RE: Smoking and Hollywood

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Smoking and Hollywood

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Smoking and Hollywood

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:37:04 PM

Tuomas

Posts: 242
Joined: 2/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub
Sometimes I really wonder if we will end up in padded rooms, eating gruel - forbidden from doing anything exciting, fun and *le gasp* dangerous because we might get killed.

B-but, the gruel could be hot! You might be burned with the gruel! It must be served luke-warm and with plastic spoons, because you might hurt someone with a hard, metal spoon...

(in reply to AquaticSub)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:39:29 PM

AquaticSub

Posts: 14867
Joined: 12/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I haven't heard of any product placement in novels.

I hadn't either, but found this link interesting:

http://www.absolutewrite.com/novels/product_placement

You know I can't say I found it all that interesting. Somehow, I don't think Steven King will start writing to appeal to the ad companies. Perhaps the romance novels but those are already greatly tailored to their readers and really... I won't care because I prefer the ones that are historically accurate.

Also the simple fact that product placement might be starting in novels does in no way indicate that novelists are changing the characters they write to suit ad men.

< Message edited by AquaticSub -- 5/10/2007 9:41:43 PM >

_____________________________

Without my dominance you cannot submit. Without your submission I cannot dominate. You are my equal in this, though our roles are different.-Val

It was ok for him to beat me but then he tried to cuddle me! - Me

Member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair

(in reply to dcnovice)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:39:34 PM

mistoferin

Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessDustyGold
<general reply> And will we be going after the drinking next? The gratuitous drinking that is. Because we know that in most instances the drinking is necessary, especially when we get to see the Smirnoff label.
Or is it still okay for James Bond to continue to order his martini "shaken, not stirred" as long as he doesn't light up?

Great point Dusty. I don't know if you've noticed or not but there has been a rather obvious reappearance of liquor ads on TV. For years they were not able to show them....now suddenly they are everywhere. Seems that is an acceptable vice....even though alcoholism kills people and destroys lives in monumental proportions.

_____________________________

Peace and light,
~erin~

There are no victims here...only volunteers.

When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train.

"I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"

(in reply to GoddessDustyGold)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:41:02 PM

Tuomas

Posts: 242
Joined: 2/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
My sympathies on the loss of your friends, Tuomas.

No worries; it was over six years ago. I'm just annoyed how those pressure groups used their deaths, and their family's pain to promote their ideology. Some of them tried to enlist me -as a "victim"- in their sick plot. Anyway, back to the subject...

(in reply to dcnovice)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:41:15 PM

AquaticSub

Posts: 14867
Joined: 12/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuomas

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub
Sometimes I really wonder if we will end up in padded rooms, eating gruel - forbidden from doing anything exciting, fun and *le gasp* dangerous because we might get killed.

B-but, the gruel could be hot! You might be burned with the gruel! It must be served luke-warm and with plastic spoons, because you might hurt someone with a hard, metal spoon...

Wait! We won't be able to have plastic spoons either! You can break them and stab yourself with the sharp bits.

_____________________________

Without my dominance you cannot submit. Without your submission I cannot dominate. You are my equal in this, though our roles are different.-Val

It was ok for him to beat me but then he tried to cuddle me! - Me

Member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:46:26 PM

Dauric

Posts: 254
Joined: 7/13/2006
Status: offline

Well, I haven't gotten in to my rant about large companies, there it's a case-by-case basis thing. I try to shop where I know the employees are treated well, and I try to avoid places where they have a corporate cultre of treating people like shit. This is a rant for another thread and another time though.

Advertizing though, I've seen the mad fucker behind the curtain and it's a sausage factory, with consumers as the meat. The amount of time and money that goes in to finding ways to push the buttons on the populace as a whole, to make images that will stimulate the most primitive parts of your brain without you realizing it... Scary depraved shit man. It's no exageration that the ultimate goal of advertizing research is mass mind control.

And yeah, I dropped out of that degree when I'd finished my technical skill classes and I started getting in to the part where you make five different advertizing campaigns. Started to hate myself.

$0.02,

Dauric.

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:49:10 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

You know I can't say I found it all that interesting.

