Disney bans smoking/mini-rant

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:37 pm

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/ae1674e6-3ad1-1 ... fd2ac.html

....for f*** sake....

This is the most retarded thing I've read in a while. Really pisses me off seeing things like this

Banning smoking in movies...thats REAL great

I do not smoke, nor do I ever intend to, but why is America just freaking out about smokers in these past few years? Baned in restrants and bars, and movies getting a higher rating just because a smoker is shown. Seriously, I was in the movie theater. For one trailer, in the box with the rating, said something like: Rated PG for thematic elements and smoking. WTF? Smoking pot, ok, I get that, but normal cigarettes...

If somebody wants to smoke, let them. They know about the health risks. Its their decision. Just don't go puffing it in other peoples faces.
Their was this one commercial a while back that really pissed me off. People outside watching there children's soccer game. One guy in the stands started to lit up a cig. Everyone stops playing and stares disapprovingly, and the others in the stand. The man ready to smoke puts out his cigarette. The game continues happily....I don't know why, but seeing s*** like that really, really pisses me off.

If I was that guy in the commercial, I'd blow smoke in all their stupid faces then put out my cigarette on someone's forehead.

People just keep getting dumber and more ignorant everyday.
And their are actually people out there who want a movie automaticlly rated R for showing smoking? 'Cover your eyes children! The bad man is lighting it up!'
I hope this isn't a growing tread...banning smoking out of all movies. Some people find sex and violence offensive...why not just ban that too? How about banning people being mean to each other while we're at it? That makes for some good tv/film.

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:46 pm

I don't really like it when people smoke, since it is dangerous and I don't really see what they get out of it, but yeah, this is stupid. Especially when you consider that the last movie they released involved a character getting another character drunk to extract information.

Set · Post by **Set** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:56 pm

Of all the stupid...oh I swear...

And what are they going to do with their older films? Cruella DeVille always carried around one of those fancy cigarettes in 101 Dalmations.

This is just another excuse for lazy-a** parents to not take care of their children. “We know that the presence of smoking in a movie significantly influences a child's decision to start,” No. Stupid friends and parents who don't DO THEIR DAMN JOB AND TAKE CARE OF THEIR SPAWN are the reason for that. People will look for any excuse not to accept responsibility for their own actions. "The devil made me do it." "I was drunk." "It's the movie's fault." "Video games are evil." It's the exact same s***. And it's stupid.

Teh_DarkJokerWolf · Post by **Teh_DarkJokerWolf** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 12:07 am

Like I said slowly but surely everything is being pulled away from us..

This just proves it..I never thought anything of it when I seen it in Disney Movies..Well I wonder wat will be taken out of movies next..I guess it is for a good cause but then again kids see people smoking in everyday life, so really wat is it helping?

Midnight · Post by **Midnight** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:32 am

I think the problem is, there's no "safe" level of second-hand smoke. You don't have to have smoke breathed into your face for second-hand smoke to affect your health. (Also, cigarette smoke gives me really bad headaches; I had to give up going to the pub for about ten years until they banned smoking in pubs a couple of years back).

There's no excuse for banning smoking in movies though (or, for that matter, digitally altering scenes so that characters aren't smoking any more). There's a hell of a lot of other stuff going on in movies that's more harmful than smoking. (Not that some of the other ideas about what is or isn't acceptable in movies aren't just as silly. For example, I've always thought the American censors have it a bit bass ackwards when comparing their attitude toward sex with their attitude toward violence...)

ravaged_warrior · Post by **ravaged_warrior** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 2:42 am

Midnight wrote:For example, I've always thought the American censors have it a bit bass ackwards when comparing their attitude toward sex with their attitude toward violence...

That's true, but I find the swearing thing a bit more ridiculous. Did you know that if you say f uck in a movie, it will be rated PG-13, and if you say it at least three times, it will be R? The concept of a "bad" word is ridiculous to start with (though I draw the line at racial slurs - I understand the problem there), but when a violent movie like Live Free or Die Hard censors the word with a gunshot it's just ridiculous. It also disturbs me a bit that Coming to America, a movie that should probably be rated PG, is rated R because of swearing.

But you're right about sex as well. Any nudity that it sex-related will make the movie R. Generally, this means basically all movies with nudity because it always seems to be either sex-oriented or possibly considered such. I've only seen otherwise in two movies, Titanic and Airplane. I surprised they let Titanic slide, though, since that could probably have easily been construed as sexual.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 5:07 pm

If you think it's a bad thing that smoking is banned from a restaurant, simple: Don't eat there.

