Thread: Smoking in Films

The answers to some people's questions and objections can be found here:
The NSW Public Health Bulletin May-June 2004: Promoting tobacco to the young in the age of advertising bans
Film is arguably the most influential medium among the young. There is strong evidence that seeing smoking in film encourages children to smoke. One study found that non-smoking teenagers whose favourite film stars smoked on screen are up to 16 times more likely to view smoking favourably.

... and here:
ASH Australia media release: Oscars tobacco 2004 movie smoking films

A study published this month in the American Journal of Public Health* shows the incidence of smoking scenes in randomly-selected movies, after falling in the early 80s, had risen again since the 1990s to levels observed in 1950 – when smoking rates were twice as high.

... and here:
The Cancer Council New South Wales :: Reeling Them In - Smoking in movies

Out of the top ten non-animated movies at the Australian box-office in 2006 , seven contained smoking.


I will leave you to read them if you are interested.

If you google "smoking in films" on Australian sites, you will find several others.

NB. Some of these sites are advocating a ban.
I am not.
I am just suggesting that the gov't stops spending money on promoting smoking at the same time as it spends money aimed at discouraging people.

Some interesting stuff in those links, however wherever smoking is......it is normal.........its not illegal.......people know the risks. If you saw somebody shooting up on your way to work, it would make you stop in your tracks..so to speak. To see someone light up a smoke is a bit like watching a car drive past.

Lets just say that it was banned in the handful if that of Aust movies, what about the predominant overseas industry?

Regards

Stevo

Originally Posted by stevo68

Some interesting stuff in those links, however wherever smoking is......it is normal.........its not illegal.......people know the risks. If you saw somebody shooting up on your way to work, it would make you stop in your tracks..so to speak. To see someone light up a smoke is a bit like watching a car drive past.

Lets just say that it was banned in the handful if that of Aust movies, what about the predominant overseas industry?

Regards

Stevo

That's right, and that is why it is not relevant to compare it with shooting people and other illegal activities in films that some people have mentioned.

I have not advocated a ban.
I have just suggested that the government should stop providing funds for something which appears to encourage young people to begin smoking.

That's right, and that is why it is not relevant to compare it with shooting people and other illegal activities in films that some people have mentioned.

I have not advocated a ban.
I have just suggested that the government should stop providing funds for something which appears to encourage young people to begin smoking.

Funds for what though? The very few Australian movies that they may provide funding for, where there maybe a couple of minutes all up in a 2hr movie of somebody having a legal smoke. The same ciggies that the govt makes a $$ out of? I'm not saying I disagree, but I cannot see what result it would have. Lets say for arguments sake that they did stop providing funds to Aust movies as that seems to be your target. Who's to say that the film makers don't source funds from elsewhere. Problem is not solved.

Also, where does self responsibility fall? When I was 16 odd, it was my choice to pick up a ciggie and smoke. It wasn't cool because of a movie, it was cool because I wasnt allowed to do it....just like drinking some booze. As stated before, I'm trying to quit at the moment, probably why I am a bit tetchy of late. This is my 4th attempt in 24mths, whose fault is that....mine and mine alone. Fast food is prevalent in many movies, obesity is becoming a major problem in many countries, it also is not illegal. Is a "teen" who becomes a fatty boomba, become that way due to a movie or because they see it in day to day life. A teen will see far more smoking in day to day life than they ever would in a movie. I would also be interested to know of these Aust smoking movies, I watch a lot of movies, Rogue for one the other day....not one ciggie in the movie.

Regards

Stevo

Originally Posted by vnx205

I thought "Thank You for Smoking " was a great movie.

I guess you thought "An Inconvenient Truth" was a good movie too.
Both movies were made in peddle a particular moral point. A marketing exercise if you like.

'Smoking kills" easy to say but not true. Smoking may kill, or smoking is likely to lead to an earlier death would be true.
'One cigarette is too many': Wood smoke puts out more carcingens than tobacco, how many camp fires have you sat around?
I am not saying it is good for you but bans reduce our freedom, the majority think smoking is wrong and some pressure groups want it banned.
The same is true of 4WDrives.
And there are some health pressure groups wanting a ban on alcahol, because one drink is doing you harm.
I do not smoke but have socially smoked in the past. If smoking kills I should die of a smoking related illness....................I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Originally Posted by CaverD3

I guess you thought "An Inconvenient Truth" was a good movie too.

Yes I did. Not because just assumed that it was telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, but because I believed it did a good job of making a lot of people look more seriously at the issue.
Actually I don't really see it as a good movie. It doesn't really have a lot of cinematic qualities. I think of it as a good message.

Originally Posted by CaverD3

Both movies were made in peddle a particular moral point. A marketing exercise if you like.

