Smoking Kills

I was heartbroken to hear that Woody Allen cancelled the release of his latest film in India, because the ‘SmokingKills’ warning was a distraction.

It is something that has pissed me off for long, too.

Having watched The Lunchbox and raved about it, I am tempted to say it
was my idea of the perfect Hindi film.

Not for me the outlandish costumes and people flying off the surface
like they popped anti-gravity pills. Not for me the loud soundtracks
that butt into your head, pulling you here and there, making you feel
things that the story is incapable of making you feel. Give me a film like this anyday.

However, if there was one thing that irked me in The Lunchbox, (and this
wasn’t because of the makers at all), it was the ‘Smoking Kills’ sign
that kept popping up everytime Irrfan Khan lit up a cigarette.

Every Indian film is compelled to give warnings about the ill effects
of smoking every time a character is shown smoking, and this is
supposed to deter the youth of the country to take up the evil habit.

Now, there are so many things wrong with this, but I shall harp here
about the two most annoying things.

a. Creative Liberty: A film is a creative medium. Which means my story
and characters will behave in a certain manner because I made them.
You have paid me your money to come watch what I made, with the
confidence that it will be well made, and not treat you at par with
the orangutan in the state zoo.

Now, if I make a film on Shiva and show him smoking his chillum, will
I have to add a ‘Smoking Kills’ warning at the bottom of the screen?
But how? He is God, no? How can he do something that might kill
people? Also, most people who hang out near Shiva temples first pray
for a few seconds to Bholenath and then light up the chillum. Would
you have the Supreme Court pass an ordinance asking the religion to
disassociate itself with the evil habit?

Oh, I forgot. You wouldn’t, because that constitutes religion. But
films? Fuck it, yaar. We have been singing and dancing for decades
now. Who gives a fuck?

2. Playing with the medium: When I am watching a movie, I am immersed in
it. In the story, the characters, and what is happening to them.

Ignoring the annoying kid who cries every two and a half seconds, and
the letch who whistles every time anybody female appears on screen, I
have somehow managed to suspend my disbelief, and get involved in what is going on.

And right then, BAM! I am jolted back into reality with a warning
about how smoking kills.

This, after there has been an anti-smoking law passed in the country
since 2008. And every cigarette box has a picture of a topless John
Terry with his lungs burnt.

And all those ads with Mukesh, that poor 24 year old guy who died of
oral cancer, but if he were a ghost, he would come back to haunt the
fuck out of that doctor for pimping his death out for his own needs.

But no, apparently the youth of the nation, with all the brains that
their many gods have gifted them, are thick enough to start smoking
after watching it on screen.

And those two words – ‘Smoking Kills’ – are all that stand between
them and a life of waste and ash.

Give me a break, morons!

What’s next? Digvijay Singh fighting for the rights of smokers, and
Manmohan Singh saying that smokers have the first rights to Oxygen of
the nation?

Since we are anyway doing our bit for the youth of the country, why not go the whole hog?

Why not insulate the youth of the country from the other evils that
films propagate? Don’t they need warnings too? What if the youth watch
films and want to loot banks like Hrithik Roshan in Dhoom 2? What if
they watch Uday Chopra in Dhoom 3 and decide that education is not really necessary?

Won’t that be a crisis of sorts?

What then, could solve this problem?

More warning signs!

As it is, all these cinematographers these days use vast, wide frames
for their shots. Breathing space, they call it. Why not use this
breathing space as a warning space? Fill up the empty spaces with
disclaimers for the youth?

I am totally for it.

So let’s begin with a probably list.

1.      The Police Officials Disclaimer:

While the police is supposed to keep you safe, and instil a sense of
security in your life, the police have connived with Bollywood to
create an image of totalitarian monsters.

As if all the decades of the corrupt policemen who would eat out of
Amish Puri’s hands wasn’t enough, there is the new crop of police
films nowadays.

The ones with cops who survive on a steady diet of steroids, and bash
up people as and when they please. Every popular superstar has played
a cop, and he randomly sings songs on the road, punches people, shoots them, has slo-mo wars with the baddies in the middle of a road. And no one says anything.

Won’t it create the wrong impression about policemen of the country? Won’t
it eclipse the fact that they are actually soft hearted puppies who
would go out of their way to make you feel comfortable, especially if
you’re a woman who’s gone to lodge a complaint? How do we ensure that
the youth of the county doesn’t mistake our cops for WWE superstars? Or Altaf Raja?

