Disney bans smoking

[D-Dogg]

Stop dispensing with the lies!! I happen to know you witnessed NO vomit that night!!

Wow...I'm really anti-smoking for the people I care about. I'm glad you were "almost" disgruntled.

I still turn red thinking about my stupid drunken antics that night.

TMI

ok, I'll stop.

 

[Linderbee]

TMI

ok, I'll stop.

Thank you. WAY TMI...geez.

 

[Covert Rain]

From an adult view I could care less about this. It won't impact my enjoyment of a movie one way or another. It's not like the act of smoking makes or breaks a film. From a parental point of view, anything that de-cools the act of smoking gets a thumbs up from me.

 

[Linderbee]

From an adult view I could care less about this. It won't impact my enjoyment of a movie one way or another. It's not like the act of smoking makes or breaks a film. From a parental point of view, anything that de-cools the act of smoking gets a thumbs up from me.

That sums it up for me perfectly.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

From an adult view I could care less about this. It won't impact my enjoyment of a movie one way or another. It's not like the act of smoking makes or breaks a film. From a parental point of view, anything that de-cools the act of smoking gets a thumbs up from me.

That sums it up for me perfectly.

I third this notion.

 

[Stout]

From an adult view I could care less about this. It won't impact my enjoyment of a movie one way or another. It's not like the act of smoking makes or breaks a film. From a parental point of view, anything that de-cools the act of smoking gets a thumbs up from me.

All right, so now I've decided that stunt work is an incredibly risky field, and that, by watching how films glorify these dangerous stunts, we put kids at risk of injury by attempting such things. As such, I do not feel that high falls are safe to watch in movies any more, as children may begin jumping off of buildings as a result. So who cares how I feel? If I'm the guy in charge, then the films will no longer have high falls.

Outrageous? Of course. A good parallel to the dangers of smoking? Not at all. The same thing? Abso-frickin'-lutely. So something is dangerous and bad for you. So YOU personally don't like it. That means that stupid studio execs can water down films by censoring things out?

Hey, if you want it to affect the rating scale, fine by me. Banning it? ********.

 

[Linderbee]

I don't recall studies showing THOUSANDS of people dying annually from working as a stunt man, nor do I see research showing that having stunt men in movies leads to kids having a life-long deathly addiction to performing stunts.

Your analogy fails miserably. It's NOT the same thing, by any stretch.

 

[abomb]

And while I haven't told my wife about the Cleaveland shot (please let that disappear *cough dcr cough*)

Seriously DCR, you gotta kill those pics. My gf is fearful of ASFN meets for fear of the 1600x1200 images appearing on the interwebs.

 

[Linderbee]

Seriously DCR, you gotta kill those pics. My gf is fearful of ASFN meets for fear of the 16000x12000 images appearing on the interwebs.

ftfy...

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Seriously DCR, you gotta kill those pics. My gf is fearful of ASFN meets for fear of the 1600x1200 images appearing on the interwebs.

Didn't I go through and resize them?

 

[Linderbee]

Didn't I go through and resize them?

just the one I asked you to.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

just the one I asked you to.

It was on my "to do" list, must have slipped my mind.

 

[Stout]

I don't recall studies showing THOUSANDS of people dying annually from working as a stunt man, nor do I see research showing that having stunt men in movies leads to kids having a life-long deathly addiction to performing stunts.

Your analogy fails miserably. It's NOT the same thing, by any stretch.

And I don't recall studies showing THOUSANDS of children dying annually from Bruce Willis smoking a cig in a movie either. My example is absurd, and banning smoking in movies is equally absurd. It's the whole puritanical, impose our morality movement, and I don't like it.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

And I don't recall studies showing THOUSANDS of children dying annually from Bruce Willis smoking a cig in a movie either. My example is absurd, and banning smoking in movies is equally absurd. It's the whole puritanical, impose our morality movement, and I don't like it.

