Should movies with smoking get an NC-17 rating?

[Osborn F Enready]

Glad to see so many common sense minded, level headed replies.

I especially like this one.....

another day said: Please...people smoke everywhere. What's next, ban kids from going to coffee shops because people smoke outside? Ban celebrities from smoking because impressionable kids might copy them?

and would add......

Ban kids from going to family get-togethers because family members may smoke while around them, in sight of them, or within airs reach of them.

What insanity.

[Mr.Vicchio]

How silly. How ignorantly silly. We watched Black Snake Moan last night, that's an R rated flick... but smoking might get an NC17...

I tell ya, it's the Rome Symptoms coming out to bite us.

[Praxius]

But to be honest, I have heard mention of this being suggested before in the past..... I can't remember by whom, but there are other's out there who agree... unfortunatly.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I could see excessive smoking as a reason that a movie is given a worse rating, along with other factors, but to stick it right a basically porn level is idiotic.

[Technosoul]

Is the 17 rating the same as a PG 13 rating here in usa? I never saw that rating on moveis here.

Whatever - if the movie industry wants to inform parents and viewers about the contents of their films they should be allowed to do so as they please. Some DVDs I get remain unrated.

About cigarette companies promoting products this is not true unless you acturally see a "name brand" being used. Most movies do not promote name brand products for a number of reasons and it would be stupid to pay to advertise if the name of your product is not visable.
I think that is just a myth being spread around by anti-smoking people who get rich off of pushing such falsehoods for the purpose of demonizing certain social behavorisms. More grant money for them is the bottom line for such passion.

Kids should not be sat down in front of a baby-sitting TV set anyway, let them play doing fun stuff. Teenagers who are allowed freedoms outside of partental supervision must be trusted to think wisely or else hire them a real Nanny to follow them around.

Quote by: Technosoul I think that is just a myth being spread around by anti-smoking people who get rich off of pushing such falsehoods for the purpose of demonizing certain social behavorisms. More grant money for them is the bottom line for such passion.

Other than your uninformed opinion, do you have one shred of evidence to support this allegation? As you do not, why would you perpetrate such a malicious defamatory falsehood?

I challenge you to use your real name and contact information and publicly accuse with evidence one real person of the activities you claim. If you can't do that then show some moral courage and withdraw your comment with apologies.

I've done work with people who are active in the anti-smoking area. I have never met anyone, nor even heard of anyone who fits the vicious description you've tendered.

Regards
S.

[another day]

Quote by: Technosoul Is the 17 rating the same as a PG 13 rating here in usa? I never saw that rating on moveis here. .

No, NC-17 is the worst rating, higher then R..you don't see hardly any movies with that rating that don't get edited to drop it down to an R because i believe they don't play nc-17s in theaters or at least many won't. It's bad for business.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: sdbest Other than your uninformed opinion, do you have one shred of evidence to support this allegation? As you do not, why would you perpetrate such a malicious defamatory falsehood? I challenge you to use your real name and contact information and publicly accuse with evidence one real person of the activities you claim. If you can't do that then show some moral courage and withdraw your comment with apologies. I've done work with people who are active in the anti-smoking area. I have never met anyone, nor even heard of anyone who fits the vicious description you've tendered. Regards S.

In your O.P. you mentioned 7 organizations funding Glantz on this project and that adds up to a lot of loot. By YOUR own post we can see that he is getting rich from all those oganizations who are now or who have in the past supported him with funding.

If the movie industry is guilty of racketeering as a de factor marketing arm of the tobacco industry then tell the FBI and have them arrested, don't come asking me for donations or support for his phoney claims.

Our own government has already stated that many of his claims were falsehoods and he is mostly "pretending" to be some sort medical expert.

Illinois Smokers Rights

If you worked with or are still involved with that project then you should have been upfront about your own "conflict of interest" in making that post and pretending to be objective, hey, if you are or were on their payroll. You are guilty perhaps of "spam" and this post should be rejected by monitors.

If you think anyone can sue me for my opinonated claims bring them on. Because I got the evidence to support it in any court but they will not do that because they cannot lie under oath.

