# Damn BS over smoking in movies



## Bender (Sep 13, 2010)

So much that we don't see kick-ass bad-ass gangsters like those in The Usual Suspects ,Eastern Promises and adaptations to comic books and what not. Am I the only livid over this? Shit is fucking ridiculous.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 13, 2010)

wait what?


----------



## Rukia (Sep 13, 2010)

This is what I think.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmF_Phk6eIE[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 13, 2010)

I think he's referring to smoking in movies? I dunno.....he wrote that as if he was drunk.


----------



## Bender (Sep 13, 2010)

Parallax said:
			
		

> wait what?





MartialHorror said:


> I think he's referring to smoking in movies? I dunno.....he wrote that as if he was drunk.



*snip* Inappropriate - Para



			
				Rukia said:
			
		

> This is what I think.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmF_Phk6eIE[/YOUTUBE]



De Niro was dynamite in that flick

Although I liked his role as the the top notch G he is in "The Godfather II"


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 13, 2010)

Title: "Damn BS over smoking movies"

Er, smoking movies? Do you mean smoking IN movies?

Post: "so much that we don't see kick-ass bad-ass gangsters like those in The Usual Suspects ,Eastern Promises and adaptations to comic books and what not. Am I the only livid over this? Shit is fucking ridiculous"

For one, you're presuming I've seen all of those movies. I have, but I never took note of the smoking there. I dont think many people do......the only times I've taken notice are in the new Wall Street movie(from the trailer) and Clint Eastwood's Leone collaborations. 

Plus, I dont see how smoking makes people appear any more badass. If I've missed the point, tell me......but seriously, if you think your post is easy to understand, then english must be your 2nd language.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2010)

MartialHorror said:


> Title: "Damn BS over smoking movies"
> 
> Er, smoking movies? Do you mean smoking IN movies?



You're acting  like a bitchy little girl. You just stated what I was saying so I don't see why the need to complain.



> For one, you're presuming I've seen all of those movies.



One, you're not the king of movies that everyone comes to, to obtain knowledge about movies they've never seen.

Also it's funny that you don't know what's so badass about it since in your mediocre RE film adaptations you love so much Jill Valentine is a sexy smoking badass.


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 14, 2010)

> You're acting like a bitchy little girl. You just stated what I was saying so I don't see why the need to complain.



I understood. You just said it so poorly that others were confused. You honestly did seem like you were typing while drunk.



> One, you're not the king of movies that everyone comes to, to obtain knowledge about movies they've never seen.



How did you get that implication? You called me retarded, so I said you're presuming I saw those movies and knew what you were talking about. Maybe you should come to me about movie knowledge because you're not making yourself look very good.



> Also it's funny that you don't know what's so badass about it since in your mediocre RE film adaptations you love so much Jill Valentine is a sexy smoking badass.



Another sentence that's just.....strange. I mean, yeah, I love those RE film adaptations......I mean, I was only lukewarm on them.....actually, wait, why am I dignifying that with a response? You're resorting to lying again, little Bender.

I just love how you throw in that Jill comment without even completing your sentence.

You have to be drunk dude.....


----------



## Gunners (Sep 14, 2010)

> You're acting like a bitchy little girl. You just stated what I was saying so I don't see why the need to complain.


Actually you're acting like a little bitch. He responded to you with patience, you continue crying like a girl on the rag because someone explained why your original post was confusing. 

Anyway if a movie is good, the lack of smoking won't matter.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2010)

MartialHorror said:


> I understood. You just said it so poorly that others were confused.



The only one confused is you and Parallax.



 You honestly did seem like you were typing while drunk.




> How did you get that implication? You called me retarded, so I said you're presuming I saw those movies and knew what you were talking about.



I didn't presume anything, I'm stating movie that have smoking in it. 



> Maybe you should come to me about movie knowledge because you're not making yourself look very good.



Talk about egomaniac...  

Go to...  someone.. like you for advice..? 


    

:rofl 

That's hilarious

You gave Dragon Ball: Evolution a decent rating 

The Expendables (A movie made to rehype Stallone's favorite 70's movies)

Excuse me while I try and go find something to stop me from laughing myself to death.