Disney can do what they want and they will - especially with their family-oriented films. If you don't like it - don't support them. Boycott their films.

As for the studies...this is from the first post:

Research cited by American Legacy, a nonprofit created out of landmark litigation between the tobacco industry and states attorneys general, shows that 90 percent of all films depict smoking and children with the highest exposure to smoking in movies were nearly three times more likely to start smoking.

Tobacco is featured in three-quarters of G, PG and PG-13 rated movies and 90 percent of R-rated movies, the studies showed.

Also - Do you have a problem with showing a PSA before films which include smoking?

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

Disney can do what they want and they will - especially with their family-oriented films. If you don't like it - don't support them. Boycott their films.

As for the studies...this is from the first post:

Research cited by American Legacy, a nonprofit created out of landmark litigation between the tobacco industry and states attorneys general, shows that 90 percent of all films depict smoking and children with the highest exposure to smoking in movies were nearly three times more likely to start smoking.

Tobacco is featured in three-quarters of G, PG and PG-13 rated movies and 90 percent of R-rated movies, the studies showed.

Also - Do you have a problem with showing a PSA before films which include smoking?

I'm not for nor against this, but how can 90% of all films depict smoking when they state that 75% of G, PG, and PG-13 along with 90% of R movies feature tobacco?

 

[Linderbee]

I'm not for nor against this, but how can 90% of all films depict smoking when they state that 75% of G, PG, and PG-13 along with 90% of R movies feature tobacco?

Because there are a LOT more R rated films out there than the others.

 

[Linderbee]

And I don't recall studies showing THOUSANDS of children dying annually from Bruce Willis smoking a cig in a movie either. My example is absurd, and banning smoking in movies is equally absurd. It's the whole puritanical, impose our morality movement, and I don't like it.

I didn't say thousands of children...I said thousands of people. Most smokers started smoking in their youth.

 

[Stout]

Disney can do what they want and they will - especially with their family-oriented films. If you don't like it - don't support them. Boycott their films.

As for the studies...this is from the first post:

Research cited by American Legacy, a nonprofit created out of landmark litigation between the tobacco industry and states attorneys general, shows that 90 percent of all films depict smoking and children with the highest exposure to smoking in movies were nearly three times more likely to start smoking.

Tobacco is featured in three-quarters of G, PG and PG-13 rated movies and 90 percent of R-rated movies, the studies showed.

Also - Do you have a problem with showing a PSA before films which include smoking?

I raise the BS flag. There is NO WAY they can possibly know this. Absolutely no way they can trace such things back to movies that depict smoking. Utterly ridiculous.

And no, I'd have no problem showing a message beforehand, or even raising the rating on it.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Disney can do what they want and they will - especially with their family-oriented films. If you don't like it - don't support them. Boycott their films.

Which is exactly what I will do. I grow weary of a small percentage of hypocrits trying to save everyone from themselves.

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

Because there are a LOT more R rated films out there than the others.

55% are rated R, historically speaking. It doesn't matter, the stat still doesn't add up.

http://www.infoplease.com/askeds/rating-motion-pictures.html

 

[Brian in Mesa]

I'm in the middle on this because I detest smoking. I've lost two family members to cancer. Both were smokers that just couldn't quit the habit.

I don't mind Disney making their family films more family-friendly or putting PSAs in front of other films with smoking.

I'd still like to see how this study was conducted (and where they get their numbers) because I really don't buy into kids/people being influenced by what they see to the degree someone would link their smoking to a film icon lighting up on the screen. I buy into a small percentage of the population being influenced by what they see or what their friends do, etc, but not to the degree some say. I saw tons of R-rated films as a child and I didn't buy into any of the habits I saw depicted on the screen.

I'm about as clean cut as they get but I'm also anti-censorship in most cases. Parents should be raising their kids to make the right choices. If that was happening studios wouldn't have to regulate their industry to do the parenting.

