Craig's "constant struggle" to quit smoking

edited August 2011 in News Posts: 886
http://news.celebritywonder.com/2011/08/12/Daniel_Craig_Struggles_To_Quit_Smoking.html

Daniel Craig finds it a ''constant struggle'' to resist the urge to have a cigarette after giving up the habit.

The 'Cowboys and Aliens' actor - who married actress Rachel Weisz in a secret ceremony in front of just four people in New York in June - still "loves" cigarettes and finds it "very difficult" not to be tempted to return to the deadly habit.

When asked why he stopped smoking, he replied: "Because it's stupid, no offence ... yes I love it, it's dumb and it will kill you ... It's still a constant struggle, they always say you're an addict and you can never actually stop being a smoker.

"It's a horrible thing, it's a real addiction, very difficult."

The 43-year-old hunk is best known as the latest actor to play James Bond, and while he faced criticism when he was announced to play the iconic British spy in 2006's 'Casino Royale', he insists he doesn't feel "resentful" towards those unhappy with his casting.

When asked if he feels smug about starring as Bond, he told 'The Kyle & Jackie O Show' on 2Day FM: "No, not at all, there's no point is there, I'm not going to dwell on it, we made a good movie, it speaks for itself, I don't need to be resentful, I just get on with my life and be happy.

- <i> poses the question whether we will see his Bond ever smoke... </i> :-?
«134

Comments

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,418
    If he's a smoker anyway, can he please light one up in Bond 23, in honor of Fleming's Bond?

    That said, I've never touched a cig but I bet it's hard to quit. Nicotine is terribly addictive. He really should try and go for the nicotine in one form or another (pills, patches). It's what the body wants and it's no poison in small doses.

    I'm addicted to caffeine. Not a strong addiction but I feel the urges. It takes some guts to quit drinking caffeine holding drinks. On the other hand, in small doses, caffeine has a positive effect on one's cognitive performances and one's mood. Anyway, I bet quitting smoking is more painful than quitting caffeine. The latter requires about a week, often less. I haven't studies the statistics on smoking yet but I guess it takes a little more than that...
  • Posts: 1,856
    @dathdimi NO its just WRONG!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,418
    Eh... What is? Be more specific, please. Four-word posts are not the best way to properly communicate something.
  • Posts: 1,856
    Its Just Not Right in a way one cannot explain, Just morally wrong
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 886
    Well I think the last role he had in Dragon Tattoo didn't help him as his character was a smoker, goodness knows what he'll do when he films the next two films of that trilogy.
    Staying away from smoking roles probably isn't all that hard in films today and doubt whether his Bond will ever light up.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,418
    Its Just Not Right in a way one cannot explain, Just morally wrong
    WHAT is? What are you talking about? Smoking? Explain what you think is morally wrong. We don't know what you're talking about.
  • BondBond 1930—2020
    edited August 2011 Posts: 458
    I don't think Craig should light up in B23. One of the biggest reasons smoking was considered "cool" through the early-to-late 20th century was because of movie characters smoking. Now that films have relegated smoking to insane or homeless characters, it's quickly losing its appeal and thankfully fewer and fewer teenagers are taking up the dangerous habit. Craig's Bond already departs far from the Fleming literary character in enough other ways... not much of a stretch to lack the cigs.
  • Posts: 1,856
    ^ Thats what i mean @DathDimi!
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 19,418
    Ok, well, let's all wish Daniel Craig good luck quitting the habit then. I'm not pro-smoking either, but I wouldn't mind a Bond-with-cig moment in another film. It's not like I'm obsessed about it either, you know. If he doesn't smoke, that's fine with me too. ;;)
  • Posts: 5,634
    I applaud Craig for kicking his nicotine cravings in to touch, damn I wish I was quite so determined, feel like one right now as it happens

    You could count on the fingers of one hand the number of times we saw Bond have a light up ever since the start of filming back in Doctor No and beyond, I remember Dalton could be seen now and again getting the smokes out in his two pictures, even Connery once or twice, Moore favored Cigars but very infrequently

    as someone said before, does it matter if Craig lights up in his next outing, not really, but smoking in bond films now seems uncool some would say

  • What's wrong with a good old pipe?
  • KerimKerim Istanbul Not Constantinople
    Posts: 2,629
    Isn't that what Rachel has been telling Dan?
  • BondBond 1930—2020
    Posts: 458
    I thing cigars are still considered "cool" and okay for popular movie characters, but cigarettes are definitely out. Not sure where pipes fit into the equation, but I think they're seen as too archaic.
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864
    If he's a smoker anyway, can he please light one up in Bond 23, in honor of Fleming's Bond?