> explained why your original post was confusing.



I left out one word BIG DEAL.


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 14, 2010)

> I didn't presume anything, I'm stating movie that have smoking in it.



But when you're talking to ME, TO ME, for your post to have any kind of relevance, I need to have seen the movies.



> Talk about egomaniac...



Jokes just fly past you....



> You gave Dragon Ball: Evolution a decent rating



No I didn't. Stop lying. 



> The Expendables (A movie made to rehype Stallone's favorite 70's movies)



Do you really want to start this again? Actually wait, you've made another error. If anything, it was a rehype of the 80's movies(and once again, your sentence makes no sense). 

Actually, Bender, this is a serious question? Are you drunk or is english a 2nd language for you? If you are or it is, I'll drop this argument because if you're impaired, debating you would be like beating a dead puppy and if english is your 2nd language, making fun of your mistakes would be a dickish thing to do.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2010)

MartialHorror said:


> But when you're talking to ME, TO ME, for your post to have any kind of relevance, I need to have seen the movies.



Then look up the movies that I listed mr. Know-it-all.


Jokes just fly past you....




> No I didn't. Stop lying.



I don't lie. 




> Do you really want to start this again? Actually wait, you've made another error. If anything, it was a rehype of the 80's movies(and once again, your sentence makes no sense).



Start it up again. You'll see that you're vastly outnumbered.


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 14, 2010)

> Then look up the movies that I listed mr. Know-it-all.



I've seen them and as I said, I took no notice of the smoking in them. 



> I don't lie.



Then you dont know what 2/4 stars usually means, or you didn't read my review and are simply leaching off Rukias words.



> Start it up again. You'll see that you're vastly outnumbered.



Er, what are we debating about here? Most people like the Expendables. I've proven this before.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2010)

> Then you dont know what 2/4 stars usually means, or you didn't read my review and are simply leaching off Rukias words.



I'm perfectly aware of what 2/4 stars are and it's exactly why I say your rating system sucks ass.




> Er, what are we debating about here?



Well you're still angry I'm being such a dick to you If I remember correctly.



> Moststupid people like the Expendables.



That means nothing. A lot of people liked "Vampire's suck" that doesn't mean that it's better than Scott Pilgrim vs The world cuz it overtook it at the box office.


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 14, 2010)

> I'm perfectly aware of what 2/4 stars are and it's exactly why I say your rating system sucks ass.



I wont deny that my rating system is flawed. But tbh, most rating systems are flawed. Example the /10 rating can be taken in two ways. The majority of the systems have 7-10 being positive, 4-6 being mediocre and 0-3 being negative. But to other people, they might take that as 7/10= 70%= C-= Mediocre.

and the /5 star rating is usually the same as the /4 star rating, except its harder to give full ratings. Thats why most people stress that ratings are just part of the review, not the driving force. 

In other words, you're supposed to read it, figure if you'll like or dislike the movie based on it, and then take the rating with a grain of salt. 



> Well you're still angry I'm being such a dick to you If I remember correctly.



I was refering to the Expendables(I said do you want to start this again when you used my enthusiasm over the movie as a reason to not take me seriously.



> That means nothing. A lot of people liked "Vampire's suck" that doesn't mean that it's better than Scott Pilgrim vs The world cuz it overtook it at the box office.



Once again, refering to fans as stupid is pointless because I can throw it back at you: Have you considered that you're the one who's stupid? Have you considered that SP might be the crap movie? 

A lot and most are two different things. If "Disaster Movie" has 25,000 fans.....thats a lot, until compared to the fact that 25,000,000 people watched that movie(Im guessing on the number). 

Most people disliked Vampires Suck anyway(although most felt it was still better than most of the other spoof duos film). I wasn't refering to the money anyway.

Also, I wont argue that SP's reception has been better than the Expendables, nor do I feel threatened about that in any way(unlike you seem to be). But your whole argument can, and has been, thrown back at you. If you think the fact that most like the Expendables shows that most people are stupid, then why can't I say the same thing about SP? Who decides that? You?!