Why not give a disclaimer sign there?

police


2.      The Women’s Disclaimer:

Now, it’s an established fact that Bollywood treats its women as crap.
They are generally doormats, or objects of affection. Look at the top
grossers of the last three years, and you’ll notice that the women had
nothing much to do in the film (Except that slo-mo shot of her
running, of course!).

They’re either the sister who gets raped by Raj Babbar, or the mother
who is praying for her son (because, you know, the daughter’s in the
kitchen, cooking gaajar ka halwa – the hero’s favourite!).

How about a disclaimer for women, then?

How about a disclaimer reassuring women that they are not really
doormats and objects of affection? That they are normal people, and
their existence is not merely to get the hero to sing and dance with
them?

Don’t they deserve a disclaimer too? Come on!

sheila ki jawani 2

3.      The Fairness Disclaimer:

Another known fact is that you have to be fair in Bollywood. Because
life is not fair, and our cinema is escapist, so you have to be fair.

Shah Rukh Khan's Fair and Handsome Print Ad
Everything’s fair in love and Bollywood.

If you’re dark, you’re either a thief, or a poor man. Or the villain’s
sidekick who speaks in ‘Hoohoohaahaa’ language. You fly off the ground
when the hero punches you, even though in reality, you could crush him
to chutney and eat him with masala dosa.

But no, if you’re dark, there is no place for you here. Actresses like
Kajol will endorse skin ‘lightening’ creams, and dark actors like Shah
Rukh Khan and Ajay Devgan will be painted, layer on layer, till they
are presentable enough to the camera.

Now, let us stop and pray for the dark-skinned people. Won’t they feel
offended? Won’t they get the idea that there is no other work for them
on earth, than to look fair?

What will all the brands do? The telemarketers, and the consumers of
fairness creams, the very elixir that made Shah Rukh Khan what he is,
that stood by him from his earliest days (as he says himself) in this
advertisement.

Don’t they all deserve a disclaimer too?

chennai express

 

4. The Science Disclaimer:

Copernicus lost his life in its pursuit.

People have devoted their lives in their pursuit. The greatest minds
who walked this earth spent decades, arriving at them.

Close home, millions of engineers exist in our own country. Who have
studied the laws of physics for many years, and then went on to write
books like The Three Days of Sixty Nine. Spent hours of their time, sacrificed their social life, and copious amounts of their own seed to pursue them.

What about them? What about the concepts of science in general?

Won’t the practitioners of this great science feel offended by our films?

Don’t they deserve a disclaimer too? Won’t their very foundations be
shaken by what is shown in our movies??

car flying

 

5. The Sexual Harassment Disclaimer:

Smokers kill themselves with the habit. Agreed.

But they do it silently in their own way without disturbing anybody.

They don’t go around violating people, passing remarks, singing songs,
and touching them. You know who does that? Sex offenders.

And also, every Bollywood superstar.

It always happens that the girl loves it. She likes being called
names, and sung songs to, on her way (walking can be a lonely thing
sometimes, you know). She then falls for the guy.

And this apparently happens in every city and town in the country. It is for
strange reasons, called ‘eve-teasing’, a seemingly lesser crime than
sexual harassment.

sexual harrasment
But there will not be a disclaimer for them. No no.

Disclaimers are for smokers.

Dumb cretins of the society who have chosen to burn their lungs with
their own money.

So we need a warning, to keep away.

And the perfect film, is ruined.

Because Smoking Kills.

Sexual Harrassment meanwhile, simply lands you in jail.

And then Ram Jethmalani brings you out.

93 thoughts on “Smoking Kills

  1. I kinda agree with the Smoking is injurious disclaimer…usually kids take in to worshiping a film hero or to put it aptly the character the hero essays on the screen.When smoking/drinking is shown as a cool or a brave act, they might be tempted to follow it.Showing the warning can b e considered a moral step from the makers that says though this character does it, it is not a safe option.Yeah…everybody who smokes know this, but what is wrong in showing a small write up on the corner of the screen.Just like we all know the obscenities that are beeped out , but in spite of this the beeping is may be a moral step mainly aiming the kids. I don’t find these “warnings” or “beeps” distracting, what actually is distracting or fun killing practice in Indian theaters is the Interval. The 5-10 minutes break between 2-2.5 hours movie pushes us out from the plot and breaks the flow, doesn’t it?

    Like

    1. Are you serious? What’s wrong with a small disclaimer? Its called tampering with someone’s creative control. If I make a movie on Winston Churchill, can I show him without his cigar? Or Holmes, for that matter?