    That said, I've never touched a cig but I bet it's hard to quit. Nicotine is terribly addictive. He really should try and go for the nicotine in one form or another (pills, patches). It's what the body wants and it's no poison in small doses.

    I'm addicted to caffeine. Not a strong addiction but I feel the urges. It takes some guts to quit drinking caffeine holding drinks. On the other hand, in small doses, caffeine has a positive effect on one's cognitive performances and one's mood. Anyway, I bet quitting smoking is more painful than quitting caffeine. The latter requires about a week, often less. I haven't studies the statistics on smoking yet but I guess it takes a little more than that...
    Dimi, you're one of the smartest, funniest guys I know, but I can't believe you'd advocate Craig lighting up in 23 because Fleming's Bond smoked.

    We've all had this debate countless times, so I'm not going to go too deeply into it, but suffice to say smoking kills you. It is possibly the biggest killer there is. Craig himself says he's still addicted, despite not smoking. He will probably go through the rest of his life trying to resist the urge to smoke and thereby slowly kill himself.

    I'm an ex-smoker myself. I miss smoking. I loved it. Every time I'm out at a party of a gathering, I want to smoke. Essentially, I crave something that would undoubtedly lead to a prolonged and agonising death.

    So, do you really think Craig will light up in honour of a man who was himself killed prematurely by smoking? Do you really think he will encourage others into an addiction that will kill them, or at best plague them all their days? To quote a certain Russian arms dealer, "I think not."

    I also think it's impossible for you to understand the power of an addiction like nicotine. You compare it to caffeine. Man, I hate to break it to you, but that isn't even close to being as addictive as nicotine. NOT EVEN CLOSE. And coffee is gonna have its side effects, sure, but it is not going to KILL YOU. You have never tried a cigarette, so you don't understand the addiction of the dangers fully. You should be glad of that and you should hope that it stays that way for you and everyone who has never tried smoking.

    Your an educator. You deal with kids everyday, their welfare and their futures. Yet you advocate a role model smoking. Studies have shown that kids emulate their role models, particularly when it comes to smoking. Do you really think that because Fleming wrote that Bond smokes it is worth even one kid getting addicted to smoking, worth even one death? Sure, why not. What's a couple of kids becoming addicted to smoking? What's a couple of deaths? As long as Fleming's character, a character that is rooted in the 50s where understanding of smoking was entirely different, is properly represented, eh?

    Of course people have a choice to smoke or not, but we should not encourage or influence that choice to be pro smoking. If we do, we are complicit in the consequences. They might be playing Russian Roulette, but we'll have loaded the bullet. The film "Thank You For Smoking" advocates choice, but remember that this choice has a billion dollar industry behind it. I know quite a few people who work for British American Tobacco. Guess what they tell me? Despite the dangers, despite all the evidence, people are still smoking.

    Let's not forget that the strain this puts on our already stretched health services and practitioners. Why is the UK government discouraging smoking when it's a massive source of tax revenue for them? Simple. The money they spend looking after those people suffering from smoking related disease and illness is greater than the revenue from tobacco taxes. Far greater.

    I quit smoking nearly a year ago and I still struggle with my addiction. What's worse is that the damage may already have been done. I'll never know. I wish I'd never started, but I will make damn sure that I strongly discourage anyone else from starting.