I would not give out my name to anti-smoking zealots any more then to anti-abortions zealots, they might shoot me for expressing my right to speak my mind. We cannot trust zealots of any kind when they get over emotional about stuff.

The movies show all kinds of people smoking, the scum-bags as well as the heros, both the bad guys and the good guys, both the "role models" and also the personalities that are unliked or not cool. It is just a prop and nothing more and as a whole the movie industry is not promoting cigarette smoking one way or the other. Your attack is unfounded on the facts and is a total myth.

No one is making movies about Donald Duck smoking cigarettes for the kids to watch. Teenagers do in real life the same things adults do and that is likewise pitured in movies, if movies want to appear realistic and not as "mentors" or as de factor agents of Stanton A Glantz, then that is their artistic right to do so. So back off.

Stop trying to dominate everyone via censorship or with "bad ratings".

If you don't like my fire then don't come around, cause I'm gonna burn another one down. Last thing we want for entertainment at the movies is a lot of Mormon produced films.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: sdbest A query: would you be in favor of retailers being able to sell cigarettes to children of any age? If not why not? And if so, why? Regards S.

you changed the topic. try and stay on track.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: another day No, NC-17 is the worst rating, higher then R..you don't see hardly any movies with that rating that don't get edited to drop it down to an R because i believe they don't play nc-17s in theaters or at least many won't. It's bad for business.

So they will not willingly put such a rating on a movie. Unless they are stupid. Because hundreds of classic movies made up to date could never be shown again on TV. after being "re-rated" by those clowns.

Just think of all the famous movies where actors were smoking, which would have to be reclassified as pronography and unfit for public consumption other then at places catering to so-called perverts.

What a joke!

Want to look cool? Pose with a cigarette, a gun, and have naked girl hanging on your arm, in front of an expensive car.

If you don't agree. Provide a better "image". Tell them to use all that funding to make movies their way. Tell them to open their own studio and make "nice" movies and allow the marketplace consumers to determine what is best. If they cannot provide a better role model that's effective as a new influence on teens then "hang it up".

[Autolykos]

Quote by: sdbest Tobacco companies, for decades, have colluded with Hollywood to have smoking portrayed favorably in movies. The tobacco companies do this because it helps sell cigarettes, and, more importantly gets young people to start. "Smoking in movies is the most powerful pro-tobacco influence on kids today, accounting for 52% of adolescents who start smoking, an effect even stronger than cigarette advertising." [Source] Given that watching tobacco use in movies is so harmful to young people, should movies that depict smoking be given an NC-17 rating?

As you have already pointed out, movie ratings are voluntary in the United States. If the MPAA's Classification and Rating Administration wishes to rate all films depicting smoking as NC-17, they are free to do so. I would not agree with the decision, ethically speaking, but it would not be mine to make.

- Rob

[Gods_Mercenary]

I still don't see how smoking gets the same rating as a porno, Sdbest. I mean, It's the parents decision whether to allow children to go. You could have a warning to parents at the entrance to the movie theater along with its rating, but if they ignore it, then that's their problem.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: sdbest A query: would you be in favor of retailers being able to sell cigarettes to children of any age? If not why not? And if so, why? Regards S.

If a state government (not the federal government) wants to set a minimum age at which someone can purchase tobacco products (like they do with alcohol), most, if not all, states have the authority to do so.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Chancellor If a state government (not the federal government) wants to set a minimum age at which someone can purchase tobacco products (like they do with alcohol), most, if not all, states have the authority to do so.

And why not a law that only people of a certain age can enter a movie house or buy a DVD to rent. Why not make it unlawful to sell or rent movies to persons under the age of 18? After all the state has the consitutional authority. The right to abuse authority is apparently okay in the minds of a "police state" because it is Consitutional and so "why not"? After all it is not good for kids to see The Lion King or Spiderman because of all that violence. And violence is as harmful as smoking.

Anyway, parents are busy people and do not have time to sit down and talk to the kids about every movie or rap song that comes out. So just ban the movies such that only adults can get them with laws that prevent underaged and gullible kids form the movie houses and DVD rental stores. As well as not allowing kids to take part in movies as actors.
We don't want our kids "seeing dead people" do we? And god forbid they might be influenced by Harry Potter and all the witchcraft pagan stuff that can undermine the morals of Ameirca. For it is clear that Hollywood is a de factor arm of nudist camps and their objectives and not the de factor arm of the anti-smoking camps.