Of course, but a lot of other excellent movies also promote a particular moral point. "Dr Strangelove or how.... .... " springs to mind as a recent example.

Originally Posted by CaverD3

'Smoking kills" easy to say but not true. Smoking may kill, or smoking is likely to lead to an earlier death would be true.
'One cigarette is too many': Wood smoke puts out more carcingens than tobacco, how many camp fires have you sat around?
I am not saying it is good for you but bans reduce our freedom, the majority think smoking is wrong and some pressure groups want it banned.

I agree. bans reduce our freedoms. That is probably why I am not advocating a ban.
If the gov't spent taxpayers money giving people the impression that it was a good idea to breathe in campfire smoke and at the same time spent money telling people that campfire smoke was a health hazard, I would probably find that a bit odd too.

Originally Posted by CaverD3

The same is true of 4WDrives.
And there are some health pressure groups wanting a ban on alcahol, because one drink is doing you harm.
I do not smoke but have socially smoked in the past. If smoking kills I should die of a smoking related illness....................I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Surely you are not claiming that there is no health risk associated with smoking just because you smoke and are still alive!
I had a great uncle who was part of the Gallipoli landing and he lived to be almost 90. Does that prove that there was no risk associated with being part on the Gallipoli offensive? Of course not. No more than your being alive proves that smoking is safe.

Never said it was not bad for you:

Originally Posted by CaverD3

'Smoking kills" easy to say but not true. Smoking may kill, or smoking is likely to lead to an earlier death would be true.
'One cigarette is too many': Wood smoke puts out more carcingens than tobacco, how many camp fires have you sat around?
I am not saying it is good

Just some general statements about smoking are an exageration.
I think all is relative and there is only one thing guaranteed to lead to death...............................being born.

Originally Posted by stevo68

Funds for what though? The very few Australian movies that they may provide funding for, where there maybe a couple of minutes all up in a 2hr movie of somebody having a legal smoke. The same ciggies that the govt makes a $$ out of? I'm not saying I disagree, but I cannot see what result it would have. Lets say for arguments sake that they did stop providing funds to Aust movies as that seems to be your target. Who's to say that the film makers don't source funds from elsewhere. Problem is not solved.

Also, where does self responsibility fall? When I was 16 odd, it was my choice to pick up a ciggie and smoke. It wasn't cool because of a movie, it was cool because I wasnt allowed to do it....just like drinking some booze. As stated before, I'm trying to quit at the moment, probably why I am a bit tetchy of late. This is my 4th attempt in 24mths, whose fault is that....mine and mine alone. Fast food is prevalent in many movies, obesity is becoming a major problem in many countries, it also is not illegal. Is a "teen" who becomes a fatty boomba, become that way due to a movie or because they see it in day to day life. A teen will see far more smoking in day to day life than they ever would in a movie. I would also be interested to know of these Aust smoking movies, I watch a lot of movies, Rogue for one the other day....not one ciggie in the movie.

Regards

Stevo

I hope I don't appear argumentative in responding to your points.
I read your post as a series of considered comments and genuine questions, so I will try to reply in the same vein.

I think I agree with pretty much everything you say about other influences and taking responsibility for your own decisions.
I also agree with your comment that film makers will source other funds. I said something like that in the first post and have repeated it a couple of time since.

However that does not mean there is no point in cutting gov't fund to those films.

Sometimes it is worth doing something because it draws attention to the issue, like Earth Hour or whatever it was called when people turned off their lights for a while. The energy saved was minuscule, but it did raise awareness of the issue.

The publicity which I assume would accompany such a withdrawal of funds (not a ban) might even do more than the current health campaign to raise the public's awareness of the issue of tobacco companies trying to make smoking seem attractive to young people. After all they are desperate to get new customers; all their old ones are dropping dead.

Surely it would also make it easier for the gov't to appear serious about encouraging people to avoid smoking.

I think your point about seeing more smoking in real life than in movies is debatable. How else do you explain the enormous discrepancy between the actual % of smokers (24%) and the belief of young people that the majority of adult smoke.
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that seeing your favourite actor smoke has a greater impact than seeing you neighbour smoke.

My suggestion (Actually it is not my suggestion. it came from some medical body like the AMA) will not solve the problem.
It will not keep smoking out of movies.
It will not stop every teenager from taking up the habit.
However given the enormous cost of smoking, surely even a small step in the right direction is worth taking.
It would also eliminate the current situation where gov't funds are used for contradictory purposes.

Originally Posted by CaverD3

Never said it was not bad for you:


Just some general statements about smoking are an exaggeration.
I think all is relative and there is only one thing guaranteed to lead to deat...............................being born.

Which ones?