.

I recently bought two DVD movies featuring lots of gun action, Passchendaele and Universal Soldier: Regeneration. The two were made with $20 million and $14 million respectively, chump change amongst the Hollywood crowd. I was thinking that with such a relatively low budget for the two of them, there would be bad gun technique. Remarkably, there wasn't.

While Passchendaele's battle sequences were brief compared to the total length of the film, the "behind the scenes" featurette actually showed that they went to some effort to train the actors (background and otherwise) in the use of the WWI-style firearms, even including the basics behind the bayonet drill and even how to whack someone's brain's out with the butt of your rifle convincingly (and safely). Unlike Saving Private Ryan, no one holds a rifle one-handed. There are no noticeable gaffes with the firearms, and the hand-to-hand combat all feels convincing--while it lasts.

As for US:R's case, all the gun-firing actors seemed to check out just fine, even the MMA fighters hired for this movie who aren't likely to have extensive firearms experience. No one I noticed in my repeated viewings holds a gun by the magwell (then again only one actor uses a gun with a foregrip in that movie, and yes, he uses the foregrip), everyone appears to be using proper stance, no one "looks like an actor handling a firearm for the first time," etc. All this for 14 million.

Now that you've told me differently, I can see once again how much sway directors can have over the production--though I'm not entirely certain just how much "respect" armourers get compared to all the famous egocentric escapades certain directors like James Cameron and Stanley Kubrick got away with. Whatever happened to treating your team like valuable assets with useful specialist knowledge to be given a modicum of respect and listened to when possible?

gunguy001,

About Canadian gun-related news, I hear the security for Canada's capital build in Ottawa are finally getting MP5s to supplement their sidearms. Are they going to use versions with foregrips and flashlights to make it easier? The 9mm version or the .40 S&W version?

Wait, there's a .40 variant of the MP5? I thought there's only the 9 and the 10.

Well as most users found that the 10mm was way too hot for those who only qualify with their handguns and switched over to the .40 S&W. H&K decided to rechamber the 10mm MP5 to the .40S&W. that way they could expand their market. unfortunantly for them SWAT teams here in the states have switched over the the M4 carbine style weapons.

Well SWAT Teams do still use MP5s.