March 2, 2011
Today's MPAA ratings bulletin announces that Weinstein's The King's Speech has been re-rated from "R" to "PG-13 for language." The bulletin notes: "Edited version. Content is different from 'R' rated version...9/15/10."
Re-rating may get Weinstein a sales boost on the DVD release, but an MPAA waiver also allows the re-rated film to be released to theaters to reap post-Oscars® publicity. News:
"We thank the MPAA for their speedy and sensitive consideration of the alternative version of The King's Speech," said [Weinstein] COO David Glasser. "We are thrilled that they have assigned this version a PG-13 rating and are very grateful for the waiver of the 90-day withdrawal period. At this time, [Weinstein] and the filmmakers are discussing the appropriate next steps."
February 23, 2011
Today Smokefree Movies ran a full page ad in Variety and Hollywood Reporter highlighting the fact that the new Paramount animated movie Rango, which will hit the theaters next week, on March 4, featured smoking. Given that the movie is a cartoon, the producers can's use the excuse that the actor insisted on smoking! Any smoking -- even in cartoons -- contributes to youth smoking.
See the full ad here.
February 2, 2011
The well regarded film, "The King's Speech" is filled with smoking. The MPAA rated it "R" for language because of one scene where the "f-word" wasrepeated several times as part of a speech therapy session, somethingthat I think was silly. Despite all the smoking, we would not haverated the film "R" for two reasons: (1) King George actually smoked (anddied of lung cancer) and smoking's negative consequences are clearlypresented (effects on the voicebox).
To see the full ad, click here.
January 12, 2011
At a time that states are facing unprecedented deficits and making large cuts to education and other programming, they continue to spend billions of dollars subsidizing movies that promote smoking. We ran an advertisement in the January issue of State Legislatures magazine making this point.
December 23, 2010
Jim Lightwood and I just published a new paper in Social Science and Medicine showing that, like the California program, the Arizona program had an immediate effect not only on smoking but also healthcare costs. Like California, the effect grew with time.
Interestingly, the Arizona program, which was weaker and more focused on youth that California, while highly cost-effective, was less cost-effective than the more aggressive California program.
So the bottom line is this: Large scale tobacco control programs work and contribute to short-term medical cost containment and more aggressive programs produce bigger benefits.
Here is the abstract: