Movie/film suggestions.

@immatthewj , ah! Thank you for that information. It makes perfect sense and I stand corrected. Didn’t think of that, and I love learning something new!

Now the question: If the gun was modified to fire blanks, how did it manage to fire a live round without a problem??

Just thought of something, it was a revolver so that negates the need for any modification as the cylinder turns mechanically.

Yes, @thecarpathian , Baldwin had (what I believe was a single action type of) a revolver chambered in .45 Long Colt (which is not a round to be sneezed at, although not as powerful as a .44 magnum) and blanks and live rounds would have fired interchangeably out of that.  I am not at all familiar with the make that they stated that the revolver was.

Another example of what I was attempting to explain would be the rifles that the Honor Guards typically use at military funerals.  Not that I go to that many, the last one was my dad’s almost ten years ago to the day, but at my Dad’s, the Guard was using M1 Garands (which are semi-automatic) for the three-volley salute, and after each volley they had to manually re-cock their rifles prior to the next volley.  Meaning that their Garands had never been modified to fire blanks in a semi-auto mode, but had they been firing live rounds at my Dad’s funeral (almost surprised they were not, considering the nature of that town) they could have fired their volleys in a semi-auto mode without manually re-cocking.

Anyway, I am glad that the explanation I attempted worked for you, as I frequently struggle converting my mechanical understandings into words.  Just a couple of more "fun facts" if you are interested--on the subject of the .45 LC and the .44 mag, a .44 mag will drop right into the cylinder of a .45 LC (but not vice versa).  I only know this because I have tried it with mine, and it would PROBABLY discharge, but I would never try to actually fire a .44 mag out of a .45 LC because I am about 99.9% positive that the .45 LC frame would NEVER withstand the pressure.

And back to semiautomatic rifles and rifles that are not semiautos (such as a manually operated bolt action), given that explanation I attempted a few posts ago, if you were to take one of each with a barrel of identical length firing an identical load, the semiauto (the "gas gun") would have a somewhat lower muzzle velocity (although I do not know the actual specs) than the bolt action, because a percentage of the expanding gas (and I don’t know the actual percentage) is bled off to work the action of the semiautomatic.  Although with that typed, back maybe 13 or 14 years ago when I was spending a lot of time at the range, I would frequently run into this guy I liked who practically lived there.  One of his (many) guns was an AR10 chambered in .308, and the last time I talked to him he told me he had gone from being able to hit eggs at 600 yards with it to golf balls!  I guess I sounded a bit skeptical, because he said, "I never said that I was hitting them with EVERY shot, Matt."  But a gun that would do that is a pretty good shooting gun regardless of whether a "gas gun" or not.  And I suppose it is possible that maybe he was making those shots--after all, guns were his thing and maybe his only thing and he had an EXTREMELY nice scope and he worked up his own loads.

The last "fun fact" I’ll throw out is about the loads.  Understanding what I was attempting to explain about the expanding gas pushing the bullet down the barrel, for every given load there is an ideal barrel length.  As with a barrel that is shorter than ideal for a given load, the bullet will exit the muzzle while the gas behind it is still expanding and energy will be unused and wasted.  While with a barrel that is too long for a given load, the bullet will be still traveling down the barrel after the gas behind it has ceased expanding, and now the barrel is acting as a drag on the bullet.  So the barrel with a chambered cartridge is basically like a calibrated open-ended pipe bomb, and in the case of a semiauto, some of the energy is designed to be bled off to make the gun fire without being MANUALLY re-cocked between shots.

@hce1 

@immatthewj Elephant may bowl you over; it’s gripping. Snowpiercer is a rollercoaster ride, a genre in which I think Bong Joon Ho excels. Get out the popcorn and hold on. I haven’t seen American dreamer, but I’m a big fan of Matt Dillon. And, I, too, am a current Peacock subscriber. I’ll throw it into negotiations with my wife.

Elephant is now on top of my short list.  It will be happening this week I am pretty sure.  As far as Matt Dillon, Haunted Heart (2024) actually has Matt Dillon as a main star of the movie, and it seems to be sort of intended to be a bit of an intense psychological thriller, but after watching American Dreamer (2022) last night, with Matt Dillon in a supporting role as Peter Dinklage’s (with Shirley Mac Laine as a costar) real estate agent, I thought that Dillon was better in the latter.  American Dreamer is a bit of a dark comedy, and imo this was Matt Dillon at his best (even in a supporting role) with his vocal inflections and the way he would annunciate certain words and the facial expressions (grimaces and such) that he would put on when he delivered his lines in excellent form.  (Danny Glover also had a smaller supporting role as a private detective that Matt Dillon arranged for Peter Dinklage, and he was quite good as well.  There were many laugh out loud moments in this one.)