Should movies with smoking get an NC-17 rating?

[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?

For more information on this issue, see Smoke Free Movies, a project of "Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. Professor Glantz is co-author of The Cigarette Papers and Tobacco War and director of the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. This project is supported by grants from the American Legacy Foundation, the Arimathea Fund of the Tides Foundation, and other donors. Earlier support came from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund."

Regards
S.

[Chancellor]

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? For more information on this issue, see Smoke Free Movies, a project of "Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. Professor Glantz is co-author of The Cigarette Papers and Tobacco War and director of the UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. This project is supported by grants from the American Legacy Foundation, the Arimathea Fund of the Tides Foundation, and other donors. Earlier support came from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund." Regards S.

If you socialists up there in Canada want to legislate people's lives away and have your government controlling what you are allowed to see, hear and say, that's your choice (a ridiculous choice but your choice nonetheless). But there is no place for such socialism in the United States of America!

Life is a terminal illness that has a 100 percent fatality rate: maybe we should protect people from life, too!

The impact of these kinds of stupid government regulations is that children never learn to make decisions for themselves. Sometimes children need to be allowed to make their own mistakes so that they can learn from them; they need to be allowed to fall and scrape their knees once in a while.

But people like you make it sound as if there was no way children could have ever survived in the days before all your socialist laws controlling every aspect of people's lives.

When I was a child, television shows still showed people smoking - including talk shows like Johnny Carson's Tonight Show - and it didn't make children start smoking. We watched movies that showed people smoking and it didn't make us all want to go out and start smoking.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Chancellor If you socialists up there in Canada want to legislate people's lives away and have your government controlling what you are allowed to see, hear and say, that's your choice (a ridiculous choice but your choice nonetheless). The impact of these kinds of stupid government regulations is that children never learn to make decisions for themselves.

The movie rating system has nothing to do with "stupid government regulations." The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) which assigns movie ratings has nothing to do with the government. It is a voluntary industry association. Now that I've hopefully corrected your misunderstanding, do you have comments relevant to the post?

Regards
S.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: sdbest The movie rating system has nothing to do with "stupid government regulations." The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) which assigns movie ratings has nothing to do with the government. It is a voluntary industry association. Now that I've hopefully corrected your misunderstanding, do you have comments relevant to the post? Regards S.

Yes, it's a private, voluntary organization - one that is pressured by government to establish ratings.

[Praxius]

If you socialists up there in Canada want to legislate people's lives away and have your government controlling what you are allowed to see, hear and say, that's your choice

There see... generalizations don't just come from Canada

Nobody in my entire life that I have talked to, has ever said they started smoking because of an actor or a movie.... this isn't 1952 anymore..... Movies and Actors were not the reason for my father starting smoking.

Movies potray real life.... there is still a good % of the population who still smoke.... to not have anybody smoking in a movie or to regulate a 2 hour long movie that has one guy in the background smoking for 5 seconds as a 17+ rating.... that's just silly.

Heck, you gotta be 19 or older in Canada to Drink (18 in Quebec and I believe PEI as well) and 21 in the US..... so should all movies that have a few people sitting around having a beer should be 17+ rated?

Pardon my "Canadian Socialist" attitude.... but if someone wants to take the responsibility of smoking or something else society deems as unhealthy.... then let them.... let them die off faster then normal..... allow natural selection to take it's course.... problem solved, regardless of their age....

If some 12 year old kid starts smoking.... hell..... that'll kill off the dumb kid faster.... who cares? Natural Selection for Parents when you think of it.... Teach your kids right and they'll live.... make them stupid, and they will die a stupid death.

And I'm sorry, but I don't rate my movies, or judge them based on if they got someone smoking in them or not....... I goto see them for the story and the characters..... They could be smoking a cigg... a joint.... they could be drinking and puking their guts up... they could be surfing the waves, or having sex with hundreds of women in one night...... that doesn't mean I'm gonna revolve my life around those things....... I never did when I was a kid, I don't now.....

What makes you think kids are more stupid now then when we were?

Did you ever pick up smoking as a child?

Do you smoke now?

If yes to any of that, could you please explain so I can factor in your experience to my equations?