      And I find this whole concept of kids will pick it up, quite derogatory to kids
      itself. You were a child once, can you tell me one habit that you picked up from films?

      Every Bollywood film has had the hero smashing villains to pulp. Do kids really go out and start doing that?

      It’s an absurd law. Something ridiculous as this can only happen in India. Trust me, if kids were really to get influenced, there are worse things in films for them (which was basically the point of the article in the first place )

      Like

      1. Showing the microscopic message is better than axing out the whole scene right?And the ads that roll out before the movie that talks about good old Mukesh, yeah that could be revisited and made a little more relatable. Children are easily influencable, it is why we elders do not swear before them.They would pick that up quite quickly.
        http://www.cmch.tv/mentors/hotTopic.asp?id=66
        Take a look.
        However, I don’t know if showing the disclaimer alone would restrain them, may be it is more for morality sake!

        Like

      2. Your argument straight out ignores basic behavioral science. It is stupid to argue that since there is no apparent change in behavior because of fight scenes, the same applies to smoking scenes (or) since there are worse things in films to influence people’s behavior, smoking need not have the emphasis it has currently. get to know some basics of human psychology, subliminal cuing, etc… before getting serious about topics like this.
        This article is worth reading for just its humor and nothing else!

        Like

        1. Well, my psychoanalytic friend. Using all the behavioral science theories you have carefully acquired through the years, why don’t you tell me how films have helped you pick up a habit?

          Also, throwing in names and dropping in theories, and then reducing things to ‘just humour’ is all good.

          But are we at some Behavioral Sciences meeting?

          You’re ignoring even more basic facts, lost amidst your theories. Why do films have to bear the burden of saving society? Why do films have to make society better?

          Why can’t they be what they are, films – an expression of someone’s creativity?

          Your argument is just intellectual masturbation, nothing else!

          Like

          1. -> Why do films have to bear the burden of saving society?
            Because, films are advertising a product that kills people. In thousands. It is further an addictive product. Once, a person is hooked up, it puts up tremendous burden on him and his family to try and get him rid of the habit. And he is not able to get rid of it.

            -> Expression of someone’s creativity?
            I would suggest all filmmakers to create something which is not related to smoking. Is the creative space so limited that smoking has to be included?

            You should be happy that smoking is legal in the country in the first place, and that smoking scenes are even allowed. They shouldn’t be.

            Like

            1. wooowww… wat a comment to make.. if films were to be controlled tat way then there wud be so many things banned like someone decides kissing shouldnt be shown den make films without kiss??? a person who smokes , wont give a damn abt the signs or the hero posing for it..he/she might think its right..everyone has their own beliefs.. if based on the beliefs of few ppl there were bans then it wud be a disaster..
              and btw i picked up many habits frm tv wen i was a kid.. atleast i wud pretend to be every super hero or smetimes the villian too..bt once u grow up n start thinking i guess all of tis doesnt matter!!!
              I agree wid the part wer mvs r meant fr entertainment, i create dem in certain way n i dont want others tampering to it.. they r thoughts of some particular person.. i might agree or disagree to it bt to tat person it might matter a lot.

              Like

              1. The warnings are targeted more at virgins and less at existing smokers I think. Kissing argument is pointless. Unless health effects of kissing are same as that of smoking. Fwiw kissing is more sanitary than average handshake.

                Like

          2. Ok, now what do you make of the juvenile that escaped the gallows despite being a monster in the Nirbhaya case? Reasons for what corrupted this “juvenile” mind 1) Upbringing 2) Bad company 3) Movies. Regardless of the order of things that corrupted his mind, my point is, movies always have its influence on society. You can’t deny that. And only the educated elite like you can see the movies for art’s sake and at the same time not get imbued by any of the less moral acts that is being enacted on screen. For the rest it definitely is a major influence. BTW, an educated elite like you should have know better than this “…is just intellectual masturbation” while replying. See you do consider somethings less moral. So don’t get all worked up. You do have your fan following and all that…enjoy that and also try to learn to listen to the other side of the arguement! Happy blogging!

            Like

        2. I am more intrigued by the basic theories you might have ignored here. Didn’t you know that ‘warnings’, especially when they are unnecessary, draw your attention to a thing that could have otherwise not attracted much attention? I am sure you know the Psychology behind warnings and words of caution! By screaming out loud every time a character in a film holds something that has smoke coming from an end, while having them anyway continue to do so in the film, creates a false sense of rebellion. Won’t the children take to the act more because the characters are doing something that ‘they are not supposed to’? You say ‘NO’ and there is an urge to do it ‘MORE’. Whether you do it or not is a choice you make. Don’t they teach that in psychology any more?