    So, in short (too late!) I strongly disagree with Bond smoking and I sincerely hope that we will not see Craig (or any other Bond actor in the future) smoking in the films.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,534
    I strongly disagree with Bond smoking and I sincerely hope that we will not see Craig (or any other Bond actor in the future) smoking in the films.
    :-q Sorry.
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864
    I strongly disagree with Bond smoking and I sincerely hope that we will not see Craig (or any other Bond actor in the future) smoking in the films.
    :-q Sorry.
    So you think we should be encouraging people to smoke, do you? What a surprise.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2011 Posts: 15,534
    I strongly disagree with Bond smoking and I sincerely hope that we will not see Craig (or any other Bond actor in the future) smoking in the films.
    :-q Sorry.
    So you think we should be encouraging people to smoke, do you? What a surprise.
    The character should not keep restraining himself to every PC stuff the world keeps inventing. What next ? No car chases because it incites people to drive dangerously ? If we continue listening every PC rubbish, there is no limit to what we and Bond will be forbidden to do.

    And I have never been tempted to smoke when seeing characters smoke on film. I find that utter rubbish that millions of kids would start smoking because Bond would light up a smoke.

    I see you have abandoned your life to the PC society, and will blindly stop doing everything the PC world will tell you not to do anymore.

  • The character should not keep restraining himself to every PC stuff the world keeps inventing. What next ? No car chases because it incites people to drive dangerously ? If we continue listening every PC rubbish, there is no limit to what we and Bond will be forbidden to do.

    And I have never been tempted to smoke when seeing characters smoke on film. I find that utter rubbish that millions of kids would start smoking because Bond would light up a smoke.

    I see you have abandoned your life to the PC society, and will blindly stop doing everything the PC world will tell you not to do anymore.
    DC007, where did Doubleornothing write that he "abandoned (his) life to the PC society, and will blindly stop doing everything the PC world will tell (me) not to do anymore"? These kind of assumptions and taking to the extreme lead to us talking at each other instead of with each other.

    Someone can be very anti-smoking and even not want role models for young boys to smoke and yet still be very un-pc in other ways. It's not an all-or-nothing equation.

    One of the things that we often do is extrapolate our own experiences onto others. You say that you were never tempted to smoke when seeing characters smoke onscreen. But that doesn't mean that others don't. I tried smoking because I thought it would make me look cool like Dalton in TLD. Luckily, I stopped after two weeks largely because I wasn't getting checked out by girls any more than I was before - and I've since come to realize that if you need smoking (or any other "prop") to make you look cool then smoking will not make you look cool...it has to come from within.

    However, I have spoken to many people who *did* start smoking when they were 12, 13, 14, or even older just to copy their heroes like James Bond or others, thinking that it would somehow make them closer to that character. It does have an effect on a certain percentage of young guys which is why there's concern about it. Just because you yourself didn't experience that doesn't mean it isn't a factor - as people have admitted to me it was for them.

  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited August 2011 Posts: 19,418
    Gentleman, my first post in this thread apparently drew first blood in a heated debate I don't wish to see repeated in the immediate future. Let me assure you that I had no intentions to stir things up, offend anyone or, more importantly, promote smoking. I myself campaign vigorously against smoking and when I do, I try nothing less than to impose shock and fear onto those who light up regularly.

    That said, when considering James Bond with a cigarette between his fingers, I tend not to consider the Zeitgeist. Either when reading Fleming or watching the pre-Brosnan Bonds, smoking cannot by avoided. Many of us have stated elsewhere that Connery's introduction as Bond is one of the coolest moments ever. Him lighting the cigarette is not merely part of that moment, it's fundamental in oozing Bond's 'cool'. Lazenby's extreme close-ups at the beginning of OHMSS allow us yet another remarkably detailed visualisation of one of the literary Bond's strongest vices. And while we take a dump on DAD more than often, we mustn't forget that even this film broke through the PC shield by having Brosnan not just smoke a cigar, but on top of that explain that it is a very unhealthy (cancerous?) one.