[Milton Bradley]

No.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Praxius There see... generalizations don't just come from Canada Nobody in my entire life that I have talked to, has ever said they started smoking because of an actor or a movie.... this isn't 1952 anymore..... Movies and Actors were not the reason for my father starting smoking. Movies potray real life.... there is still a good % of the population who still smoke.... to not have anybody smoking in a movie or to regulate a 2 hour long movie that has one guy in the background smoking for 5 seconds as a 17+ rating.... that's just silly. Heck, you gotta be 19 or older in Canada to Drink (18 in Quebec and I believe PEI as well) and 21 in the US..... so should all movies that have a few people sitting around having a beer should be 17+ rated? Pardon my "Canadian Socialist" attitude.... but if someone wants to take the responsibility of smoking or something else society deems as unhealthy.... then let them.... let them die off faster then normal..... allow natural selection to take it's course.... problem solved, regardless of their age.... If some 12 year old kid starts smoking.... hell..... that'll kill off the dumb kid faster.... who cares? Natural Selection for Parents when you think of it.... Teach your kids right and they'll live.... make them stupid, and they will die a stupid death. And I'm sorry, but I don't rate my movies, or judge them based on if they got someone smoking in them or not....... I goto see them for the story and the characters..... They could be smoking a cigg... a joint.... they could be drinking and puking their guts up... they could be surfing the waves, or having sex with hundreds of women in one night...... that doesn't mean I'm gonna revolve my life around those things....... I never did when I was a kid, I don't now..... What makes you think kids are more stupid now then when we were? Did you ever pick up smoking as a child? Do you smoke now? If yes to any of that, could you please explain so I can factor in your experience to my equations?

The kinds of things you're saying are part of my objection to the original poster's post (the original poster is a Canadian). I resent government and organizations like the one in question trying to protect people from themselves. The only reason for including smoking in the NC-17 rating is because it's politically correct to paint smoking as being some great evil from which children have to be protected.

Like you, I don't know anyone who started smoking because they saw smoking portrayed on television or in the movies.

Are kids today more stupid than we were? The more government and the political correctness police keep trying to protect them from every little thing, the more stupid they become.

Did I ever pick up smoking as a child? No. I was doing pot, other drugs and model airplane glue but I gave all that up when I was 11. Do I smoke now? I smoke pipes and cigars.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Chancellor The kinds of things you're saying are part of my objection to the original poster's post.

I know.... I was just showing you how generalization doesn't always work The majority of my comments were geared to the original post.

[Rooster]

I do not know of anyone who started smoking because some actor smoked or they saw it in a movie. People learn to smoke from their friends, parents & relatives.

If you dont want young people smoking, then educate them. What they decide to do from their is their own decision.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Chancellor The only reason for including smoking in the NC-17 rating is because it's politically correct to paint smoking as being some great evil from which children have to be protected.

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.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Rooster If you dont want young people smoking, then educate them. What they decide to do from their is their own decision.

You'd be OK with tobacco companies giving free cigarettes to 6 year olds in order to get them addicted to nicotine early? If not, why not? If so, why?

Regards
S.

[sdbest]

Quote by: Praxius Nobody in my entire life that I have talked to, has ever said they started smoking because of an actor or a movie....

Perhaps (now this is just an off the wall, blue sky notion) if you did just a minimum of independent research beyond your circle of acquaintances you'd learn why tobacco companies invest so heavily in having their products featured in films.

Perhaps (and again I know that this is crazy idea) if you took 5 minutes to look at the sources I posted you'd have a better understanding of this issue and the supporting data and research.

Just a thought, a crazy, crazy one I know. Hey, don't let me disturb your preconceived and totally false ideas.

Regards
S.

[5010]

So a movie can show someone driving recklessly in a humourous way (colliding with barnyard chickens for example) and be rated G while another shows someone lighting up a pipe and is rated NC-17?

Which act is more harmful to yourself and others, driving recklessly or lighting up?

The rating has nothing to do with child safety. It is all about Political Correctness.

[Osborn F Enready]

Word 5010, word.

[shawmutt]

Yes. But only if they're smoking...

um...

family site, right?

nevermind

[Sbh052]

I don't think it's smoking in movies that start teens to smoke. I think it's the other infulences they have around them. Such as, watching a parent or close relative smoke. If you grow up in a house where everyone smokes, it seems that you have more of a chance to smoke one day too.

[Praxius]

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.

