Person Seriously Injured on T3 Movie Set

Discussion in 'Transformers News and Rumors' started by SilverOptimus, Sep 1, 2010.

  1. DrLee

    DrLee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Posts:
    1,467
    News Credits:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +97
    according to Deadline Hollywood.... it's Paramount, not Bay, that's being sued here...
     
  2. MTME

    MTME Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Posts:
    11,326
    News Credits:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +46
    first and foremost I wish the lady recovery. Her health and recovery should be on the forefront of people's thoughts here. If you are religious pray for her, if you aren't wish her luck.

    There have been people here on the boards that have been extras and perhaps they can shed some light as to whether they were paid or had to sign a waiver. It really has no bearing in a lawsuit such as this if extras were paid or not.

    I cannot imagine them not having to sign a waiver because their likeness and images of them are being used in the movie. My students have to sign a waiver just to be on the school website. You have to have people's permission to use them on a tv show. Even on cops people have to sign a waiver to be on there once they are filmed. Those that have a blurred out head, guess what they didn't sign the waiver.
     
  3. Paxtin

    Paxtin ...

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Posts:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    282
    Likes:
    +2,952
    You know I was just thinking about this the other day and if there was any new info on it.

    This really doesn't look good for Paramount. I honestly wouldn't be too surprised if they end up throwing Bay under the bus if this ends up getting enough media.

    I've been a big apologist for these films, but I honestly don't want to see this movie anymore. Entertainment is not worth gambling with the wellbeing of people's lives. Especially when they were not even aware that their lives were being put at risk. That's just stupid.
     
  4. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    9,468
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    282
    Likes:
    +1,039
    Well in a way it's a good thing she didn't sign a waiver. When attempting stunts of this nature, it's only right that the studio should take account for the full responsibility and liability entailed, should anything go wrong.
     
  5. DrLee

    DrLee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Posts:
    1,467
    News Credits:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Likes:
    +97
    i wonder who made the piece that broke.... how liable could they be in all of this?

    i've held this opinion since the incident happened.... Bay may not be the best director around.... but he is not stupid. if the Stunt team said it was safe.... then just how much can you blame him? if it turns out they voiced concerns and he ignored them, then that's a different story. but i have not seen anything that suggests they had any concerns about this stunt.
     
  6. Bgrngod

    Bgrngod Autocon

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Posts:
    6,114
    News Credits:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Likes:
    +35
    I have a hard time believing this and we can't go assuming no one signed waivers just because a friend of someone said so. These movie studios have been around a very long time and know the pros/cons of using waivers. If extra DID get paid, like you mention in your other post, then the contracts they signed for their time probably covered this as well.

    That'll never happen. No settlement for a case like this is going to be determined based on how successful the movie is. A settlement will be determined based on future potential costs for care, medical bills, lost earnings, and punitive stuff. They would never scale any of that based on the potential success/fail of the movie that was being produced at the time.

    Still confusing about what exactly happens. Up until today it sounded like a cable piece went through a window but this makes it sound like an entire car landed on her.

    And it looks like we are already going to assume she didn't.

    If she did sign a waiver, which she might have done, then the family could still sue for gross negligence. Waivers don't cover any and all possible harm what might happen. They have a limit.
     
  7. Opticron Primal

    Opticron Primal Comin' up OOOs!

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Posts:
    10,383
    News Credits:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    292
    Likes:
    +121
    They're suing for 50,000. Paramount will settle and everything will just go away.

    Again, accidents on movie sets are always a possibility. Blaming Bay up and down or threatening to not see the movie doesn't change that fact. What's done is done. I'm happy the woman in question wasn't killed. Them suing isn't surprising and Paramount is lucky it's not gonna run them dry. If they throw Bay under the bus, then they're idiots. He may not be the best director but he makes damn sure that people are as safe as they can be when filming.
     
  8. Regressor

    Regressor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Posts:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    Could somebody elaborate on the waivers and what do they say.

    If the extras were driving cars, they probably don't appear themselves as their likeness.

    here is the document itself as posted by Deadline:

    http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Complaint.pdf

    The defendants are: Paramount, DW Studios, a location management firm, three location managers and Ryerson Inc. the firm that prepared the cars.

    It says the demanded sum is in excess of 50 000$. Also this is said about all of the defendants so I don't know if each one of them has to pay the sum.
     
  9. Regressor

    Regressor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Posts:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    And also Paramount is probably gonna settle out of court.
     
  10. Bumblethumper

    Bumblethumper old misery guts

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Posts:
    9,468
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    282
    Likes:
    +1,039
    You're right, we shouldn't assume that based on what happened in one person's example. Let me change that to "It's probably better if she didn't sign a waiver".

    At any rate even if gross negligence couldn't be proven, I still think with an accident as serious as this the company needs to assume the responsibility. If you're going to be attempting such elaborate stunts you should take responsibility for pretty much anything that goes wrong.
     
  11. MTME

    MTME Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Posts:
    11,326
    News Credits:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +46
    I am going under the assumption extras did sign a waiver because of their likeness being used. It is a matter what the wording is in the waiver is what will come up in the lawsuit.