          Like

        3. I have read scientific studies concluding that watching a 60 second action commercial increases levels of aggression among children. So for all your cries, you seem to be the one ignoring science.

          Like

      3. Well, I partly agree and partly dont. If you ask me whether kids pick up a habit from films. Most definitely yes. But would showing a disclaimer stop them from doing that. Mostly No. Rarely Yes. Why? fighting villains takes effort, might have consequences, involves other people (the villain). Eve-teasing has consequences, involves other people. But smoking is something that involves only you and the cigarette. So if you categorize things into two mutually exclusive sets – “small doable in real life” things and “Big consequential involving other people” things. I would say kids might be attracted to the small doable in real life things and might just do it (taking care of small consequences like “what if my mother finds out that I am smoking” by the usual ways people use to hide the fact that they are smoking). But if a kid has to decide that he wants to smoke by looking at a film, a small “smoking kills”:sign wouldn’t stop him except in some rare cases (when kid has good discernment that he/she manages to stay away from it knowing its a bad habit, but again that’s not being a kid. So that’s rare).

        Anyway, that’s what I had to say!

        Like

    2. And where does this stupidity end? Tomorrow, what if they start asking authors to carry disclaimers in their books?

      Censorship in the creative arts is a regressive step. It should be challenged. If you think kids will get influenced, keep them at home for heaven’s sake. Whatever happened to
      the concept of choice and discretion?

      Are we animals? Or insects??

      Like

        1. I had a little girl thinking tat the idea of face smeared with choclate is a gud thing bcoz of the dairy milk add wich shows girls looking very pretty doing that… N the worst thing is fairness adds.. I thought n chose wat i liked n wat i dint. bt many grls feel inferior bcoz of their complexion. All thanks to adds. Bt i dont believe in completely blaming media.bcoz if kids have to learn smething wrong, then they will.. i have seen ‘spoilt’ kids who dont have tv at home!!

          Like

      1. Basically you want us to choose between creative freedom and Social welfare. I can side with freedom only if there is an assurance that it will not be exploited to fill private pockets, which is how this whole smoking in movies issue came into being in first place!

        To answer your question, yes we are indeed animals 😛
        No, we are not insects, we come under a different phylum altogether.

        Some links which shed more light on the matter:
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19959693
        http://www.smokefreemovies.ucsf.edu/

        A simple googling would have given you lots of information, I don’t know why you chose to be ignorant and vouch for smoking under the disguise of creative freedom. Maybe you are a smoker and you feel perturbed by the realization each time you see those signs!(Its just a wild guess)

        Like

        1. Oh, man! Don’t I love it when blokes read a blog and plunge into conclusions.

          Firstly, I wasn’t making it about freedom vs society. That was your argument.

          And fill private pockets? Seriously, man? With all your theories and superman like Googling skills, that’s the best you came up with? I find it ridiculous that every time an argument needs to be buffered, society and the evils of capitalism will be brought in!

          How about this. I’m making a movie on SatyajitRay. I show him smoking.

          Am I an evil person out here to fill my pockets? Or am I merely looking for an honest portrayal?

          And it’s funny how you’ve deduced why smoking came into movies in the first place. Bold theory, my
          friend, but could it not have been that smoking is shown in movies because people smoke in real life?

          Its like saying that car companies are responsible for films showing people driving.

          You’re funny, you know that? May be you should start writing humour too. Coupled with your deep knowledge of theories and Googling skills, it would be a profound read.

          Like

        2. Smoking is a personal choice. Lets not attack just that. Its just about the tip of the iceberg. If anyone is so concerned, there should be a lot more disclaimers, much like the ones mentioned in the blog. Why is treating one half of the society (read as ‘women’ in case you didn’t get that) like shit overlooked and disclaimers are provided about smoking?

          Like

        3. A much wild-er guess… Are you upset HR did not bring up the Alcholic Disclaimers? 😛
          You should have included the Alcohol stuffs.. (Madiraa) … Ranging from Kingfisher Beer to Kingfisher Calendars…. 🙂

          Like

      2. Lovely article.. Equally good comments.. Debatable points there.. Loved it. I am a smoker too (something I am not proud of), I did not take to the habit seeing movies, But I am sure there are quite a handful out there, who have took to this habit watching their favorite star doing the same.

