Agreed. If they weren't dangerous then the actors would do the stunts themselves. I'm certain there's a non liability clause in there somewhere.

Not only that, but does suing bring your loved one back from the dead?

@thorstein
Money helps.

@lord_sloth
It doesnt matter how dangerous the stunts are. Yes stuntman jobs are dangerous, but when you are put into unecessary danger.. then someones gotta be liable.

Its one doing a stunt u need to take all necessary precautions to avoid harm. Its like asking someone to take a take a stab from a knife... with a real knife. Instead of switching it out for a prop. Still risky, but at least u wont die. Its like asking a stuntmant to flip a car... without being buckled up. Usually they would more then likely be in more then just seat belts even... harnesses and bungie ropes lol.

While true, one can understand the parents NATURAL reaction. Easy for you to say, but what if it was your dearest one?

well its not like he was accountant on set that got driven over by a stuntman. thats wrongful death.

i think he knew and his parents knew that what he does is very dangerous and could kill him if something went wrong. unfortunately not everyones occupation goes 100% right all the time.

if you ask me, the parents are just gold digging.

doesn't matter. It' just like someone who rides motorcycles. They and everyone knows they're a lot more dangerous than any 4 wheeled vehicle.

Some people close may not like they're doing it, but in the event of a deadly crash those close friends/relatives aren't going to sue the bike manufacturer.

Now do you see how dumb it is to sue when your job was a stuntman?

Even though the victim is a stuntman, it doesn't automatically relieve the company of responsibilities. If the company or the person in charge was reckless then it's reasonable.

It's hard to say without know more details.

I wouldn't go with that approach, given the history the media has with presenting lawsuits. There might very well have been some serious screw ups in co-ordination, and while being a stuntman is dangerous per se, the film studios still have a responsbility to keep them as safe as possible.

Let's also keep in mind, that civil lawsuits take quite a lot of time, and can cost a lot of money, and that "gold digging lawsuits" aren't in fact as common as one might think. Most people who sue someone has talked it over with a lawyer, and usually think they have a case. They don't just hobby sue many companies and hope for a lucky break.

What if a stuntman is sitting on a lethal explosive and is not told about it? And then you watch a real human being actually getting blown away in the movie theater. I know it's an exaggeration but I don't believe anyone should get away from getting someone killed if it's his/her job not to and if the stunt did his part correctly. It all depends on whether the stuntman effed his thing up or if the crew did theirs.

yeah, but if they weren't taking adequate precautions then there could be a case.

sure, the job is dangerous, but they're not doing these stunts without making them as safe as they possibly can while still performing the stunt.

the stuntmen put their lives in the hands of the people working on the film.

Maybe they should hire stunt men for the stunt men :)

oh come on have a heart will you?.. that was funny though.