I was intrigued by the author's using product placement as a way to get PR for his book. Also, I'm procrastinating from a project, so any diversion is interesting.

quote:

Also the simple fact that product placement might be starting in novels does in no way indicate that novelists are changing the characters they write to suit ad men.

True. Aside from Fay Weldon (whom I've never read), at least.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to AquaticSub)

Profile

Post #: 47

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 9:53:15 PM

Tuomas

Posts: 242
Joined: 2/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildnfreehrt2004
However, a person drinking soda, eating McDonald's etc doesn't directly affect other people's health/lifespan/quality of life (as having bad health) to the extent that second hand smoke does..... Do those other people get to choose whether to be exposed to tobacco smoke in the same way they can choose not to be exposed to soda, McD's, alcohol, et al...?

That's another thing that I've noticed about American society: the lack of common courtesy. Having spent some time in a "backward, third world country" I've had some comparison. Smoking does affect the people around you, and the smoker should respect social courtesy. Here -where smoking is a lot more prevalant (recent Health Ministry said 42% of the population declared themselves regular smokers"), people who smoke are very courteous about lighting up. They always ask the people around them if they mind. If you do, they will not smoke, or will leave the table, conversation, room, etc. Americans don't do this. In fact, the courtesy extends to offering everyone else who smokes cigarettes. In restaurants, they will ask people in neighboring tables if they mind the smoke, and if you do mention that the smoke is bothering you, they will appologize and put out there cigarette. Apparently, Americans are incapible of doing this.

So, yes, you can "choose" to be exposed to second-hand smoke. Afterall, nothing stops you from just getting up and leaving...

(in reply to Wildnfreehrt2004)

Profile

Post #: 48

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/10/2007 10:12:21 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

A very quick google reveals that Brown and Williamson was paying $120,000 a year in 1983 to a company called Associated Film Producers which apparently acted as a middleman between B&W and film producers. In that same time frame B&W was going to pay $500,000 dollars for their products to be smoked by Sly Stallone in 5 movies.
http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesj/j/h/b/jhb50f00/Sjhb50f00.pdf

It does appear that B&W was not getting good value for the money they were spending but that didn't seem to deter them.

From the same source, a document on RJR's tobacco product placement activities:
http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesd/d/y/x/dyx62d00/Sdyx62d00.pdf
First page is scanned upside down but the rest are right way up if not terribly clear.

A Lancet article from 2001 drew the conclusion that product placement was still underway even though a ban on tobacco product placement was begun in 1988 by the tobacco industry voluntarily.
Sargent, JD et al. Brand appearances in contemporary cinema films and contribution to global marketing of cigarettes. The Lancet, 2001; 357: 29-32.

Here is a study with additional primary sources on tobacco company product placements:
http://www.quit.org.au/quit/fandi/fandi/c15s7.htm

(in reply to Dauric)

Profile

Post #: 49

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 1:40:17 AM

Vendaval

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

General reply -

I don't agree with this new MPAA regulation at all. Thank you folks who posted links on product
placement. A really obvious example is "Toy Story" for one.

No need to worry about the old classic films, quoting from the OP"s linked article -

" Would "Casablanca" have been rated XXX?

Depictions of smoking in movies will now be a factor when deciding what a film's rating will be, possibly making a PG-13 movie R-rated, the Motion Picture Association of America said yesterday. The policy affects only new movies."

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 50

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 5:39:39 AM

AquaticSub

Posts: 14867
Joined: 12/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

A very quick google reveals that Brown and Williamson was paying $120,000 a year in 1983 to a company called Associated Film Producers which apparently acted as a middleman between B&W and film producers. In that same time frame B&W was going to pay $500,000 dollars for their products to be smoked by Sly Stallone in 5 movies.
http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesj/j/h/b/jhb50f00/Sjhb50f00.pdf

It does appear that B&W was not getting good value for the money they were spending but that didn't seem to deter them.

From the same source, a document on RJR's tobacco product placement activities:
http://ltdlimages.library.ucsf.edu/imagesd/d/y/x/dyx62d00/Sdyx62d00.pdf
First page is scanned upside down but the rest are right way up if not terribly clear.