        On a serious note, if movies indeed do influence people, and if there has to be a statutory law as a responsibility on part of the government to prevent a bad message from influencing people, there are many more things that you have mentioned in this post which needs more attention than smoking (defaming cops, women objectification, violence). Violence especially deserves a special, special warning.

        Like

  2. Great article. Here is another possible disclaimer-
    “The schools and colleges shown in this movie are in no way close to how they are run in reality. Students are asked not to have any false expectations.”
    (applicable for Student of the year,Kuch Kuch Hota Hai,Kabhi Kushi Kabhi Gham,Main Hoon Na..etc)

    Like

  3. Not connected to smoking but still just remembered when you mentioned the Woody Allen issue;how David Fincher didn’t allow his “the girl with the dragon tattoo” to be released in India as he didn’t want any of the nude scenes cut. He was perfectly fine with Censor Board giving an 18+ A rating but still he wouldn’t compromise on his work. But the great people in the Board couldn’t allow that and still insisted on cutting the nude scenes. David Fincher said fuck off and didn’t release the movie in India.
    I still don’t get it. I mean do the Censor Board really think that people above the age of 18 can’t handle exposure to nudity? And yeah we just happen to be the land of Kamasutra.
    Ok forget that, any kid with tv can easily access MTV or the other channels where the programmes glorify women prancing around in bikinis.But no objection to that. Again item numbers are the rage now. Any movie- be it a comedy(most of the Priyadarshan Hindi films),action(Agneepath), or horror(Tees Maar Khan)- can’t do without item numbers where scantily dressed women leaving little to imagination dances to songs whose lyrics are dumb and disgusting. But no,no objection to that either. Nobody has any problem with people 18 or above(or below) watching it. But the censor board has an issue when a renowned director wants to release a critically acclaimed Oscar nominated movie uncut in India. Hypocrites!!!

    Like

    1. our parents have a problems with is dating and then they force us to sleep with strangers on ‘honeymoon’. You should’ve read the hypocrisy memo way back 😛

      Like

  4. Let Woody Allen go to hell as Indian Filmmakers are also supposed to go through the mandatory rules in other countries prior to the release of their films. If he cannot obey the rules in India better not make revenue from here. Also the government has every right to interfere and regulate a creative medium which is meant for public release. Coming to the Smoking kills ad. Yes, that ad is as stupid as any PSA released by Government of India and their need to be a regulation in the quality standards of PSAs too. So that the smokers feel that Mukesh was really harmed and lungs is really like a sponge. Also I believe that a creative medium like cinema has the ability to influence the minds and actions of the viewers if acted spot on!!

    Like

          1. So you equate Chatur’s speech to woman bashing?
            Grand masti was pathetic. I regret having watched it and feel sick it was ever made. Though I am still skeptical if there was any woman bashing in it. If anything the men were looking losers.

            I haven’t seen the other movies that you have mentioned. Mainstream bollywood is at a low point and I don’t intend to bring myself down with it,

            Like

  5. Very well written! I see the point you’re trying to make by being sarcastic but you know what? There are scientific studies which have convincingly proved that smoking on screen has an influence on kids. Heck, Big Tobacco even paid production houses to put smoke scenes in movies for the same reason.

    So, unless you can prove (scientifically) all those things you wrote about, your articles are going to remain in the sarcasm genre.

    Like

  6. What ifthey watch Uday Chopra in Dhoom 3 and decide that education is not really necessary?//

    Awesome 😀 Well written!! You have expressed the feelings of many who could not get the right words to express the anger over this issue 🙂

    Like

  7. Oh cmon this is ridiculous….Its just a disclaimer & by your own logic if nobody gets influenced to smoke watching people smoke on screen so why do u think anybody would get influenced watching that small little disclaimer to quit smoking. Heck all cigarette packs carry that disclaimer too & has that changed even one smoker’s mind.

    The disclaimer is a gesture which needs to be appreciated as it indeed is a hazardous habit which this disclaimer wants to create awareness against after that it is the individual’s choice whether he wants to smoke or not.

    Now coming to your part about limitation on creativity i doubt how creativity can get hampered by displaying a small little disclaimer. We already publish one at the start of the film…”All characters in the film are fictional & bear no resemblance with any person living or dead….” or “No animals were harmed in the making of this film” does is hamper creativity.