If you think it's a bad thing that Disney banned smoking from all of their movies, simple: Don't watch them.

This is only as big a deal as you're making it.

Scott Gardener · Post by **Scott Gardener** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:14 pm

I think one reason it's a bigger deal today is that cigarettes are more toxic and foul-smelling today. I remember as a kid seeing cigarette vending machines. Smokes then had an almost pleasant aroma. Nowdays they stink to high heaven, and being around smokers even when they're not actively engaged in their trade makes me gag. And, given that I work in an ER, I'm around them a lot, as they tend to end up there more frequently.

Granted, that's probably not the only reason. There's a jolt reaction by our society--we're suddenly thinking about something taken for granted. They never worried about gay marriage back in 1960 because no one ever thought about it. Being gay was itself so weird and deviant a thing back then that no one considered it could instead be thought of as a legitimate lifestyle, let alone another way to organize a family. (Just another example, not an attempt to redirect the conversation.) We started thinking about just how much damage cigarettes are really doing only lately, and we're starting to look back at our past cultural elements such as Popeye and ask ourselves the old "what were we thinking?" Remember that segregation also wasn't considered a big deal in the United States until the 1960s. (That those of you in Europe got over it first was probably the first hint that America was losing its mid-20th century bragging rights about being a social front-runner.) We're looking back and wondering why we ever let smoking on airplanes be allowed in the first place in retrospect. (Perhaps even more so about allowing it on dirigibles filled with hydrogen and painted with explosives.)

I see it very likely that anti-smoking movements will continue forward until smoking becomes a part of history. Here in the U.S., we pour almost a third of our federal budget into health care programs, meaning that a third of all our tax money goes into other peoples' medical bills. Those of you in other countries blessed with actually decent health care systems that provide for everyone are probably spending at least as much as well, if not more. If billions of those dollars could be saved, passing those savings onto you personally in the form of hundreds or even thousands of dollars back into your own pocket, it's hard not to be resentful of people on welfare with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease lighting up. Suddenly, either the freedom to smoke sounds like the ranting of a cliche teenager about the right to do things at the expense of others, once your money gets involved.

For me, personally, I win either way. I'm a doctor, so I have job security seeing sick people. It's a bit frustrating emotionally, though, seeing so much preventable illness. That, and you would not believe how much I pay in taxes, so I'm in a weird and screwy way ultimately paying myself. But, the cigarette/cash engine is not very efficient economically; most of that money gets dissipated as heat.

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:55 pm

Suddenly, either the freedom to smoke sounds like the ranting of a cliche teenager about the right to do things at the expense of others, once your money gets involved.

Was that directed at me then?

Aki · Post by **Aki** » Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:05 am

Smoking's bad and all, but it being part of ratings in movies is silly. It's disneys choice to ban it, and they can if they want, but I'd rather not movies be rated higher than they should've been because of some smoking.

Don't want to see smoking? Simple, don't watch the movie. Think it gives the wrong impression? Just as simple! Explain how bad it is. Bans shouldn't cater to lazy parents.

Scott Gardener · Post by **Scott Gardener** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 8:32 pm

Silverclaw: No, not directed at you. It was directed at the argument itself.

I will concede that having depictions of smoking used as the basis of a censorship rating is a bit much. But, I think we're misdirecting censorship as is.

Terastas · Post by **Terastas** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:36 pm

Regarding the ratings, I'd consider smoking on par with drinking, so if one can get the rating hiked up from G to PG, it makes sense that the other would too.

In all fairness, it's not like the influence smoking and drinking has on the ratings is huge. Even if that does somehow upgrade the movie from G to PG-13, how many twelve-year-olds do you think are pissed that they can watch movies with smoking in it anymore?

We're all adults here, so this affects us. . . How?

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:29 pm

I just hate these crazy, overprotective, parents that get in mobs and act like a bunch of whiny pussies.

When I was a kid, I watched people smoking/drinking in movies and I've never been compelled to start smoking and getting drunk because of it. Soon we'll end up having edited versions of 101 Dalmatians, Pinocchio, ect if people like that get their way. Really, isn't their better/more constructive ways for them to waste their time?

Aki · Post by **Aki** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:14 am

Terastas wrote:Regarding the ratings, I'd consider smoking on par with drinking, so if one can get the rating hiked up from G to PG, it makes sense that the other would too.

In all fairness, it's not like the influence smoking and drinking has on the ratings is huge. Even if that does somehow upgrade the movie from G to PG-13, how many twelve-year-olds do you think are pissed that they can watch movies with smoking in it anymore?