    My point is that I sometimes forget to consider a Bond film within the moralistic boundaries of its time. And I happen to crave a Bond that dares to go back to Fleming's writings. As such is the case, I figured it might be interesting to see the Craig Bond with a cigarette, not necessarily implying that Bond should suddenly advertise certain cigarette brands. Furthermore, I have no 'strong' desires to see Bond smoke. If it doesn't happen, I won't less enjoy the film for that. I don't find it that important, really. It was perhaps clumsy of me to so overtly advocate Craig lighting one up in Bond 23, when in fact it was more of a 'just a thought' thing for me.

    I am surprised though to find such harsh accusations of me walking around with WRONG and IMMORAL ideas come my way. I refer to Bond lighting a cigarette and suddenly fierce objections pile up like manure near a farmhouse. Yet we constantly groan about how the PC world has all but castrated Bond, how the Bond series should instead break the pattern of being too considerate of all fancy ethical concerns that have permeated our cultural treasures and forced them on their knees, thereby effectively losing their appeal, rendering everything vanilla bland and whatnot. Isn't smoking one of those things? We can condone violence and sex, proudly admitting that good upbringing involves explaining our kids that not everything they see on TV can or should be copied. Yet smoking is out of the question? I honestly think there's a higher risk of a child driving daddy's car at 150 mph in a wild moment of Bond wannabe attitude than of it smoking a cigarette in an attempt to be like Bond. Not everything Bond does is considered cool by our youngsters, trust me. I know quite a few Bond fans who won't wear a tuxedo or even a tie, who won't eat caviar, play cards or golf, or wear polo shirts. Why do we insist then that all TV smoking will inevitably lead to an increase in the habit?

    Once more, please don't misunderstand me as someone who WANTS Bond to smoke. It's not really that essential an element in the world of 007 for me. It's part of it - it used to be anyway - but I wouldn't plead a case for it. I merely think that it would be a bit like salt. Use a little and you enhance the flavours in your meal, use plenty and the meal becomes uneatable. Give Bond the proper time and camera set-up and you could have a cool moment, make him smoke a dozen of cigarettes in one film and you're overdoing it.

    I hope I've made myself sufficiently clear. I respect people's anti-smoking opinion; in the real world I'm much of an anti-smoker myself. But in a Bond film, I find it neither objectionable, when it happens only rarely, nor dangerous in the sense that our impressionable youngsters will suddenly start smoking in large numbers. On the other hand, I don't mind this issue as much as the length of this post may suggest. It's neither a priority for me nor a concern. I will, however, protest against the naive reasoning that a cigarette more or less in a Bond film will make a difference when evidently so many cigarettes get smoked on screen every day and when Bond isn't exactly a saint in other departments either. One last thing, if a ten year old watches DN, then what? Will you tell him that Bond's introduction is the coolest scene ever or spoil the fun and lecture him on the issues regarding smoking? Or better still, will you restrict his access to 007 to only the absolute smoke-free Bonds, in which case we're denying him the pleasure of many of the classics? I'm a trifle confused at how sensitive this thing has become. If you're worried that a kid may pick up smoking from the Bonds, we might as well pray that guns, speeding, loose sexual relationships, alcohol use and other devious forms of misconduct be absent from Bond 23 as well... in which case we might henceforth deny the very existence of Bond to everyone under 21.


  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    If he's a smoker anyway, can he please light one up in Bond 23, in honor of Fleming's Bond?

    That said, I've never touched a cig but I bet it's hard to quit. Nicotine is terribly addictive. He really should try and go for the nicotine in one form or another (pills, patches). It's what the body wants and it's no poison in small doses.

    I'm addicted to caffeine. Not a strong addiction but I feel the urges. It takes some guts to quit drinking caffeine holding drinks. On the other hand, in small doses, caffeine has a positive effect on one's cognitive performances and one's mood. Anyway, I bet quitting smoking is more painful than quitting caffeine. The latter requires about a week, often less. I haven't studies the statistics on smoking yet but I guess it takes a little more than that...
    Dimi, you're one of the smartest, funniest guys I know, but I can't believe you'd advocate Craig lighting up in 23 because Fleming's Bond smoked.