    Your blog entry is hilarious on content (i agree with your other disclaimers) but is too one sided on the one that is relevant as smoking on screen does influence ( i m not quoting any scientific research here…but just remember how many of us have tried doing the rajnikant cigarette catch or why did superbikes/racing bikes become a rage after dhoom)

    Cheers!!!

    Like

      1. Do u remember the disclaimer they put at the start completely “All characters in the film are fictional & bear no resemblance with any person living or dead…” Thats why it needs to be there on every scene & other reason is a basic lesson that pointing the mistake as and when it occurs is more likely to catch attention

        Like

  8. Dear Naysayers,
    I believe the whole point of the post was much bigger than simple “Smoking Kills” disclaimer bashing. It just goes to show that government intervention in creative mediums is a simple knee-jerk reaction by the not-so-qualified or equipped members of the Board. The problem is much bigger than mere distraction while watching a film. Censorship of any kind, anywhere is extremely regressive. It tends to push a society back to the middle ages (Not that our Indian society is far from it.)
    Major English movie channels beep out “ass”, “butt” and even the anatomically correct “nipples” while a Zee Cinema will be blatantly airing “Haraamkhor”, “Teri Maa ki…” and yes, Katrina gyrating more lasciviously than Elizabeth Berkeley in Showgirls. This just goes to show what a hypocritical setup we are, apart from the fact that our moral compass is completely haywire.

    But hey, considering that there are cretins everywhere in positions of power & regulation, “Smoking Kills” feels like a let off.

    Like

    1. Brilliantly paraphrased it there my dear friend!You just paved my way for an easy settling, now that you have expressed what I wanted to at the end of the comments’ section.You’re absolutely right about our government simply going to town with these disclaimers without actually putting an iota of thought into it,thus rendering it a very ‘as a matter-of-fact’ expression.I believe and this is my personal opinion-whereby smoking in real life is considered slow death,the repetitive and blatantly coerced filling up of all available audio-visual media with absolute bollocks under the guise of this hideous word-‘masala’ entertainment, is most certainly a blitz kreig of brain damaging content on an individual’s senses and therefore leads to an almost instantaneous and permanent cerebro-creative atrophy.What say fellas?

      Like

  9. Very well said, I am happy to see that people who are misguided by the crap happening all around are starting to open their eyes and facing facts. I have some of my own though. would like to share them.
    Recently I watched the movie “2 guns”, it was given an Adult rating by the Indian Censor Board, whenever we see such films, it is understood that their might be abusive language or nudity. Well the movie had both but the nudity part was still cut off and the abusive part was left off. I want to ask that the movies and songs these days use words like kamina, panoti etc which a kid from age 2 to a kid at age 13 will understand and ask their parents what it means. But no, we are fine with it as the movie stars big commercial heroes, are made on a big budget, masala entertainment so they dont qualify for being restricted viewing. BULL SHIT.
    All in all I can say is this that I am proud to be an Indian, but the word HYPOCRISY is defined by an Indian far better than anyone on this planet.

    Like

  10. Well written blog but it is surprising to see how a well educated people of our country are divulging from the core essence of cultivating a good society.

    Creativity getting hampered by showing a disclaimer?

    Showing Lord Shiva smoking Chillum is not a problem, but people who see that might not be as matured as Lord Shiva who understands that smoking is only a part of his life which has other important things to take care off.

    That disclaimer is intended for those people who might get influenced by the movies or the stars who are portraying the characters in the movie. For a 12-13 year old kid watching Rajni Kanth rocket a cigarette into his mouth is style and fashion. The message is intended for him to not fall trap to such things. Even you go back to the village environment, even the parents of the kids might not be completely aware of the problems caused by smoking.

    These messages educate them. We are not in a country filled with intellectual people my friend, we are in a country which has highest illiterate population. And change has to come in every possible way to educate these people. Even if couple of parents are able to save their children from these habits, it is quite an achievement.

    If a well educated person like you and me and the directors of the movie think that a small disclaimer coming at the corner of the screen can hamper creativity, I don’t think anything wrong in our government expecting the same message can change the minds of a few people.

    Living in reality is as important as enjoying the 3 hours of movie with utmost creativity my friend. So lets us disrespect the message that is being given as education to people in every corner of the country. At the end of the day we all have to march towards better India and a better world.