'Harry Potter' Naked? | News | Access Hollywood

Do you want your teenage daughters getting google-eyed over a naked Harry Potter? Act now while Bush is still in power to effect age limitations on who can watch movies. For the sake of the children (and busy parents everywhere).

If you agree, send me all your donations and I will get busy representing your "rights" or elect me as your new dictator to replace Bush. I need the money!!!!

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Technosoul And why not a law that only people of a certain age can enter a movie house or buy a DVD to rent. Why not make it unlawful to sell or rent movies to persons under the age of 18? After all the state has the consitutional authority. The right to abuse authority is apparently okay in the minds of a "police state" because it is Consitutional and so "why not"? After all it is not good for kids to see The Lion King or Spiderman because of all that violence. And violence is as harmful as smoking.

We're talking about the authority of the 50 states, not the federal government. A state can pass a law that requires people to be a certain age in order to enter a movie house (like it does with "adult" movie theaters). A state can pass a law requiring someone to be a certain age before buying certain kinds of DVDs (such as X-rated ones). It's the federal government that does not have the authority to pass such laws.

Anyway, parents are busy people and do not have time to sit down and talk to the kids about every movie or rap song that comes out.

Their responsibility to their children comes first!

So just ban the movies such that only adults can get them with laws that prevent underaged and gullible kids form the movie houses and DVD rental stores. As well as not allowing kids to take part in movies as actors.

The leftist solution.

We don't want our kids "seeing dead people" do we?

A typical example of leftist paternalism.

And god forbid they might be influenced by Harry Potter and all the witchcraft pagan stuff that can undermine the morals of Ameirca. For it is clear that Hollywood is a de facto arm of nudist camps and their objectives and not the de facto arm of the anti-smoking camps.

Now, this is where the conservatives come in.

'Harry Potter' Naked? | News | Access Hollywood Do you want your teenage daughters getting google-eyed over a naked Harry Potter? Act now while Bush is still in power to effect age limitations on who can watch movies. For the sake of the children (and busy parents everywhere).

Legislation is the responsibility of Congress, not the executive branch.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Chancellor We're talking about the authority of the 50 states, not the federal government. A state can pass a law that requires people to be a certain age in order to enter a movie house (like it does with "adult" movie theaters). A state can pass a law requiring someone to be a certain age before buying certain kinds of DVDs (such as X-rated ones). It's the federal government that does not have the authority to pass such laws.

Here where I live, the theatres and movie rental stores supply this regulation of age, and unless you are there with a parent, most won't rent or sell to you if you are underage, based on their own regulations of these ratings.

Their responsibility to their children comes first!

Indeed it does..... where do you come off imposing your own morals onto other families and cultures?

How about giving back some responsibility to parents and their ability to raise their kids? Or should the State be responsible for all of this and parents are just there to spit American Citizens out? Didn't the Soviet Union do this?

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Praxius Here where I live, the theatres and movie rental stores supply this regulation of age, and unless you are there with a parent, most won't rent or sell to you if you are underage, based on their own regulations of these ratings.

Yes, but Canada is effectively a socialist country anyway.

Indeed it does..... where do you come off imposing your own morals onto other families and cultures?

What are you talking about?

How about giving back some responsibility to parents and their ability to raise their kids?

Maybe you should tell that to your own government.

Or should the State be responsible for all of this and parents are just there to spit American Citizens out? Didn't the Soviet Union do this?

No, the State should not (and is not) responsible for any of this and by taking such responsibilities upon itself, the State is usurping authority it does not have.

[Technosoul]

I cannot speak for Canada, and they no doubt are confused by now with what Chan ... said. But the United States should be united and not different in each state concerning these important matters. Did they leave it up to each state to determine if cigarette sin taxes should be enforced or was it the House of Representives at the federal level. All movies have some sort of bad influence. Nudity, bad words, violence, people breaking the law, people drinking or acting stoned. Just don't allow kids under 18 years of age to have access to such subversive material.