    We've all had this debate countless times, so I'm not going to go too deeply into it, but suffice to say smoking kills you. It is possibly the biggest killer there is. Craig himself says he's still addicted, despite not smoking. He will probably go through the rest of his life trying to resist the urge to smoke and thereby slowly kill himself.

    I'm an ex-smoker myself. I miss smoking. I loved it. Every time I'm out at a party of a gathering, I want to smoke. Essentially, I crave something that would undoubtedly lead to a prolonged and agonising death.

    So, do you really think Craig will light up in honour of a man who was himself killed prematurely by smoking? Do you really think he will encourage others into an addiction that will kill them, or at best plague them all their days? To quote a certain Russian arms dealer, "I think not."

    I also think it's impossible for you to understand the power of an addiction like nicotine. You compare it to caffeine. Man, I hate to break it to you, but that isn't even close to being as addictive as nicotine. NOT EVEN CLOSE. And coffee is gonna have its side effects, sure, but it is not going to KILL YOU. You have never tried a cigarette, so you don't understand the addiction of the dangers fully. You should be glad of that and you should hope that it stays that way for you and everyone who has never tried smoking.

    Your an educator. You deal with kids everyday, their welfare and their futures. Yet you advocate a role model smoking. Studies have shown that kids emulate their role models, particularly when it comes to smoking. Do you really think that because Fleming wrote that Bond smokes it is worth even one kid getting addicted to smoking, worth even one death? Sure, why not. What's a couple of kids becoming addicted to smoking? What's a couple of deaths? As long as Fleming's character, a character that is rooted in the 50s where understanding of smoking was entirely different, is properly represented, eh?

    Of course people have a choice to smoke or not, but we should not encourage or influence that choice to be pro smoking. If we do, we are complicit in the consequences. They might be playing Russian Roulette, but we'll have loaded the bullet. The film "Thank You For Smoking" advocates choice, but remember that this choice has a billion dollar industry behind it. I know quite a few people who work for British American Tobacco. Guess what they tell me? Despite the dangers, despite all the evidence, people are still smoking.

    Let's not forget that the strain this puts on our already stretched health services and practitioners. Why is the UK government discouraging smoking when it's a massive source of tax revenue for them? Simple. The money they spend looking after those people suffering from smoking related disease and illness is greater than the revenue from tobacco taxes. Far greater.

    I quit smoking nearly a year ago and I still struggle with my addiction. What's worse is that the damage may already have been done. I'll never know. I wish I'd never started, but I will make damn sure that I strongly discourage anyone else from starting.

    So, in short (too late!) I strongly disagree with Bond smoking and I sincerely hope that we will not see Craig (or any other Bond actor in the future) smoking in the films.
    Ceaser's ghost you can talk. I get where you're coming from but please, such rants as yours degenerate into something that its not trying to be and that is, it becomes laughable.
    Bond is a fictional hired killer, an assassin. He's not slapping handcuffs on the big baddies, he's executing his pap paps and sending them off to sleep and you want to talk about the adverse impacts of cigarettes?? What about the ever growing gun culture? What about the ever growing rate of unprotected sex with multiple partners that result in unplanned, unwanted and even teenage pregnancies? What about the ever growing threat of STIs?
    Its easy to blame other people for the problems we face but the reality is, the Bond movies aren't infinitely obligated to serve as some sort of moral or ethical source by which free-thinking societies who have the flexibility to make their own decisions should base or pattern their own actions on.
    Any educated person should know the basic risks of smoking, God knows there are enough campaigns that drill it down societies throats to substantiate that but if they don't have guns pointed to their heads, forcing them to smoke then where lies the problem? Surely, one of the challenges to overcome addiction is to also overcome temptation. There are many alternative supplements and support groups but again it comes down to making the choice to do something about it instead of blasting movies for having certain characters light up. I've watched many movies in my life time but never have I ever felt the urge to go out and intentionally hurt people in any physical capacity just because my heroes may do so even if it is for the greater good.
    I say all this speaking as an ex smoker who gave up for the simple reason that my health is important to me and the fact that I'm a strong-willed person who refuses to be beaten by some nicotine stick. It's down to choice, my choice and I won and am still winning. If other people choose to smoke it's because they've chosen to, don't shift the blame elsewhere, it's pathetic and an obvious sign of fundamental weakness. There's no point in complaining about something you have the power or the opportunity to change. If Bond lights up or doesn't light up I'm not bothered because I know what my reality is, maybe it's time for people like you to cash in that reality cheque instead of keeping it tucked away under your mattress.
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 886
    May I ask for a little more calm in this thread? I realise this is a touchy subject for many but let's not have it degenerate into roll-ur-own/nicotine patch slinging.
    I, and no doubt a few more, would appreciate it. Many thanks! :-D

