Stuntman required

Hey All

I think everyone shuld probably read Andy's post so I've quoted the whole thing again.

I wanted to comment that, waiver or no waiver, there are ways and means, legally speaking, of attributing responsibility for your broken arm/neck/back or your untimely death to organiations who pay you, with full knowledge of your lack of training, to do something dangerous.

Leah

Andy Fraser wrote:
>
> Ok, I'm back now from an excellent rehearsal involving safely
> constructed props and weapons used by actors with previous
> stage combat training/fight performance experience in an
> environment where there is proper insurance and...but I get
> ahead of myself.
> In all seriousness, Craig has made some excellent points,
> partly with regard to the film director and/or producer, but
> primarily he writes with the actor/stunt performer in mind.
> I'll now put in my two cents worth from a Fight Director's
> point of view and hopefully I'll be able to add something to
> Craig's already comprehensive post.
> First of all, some terminology (please forgive me, those of
> you who know these things already!). A Fight Director is a
> specialist who is trained to direct and choreograph violence
> which is both safe (for all concerned) and dramatically
> effective (makes sense for the character/actor and looks good
> to the audience). Fight Directors work in theatre, film and
> T.V. Fight Directors co-ordinate fight moments only. They do
> not devise car chases, high falls from buildings, set people
> on fire, etc. In Australia, only those individuals who have
> qualified as a Fight Director with the Society of Australian
> Fight Directors Inc. may properly use the term.
> A Stunt Performer is a widely skilled individual who has
> gained said title from the M.E.A.A. Stunt Register. He/she is
> qualified to perform action sequences (fighting, vehicle
> work, falls, diving, wire work, etc.) under the supervision
> of a qualified Stunt Co-ordinator. Therefore, Stunt
> Performers may only perform stunts. They are not qualified to
> devise and co-ordinate them. They work almost exclusively in
> film and T.V.
> A Stunt Co-ordinator is an individual with further skills and
> training and again, has received this rank from M.E.A.A. A
> Stunt Co-ordinator is qualified to devise, supervise and
> co-ordinate stunts and action sequences. They may also
> perform in them. Like Stunt Performers, they work almost
> entirely in film and T.V.
> Safety Officers are individuals specifically trained and
> qualified (through M.E.A.A. again) to advise on workplace
> safety during a shoot. This can range from making sure cables
> are properly taped down through to the safe co-ordination of
> stunts. As such, many Stunt Co-ordinators are also Safety
> Officers. In the theatre, Fight Directors perform a similar
> role advising as to the safe construction of set, costumes,
> etc. as they affect the fight sequence.
> Often on a film set, a Fight Director and a Stunt
> Co-ordinator/Safety Officer will work in tandem, with the FD
> choreographing the fight moment, and the SC/SO ensuring that
> the working environment was safe to perform in. This was
> certainly my experience on both 'Teesh and Trude' and 'The
> Shark Net', two recent examples.
> PHEW!
> Judging from the original posting, what this shoot needs is a
> Stunt Performer (that's already been asked for), but more
> importantly, a properly qualified Stunt Co-ordinator/Safety
> Officer. (Please see Craig's comment about the army medic!).
> It probably doesn't need a Fight Director (based on available
> information), but if the character who falls through the
> skylight gets, say, punched up just prior to the fall, then a
> Fight Director would be called for.
> Sadly, it would appear unlikely to happen based on the info
> in the original post and it really throws up the wider
> implications of a situation like this. Namely that:
> 1) Someone will probably be found who is crazy enough to do
> the stunt.
> 2) Someone will one day get SERIOUSLY injured doing something
> like this and I am extremely worried that that day is not far
> off.
> This is especially true given the number of low/no-budget
> short films being done which require this sort of thing. Both
> my Fight Director colleagues and Stuntie cousins know that
> for every one of these we get asked to work on, another
> half-dozen or so get made with a "hit-and-hope" mentality
> which smacks of ignorance, arrogance, or a combination of both.
> In theory, every stunt/piece of action/fight sequence
> (including the one in the original post) is feasible. By the
> same token, so is every one potentially hazardous. I also
> firmly believe that you cannot make any stunt/fight
> COMPLETELY safe. There is still the human element to
> consider. However, what you can do is REDUCE the risk to as
> infinitesimal amount as you can. That is why there are people
> such as Stunt Co-ordinators and Fight Directors around as
> they are able to offer practical solutions that minimise the
> actual risks and get rid of the unnecessary ones.
> Unfortunately, the cynic in me thinks that it will only take
> a major accident, followed by a high-profile lawsuit to
> change the prevailing attitude. This is equally applicable to
> stage and screen, amateur and professional.
> Part of the reason Craig makes such strong and
> well-articulated points in his post is that he comes from an
> INFORMED position. This is largely down to his many years of
> experience in the industry, but also partly because, two
> years ago he gave up 18 consecutive Sunday mornings to get
> some Stage Combat training. It not only gives performers the
> "fighting skills", but, far more importanly, gives them the
> awareness they need to be able to recognise when they are in
> a potentially dangerous situation. Trainee Stunt Performers,
> as part of their journey, develop a similar awareness with
> regard to all the various disciplines that they must master.
> Budget, or the lack thereof, is no excuse. Absolutely not. If
> you can't afford a Fight Director or Stunt Co-ordinator, then
> don't do the project. Would you do a big musical without a
> choreographer? Would you shoot a film without a Director of
> Photography? In my opinion, any company/director/producer
> (delete where applicable!) who fails to engage such a
> specialist when necessary is negligent. Waivers, shmaivers.
> Hiring a qualified specialist shows that the company has
> shown duty of care and can claim it took appropriate measures
> to achieve workplace safety in the event of an accident.
> As for those actors and aspiring stunt performers...get some
> training. Learn to recognise when you are being asked to do
> something that is potentially unsafe and request the presence
> of someone who is qualified to advise on the situation. You
> are not expendable and you have a right to work in an
> environment which is as safe as it can be. An actor once
> said to me, "But I'm afraid if I do that, I might never work
> again." I replied, "And if you don't, you still might never
> work again..."
> Sorry for the doom and gloom tone, its just that I take it
> all very seriously. Well, it IS my profession after all and I
> do have my biases! I recognise too that I've been very
> long-winded, but hey, I don't write in here that often.
> Although, (mainly for Jarrod) I do visit this website almost
> daily!
> Happy Swashbuckling!
> Andy Fraser
> Fight Director