A Lancet article from 2001 drew the conclusion that product placement was still underway even though a ban on tobacco product placement was begun in 1988 by the tobacco industry voluntarily.
Sargent, JD et al. Brand appearances in contemporary cinema films and contribution to global marketing of cigarettes. The Lancet, 2001; 357: 29-32.

Here is a study with additional primary sources on tobacco company product placements:
http://www.quit.org.au/quit/fandi/fandi/c15s7.htm

Considering that tobacco companies aren't allowed to advertise many places, I'm not surprised. However, were they paying to have smoking inserted into the film, or simply to have an already smoking character smoke their brand?

_____________________________

Without my dominance you cannot submit. Without your submission I cannot dominate. You are my equal in this, though our roles are different.-Val

It was ok for him to beat me but then he tried to cuddle me! - Me

Member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 51

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 5:52:08 AM

Dauric

Posts: 254
Joined: 7/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuomas

So, yes, you can "choose" to be exposed to second-hand smoke. Afterall, nothing stops you from just getting up and leaving...

Oh I soooo have to disagree with you there.

The college I attended had numerous smokers. When there was a break they'd go outside, -just barely- outside, and stand in the entryway of the only non-emergency entrance of the building. If more than two or three classes let out for a 15-min break at once, you would have to get through a sea of smokers to get back in to the building again. Administration made numerous requests for the smokers to move away from the entrances and go to the provided 'picnic' areas, but they still never moved from the entrances of the buildings. I suppose they didn't have enough breath to move farther than the doors.

In my case at least (detailed up in the thread) that was enough to set off an attack of excruciating pain. I had to hold my breath and make my way, as politely as possible, through them to get back in every freaking time.

There are times you cannot avoid being in certain places at certain times. It's usually at those times you find out who's an @$$ and who isn't.

$0.02,

Dauric.

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 52

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 6:02:41 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

I wonder who paid the product placement in Trainspotting?

More seriously though, I wonder what the value is of classifying media like this? OK, it gives us an idea of the content of a film, for example - but it doesnt prevent minors from watching violence and often it doesnt prevent them from seeing sexual scenes either. Minors may be forbidden from certain films at the theatre to continue the example, but once theyre out on DVD its a free for all really. If such classification is meant to reduce violence etc amongst minors, by preventing them from seeing it, then clearly it doesnt work on that front either, in the UK at least where violent crime, often random and for "fun", is on the up and has been for a long while.

In addition, we often see material which is just as adult in theme on the news, which has no classification, and I can hardly send my UMs from the room when the news comes on? Most relative though is the Internet - yes, I have parental controls set, or I did have until we discovered that even on teenage settings, the control banned almost all content that might be of any interest or use even to a seven year old. The controls are now switched off, the PC is in the living room and I keep an eye on what theyre up to.

Above all though, I wonder what the value is of trying to closet children away from the realities of life and the world? It is of course the right of any parent to do that, or at least try, but personally I think its better that they learn what life and the world is about before they reach majority and are then spewed into an adult world where they dont have any clue as to whats going on. My UMs have seen films and other media that would make the classification board turn white with horror at my "irresponsibility" - but thats my choice, and given that I have handled it properly, which I think I have going by their character and behaviour, they are now equipped to deal with life and the world which they live in, which isnt the fluffy bunny pink candy cloud world they might otherwise think obtains.

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to AquaticSub)

Profile

Post #: 53

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 6:21:42 AM

Dauric

Posts: 254
Joined: 7/13/2006
Status: offline

LadyEllen,

Agreed, Agreed, Agreed.

Ultimately ratings are a feel-good band-aid. They make marginal parents (and there's so Goram* many of them) feel better and let them feel that they're doing something. It's even more insidious though as far as the spread of violent images: It creates "Forbidden Fruit". Some movie makers even aim for an "R" rating to improve their sales.

And good on you for having the computer where you can see what they're up to! For all the idiots that breed but don't parent it's good to see someone out there actually raising their children.