    Personally I can't see Craig's Bond ever lighting up, way too much pressure on the studios, would I like Bond too? Yes, but do I condone smoking? No, but I certainly don't force my views onto others. If they want to smoke and cough up a lung, please go ahead but do so away from my nostrils/lungs.
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    @Darthdimi, why are you apologising? You have an opinion and others have there's. It will of course stir up conflicting opinions but that is the point of these forums. Also, millions of people smoke, they can moan till they're blue in the face but at the end of the day, it's not as if the help or the choice of options to give up aren't there. Hell, the packs even come with gruesome health warnings. The hypocrisy of some people is almost entertaining in itself but what ever, if you want to see Bond smoke, that's your choice and not something you should be ashamed of or have to apologise for. It's absurd.
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 2,509
    Yeah I wish Craig would light up a cigarette. I would stand up and cheer. He never will though. If he did I'd be more surprised than if we actually got a good film!

    Later this month I will have gone 2 years without a ciggy but I still suck on the nicorette inhaler that I love. I can suck on it anywhere. It's in my mouth right at this minute. Damn nicotine! I'm dependent on the inhaler but not the cigs anymore and it aint doing any damage to my health. It's the chemicals in a smoke that kill you not the nicotine. The latter is just the addictive element. I make a pack of 42 cartridges last a month so I don't spend that much at all.
  • Yeah I wish Craig would light up a cigarette. I would stand up and cheer. He never will though. If he did I'd be more surprised than if we actually got a good film!

    Later this month I will have gone 2 years without a ciggy but I still suck on the nicorette inhaler that I love. I can suck on it anywhere. It's in my mouth right at this minute. Damn nicotine! I'm dependent on the inhaler but not the cigs anymore and it aint doing any damage to my health. It's the chemicals in a smoke that kill you not the nicotine. The latter is just the addictive element. I make a pack of 42 cartridges last a month so I don't spend that much at all.
    Congrats on the two years! :)

  • Later this month I will have gone 2 years without a ciggy but I still suck on the nicorette inhaler that I love. I can suck on it anywhere. It's in my mouth right at this minute. Damn nicotine! I'm dependent on the inhaler but not the cigs anymore and it aint doing any damage to my health. It's the chemicals in a smoke that kill you not the nicotine. The latter is just the addictive element. I make a pack of 42 cartridges last a month so I don't spend that much at all.
    I'm a huge anti-smoker, even more so after watching two friends die long, agonizing deaths from lung cancer, but I always say I have no problem with cigarettes per se. It's cigarettes that are ADDICTIVE and CAUSE CANCER that I have a problem with.

    The best solution I ever heard to the "smoking kills" problem is to regulate the amount of nicotine and carcinogenic elements in cigarettes and lower the legal limit every year by 2-4%. It's a small enough change that the body doesn't start jonesing but after a generation you have non-addictive, safe cigarettes. That way anyone who smokes does it because they want to, not because they HAVE to and they won't kill themselves by doing so.