Your arrogance is your problem. there is nothing wrong with making mistakes or having controversial beliefs. It's that it never crosses your mind that you might be wrong, so you act like a jerk and then (usually) run away when you're proven wrong. Plus, I've seen no critical insight from you, which is why I think you leach off of other peoples arguments.

If you want, we can just drop this though, as we've gotten off topic.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Sep 14, 2010)

Why is the OP so mad?


----------



## Corran (Sep 14, 2010)

What am I reading Bender? Are you angry that smoking isn't as present in movies these days? Your topic title and first post are a bit confusing.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 14, 2010)

What is the point of your ranting? Why does that shit even matter?


----------



## Mider T (Sep 14, 2010)

Comments like that aren't allowed here.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Sep 14, 2010)

I DESPISE anyone that tries to rule over my life!!!**


----------



## Mider T (Sep 14, 2010)

OP is probably thinking it was a big mistake to try to appeal to us forum RETARDS


----------



## Rukia (Sep 14, 2010)

I read an article last week about how smoking scenes are starting to disappear from movies.  It's just another example of how prude our society has become.  Some organization of bored housewives in liberal California probably bitch to their local governments every time they see a movie that glorifies smoking.

These days I only see smoking when I tune in to Mad Men.


----------



## Bender (Sep 14, 2010)

Corran said:


> What am I reading Bender? Are you angry that smoking isn't as present in movies these days?



Uh yeah...


----------



## CrazyMoronX (Sep 14, 2010)

I never noticed, nor do I care.


----------



## Corran (Sep 14, 2010)

Bender said:


> Uh yeah...



Well before you edited it seemed like you might of rushed making the topic or you were tired. 


But in response to the smoking thing. It doesn't really matter. If a movie or tv show needs it they will put it in. Characters don't need to smoke for no reason and I'm guessing the smoking rate has been declining so its not far fetched to think that shows and movies set in current day would have less smoking.


----------



## Piekage (Sep 14, 2010)

I don't really care if a character smokes or not, as long as the character and story are good. Tossing in a smoke scene for the sake of a smoke scene is stupid if said scene isn't relevant to the plot, and *if* your implying that a character has to smoke to be considered 'badass' or cool then that's  rather childish way of looking at things. In a world where shit like Twilight and Last Airbender can turn a profit, isn't focusing on poor characterization and story telling more relevant than if a character smokes or not?


----------



## Akatsuki4Life (Sep 15, 2010)

I think the whole freak out over the smoking issue all together is ridiculous.  People are going to smoke whether or not its in movies or not.  I'm not angry that there is no smoking in tv or movies, but I do miss a character enjoying the occasional cigarette once in awhile, sometimes it really can add to the allure.  I think that is one of the things about Asumas character that made him kind of funny imo.   Always had a cigarette hanging out of his mouth, even during a fight. Now that's just plain awesome.  (Not that I am an idiot that thinks smoking makes you cool.)


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 15, 2010)

Meh, on one hand, if it inspires people to smoke.....then I dont like it.

On the other, if they start smoking from it, then their parents really messed up somewhere.

It's not even that smoking is glorified in movies. It's just....there. So I can go either way.


----------



## Chidori Mistress (Sep 16, 2010)

I don't really care.


----------



## Roy (Sep 16, 2010)

Ok           .


----------



## Munak (Sep 16, 2010)

And they're supposed to be making a Cowboy Bebop movie. 

A non-smoking Spike? Preposterous.


----------



## Hyouma (Sep 16, 2010)

Smokers have always been discriminated against these last few years, but luckily there are still plenty of movie makers who don't outlaw it on their screens. Always funny how people can react on a cigarette (or nudity) and don't comment on the violence at all.


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 16, 2010)

Hyouma said:


> Smokers have always been discriminated against these last few years, but luckily there are still plenty of movie makers who don't outlaw it on their screens. Always funny how people can react on a cigarette (or nudity) and don't comment on the violence at all.