Now if I was like the anti-smoking guy and got lots of donations I could lobby washington and get those dumb laws amended that are preventing me from enacting those rules with our police department.

Or else we could tax Hollywood out of business so that they cannot promote all those bad things anymore. Parents should not have to play Big Brother without the help and the back up of government concerning those undersupervised kids who sneak around trying to get peaks at adult behavorism. What if they grow up to be like us? Good greif, what if kids got abondoned at an airport and took it over, national security is at risk. Pushing too much responsibility off on the parents will only lead to more abortions. Why should parents spank kids for not following the rules when we pay the police to do it with billy clubs? It is clear that the government is better trained at torturing kids then parents.

Rating the films just because someone lights up a cigarette will not remove the root cause which is that films can influence society because we are all copycats of the superstars. Better to go hog wild and pass a national law that kids cannot watch movies, DVD, or TV. As well as knotholes in walls and keyholes. (in case they see someone smoking on the other side).

By the way, I am only entertaining my self by advocating all this garbage.
But if those big companies want to send me all that grant money, I don't mind selling out and preaching to people like those anti-smoking people
do.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Technosoul I cannot speak for Canada, and they no doubt are confused by now with what Chan ... said.

What's so confusing about saying that Canada is effectively a socialist country?

But the United States should be united and not different in each state concerning these important matters. Did they leave it up to each state to determine if cigarette sin taxes should be enforced or was it the House of Representives at the federal level. All movies have some sort of bad influence. Nudity, bad words, violence, people breaking the law, people drinking or acting stoned. Just don't allow kids under 18 years of age to have access to such subversive material.

The founding fathers created a constitutional government that put significant limits on the federal government. It really is up to each of the now 50 states to determine whether they should have sin taxes in their respective states (though, arguably, the 14th amendment put the same restrictions on the states that the Constitution puts on the federal government).

Now if I was like the anti-smoking guy and got lots of donations I could lobby washington and get those dumb laws amended that are preventing me from enacting those rules with our police department.

Or you could challenge the constitutionality of those laws in the Courts.

Or else we could tax Hollywood out of business so that they cannot promote all those bad things anymore.

The State of California is arguably free to do exactly that.

Parents should not have to play Big Brother without the help and the back up of government concerning those undersupervised kids who sneak around trying to get peaks at adult behavorism.

The only way the government can help parents is to keep its nose out of parental business and stop trying to usurp parental authority. It's the parents' job to supervise their children and dictate what their children may or may not do, watch, etc.

What if they grow up to be like us?

Gasp! What an outrage! How dare you suggest that children might actually do such a terrible thing! :) Of course, good parents would be pleased to have their children to be just like them.

Good grief, what if kids got abondoned at an airport and took it over, national security is at risk.

Maybe the kids would do a better job. :)

Pushing too much responsibility off on the parents will only lead to more abortions.

Abortion is a sign of a parent not carrying out her responsibility.

Why should parents spank kids for not following the rules when we pay the police to do it with billy clubs? It is clear that the government is better trained at torturing kids then parents.

What you call torture others call correction.

Rating the films just because someone lights up a cigarette will not remove the root cause which is that films can influence society because we are all copycats of the superstars. Better to go hog wild and pass a national law that kids cannot watch movies, DVD, or TV. As well as knotholes in walls and keyholes. (in case they see someone smoking on the other side).

Oh, yes, we soooooo need the government to protect us from ourselves! :)

By the way, I am only entertaining my self by advocating all this garbage. But if those big companies want to send me all that grant money, I don't mind selling out and preaching to people like those anti-smoking people do.

Your sarcasm is noted but what makes it so entertaining is that it isn't all that far from what some people actually want.

[Punkbuster]

Our society has gone nuts- we can R rate slasher movies, endless sexual innuendo (and worse) abusive and offensive language and violence of every kind. But SMOKE Oh My God! Run! Run and tell the others! They are smoking on screen!! Is this a left over from the Clinton era when he started the entire "villify tobacco company" thing to boost his ratings? He always had a place to hide a good smoke so only two could see it.