    Jai Hind,
    Krishna Chaitanya Emani

    Like

      1. My dear friend… along with the message there is also a picture which depicts Do Not Smoke… 🙂
        All that I am saying is, if at all there is any, that message could only benefit but not harm… what you are losing as a trade off for it is the annoyance to the eye to see that warning??? There are bigger problems to resolve than that my friend… That is bare minimum we are expected to adjust for better cause…

        Like

  11. khaanticuttacki: To all the people who are having problems or take it as an offence to their ‘schools of thought’ here are a few reminders (disclaimers) which are the author’s own (in no particular order):
    >> The thin line between bullshit and cowdung.
    >> This blog is marginally more interesting than picking one’s own nose, by some Mr Naipul
    >> and finally, Very irresponsible writing, such kind of people are a threat to the nation, by some Mr. Sibal. 🙂

    Like

  12. as much as I prefer creative freedom, i still feel smoking kills tagline isn’t a bad move. By saying not a bad move, I am not applauding the measure, nor am I saying it is the best idea out there. As you have put forth at the beginning, by getting immersed in a film suspending all the disbelief, one gets into a vulnerable state dictated by the filmmaker. That is why you cry for a well crafted emotional scene. It is stupid to assuage ourselves that movies aren’t going to influence our characters. As much as one will agree that Ayn Rand changes our perspective of society and individuality after reading her works, one should also agree that the characteristics of people in films we root for will be transferred to us subliminally. I remember, as a teenager, after watching ‘Schindler’s list’ i tried to behave like an aristocrat. I also remember as a kid tossing my reynold’s pen often in air and catching it with my mouth just like Rajinikanth do. My refrain in upgrading to cigarettes later on in life does talk about my apprehensions on the perils. But the point I am trying to make is we will always be influenced by the characteristics of people we root for, be it in cinema or real life.

    As rightfully put forth by you, that why not extend this justification to other ills of the society. I share your sarcasm here. But the bigger problem here is that, those 5 examples you gave will involve anyone in this world apart from the executor. So either a girl will slap a guy, or he will damage a lot of property by doing those stunts instantaneously.But cigarettes, they don’t trouble others mostly (if you remove passive smoking out of the spectrum). It is also easy to take up once you get the urge. If you take a survey on how smokers got into this habit, most will say there were influenced by their peers. I really want to interact with a smoker who says ‘no one in my social group smoked, I started smoking because I can’. This applies to any habit of ours; we need an external influence to nudge us into trying. It all depends on our risk taking factor and precautionary mindset to get trapped in it or not. This external influence is abundant in films, more than one gets to witness in real life. Yes my friends do smoke, I accompany them to that corner in the office at times. But the pungent smell somehow puts me off, while in the 2D medium in the comfort of your chair, you only get to see the coolness of the white smoke smoothly flowing out of the nose or mouth.

    So be happy that the authorities have taken up an initiative to spread awareness and also give a reality check when after being disoriented by the creativity of the film we get pulled into trying the antics of the people. Yes its not a good move, but it is still a move. Our rules and laws have never been fool-proof. It needs more pruning. But why such hatred and commotion for something that lasts only 3hrs at the max? If you agree that the movie may only last 3hrs but it lingers on your mind for a lot more time, testing you, molding you, then be ready to accept that films have the power to do things that can cause troubles to your life in the longer run.

    PS: I am not an intellectual trying to outwit your points. It is more of a thinking out through words. So anyone who wants to comment on this POV shall treat this as a debate and don’t go into the usual ‘witty’ attacks.

    Like

  13. Regarding your “do kids pick up stuff from movies”, would like to point to 2 Telugu movies by a popular star Mahesh Babu. I personally know 2 friends who loved the way he looked cool on screen while smoking in “Okkadu” and picked the habit. He smokes after a fight for some “relief”.

    In the movie “Businessman”, he is shown as a glorified don. Again, in Hyd, the police said that lot of youngsters confessed that they resorted to petty crime after seeing their star pull off crime in such a cool manner. So, yes kids, especially teenagers, are influenced a lot by the on screen antics of their favorite stars.

    Ok, having said that, disclaimers on screen is nonsense!!

    Like

  14. I never understood why the Bollywood actresses enjoyed being chased by the ‘heroes’, and stalked all over the place till the finally said yes. I mean, that’s STALKING! If any guy acts the way most of these actors in Bollywood movies do, the women should get a restraining order against them instead of falling in love with them.

