Sometimes, you gotta wonder about the age of the person making the inquiry..... :D

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

Pardon me, I'm not a US Citizen so it's exceedingly unlikely I'd meet Hollywood stars.

Not being a U.S. Citizen has nothing to do with being oblivious to what a "Hollywood Liberal" is. All one has to do is do things like watch the news, or read the newspaper. Meeting them in person is very instructive, but you don't have to physically be in contact with them to know the type. To not know, implies that a person is being what is called a 'low information voter', i.e. someone who does not keep up with politics, national news, international news, etc. Gotta be careful not to appear like that.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

I don't call it naive, I call it having professional attitude and demeanor.

What makes that statement naive is the assumption that everyone else in the world has a professional attitude and demeanor. Most people do not. You may show a stunningly professional attitude and demeanor when you're working. I can guarantee you that a majority of the human population does not.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

Why bring up things like politics when you don't have to? It just gets in the way of a smooth production. I would think that actors know how to act well already; can't they at least act civil and not bring up unnecessary stuff?

Again, Hollywood Liberals are insulated. They assume everyone around them has the same opinions. Stallone recently stuck his foot in it when he opined very anti gun statements after the tragic Newtown Massacre. Sure, we all feel horrible about the tragedy, but he assumed he was talking to a circle of elite folks who have private bodyguards. What's worse are the rich Celebs who are against gun ownership but they themselves have Concealed Carry permits. I've run into quite a few really big hypocrites, who are well known.

Also I think you're confusing them being good at their job (which is to act) versus the freedom to spout off their wacky political beliefs at the craft services table or at the meal breaks.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

I would have thought that you had production companies sign contracts with you that the actors will not unnecessarily abuse the weapons while the contract is active.

Yes, it would be nice to live in a world of the hypothetical. Production companies are responsible, but it's the stupid actors who don't care. Why? Because they themselves are never individually responsible for any damaged or destroyed props or weapons. Never. The production company ALWAYS picks up the tab. Thus we have a sense of entitlement amongst actors that they don't have to respect the props. I remember doing a TV show a long time ago for Warner Brothers and the actors went out of their way to destroy the guns (because they were improvising their fight scenes without telling the director). I was so angry that I charged Warner Brother 400% of the replacement fee. Guess what. WB wrote the check without question. But that's not the point. I now actively avoid sending out anything that is historically valuable or irreplaceable. things like perfect condition historical firearms. I KNOW they'll get ruined and I know that I won't have a problem getting money from the studios, but money can't replace something of great historical value.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

Have you tried giving a briefing session to actors unfamiliar with guns and teaching them the proper respect for these weapons, along with the usual safety briefing?

LOL. Of course we do. Doesn't matter. (see above) because ultimately there will be idiot actors who don't care.

Hope this helps. One of the mistakes of 'youth' is assuming that people are not inherently stupid, shallow, vindictive or immature. the older you get, the more prepared you are for the reality that most people will fall far short of your expectations.

[Mazryonh]

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Not being a U.S. Citizen has nothing to do with being oblivious to what a "Hollywood Liberal" is. All one has to do is do things like watch the news, or read the newspaper. Meeting them in person is very instructive, but you don't have to physically be in contact with them to know the type. To not know, implies that a person is being what is called a 'low information voter', i.e. someone who does not keep up with politics, national news, international news, etc. Gotta be careful not to appear like that.

As I am not a US Citizen nor do I reside in the US, I can't vote in US elections either, so you can rest easy I don't "pollute the process" with an "uninformed vote."

Last I checked, the term "Hollywood Liberal" appears to be bandied around most often in US conservative media pundits and news agencies. I don't normally partake of the likes of Rush Limbaugh or Fox News, which explains why I haven't heard of the term much before, but it's still too easy to brand someone you don't agree with whatever epithet you want than to engage their arguments and work through them in a rational, civilized, manner. I'm more of a realist though, and don't feel the need to turn every place into my speaking hall as you imply that "Hollywood Liberals" do. To me, all that really matters for film set suppliers such as costumers, armourers, caterers, etc. is that they supply what's needed on time and on budget; their political views are immaterial to the task at hand, which is getting films made.

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

You may show a stunningly professional attitude and demeanor when you're working. I can guarantee you that a majority of the human population does not.

