 Young movie addict |
Smoking in youth-rated movies has not declined despite a pledge two years ago by Hollywood studios to encourage producers to show less “gratuitous smoking,” according to an anti-smoking group.
The American Medical Association Alliance has been trying to get movie studios to make smoking-free films.
The American Medical Association Alliance, pointing to research that big-screen smoking leads teens to pick up the tobacco habit, called for an R rating for any movie with smoking scenes….
“Research has shown that one-third to one-half of all young smokers in the United States can be attributed to smoking these youth see in movies,” said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, head of the Los Angeles County Public Health Department.
Fielding cited another study that he said “found that adolescents whose favorite movie stars smoked on screen are significantly more likely to be smokers themselves and to have a more accepting attitude toward smoking”….
Joan Graves, who chairs the Motion Picture Association’s movie rating committee, offered her own statistics, based on all of the 900 films rated each year, not just the top movies included in Fielding’s numbers.
The association has given no G ratings in the past two years to a movie with smoking, Graves said….
“Any movie with smoking should be rated R,” [Fielding] said. “And if they worry about an R rating hurting their profits, then they should work with studios to remove smoking from films that hurt youth.”
I have a feeling that I could go to lunch with members of the AMA Alliance and the Motion Picture Association and walk away not liking any of them.
Can’t we find some clerical jobs for these guys or something?
Thanks, K B
Whats wrong with a RATINGS SYSTEM so parents know whats in the film?
Kinda INTOLERANT not to allow people with other points of view to put mere ratings on a film.
Everybody knows, when the kiddies have a chance, they sneak into the R films anyway.
Too many people care too much about “Hollywood” and their Hollywood crap.
I highly recommend watching “This Film Is Not Yet Rated” to get a better idea of how f-ed up the MPAA rating system really is.
#2 Thomas, I agree, that movie is awesome. On the other hand, check out the movie “Thank You for Smoking”.
But on the other hand, these are the same people who want to make it illegal to sell food cooked in saturated fats.
If you ever want to see how far the nanny state can go, put a bunch of doctors in charge of it.
No smoking in movies? How will Hannibal light off dynamite in the A-Team remake if they take away his cigar?
This whole anti-smoking thing is getting out of hand. How will I be able to determine which movies are too violent or have too much nudity in them if they dilute the R ratings with movies that merely have smoking in them?
#4–SL==good one. I hope Nimby catches it and responds.
But===BANNING is not the issue. Its labeling. I certainly want my food labeled–even more detailed than it currently is, and TESTED for accuracy in labeling too. Just like the movies. R for tits is not enough. HOW MANY TITS are shown in this movie.
We the consumer need this info!!!!! ((Yes, I know there are tit reviewers.))
Both are insightful films. One documentary and one satire.
So, the AMA wants to put smoking in the same category as torture porn and sex. One more reason why I never joined the AMA – mixing politics with medicine. Where the hell were they when more doctors recommended Camels? Smoking isn’t really necessary to most plots and should be left out but I’d hate to see a film set in the forties where no one was puffing. Would it be so hard to say Rated PG for language, nudity and smoking?
Great… Giving a rating based on an issue people dont care about when it comes to ratings. Like we needed more reason not to take these morons seriously.
4,
After a bunch of lawyers make millions suing for said transfats, what do you expect to happen?
FWIW, I miss smoking. Stupid promises!
This is funny. Consider that what used to be (30 years ago when I was a teenager) R rated movie territory is regularly seen on ordinary broadcast television these days. Except in the old days you could say God but not damn, and now you can say damn but not God….I thought damn was the bad part!
On the other hand, are there really any movies being made these days that are worth seeing?
Fortunately, all the Humphrey Bogart and Bette Davis movies were made before the ratings system.
AMA is going to hate it when the healthy electronic cigarettes start to get more popular. All the smoke and none of the hazards.
#11, just imagine the boon it will be for government revenues. You can rake in all the tax money from the sales to drug addicts and not have such high costs afterward to treat the resultant medical problems from smoking.
next will be an R rating for films that show someone consuming a alcohol too.
# 7 Nimby said,
So, the AMA wants to put smoking in the same category as torture porn and sex. One more reason why I never joined the AMA – mixing politics with medicine. Where the hell were they when more doctors recommended Camels?
Okay, I had to look one up
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI
J/P=?
&^%&$#% http://www…...
J/P=?
[Fixed. – ed.]
So…smoking is on par with sex and nudity? So…my wife can now run around topless, or are you going to arrest anyone smoking in public?
I hate smoking and I also hate the MPAA but this is just stupid. Why not make every movie that features someone driving without a seatbelt R-rated? I see that in practically every action movie while I can’t remember the last movie I saw that had smoking in it.
Why don’t we just have a bunch of additional codes to put on the rating? Example:
PG-13 SGO = suitable for 13-year olds who are allowed to see smoking, gays, and obesity.
Whatever. My parents never cared about ratings. I’ve been watching R-rated movies since I was seven.
Not to distract from the main point of the article/comments but this is NOT the AMA doing this, it’s the AMA Alliance. Which, as far as I can tell, has noting to do with the AMA but is just using a similar name to lend some credibility to it’s wacked-out organization.
WOW, this is really going to impact all my favorite sci-fi films from the 50’s and 60’s because EVERYONE smoked in those things! In “It! Terror From Beyond Space,” the astronauts smoked while playing chess! And what about “The Twilight Zone?” Rod Serling had a lit ciggie in a lot of his intros! (But not for “Night Gallery.”)
hmmm.. puffing on electronic cig as i type.. hmmm..
I hate smoking, but not as much as I hate censorship.
I think that any movie with a fat person in it should be rated R.
We should not be promoting bodily neglect to the children.
/End sarcasm
I thought movies don’t influence people’s behavior?
That which is not mandatory is prohibited.
The fascist credo.
#24 – MikeN – I thought movies don’t influence people’s behavior?
They don’t.
Unless a film’s rating is known to be from sexual content, the vast majority of parents pay little attention to film ratings. I have 6 years movie theater and 12 years video store experience behind that statement. If this actually goes through, I promise you parents will completely stop paying attention to them.
Of course, it doesn’t help that the ratings system has become utterly meaningless when dealing with anything other than a (as currently rated) G or PG film. PG ratings used to be rated that for a reason. Go back and watch any number of PG films from the 70s/early 80s and see the nudity and F-words that were included.
Now PG is the new G and PG13 is meaningless. When studios can appeal a rating, and making no cuts to a film, have a rating reduced from an R to a PG13, the rating is meaningless.
And what do clergy and reps from NATO (National Theater Owners) have to do with a ratings appeal?
The MPAA needs to abandon it’s broken age-based ratings system for a content based one.
Ok, so let’s compare health conditions. Kids grow up watching movies with smokers puffing away and they light up at 13, keep smoking until 85 or 65 when they die of lung cancer. Then we have kids growing up with movies, Saturday morning boob toons where they see sugar blasted on their brains in every second, their teeth rot out at 5 years of age, they get diabetes at 9, and they die at 42, never smoking even one cigarette, while mom and dad get thrown out of the hospital because they were smoking.
What I don’t understand is why is there a higher percentage of people that smoke in films than in real life?
I can go down the streets of my town and see fewer people smoking than 10, 20 or 30 years ago.
In fact it is so limited that it seems ODD to see people smoke still.
But films have people smoking up a storm. And you have to think that filmmakers must still be stuck in the 1970’s with their thought.
To give it an R rating will never float. I just think people in Hollywood so wake up and see it is almost 2010 not 1975.
Cursor_
Digitally remove the cigarettes… or replace them with something else, like a lollipop or a dildo.