    I can't help but to compare this to an incident that happened in the WWE with wrestler Owen Hart. Owen did a stunt where he came down from the ceiling (rafters) of an arena straight down into the ring via a harness. During a live Pay Per View the harness release malfunctioned and Owen fell to the ring struck his head and was killed. His widowed sued everybody including the WWE however the judge determined that she could only sue the makers of the harness since that is ultimately what caused the accident and his subsequent death. She did and won. Basically it came down to that WWE didn't hold a gun to Owen's head to do the stunt and he did so under his own will. His widow has also sued the WWE (more out of anger) but for different things such as using his likeness for selling DVD's or getting royalties and things of that nature.

    SO, ultimately what I am saying is that Paramount and everybody could be names in the lawsuit but the judge might ultimately say that the only person she can sue would be the makers of the malfunctioning cable since that is what caused the accident.

    ALSO, it would be extremely difficult to do a settlement or determine monetary damages if she is brain damage, that is a life long problem and she is probably still undergoing treatment or they are figuring out how much in services she will need for the rest of her life. They need to do that before the lawsuit could settle or end up being heard.

    Make sense?
     
  12. General Magnus

    General Magnus Da Custodes of the Emprah

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    14,138
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +1,386
    Ya know what I find depressing? She was only a year older than me.. Damm.. So young and now she probably has brain damage and will suffer the rest of her life...
     
  13. MachSabre

    MachSabre Blackmarket T-Cog Dealer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Posts:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    127
    Likes:
    +37
  14. marshall dusty

    marshall dusty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Posts:
    2,571
    News Credits:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +17
    probably right, and reading on the thread, it's confirmed based on that pdf of complaint.
    there wasn't a waiver. not for the drivers, just paperwork for tax info and payment. extras in the movie who were running around during 'explosions' in other scenes, those people might have signed waivers. people sitting in cars for 8 hours doing shit didn't sign waivers. i'll edit my post later and confirm a second time with my friend who shot some of the video. (collecticon.org) there's no reason to lie to me or anyone else. only reason he was hush about it was because he could get fired (then, and not receive money)

    are you going to going to stop watching ALL other movies that involve stunt doubles, extras, actors, etc that would 'gamble' someones life?
    this situation was a freak accident and nothing else. She was NOT involved in the stunt, if she was, she'd be a stunt person and not an extra. you're gambling your life everyday getting on a roller coaster, driving, biking, etc. you could be a sober driver, getting hit by a drunk driver. you can be a biker, obeying the rules of the road and wearing a helmet. you're gambling your life.

    i'm not saying a friend of a friend. my friend, who i email, talk, text and visit his site and see personally on a regular basis was a driver, as an extra in the movie. he didn't sign a waiver, as he told me when i saw him 3 days ago. he's the same person that recorded the Dreads (rumor, SUV decept. clones) that's on the front page, ON the same day the accident happened. Someone else in a car in front of him sold their video of the accident for a pretty penny to radar online, that there is a big rumor as well (the video sale). But again, that was a big no no and it was pulled off the internets fast.

    i mentioned earlier that there MIGHT be a waiver for the extras who were on set running around as civilians who'd be in the way of actors and vehicles. The drivers, filled out their uncle sam paperwork to get paid minimum wage.

    no idea what waivers say, if they do exist.

    THIS

    yeah, we can all just assume.

    Owen Hart was the stunt man. Gabriela wasn't the stunt woman, she was an extra on a different part of the set. she wasn't involved. it's two different things.

    i'm no lawyer, again i assume, like we all do, but she can probably sue paramount for not making it safe for the extras, not involved in the stunt, from getting hurt. they could have put up a big net to prevent any debris from flying over the median.

    monetary damage issues might not be hard to determine actually. you'd be surprised as i was about a month ago. long story short, my father died over a month ago. fighting cancer. he needed surgery for something else not involved with the cancer and what was the worst decision of my family and me, he was fighting hard to survive but the blood would not stick to his body, we pulled the cord. may he rest in peace. few weeks after, we spoke to some reputable lawyers who deal with malpractice. they showed us their previous cases and outcomes. a few were so identical to my father. in the end lawyer said not to pursue anything and leave everything be the way it is. why? with similar cases like this, lawyers and doctors and analysts look at the life factor of the individual. basically, my father was 70 years old, and had stage 4 cancer with way less than 6 months to live. in the word of the law that has no feelings, it's not worth it for them to spend so much research and find out how long he'd really have. The other cases the lawyers had a woman in the other case who died, rip, she died at age 50 due to an incision left open inside her. because of this, she died. They realized that an average american woman lived to be 80.4 years old. that means due to negligence, the hospital cut the womans life short by 30 years. huge settlement was given to the family at the end. and this settlement was not asked by the family, something that's pretty much asked by the lawyer based by previous cases.
    wow, sorry i typed out a lot...
    so why do i say this?
    i figure someone who was suppose to sit in their car and drive up and down looking normal and then something crashing in her car and unfortunately striking her with such a force, leaving her impaired for the rest of her life, the way court sees this... she's due a good chunk.
    paramount, i bet, will avoid any press and settle out of court. it's the best way to deal with this and avoid hassles and on going lawyer fees.

    i work for a big company, supermarket, and i get emails from other stores about a certain slip and fall due to water, grapes, whatever on the floor. when i see the surveillance camera and see it's our fault. 9 times out of ten, we settle outside of court. we have funds for this, as all companies do and should.


    lastly but not least,
    here's an update on the event.
    Family of 'Transformers 3' extra files suit over accident - Chicago Breaking News

     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2010
    • News Credit News Credit x 1
  15. marshall dusty

    marshall dusty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Posts:
    2,571
    News Credits:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +17

    Attached Files:

  16. Paxtin

    Paxtin ...