    Well-written post though. Incredibly witty. 🙂

    Like

  15. See, I think you are comparing apples and oranges. While nobody would get up and start making people fly off the face of the earth (for the fact that they know it doesn’t happen), they could very easily take up smoking because that is what they have been seeing people around them do. And once their “idol” does it on screen, they are further compelled. But given this I still support your article. Very nicely written. A holmes movie without his pipe would really be absurd. And don’t listen to all those who start shitting about morals and society. It’s their idealistic world fantasy. It’s just not worth spending time on (:D).

    Like

  16. Its just a wild myth that shiva smokes a chillum ,you hear it all the times from the hippies who have never read a religious book or understood what a temple is all about , maybe The immortals of Meluha made you think that was the real story.
    It’s not written in the religious books that Shiva smokes Marijuana . So don’t use that to justify your take on the disclaimer. Otherwise your read is alright!

    Like

    1. I haven’t read Meluha.

      Also, no one can tell for sure if he does smoke the chillum or not. Can you say for sure? Have you met him??

      I was talking about people’s beliefs and perception. All mythology is essentially that – stories with morals. No one can say what he does, or doesn’t.

      Like

    2. I beg to differ. It is mentioned in multiple religious texts that ‘weed’ grows on the shoulder of shiv. To be precise, to the left rear side of neck.

      Many great seers (seakers of ultimate knowledge , not just religious saints) used weed as an enchancer to attaining focus or reducing the mental chatter caused by thousands of inputs brain receives from our senses. The hippies and many others with half or incorrect understanding have used weed in an attempt to reach the elusive peace of mind . Others use it as plain pleasure activity.
      Hence in this context if an artist depicts shiva having a chillium , it should carry a distracting popup showing it is injurious to health . Same should be the case when Jesus has wine.

      Like

  17. Ya man those horrific n ugly clips they show at start of movie actually gives me enuf stress to light up another cigarette

    N the 100ml tar in ur lungs makes me wonder how many litres of dust and vehicle exhaust would be there in my lungs since the past 10 yrs I hv been living in Mumbai ! 

    Like

  18. Reblogged this on rawkeron's Blog and commented:
    Well written witty piece on our anti smoking / chewing on theatres that really doesn’t do anything more than give people a sense of nausea and even complete mood turn off .

    There is already a huge lungs dipped in smoke printed on each and every cig pack! Government should be putting up videos that may help reduce rape , girl child abuse etc which is more important to the whole society. Maybe anti corruption clips should be played though they might not be effective Corruption which is much more tempting and difficult to abstain from than tobacco and it causes serious injury to the entire economy of a nation that needs to feed 1.2 billion people. If they think anti smoke ads are effective then anti corruption should be given an even bigger priority !

    Like

  19. People start smoking to appear cool… the very basis of coolness is the mild confusion instilled in the beholder as to why the person is engaged in a dangerous activity for no apparent reason. Why do you think extreme sports persons are cool? yeah..

    So, wannabe cool kids will smoke no matter what… or they’ll pick up some other dangerous activity. Like street racing.

    Like

  20. When death will be very near you, you will not be in a position to make fun of religion…..that day you will be more than eager to believe in Shiva & all the mythology…God bless you…

    Like

    1. Yeah.

      With all your prayers to your gods, can you guarantee that you’ll live longer than me? May be you should ask your god why he can’t guarantee you a long life even though you worship him.

      Like

  21. awesome post. Those ads are a irritating one. i have grown watching all sorts of rajnikanth movies. i once got tempted. but then i tried and got irritated with the smoke and left it.

    never touched again. but then, i agree with other disclaimer too. there should also be another disclaimer saying “All characters and story in this movie is fictious. does not relate to real world” 🙂 something like that.

    you should watch tamil movies like Singam. they never portrayed a real policemen.

    Good post. Loved reading early morning.

    Like

  22. If smoking is truely such a problem, den rather ban it that put disclaimers…is dat unreadable, yet very distracting note so much more effective than a ban? Why let ppl smoke and then complain? If one doesn’t object cigarette production, they better not raise a “Don’t smoke” slogan.

    Like

  23. Awesome read. Maybe sometime you should post a blog about general hypocritical Indian practices too…will jolt the living daylights out of a lot of them who swear by them.

    Like

  24. I appreciate the fact that the author takes out the time and is generous enough to reply to comments. However I request you not to waste your time and our screen space by replying to obnoxious comments by people who do not even get the point of the article but have to say something pseudo-intellectual just for the sake of it. Point in reference, the Mr. PhD in Behavioural Psychology above.
    The article makes some great points, especially the sexual harassment one. And your sense of humour is great as usual. Keep up the amazing work!

    Like

Leave a comment