And I agree with your views on exposing your children to such imagery. You choose when and where, you can discuss what they see, and you can help shape the way that they think about it, rather than let others do it for you. Kudos!

$0.02,

Dauric.

*Yes I've got the entire Firefly series on DVD.

(in reply to LadyEllen)

Profile

Post #: 54

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 6:25:15 PM

minnetar

Posts: 1272
Joined: 4/11/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level

Smoking Now a Factor in Movie Ratings, MPAA Says

By Frank AhrensWashington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, May 10, 2007; 3:44 PM

Depictions of smoking in films will now be a factor when a movie's rating is determined, possibly making a PG-13 movie R-rated, the Motion Picture Association of America said today.

Along with violence, depictions of sex, adult language and other content considerations, the ratings organizations will now examine new releases to determine if the film glamorizes smoking or if it is pervasive in the film. Such scenes could change a movie's rating upward.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051001347.html

that is the most ridiculous thing i have ever seen <taking a drag from a cigarette> lol

minnetar

(in reply to Level)

Profile

Post #: 55

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 6:51:09 PM

Tuomas

Posts: 242
Joined: 2/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dauric
There are times you cannot avoid being in certain places at certain times. It's usually at those times you find out who's an @$$ and who isn't.

Exactly. Changing the entire culture just so one person doesn't have to hold their breath while they leave a classroom.

At the risk of souding naïve, people have got to learn how to get along better, and not force their pet peeves on everyone else.

(in reply to Dauric)

Profile

Post #: 56

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 10:10:11 PM

Dauric

Posts: 254
Joined: 7/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuomas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dauric
There are times you cannot avoid being in certain places at certain times. It's usually at those times you find out who's an @$$ and who isn't.

Exactly. Changing the entire culture just so one person doesn't have to hold their breath while they leave a classroom.

At the risk of souding naïve, people have got to learn how to get along better, and not force their pet peeves on everyone else.

It's not healthy for anyone walking through there, I just get a rather immediate effects. People shouldn't be blocking doorways in the first place. Others need to use the door too.

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 57

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/11/2007 11:23:02 PM

MadameDahlia

Posts: 2021
Joined: 8/11/2004
From: SoCal aka Hell
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuomas

I guess we are not capible of deciding what is good for us...

Yes, companies do pay for product placement. However, isn't it usually the antagonists who smoke? Waterworld, for example?

"... A shmoke und a pancake. You know, a flapjack und a shigarette? No? Shigar und a waffle? No? Pipe und a crepe? No? Bong und a blintz? No? Well, then there ish no pleashing you..." ~ Goldmember

_____________________________

Insanity -- a perfectly rational adjustment to an insane world.
--R. D. Laing

"Oh, but if I went 'round sayin' I was Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away."

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 58

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/12/2007 12:26:51 AM

DominaSmartass

Posts: 961
Joined: 1/12/2006
From: This month? Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuomas
Should children be "protected" from "companies" in the media?

Well yes, there are lots of things kids should be protected from. The real question is whether it is up to the government or some outside organization like the MPAA to protect them or if it's the parents' choice. I personally wouldn't protect my children as much as educate them from an early age that everyone is trying to sell them something and to believe little of what they see on tv and in movies. But then again, I work in TV so I'm jaded.

Also, just for those who are concerned, I highly doubt the new ratings system will be retroactive. That is, don't worry about older movies from the 50s that would barely register as PG today getting turned into R due to excessive smoking.

This is just another example of how "they" think that media has such a direct and profound influence on people's minds. In fact, all studies that have tried to show any direct cause and effect relationship between what people see in media and what they do have failed.

_____________________________

“These S&M people ... they are bossy! There’s also a creepy connection between leather sex, ‘Star Trek’ and the Renaissance Faire.”

- Comedian Margaret Cho

(in reply to Tuomas)

Profile

Post #: 59

RE: Smoking and Hollywood - 5/12/2007 12:46:56 AM

Vendaval

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

Oh shit! (spits ice water out!)

Hey Lady E, please warn me before you are going to do that!

My guess would be the methadone manufacturers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

I wonder who paid the product placement in Trainspotting?

E

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to LadyEllen)

Profile

Post #: 60