Actually, it's not really that funny, especially with nudity. The main reason why nudity is frowned on more than violence is because most likely, the nudity is real. But the violence is obviously fake, so people know the difference.

But its a cycle where people are prone to changing their minds. In the 70's, nudity was artistic while violence was just sleaze. Its a culture shift I guess.


----------



## Hyouma (Sep 16, 2010)

MartialHorror said:


> Actually, it's not really that funny, especially with nudity. The main reason why nudity is frowned on more than violence is because most likely, the nudity is real. But the violence is obviously fake, so people know the difference.


Nudity in a movie is just as fake as violence in a movie imo. It's a movie per definition.



MartialHorror said:


> But its a cycle where people are prone to changing their minds. In the 70's, nudity was artistic while violence was just sleaze. Its a culture shift I guess.


Couldn't agree more on that point. Luckily there's enough different cultures in the movie industry (although Hollywood will probably continue to define the mainstream).


----------



## Mr.Blonde (Sep 16, 2010)

Rukia said:


> This is what I think.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmF_Phk6eIE[/YOUTUBE]


First thing I thought when I read the thread title was to post that link .
Oh well,the next best thing
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXjcf47y-zk&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## MartialHorror (Sep 16, 2010)

> Nudity in a movie is just as fake as violence in a movie imo. It's a movie per definition.



When a woman shows her breasts or a guy shows his butt, you are seeing actual nudity. When someone gets cut in half in a movie, you are seeing a special effect.

It's not that I personally have any moral issues over this. I just understand the argument. Imo, violence and nudity need to fit in with what's going on. Slashers need both. Gore films in general usually need both(depending on the style of gore).

But I've complained about violence in movies like "The Happening", where it's just gory for the sake of being gory with no real affect. I've also complained about nudity in movies like "The Departed"(although I dont recall any direct nudity, refering to sex here) in which it just slows the pace and cheapens the characters for me.


----------



## Hyouma (Sep 16, 2010)

With extreme violence like in your example, you're absolutely right. But things like hitting people, guns, car chases, those are real too, (all be it by stunt people- but those nude shots too), while on the other hand the star man/woman always looks perfect ,even after half the world just exploded, which isn't really convincing anyone. 

Of course there are movies that try to be realistic, in both aspects, but everything in movies should always be seen as fake imo. 

Also agree with the argument that these angles need to fit in the story, same goes for smoking. 

Thread makes me remember awesome song:
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUMSVVAkWz4[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Griever (Oct 17, 2010)

Seto Kaiba said:


> What is the point of your ranting? Why does that shit even matter?



Well, Smoking is something that sets the atmosphear, so in some movies it is important for realism. Like in movies that are set in the 1920's, if there is not heavy smoking going on it simply doesn't feel right. 

and a 1920's mobster without a smoke?, forget about it.


----------



## Yakushi Kabuto (Oct 18, 2010)

A couple of the posts on the first page do make for some light entertainment. As for the content itself, I do think that smoking sometimes look good. But that isn't the only reason why I think it shouldn't be restricted. People do all sorts of things considered bad in films. I don't believe most of them are advocating that we go out and shoot people or start drinking alcohol. Setting smoking apart from the other material doesn't feel right in that it is just another part that could give a little something to a character. A nervous gesture, trying to quit, attempting to fit in. Smoking can convey so much more than that guy over there trying to be cool.


----------



## Narcissus (Oct 18, 2010)

Ha, not sure how I missed this the first time around. Things got pretty heated.

I've never really cared about people smoking in movies or not. Fiction in general incorporates a certain level of realism in it (despite however unrealistic the plot elements may become). So naturally, movies will have smoking, and much worse thing, in them.

In fact, I dislike it more whenever movies or other mediums of fiction try to censor this kind of thing without good reason. Smoking can be an interesting element in a film, just like any other vice, so long as it isn't overused.


----------



## Butcher (Oct 19, 2010)

I don't think it makes people look more bad ass.

But it is stupid to keep it out of movies. What person goes and see a movie that has one guy smoking,and decides to smoke based off of that?


----------