I would have thought that "natural selection" in Hollywood should have weeded out those who can't stay professional enough to hold down good roles and a good reputation. You can't do those two if you're busy spouting your own ideology to everyone you meet on set.

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Again, Hollywood Liberals are insulated. They assume everyone around them has the same opinions.

I believe that's a tendency that can be found in everyone. We all gravitate to people who share the same opinions about certain issues that we do; the internet bears this out. We prefer media sources and the company of people who mirror our biases. And "mental insularity" isn't unique to any one position on the political spectrum.

Originally Posted by MoviePropMaster2008

Yes, it would be nice to live in a world of the hypothetical. Production companies are responsible, but it's the stupid actors who don't care. Why? Because they themselves are never individually responsible for any damaged or destroyed props or weapons. Never. The production company ALWAYS picks up the tab.

I take it that in a less "star-studded" area, these actors would acquire a bad reputation and companies would refuse to work with them or supply prop firearms to them. The problem is that on the Hollywood sets, there's always someone else willing to work for that kind of money, right?

[MoviePropMaster2008]

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

As I am not a US Citizen nor do I reside in the US, I can't vote in US elections either, so you can rest easy I don't "pollute the process" with an "uninformed vote."

And that's a good thing, since you seem to be fixated on a view of the world that is not firmly based in the real world.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

I would have thought that "natural selection" in Hollywood should have weeded out those who can't stay professional enough to hold down good roles and a good reputation. You can't do those two if you're busy spouting your own ideology to everyone you meet on set.

How in the world did you come to THAT conclusion? What natural selection? WTF are you talking about? You're straying into POI or BRM territory with your obtuse conclusions. You CAN spout liberal ideology (or conservative) during breaks in filming. We don't suppress people's 1st amendment rights when they're NOT filming. You seem intent on proving something that just doesn't make any sense. A person can spout off all they want that they think guns should be banned on the set. If they don't PUBLICLY embarrass the production, then why would a production stop hiring them if they are a good actor or a good marquee draw?

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

I take it that in a less "star-studded" area, these actors would acquire a bad reputation and companies would refuse to work with them or supply prop firearms to them. The problem is that on the Hollywood sets, there's always someone else willing to work for that kind of money, right?

If you're implying that I am some how 'whoring out' by taking their money, thanks for the comment. And yes, we have refused to provide guns to productions before. But that is not the point. You don't seem willing to advance any point other than your own twisted view of a 'perfect workplace' which doesn't exist. So I'm done here

[Evil Tim]

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

Last I checked, the term "Hollywood Liberal" appears to be bandied around most often in US conservative media pundits and news agencies.

It's just as frequently used by left-wing critics of Hollywood to describe an attitude that says big business is bad with a multi-million dollar movie and sees no inherent contradiction in doing so.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

To me, all that really matters for film set suppliers such as costumers, armourers, caterers, etc. is that they supply what's needed on time and on budget; their political views are immaterial to the task at hand, which is getting films made.

I'm sure movie producers would be very happy to find whatever supply of apolitical, perfectly logical robot crew members you're talking about, but in they end they have to work with actual human beings. They are professionals but they are not all professionals about it. This is called life. Being a realist does not mean you assume everyone else is one too, that's still idealism.

Originally Posted by Mazryonh

I would have thought that "natural selection" in Hollywood should have weeded out those who can't stay professional enough to hold down good roles and a good reputation.

In the end if they do a good enough job and aren't so annoying the rest of the team try to murder them on set, the producers aren't going to care if they cause a bit of friction. A job is not a Miss America contest, you don't have to try to make everyone like you to get ahead. If you hired a plumber, would you ask them to make sure they sent one who didn't have a reputation for grumbling about the weather? Do you check if you taxi driver is going to grumble about immigrants before you get in?

I mean let's face it, if "natural selection" in Hollywood worked like that, nobody would have let Alfred Hitchcock stick around and make films.

But if you are a taxi driver and have reason to believe you'll lose a fare if you say the wrong thing, wouldn't you try to, you know, not say the wrong thing rather than assume that your fare is a robot who won't react to you because you're still performing your driving function? Being cautious is hardly uncalled for when you're dealing with people who disagree strongly with you on many levels, might not be professional about it, and can take the food off your table if they aren't.