We're all adults here, so this affects us. . . How?

Them making it PG is fine with me. It's if smoking suddenly makes it R or some ridiculous stuff like that.

Which does affect me. R means I have to carry ID so they can be sure I'm 17. *shrug*

Ansuru · Post by **Ansuru** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:53 pm

Tobacco and Alcohol are some of the most deadly killers in this country. The fact that they're legal while other life-destroying drugs are not is hypocritical, shortsighted, and just plain dumb.

The campaign against tobacco is something I fully support...I especially like the states that have banned smoking in public buildings, immediately outside the entrance to public buildings, and in vehicles where children are present. If people are too stupid to take care of their children, and too disrespectful of others to take it outside without having the Law MAKE them do it, they shouldn't be able to do it. Period.

I certainly don't want to smell it. I don't want to get hit by some drunk bugger on the highway, either.

Clean air and dry drivers for all!

MoonKit · Post by **MoonKit** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:35 pm

You always say everything so clearly and well thought out Scott. I agree!

geekboy1500 · Post by **geekboy1500** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:21 pm

I don't care if YOU smoke...

but I do care if you smoke around others who don't want you to.

the movie thing though, is bs. If you want a compromise just have a little thing that says PG for "X"
the "X" could be smoking or whatever, that way overprotective parents can have their peace of mind, but the movies don't get their freedom circumsised.

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:37 am

Reminds me of that anti-smoking episode from South Park.

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:41 am

Ansuru wrote:Tobacco and Alcohol are some of the most deadly killers in this country. The fact that they're legal while other life-destroying drugs are not is hypocritical, shortsighted, and just plain dumb.

I think the most deadly killer in your country (I take it you mean US) is fastfood, not tabacco. Other then that, can you proof to me that it is?

Shadow Wulf · Post by **Shadow Wulf** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:30 am

Im not trying to be a prosmoker or anything by saying this but, Ive seen people who lived as long to be 100 and are serous smokers. The fact that they are taking smoking out of its own programs and movies is a dumb move and wont make any difference. Most people get into smoking when they are in high school and get pressured to smoke. I was raused properly, and Ive seen rated R movies that involved sex and drugs when I was in Kindergarten and it did me no harm, I didnt want to smoke a cigarettes.....because my parents smoked it and I hated the smell of the smoke. My parents let me try alchohol at an early age to show me how bad it tastes and to not drink any more than a couple of swallows until I am old enough.

Morkulv also caught my eye on one thing. We shouldnt even be concern about cigarettes at the moment. In fact I dont believe we should ban cigarettes because that just takes away more freedom from the americans, and I dont smoke, but I believe if people want to smoke, they can go ahead for all I care as long as its not near me.

What we should worry about on the similar level is fast foods, eating at mcdonalds for a month is more toxic than smoking a cigarette for a month, it sucks that America has more obese people than any other country in the world because people who are too lazy to cook love eating at those greasy joints.

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 12:02 pm

If that's how you guys feel, then come over here and help us aussies ban "cartoon characters" from re-appearing in "supermarket junk food" time and time again.

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:14 pm

Fast food shouldn't be banned (in general), just like smoking.

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:28 pm

it's all choice man. NOTHING should be banned.

If you eat too much fast food you'll get fat. You might get vascular disease.
If you drink too much, you might get Cirrhosis.
If you smoke, you might get cancer.

PERSONAL CHOICE dude. YOU are responsible for the products you CHOOSE to consume. Not the company that makes them.

DarkShadow · Post by **DarkShadow** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:04 pm

MattSullivan wrote:it's all choice man. NOTHING should be banned.

If you eat too much fast food you'll get fat. You might get vascular disease.
If you drink too much, you might get Cirrhosis.
If you smoke, you might get cancer.

PERSONAL CHOICE dude. YOU are responsible for the products you CHOOSE to consume. Not the company that makes them.

That's true Matt. I however, believe that years ago when cig's were first bought into the market, the tobacco company did not release all of the information about the products that were put inot cigarettes. Therefor, people didn't know how deadly that cigaretts could actually be. Cigarette smoke is also deadly to whoever else is around the smoker.

But that's just my opinion, and everyone is entiltled to their own thoughts. That was mine

As for banning it from movies, that's just silly

Kids see it everywhere

Lukas · Post by **Lukas** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:17 pm

i don't believe in banning smoking but:
http://dying.about.com/od/causes/tp/actual_death.htm
just to get the facts out

(but that whole movie thing is a little over zealous)