"I do not believe in banning cigarettes. Rather I believe in freedom for individuals and that adults should be allowed to smoke if they wish to". Posting a message to discourage smoking is no way tampers with your freedom of smoking. All they want to make sure is that people at young age should not get hooked to the habit when there is lack of awareness.
I personally support this initiative by Indian govt. This, one one hand forces the directors to judiciously use these props, and on other hand will create awareness to movie goers much in advance that there is a negative side of the story to otherwise appealing act of smoking. Now, with this awareness, if someone decides to indulge (without bothering others) then, that's a personal choice.
Re: Dear learned author
by Rohit l on Oct 07, 2013 08:22 PM
Then, why not as the author suggests ban cigarette sales or stringently implement 18 years above age limit or tax them heavily?
These ads seems to me a halfhearted attempt at "awareness" by the government/censor board.
I personally find the adverts before the movie begins disturbing and bit naive.
These so called "purists" have got the whole "creativity" thing going so far up their azz that they will vehemently defend anything they like in the name of arts and attack everything that's not in line with their views.
Aseem - you're a hypocrite.
If showing smoking in movies is creative freedom of director, then banning the movie is freedom, in fact right, of the censor board. They are there FOR A REASON you know. It's not as if they're cutting Woody's hands off!
Re: People like Aseem Chhabra
by Mitesh Shah on Oct 08, 2013 04:14 AM
"It is disrespect to cinema, art, the filmmakers and the audience."
Mr. Chhabra, have you see how much disrespect you got for your article. Look for the commercials around your artical. Also why you need to show Cate Blanchett picture and why not Woody ? because you think people will not pay attention to Woody's picture. And have you seen any of Woody's films other than Annie Hall? you jmention that only to give an example, didn't Woody create another good movie.
"Instead they penalise filmmakers like you Woody, and other Indian and foreign directors, by messing up their films". how does film get penalise for a message before film starts. Board did not ask to make changes in the file.
All over the west they are trying to reduce smoking. and here they are trying to encourage asians to smoke to make up for the falling business in the west. good job rediff trying to look out for our citizens (sarcasm)
Though i am a non smoker and against smoking due to its ill effects on health, i too feel showing " Repeated smoking warnings" during a film is an unnecessary distraction. I fail to understand how can someone inhale those toxic fumes inside. It takes a lot of effort to develop this habit ( as i too have tried a few puffs but could not sustain). It is beyond my understanding how some one can go on relentlessly, inhaling smokes inside, to develop a habit out of it. Believe me it requires a lot of will power !!! I however disagree with Mr Aseem that making it expensive will be a deterrent. People who are addicted will find some other more dangerous options to satiate their need for a puff, so to say. I believe there must be a social impact study to understand what drives people to smoke and becomes addicted. Any solution has to be based on that.
Re: Substantial efforts are required
by kiran kumar on Oct 07, 2013 07:49 PM
There is an easier, pragmatic way to get rid of this monster. Increase the permitted age of smoking by 1 year every 2 years. Today it is 18 years, in 20 years, it will become 28. In 50 years, it will be 43 ... slowly, we will not have any smokers. This way, we do not prohibit smokers from smoking and do not create a rigid barrier that certain people are not allowed to smoke because they are born few months late. They will catch up with the age limit and have a chance to legally try.
Of course, all this is possible only if govt. has real intention of getting rid of this menace and ready to take hit on their coffers.
Re: Re: Substantial efforts are required
by S M on Oct 07, 2013 07:54 PM
If we follow this advice then 20 year olds will be selling cigarettes in the blackmarket to 18 year olds and so on. Bans and prohibitions do not work. Self regulation is the best regulation
Re: Substantial efforts are required
by Anirban Sen on Oct 07, 2013 08:41 PM
I am a social smoker. My brain has filtered out the message on the screen of the movies with the physical act of smoking. The same way I remember an ad for a product, but do not remember the hero/heroine endorsing it unless there is something different about it.