BTW, Stout - Wouldn't raising the ratings on films which include smoking be close to the same thing as a ban? If a film was going to be PG-13 but included smoking and was raised to an R-rating, wouldn't the studio just cut out the smoking to get the lower rating?

 

[Cheesebeef]

I'm in the middle on this because I detest smoking. I've lost two family members to cancer. Both were smokers that just couldn't quit the habit.

I don't mind Disney making their family films more family-friendly or putting PSAs in front of other films with smoking.

and then, after that PSA, is there gonna be a PSA about drinking? And what if there's violence in the movie, like wife-beating or child-abuse or any other kind of violence? Should there be a third PSA saying violence is bad?

Sorry, but if you're expecting the movies to help win a battle in educating your children on the ills of society, you've already lost the war.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

and then, after that PSA, is there gonna be a PSA about drinking? And what if there's violence in the movie, like wife-beating or child-abuse or any other kind of violence? Should there be a third PSA saying violence is bad?

Sorry, but if you're expecting the movies to help win a battle in educating your children on the ills of society, you've already lost the war.

I already said parents should be doing their job. It doesn't take a "village" to raise a child. It should just take a caring parent or parents teaching personal responsibility.

I just don't see the problem with family-oriented films eliminating a filthy habit from them. This isn't the 50's or 60's anymore where smoking was glamorous and mom and dad would relax at the dinner table with their cigarettes. Smoking is now being eliminated from many places in society.

I still want to see where the study got their numbers. I'll have to go back and rewatch the G, PG, and PG-13 movies from the past and look for scenes with smoking in them.

 

[Stout]

I'm in the middle on this because I detest smoking. I've lost two family members to cancer. Both were smokers that just couldn't quit the habit.

I don't mind Disney making their family films more family-friendly or putting PSAs in front of other films with smoking.

I'd still like to see how this study was conducted (and where they get their numbers) because I really don't buy into kids/people being influenced by what they see to the degree someone would link their smoking to a film icon lighting up on the screen. I buy into a small percentage of the population being influenced by what they see or what their friends do, etc, but not to the degree some say. I saw tons of R-rated films as a child and I didn't buy into any of the habits I saw depicted on the screen.

I'm about as clean cut as they get but I'm also anti-censorship in most cases. Parents should be raising their kids to make the right choices. If that was happening studios wouldn't have to regulate their industry to do the parenting.

BTW, Stout - Wouldn't raising the ratings on films which include smoking be close to the same thing as a ban? If a film was going to be PG-13 but included smoking and was raised to an R-rating, wouldn't the studio just cut out the smoking to get the lower rating?

No, not if it's a studio self-imposed kind of thing. Well, unless it elevates an R movie into X, or some such nonsense.

 

[Covert Rain]

All right, so now I've decided that stunt work is an incredibly risky field, and that, by watching how films glorify these dangerous stunts, we put kids at risk of injury by attempting such things. As such, I do not feel that high falls are safe to watch in movies any more, as children may begin jumping off of buildings as a result. So who cares how I feel? If I'm the guy in charge, then the films will no longer have high falls.

Outrageous? Of course. A good parallel to the dangers of smoking? Not at all. The same thing? Abso-frickin'-lutely. So something is dangerous and bad for you. So YOU personally don't like it. That means that stupid studio execs can water down films by censoring things out?

Hey, if you want it to affect the rating scale, fine by me. Banning it? ********.

Not the same at all but I get what your trying to say. Again this is much ado about nothing. People are confusing the philosophical or political side of things with the end result which will not impact the movie itself. Again, this will have zero impact on the movie itself. The quality of film in no way is impacted by a character picking up a cigarette or not picking up a cigarette.

If a film hinged on the characterization of smoking then chances are it sucked to begin with. Banning smoking impacting a movie? Get real. I would hardly classify that as watering a movie down. Is the impact over hyped? Probably. It's not like you can look to film to educate your kids. However, being a parent, I will take what little impact this might have of de-cooling the act.