MovieChat Forums > The Two Faces of January (2014) Discussion > Another big-tobacco supported pos.

Another big-tobacco supported pos.


Does the tobacco industry pay these irresponsible and clueless movie producers one lump sum for having the actors look like fools and smoke in their movies, or do they pay by the scene, as depicted in this worthless excuse-for-movie, where the actors are lighting up in practically every scene. If so, I guess they took in a huge sum of blood-money. This one is not worth the barf it induces.

reply

You are so self-involved that you never considered that the reason for the smoking was the time period. It wasn't product placement or an attempt to portray smoking as "ok". Do you have a problem with the antisemitism in movies about WW2? Nearly everyone smoked in the time and locations this movie portrays, hence all the smoking.

I'm guessing you walk up to complete strangers while they are smoking and tell them "smoking kills". Everyone knows that.

You are not special or unique. You are a narcissist.

reply

Thank you for your reply. Everyone did not smoke in the 60s. My parents, relatives and others close to us never smoked. I have seen many movies from this era and smoking where is not portrayed. If they didn't include smoking in this film, no one would complain or miss it.

People chew gum, defecate, urinate, yawn etc. all the time as well. Does that mean we should see it in the movies? The big difference here is that it is well known that the depiction of smoking in movies is basically free advertising for big tobacco. It glamourize it and teaches teens and others how to smoke. Just google "Smoking in Movies" and you'll find plenty of evidence.

As for anti-Semitism, I don't see the connection.

I can only assume you are a long-time smoker and are defensive and in denial. If so, I hope you can quit. Good luck to you.

reply

People chew gum, defecate, urinate, yawn etc. all the time as well. Does that mean we should see it in the movies?
Where appropriate, yes. Yes, we should.

reply

Where is urination or defecation relevant to the plot or appropriate or essential to telling a story? Hardly ever.

reply

Ridicule's opening scene - guy pees on elderly invalid who years before had publicly ridiculed him.
Tyrian confronts his father in Game of Thrones, on the throne.
A woman pees on herself out of fear in Threads.
An abusive Hollywood star interrogates her assistant while on the toilet, farting the whole time, to intimidate the assistant, in Maps to the Stars.
Opening scene of the director's cut of Das Boot--military recruits pee on the passing car of superior officers who are on their way to a nightclub. One of the officers, who is very uptight throughout the film and is still very fresh and hasn't experienced the horrors of war yet, is aghast while much more seasoned and laid-back officers just laugh it off. In the same film, not long afterward at the club, a legendary officer gets so drunk that he passes out on the bathroom floor in his own vomit.
In The Madness of King George, the King's physicians discuss his feces. (Even today, examination of the stool may be used in the diagnosis of porphyria.)

I haven't seen any LBJ (former US president) biopics yet (although I am looking forward to seeing the Cranston one soon), but LBJ was infamous for holding conversations with people while taking a crap--one of his ways of intimidating people. It would be biographical malpractice to not include such a scene in a production about LBJ.

reply

I have only seen Ridicule and Das Boot of the things u mentioned and have no memory of those scenes. They were not essential or memorable or very realistic. How would a soldier urinate on someone's car as it passed and not be seen and reprimanded? One example I can think of is in Wolf, when Jack Nicholson is betrayed by his co-worker and turns the tables on him getting him fired and urinating on his suede shoes in the bathroom after eating asparagus. That is realistic and motivated. But if you did that with someone who wasn't a wimp it would be a good way to get your ass kicked.

reply

Also, I think it would be considered assault and illegal. You would have grounds for violent self-defense if you had bodily fluids or unknown fluids of any kind thrown at or on you. I know that it's a crime to do that to a bus driver. Throwing urine / feces at people would probably be considered assault. Or even water balloons or spitt balls. Try going to the cops or court if they beat you up and say you were just urinating on or lobbing spit balls or dousing them with water. The cops or judge or jury will probably not be amused or sympathetic. A mature adult keeps their hands and fluids to themselves and doesn't assault people over words as with Ridicule. It isn't proportional. Turn words against them.

reply

Or better yet just ignore and shun others people who abuse verbally or physically or emotionally. LBJ was a real low-life scum piece of trash from what you argue. I'd never go in a bathroom on the same floor that he was on. I'd drink less fluids and use the bathroom at home and avoid such crass idiots as much as I could.

reply

Also, there is a deleted scene where Viggo exchanges money and immediately buys two cartons of cigarettes and you see him carrying them and some food. Clearly the film-makers felt that too shameless and gratuitous.

reply

He said "nearly everyone," not everyone. 80% of the Japanese men smoke and almost as many women, I have read. Americans probably gave them a run for the money back in the 1950s to 1980s, but more and more people are waking up. They gave our soldiers cheap cigarettes to get them hooked too. Scumbags.

reply

I think less Japanese smoke now like 50-60% of men and an even lower rate among women.

reply

If they didn't include smoking in this film, no one would complain or miss it.
I think a lot of viewers would, both. I know it would seem artificially sanitized to me, like daytime television. The authentic period mood would be badly diminished, if not ruined. Smoking was such a matter of course at that time. There were ashtrays everywhere, people would offer cigarettes after dinner, it was ubiquitous.

"I've only really liked a handful of people in my life, and you've been two of them."

reply

OP sounds like an angry feminist.

Don't cry about it, missy, do something. Grab a sign and picket. Write to your senator. Or better yet, go on a hunger strike!!!

After all, you are clearly a very important individual, I'd assume a hunger strike from the likes of you would make the news, don't you think?

We are all counting on you! Get out there and make a difference!

I mean, talk about killing two birds with a single stone. Fighting the good fight, whilst feeding your ego at the same time? WOW! That's what I call efficiency.

If that's not a win/win, I don't know what is.






(During your upcoming and soon-to-be-legendary hunger strike, be sure to also give shout-outs to racism, homophobia, and the plight of the unfortunate transgendered peoples too. Might as well hit all the bases, right?)

reply

Movies don't need smoking to recreate a period. It's a cheap and lazy shortcut - like putting hats on the men and having them drink and act like sexists (Mad Men), having affairs and expecting the wives to wait on them like foot servants when they come home smelling like another woman's perfume or vagina.

reply