20th Century Fox
When we go to the movies, we have an expectation of being entertained. When we drop nine dollars a shot on a blockbuster like Avatar we don’t expect a following lecture on the dangers of smoking because it appeared in the film. Yet every time a film depicts smoking, no matter the connection to reality or not, that’s exactly what happens. It’s an interesting side effect to something that is clearly entertainment, and a hypocritical condemnation of a select behavior in film when so many other deplorable behaviors are generally left untouched.
Last week, The Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education denounced the scene in Avatar when Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) gets out of her tanning bed, er - mind-projection avatar pod - and lights one up. They didn’t like the reckless craving for a cigarette after engaging in some avataring. Specifically, “Where’s my goddamn cigarette? What’s wrong with this picture!”
Stanton A. Glantz, director of The Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco, said his Smoke Free Movies initiative would soon come out swinging with an informational campaign aimed at what he saw as the movie’s pro-smoking message.
Pro-smoking message? How about pro-reality message? Or for that matter, since the movie took place on a fictional planet in the future, which can’t accurately be predicted, a pro-fiction message? How do we know that in the future, when there are spaceships and space flight, that there aren’t safe cigarettes? Perhaps it’s full of simulated tobacco and a nicotine replacement pack to just fulfill the requirements of an oral fixation? This is the future after all, and with technology laying around to transport a paraplegic soldier into an avatar via what looks like a tanning bed, one would only assume that a safe alternative to cigarettes has been created. Of course, it still looks like a cigarette and that’s what matters.
James Cameron sent a nice email response to news outlets, that summed up his feelings about the anti-smoking crusade that has been aimed at his film. He starts off referencing Dr. Augustine, “She’s rude, she swears, she drinks, she smokes,” said Cameron. “Also, from a character perspective, we were showing that Grace doesn’t care about her human body, only her avatar body, which again is a negative comment about people in our real world living too much in their avatars, meaning online and in video games.”
He wasn’t done there as he continued on to point out the inconsistent and hypocritical behavior when it comes to judging and expectations of realism in movies, “I don’t believe in the dogmatic idea that no one in a movie should smoke. Movies should reflect reality. If it’s O.K. for people to lie, cheat, steal and kill in PG-13 movies, why impose an inconsistent morality when it comes to smoking? I do agree that young role-model characters should not smoke in movies, especially in a way which suggests that it makes them cooler or more accepted by their peers.”
“Movies should reflect reality.” In reality, no matter how much we don’t like or don’t agree with it - people smoke. Without going into a ranting dissertation on the role of the parent, but it’s up to the parents to teach their kids about the dangers of smoking, it’s not up to Hollywood to do that. It’s not up to Hollywood to teach kids not to become ax murderers or swarmy detectives. Where is the outrage every time one of the so-called “torture porn” movies come out, such as the Hostel movies? Sure, the reviews reflect the general consensus about the quality of those films, but there is never such outrage until a film attacks good ‘ol family values. Remember the storm of bad press after Kevin Smith’s Scenesmoking.org, a site that monitors tobacco use in films. Sherlock Holmes, The Fantastic Mr. Fox and The Blind Side also got “black lung” ratings for their depiction of tobacco use. That’s right, Sherlock Holmes smoked a pipe. Shield your children’s eyes!
The assumption being made by these organizations is that kids are impressionable and will begin smoking because their on-screen heroes smoke. Which goes right back to the “smoking is cool” argument. I don’t disagree, it might make some kids consider smoking. I don’t disagree with these organizations waging a campaign against Hollywood to stop the depiction of on-screen tobacco use. They have every right to misdirect their outrage. Because that outrage should be placed solely on the backs of the parents. If a 13 year old takes up smoking after seeing Avatar it’s not James Cameron’s fault for having it momentarily in his movie, it’s the parents fault for not talking to and paying attention to their kids. Overall, I agree with the message organizations such as The Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education are sending. I don’t smoke, and believe that doing everything we can to prevent our children from doing it is a righteous mission.
As for Avatar being considered “pro-smoking” because it has a scene in which a character smokes, that’s just absurd. As Cameron mentioned, the character isn’t exactly a role model and shouldn’t be viewed as such. That kind of logic suggests anything that shows up in a movie is an endorsement of that activity. In just looking at Avatar that means Avatar promotes invading peaceful planets, stealing resources, killing marines (or mercenaries, couldn’t definitively make that determination) and so on.
There is a reason we pay to go see movies, there is a reason Hollywood makes movies. They aren’t always the same reason, but the outcome is the same. While I believe Hollywood is after your money more than anything else (some of the best films of late however have not come out of the film factory on the west coast) they are also out to entertain us. That is what we must always remember when going to a movie. Not only is it entertainment, but it’s a story.
So it’s up to us how we interpret that story. Do we go see a slasher film and want to go out and start ripping off limbs of near helpless teenagers at a summer camp? Do we see a movie in which a character invents wiper blades so we become inspired and invent something? Perhaps, movies can be inspiring. They can also leave an impression. It’s this impression, whether it be smoking or violence, that we do have to think about and remind ourselves that no matter how real a movie looks or feels - it’s just not reality. Sure, there are accuracies and little details that make it reality, but it’s not. What it is - is a depiction of reality. And I don’t want to live in a reality where Humphrey Bogart doesn’t light one up during The Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.
What are your thoughts on smoking in the movies? What about when compared to violence in movies?
Image credit: Mark Fellman / 20th Century Fox