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Posts:
    9,639
    Trophy Points:
    282
    Likes:
    +2,952
    Ok first of all, yeah, accidents happen. But they don't just happen for no reason. There's no "Accident Fairy". If I get hit by a druck driver, then it's the fault of the idiot druck who was stupid enoguh to get behind the wheel in the first place. If people die on a roller coaster, then that means some dip-shit who mantains the damn thing wasn't doing his fucking job.
    Yeah, shit happens. But more often then not, it's because of some dumbass's mistake.

    And it's not the accident so much as it's the whole situation. READ the article. from what is being said, they put untrained extras, driving their own cars no less, into a prepared stunt scene. You don't fucking DO that! They were being put into a situation with dangerous heavy machinery that they were not trained to be around, for a scene they were not trained to be in.
    It's a blatant negligence of safety. Plain and simple as that. There is no spin to it. That is where someone fucked up. That's what disgusts me here.

    I myself, I just can't stand to watch a dumb ass movie with a clear conscience, knowing that some poor woman's life has been permanently destroyed in the making of it. If you can, then hey...You're a colder man then I.

    See. Half assed work done by stupid dipshits. If they were smart, they would have taken the time and done a proper job.
     
  17. Prime82

    Prime82 Optimus knows all

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Posts:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    76
    Likes:
    +0
    Bay is the director so it is on him and his stunt crew that this happened. We know they shoot fast and want to get things done so doesnt surprise me they didnt make sure the weld was secure. Accidents happen but to have extras near a car stunt in their own cars driving and involving steel cables and towing was irresponsible. And if they dont make extras sign waivers that say you could be injured on set, then that is also irresponsible. In the end though blaming doesnt change what happened, but its very sad she suffered this accident.
     
  18. Prime82

    Prime82 Optimus knows all

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Posts:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    76
    Likes:
    +0
    He wants his movies so real that people involved in anything around the "danger" area are at risk. Even if its an adrenaline rush being in his movies, I wouldnt be involved. Its time bay uses his brain and uses remote controls for cars that are only there to show traffic on a highway. Hire jamie hyneman already
     
  19. marshall dusty

    marshall dusty Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2007
    Posts:
    2,571
    News Credits:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +17
    yeah, i agree. accidents happen because of someone else. it's still a gamble we take. Look at what happened at the Hindenburg. Who's idea was it to have a balloon filled hydrogen? (given we dont know how the fire started) In the end, it was an accident. Sure, it's not the fairy accident. but we dont know if it was a fire that caused it. a spark or just engine failure (thanks wiki)

    i did read the article. Besides this unfortunate news of the accident, the only thing the untrained (not needed, except for a drivers license) extras were in danger of was michael bay's porche filming vehicle that would drive on the SAME side as the extras going the opposite direction. you can see the videos on youtube. look em up. My friend was in that scene and cars behind of Gabriela's when it happened. in any instance did he ever feel unsafe. he saw it happen and it was all just a freak accident. someone to blame? sure. but how many movies are made where someone is critically hurt. Not many, sure there are a lot more we don't hear of but for the most part. movie sets are safe. (assumption based on word of mouth, news, internet articles)

    were the extras in the same set as the stunt? Nope, they were fine. Were they too close? Maybe, we don't know until post hearing based on facts from a court of law.

    bottomline is, the stunt was designed to be safe. We dont know if it was a bad weld, bad cable, bad bracket, too much force on the tugging, different car used on the stunt the second day that maybe it was too heavy for the tow cable. variables that exist.

    this was not done on purpose.

    we dont know if they were trained either. who knows? maybe Gabriela was going too fast and was up ahead of the pack and thus maybe she got in the way of the stunt? it sounds horrible for the fact that she is severely hurt, if that's the case then she is partially(very minimal) at fault.

    Sorry, watching this movie will not make me a colder man.

    I hope you didn't see The Crow, or intend on watching Happy Feet 2 since people were killed with those movies. In fact, i hope you boycott the rest of directors and producers and stunt people involved with those movies so that you can prove a point.

    The quote you used, all words coming from a lawyer. No facts that have been proven in a court of law. Not to mention the word alleged in that quote.

    we dont know if half ass work was in play.
     
  20. Wheeljack_Prime

    Wheeljack_Prime Searching for the Infin-Honey Stones

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2008
    Posts:
    12,397
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +1,437
    It seems to me like all she was doing was moving her car into place for a relatively stationary scene. It's not like Bay was going to ask her to do a giant chase scene.

    Something tells me you won't be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows either. Or watching The Dark Knight ever again.