Law3 mins ago
Smoking in Movies.
40 Answers
First of all I suppose I am an anti-smoker. At the end of the day it stinks and will give you a cancerous lung or two.
However, is this kill-joy government going too far in classing all movies, even old black and white ones, as Cert 18 if they depict any forms of smoking?
ALL Sherlock Holmes, anything with Churchill portrayed, ALL Humphrey Bogart, and even 101 Dalmations (Cruella Deville) and Pinnochio will be re-classed.
Are we going over the top or what????
However, is this kill-joy government going too far in classing all movies, even old black and white ones, as Cert 18 if they depict any forms of smoking?
ALL Sherlock Holmes, anything with Churchill portrayed, ALL Humphrey Bogart, and even 101 Dalmations (Cruella Deville) and Pinnochio will be re-classed.
Are we going over the top or what????
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Abdulmajid. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
in the 40s and 50s smoking was glamourised,it was cool and even portrayed as being good for you,my dear father has emphysemia and suspected lung cancer,if you could see someone you love and care for unable to breathe,gasping for breath even when they are on their oxygen tank and nebuliser you would welcome ANY legislation that would stop people from smoking.ok nobody forced my father to smoke but to glamourise it as they did all those years ago hooked a whole generation and it is now the older generation that is paying a heavy price.and abdulmajid i truly hope that 1 of your family NEVER has a CANCEROUS LUNG OR TWO..................
My Grandfather smokes a pipe and has done so for over 65 years. But at 92 he is still fighting fit.
But do you really think this is necessary??
As said, I am an anti-smoker. And apart from ONE DRAG when I was 13 or 14 have never smoked in my life!!!!
I am on your side stokie, but are there not more pressing things to worry about like knife crime, muslims and the credit crunch?
But do you really think this is necessary??
As said, I am an anti-smoker. And apart from ONE DRAG when I was 13 or 14 have never smoked in my life!!!!
I am on your side stokie, but are there not more pressing things to worry about like knife crime, muslims and the credit crunch?
Well my view is Casablanca will not influence children to become independent freedom fighters in Morocco, or Sherlock Holmes will not influence children to become super-sleuths whilst sporting a deer-stalker, so why should they be pressured or influenced to smoke??
The rise to 18 years old for purchases, a ban in pubs and the power for police to confiscate ciggies from kids is enough in my book.
The rise to 18 years old for purchases, a ban in pubs and the power for police to confiscate ciggies from kids is enough in my book.
I thought the whole point of putting age restrictions on films, was to avoind certain age groupd watching things on screen that they would not otherwise see on a normal day to day basis ie extreme violence and raunchy 5ex scenes.
It is on this basis that i believe it is pc gone mad as it has with so many other issues. I will agree that smoking should never be encouraged (even though i am a smoker myself) and that the defence for doing this will be along the lines of 'youngsters look up to celebritys and seeing them smoke will encourage others to do so, but as it is a common thing that you can see on your average day, i think it is un necessary to age restict pictures with images of smoking.
It is on this basis that i believe it is pc gone mad as it has with so many other issues. I will agree that smoking should never be encouraged (even though i am a smoker myself) and that the defence for doing this will be along the lines of 'youngsters look up to celebritys and seeing them smoke will encourage others to do so, but as it is a common thing that you can see on your average day, i think it is un necessary to age restict pictures with images of smoking.
I've long suspected that this government is completely and utterly potty - and this confirms it!! Children can't watch Disney!! This is madness - and yes, they are going too far. Not only that, but we're paying these idiots to come up with this drivel - and how much is this costing? Yet more money down the drain. These films aren't shown at the cinema - they're on TV, or they're on tapes/DVDs bought or hired from shops, so how is re-classifying them going to stop kids watching? Since most of us have seen those films, one has to wonder why and how the anti-smoking campaign waged over the past few years has been so successful. Oh, hang on - could it be that people are actually capable of thinking for themselves? No, surely not!
Sorry for the rant, but the utter stupidity of this government with it's ridiculous rules and regulations, and its continual intrusion into our lives, makes me absolutely sick.
Sorry for the rant, but the utter stupidity of this government with it's ridiculous rules and regulations, and its continual intrusion into our lives, makes me absolutely sick.
My grandfather has definite emphysema, and just recently barely avoided death (he's just come out of a hospice, which was a bit of a surprise). I've also lost 3 close members of family due to smoking, and my Dad isn't any good shape due to it either.
However, the idea is ludicrous. Smoking is a real part of the stylistic atmosphere of some film genres - Noir being the best example (I don't care how many people have relatives affected - I've got plenty and anyone who says it really bothers them is just being a drama queen), and the idea will also mean that any film that depicts smoking badly (like Thank You For Smoking) will get an 18. Plus kids get plenty of education alongside a notably effective public health campaign regarding smoking so I think any effect these movies could possibly have is very doubtful.
The idea is so ludicrous, however, that I sincerely doubt it will ever get anywhere significant beyond the small commission proposing it. I think we can rest assured we're not going to see this on the statute books, regardless of the populist reporting surrounding it.
However, the idea is ludicrous. Smoking is a real part of the stylistic atmosphere of some film genres - Noir being the best example (I don't care how many people have relatives affected - I've got plenty and anyone who says it really bothers them is just being a drama queen), and the idea will also mean that any film that depicts smoking badly (like Thank You For Smoking) will get an 18. Plus kids get plenty of education alongside a notably effective public health campaign regarding smoking so I think any effect these movies could possibly have is very doubtful.
The idea is so ludicrous, however, that I sincerely doubt it will ever get anywhere significant beyond the small commission proposing it. I think we can rest assured we're not going to see this on the statute books, regardless of the populist reporting surrounding it.
Pretty soon Dracula Rides Again will be banned in case we all go around trying to sink our teeth into the necks of passers by .This is madness .
As for the lung cancer and the perils of smoking being an influence on people through films ,I don't think my Dad ever went to the cinema let alone let Humphrey Bogart or Basil Rathbone influence him .
A lifelong smoker but it was asbestos dust that killed him .
May I just add that I watched a BBC programme called George Gently at the weekend .Martin Shaw played Gently .An adaption of the books by Alan Hunter .He and his sidekick were puffing away as if their lives depended on it .
Are the BBC etc going to jump on the bandwagon ?
Next thing you know cookery programmes will be banned because they use sharp knives.
As for the lung cancer and the perils of smoking being an influence on people through films ,I don't think my Dad ever went to the cinema let alone let Humphrey Bogart or Basil Rathbone influence him .
A lifelong smoker but it was asbestos dust that killed him .
May I just add that I watched a BBC programme called George Gently at the weekend .Martin Shaw played Gently .An adaption of the books by Alan Hunter .He and his sidekick were puffing away as if their lives depended on it .
Are the BBC etc going to jump on the bandwagon ?
Next thing you know cookery programmes will be banned because they use sharp knives.
Oh, right, jno. Phew, thanks for that. The red haze has diminished momentarily - only momentarily mind! Nevertheless, the people who are proposing this are as potty as this government - and how long does it take for that particular brand of 'pottiness' (is that a word?) to spread? NOT coming to a video near you!! As for Gordon Brown being innocent? The man's a joke that just isn't funny!!
Krom, I do have a certain penchant to sink my teeth into necks occasionally - although not those of passers-by. Please don't tell me they're going to spoil my fun!! Killjoys!!
Krom, I do have a certain penchant to sink my teeth into necks occasionally - although not those of passers-by. Please don't tell me they're going to spoil my fun!! Killjoys!!
Latest Posts
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles25 mins ago
Who Told Vorderman People Care What She...
News31 mins ago
