Hitskin.com

If a movie depicts gratuitous smoking, do you think that should be enough to get it rated higher?

Not at all.

Eh, only if it's a G film being turned into a PG film. Beyond that, raising the rating cause of smoking seems a bit dumb.

Nope.

No.

I see some films with subtle (and not so subtle) messages on social conduct. It would be nice in this world where less than 25% of the ppl have this despicable, nasty habit today that it is reflected in modern film. Smoking is a good prop for the villains and neurotics portrayed on-screen and the decent, well-adjusted ppl not smoking.

Also, how would we do a period piece set in the 1950s without EVERYONE smoking, including doctors in their office. That was a horrible time for lungs that I survived (so far). It would be completely unreal not to portray that onscreen.

Unless they are smoking something "illegal" I would say no.

Simply put: F-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-ck no.

For crying out loud, you can find smoking in most cartoons, Pink Panther, The Flintstones, the Jetsons, what are we going to rerate them for more mature audiences too? And if we're seriously going to raise the viewing age on stuff for smoking, then shouldn't films depicting consumption of alcohol be made into R rated movies since you have to be 21 to do that?

Anti-smoking groups have been lobbying for YEARS to get the MPAA to sanction films that depict smoking or at least up their rating. IMO overzealous but no more than TV outright banning cigarette commercials.

Jason B. wrote:: Anti-smoking groups have been lobbying for YEARS to get the MPAA to sanction films that depict smoking or at least up their rating. IMO overzealous but no more than TV outright banning cigarette commercials.

I think it is, commercials are made to advertise and sell a product, movies are made to tell a story, they may have product placement in some films but very rarely are they trying to tell the audience go out and buy this brand of cigarettes, they just smoke whatever the hell they do, they don't specify what brand, what filters, what flavors, etc. Not that it matters anyway, even without cigarette commercials, millions of people spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year on cigarettes and chewing tobacco anyway. If the product is really good, or just already has a big buying market, they really don't need TV ads to help them along. I mean if tomorrow there were no more ads for Reese's peanut butter cups, does anybody believe the sales of them would go down? No, everybody knows what they are, how good they are and where to get them, same thing for smokers and their cigarettes.

Hell no that would be just plain stupid.

» Bully MPAA Rating Dropped to PG-13
» Anti-smoking Groups Lobbying the MPAA to
» Should bars be able to choose between smoking and non-smoking?
» If Marijuana is legalized, should smoking ban laws be amended to allow marijuana smoking in public places?
» Does hot weather affect your mood?

Hitskin.com

Should Films Depicting Smoking Affect Their MPAA Rating?