Selling is one thing... Where are you going with that?

You see Penthouse in teen movies or some other playboy they're oogling, you see them in the corner store on the shelf.... they are being advertised equally as smokes, yet where is the outcry for this? There isn't.... because it doesn't kill....

Well how do they get smokes? From friends who are older, or from family, not from the actors in a movie.

How do they get these magazines? Dad's room or big brothers'..... sometimes at grandpas..... but that's just kinda wierd.

If you were not that stupid as a child and never smoked because of movies.... exactly how do you believe other kids are that dumb?

Perhaps Inbreeding?


Maybe it's for the best in that case?

Seriously.... Is your heart just pouring out for all those poor victims of smoking? Does it really get you all misty at night? Does this physically and mentally bother you that you can not properly funtion on a daily basis?

No?

Then what do you care who smokes and who dies?

The same attitude I always see is "we gotta stop the teenagers from smoking"..... and when they start..... "OMG, quick, get them treatment!"....... Then they hit the age to buy them, and then.... as the Brits sometimes say..... you guys jog off and forget all about them and continue on the precious children...... :rolleyes:

To be equally fair.... if you restrict movies with a smoker in it to 17+, you have to apply the same standards towards every incident in a movie that may impression a child to do something that may be dangerous...... race a car.... shoot a gun.... be a super hero.... kill aliens (They could come in peace until Jr comes along and shoots them)

Come on now... be logical about this.

[Praxius]

Quote by: sdbest Perhaps (now this is just an off the wall, blue sky notion) if you did just a minimum of independent research beyond your circle of acquaintances you'd learn why tobacco companies invest so heavily in having their products featured in films. Perhaps (and again I know that this is crazy idea) if you took 5 minutes to look at the sources I posted you'd have a better understanding of this issue and the supporting data and research. Just a thought, a crazy, crazy one I know. Hey, don't let me disturb your preconceived and totally false ideas. Regards S.

Ha ha.... Oh don't worry.... I've read it all before.... I know all about it....

Oh and guess what? Now this might be a CRAZY notion..... But if you take the exact time it takes to read this and register it, that's all the time I require.... I don't need to ask for 5 mins.... unless I keep typing like this,

How many billions of dollars has Pepsi, Coke, Ford, and all the other bigs commercial sucesses in the world put money into for advertisement in movies? Just a few seconds to show their products and logos in a scene.... they're products we purchase and use in reality.... to make a realistic movie, wouldn't you add those similar things into a movie?

Since we all logically know the entire world isn't quite yet 100% smoke free, wouldn't it be logical to still have people smoking in movies?

Sorry, but this propaganda almost stinks of the crazy fanatic notions that were made in the early 1900's on weed..... only this is about Evil propaganada to kill our children *GASP!!!*

Kids wanna see the mutant with the claws kick some arse, not smoke his cigar..... that's just part of his character.... it's always been a part of his character long before I was even born.

In Movies, Animation, Shows, when you gotta make a character, you have to build everything from scratch (Unless you have a real life example) from all their good points to their bads..... all their vices and weaknesses, to their heroic attributes..... It's not very realistic when you have all the bad things taken away.... how do kids learn from that?

Why don't you slap a chastity clap on their wang chungs so they can't have fun tonight.... so they can't wang chung tonight? LIke they did way back when?

They don't know any better, children can't make logical decisions..... cripes... history repeats... and now my generation is sounding just like the 50's generation of protection..... *shudders*

Is this some sort of side effect of 9/11 and paranoia or something?

The reports are most likely true..... To a Degree.... I seen plenty of "Fill in the Gaps" in those reports.... a lot of isolation of tobacco companies from other sponsors of the same target medium.

They had them on racers a couple of years ago.... just like Tide... Just like the US Army..... That's right! Sign up, get shipped out, get blown up, get shipped back.

That seems hazzardous to your health, one would think.

[another day]

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?

[Gods_Mercenary]

I agree, cigarettes shouldn't be glorified, but they are part of life, and they're fine as long as the movie isn't geared towards kids, I wouldn't ant spongebob lighting up, for example. Plus, NC-17 is a ridiculous rating for a cigarette, a porno and a movie that happens to have a guy smoking should not be rated the same. To me, if a kid is old enough to seean R or PG 13 movie, he can see someone smoking.