  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles Moderator
    Posts: 864

    Ceaser's ghost you can talk. I get where you're coming from but please, such rants as yours degenerate into something that its not trying to be and that is, it becomes laughable.
    Bond is a fictional hired killer, an assassin. He's not slapping handcuffs on the big baddies, he's executing his pap paps and sending them off to sleep and you want to talk about the adverse impacts of cigarettes?? What about the ever growing gun culture? What about the ever growing rate of unprotected sex with multiple partners that result in unplanned, unwanted and even teenage pregnancies? What about the ever growing threat of STIs?
    Its easy to blame other people for the problems we face but the reality is, the Bond movies aren't infinitely obligated to serve as some sort of moral or ethical source by which free-thinking societies who have the flexibility to make their own decisions should base or pattern their own actions on.
    Any educated person should know the basic risks of smoking, God knows there are enough campaigns that drill it down societies throats to substantiate that but if they don't have guns pointed to their heads, forcing them to smoke then where lies the problem? Surely, one of the challenges to overcome addiction is to also overcome temptation. There are many alternative supplements and support groups but again it comes down to making the choice to do something about it instead of blasting movies for having certain characters light up. I've watched many movies in my life time but never have I ever felt the urge to go out and intentionally hurt people in any physical capacity just because my heroes may do so even if it is for the greater good.
    I say all this speaking as an ex smoker who gave up for the simple reason that my health is important to me and the fact that I'm a strong-willed person who refuses to be beaten by some nicotine stick. It's down to choice, my choice and I won and am still winning. If other people choose to smoke it's because they've chosen to, don't shift the blame elsewhere, it's pathetic and an obvious sign of fundamental weakness. There's no point in complaining about something you have the power or the opportunity to change. If Bond lights up or doesn't light up I'm not bothered because I know what my reality is, maybe it's time for people like you to cash in that reality cheque instead of keeping it tucked away under your mattress.
    Okay, for starters, this forum is a place to express opinion. To my knowledge, there isn't a word cap. Your own response isn't that much shorter than my post, so I'm not really sure what your problem is. You seem to be angry with me for simply writing. Perhaps it's because I use capitals and punctuation that it was a bit off putting. I wasn't ranting, I was expressing a point of view and doing so by putting forward concise points.

    Anyway, you ask (albeit rhetorically) why I should talk about cigarettes when Bond is a hired assassin. The answer is that studies have proven that people, particularly young people, start smoking when they see heroes in movies smoking. They do not generally take up killing other people for money.

    You ask why I don't address gun culture, STis or unprotected sex with multiple partners. Well, Gun culture isn't as prevalent in the UK as it is in the States, but even there guns aren't as big a killer as smoking. Neither are STis.

    You rightly point out that people need to be free to make their own decisions and that films like Bond don't have an obligation to dictate some kind of moral responsibility. However, when studies have proven that people are far more likely to take up smoking if they see a protagonist in a film doing so, then I have to disagree. If we can prove that there is a direct link, then surely there is a degree of moral responsibility. Especially as having Bond smoke isn't essential. If you want Bond to smoke, go watch Dr. No or read Casino Royale.

    Yes, any educated person knows the risks, but even educated people ignore them. As an educated person who knows the risks yourself, you must surely want to discourage people from smoking? Saying "M'eh, they know what they're in for" is ignoring the fact that the psychology of smoking doesn't work like that.

    Anyway, I've said what I wanted to say. I'm sorry you disagree, but you are entitled to your opinion. Just as I'm entitled to mine.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2011 Posts: 15,534
    @doubleonothing, when you have kids, will you tell them that the original Bond intro in DN is the most iconic character intro in history, or will you ruin their experience with a moral explanation on why smoking is bad ?
  • Posts: 5,634
    I smoked just recently, everyone is aware of the risks it entails, but it's peoples choice, same with drinking, could you imagine for arguments sake in Goldeneye just before Brosnan leaps off the dam, some guy appears out of nowhere - 'sorry, Mr Bond, you can't do that, it's dangerous etc'

    If nobody wants to drink, or smoke it's their decision. Each to the own and all that

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited August 2011 Posts: 15,534
    There will come a time where anti-smoking morals will be so important, that Connery's cigarette in DN will be digitally edited out. It has happened to many iconic characters before. Will you also agree to that, @doubleonothing ? Are you so against Bond smoking, and smoking in general, that previous outings should be edited to remove every occurence of Bond smoking ?
  • Posts: 5,634
    Bond could get away with smoking in Doctor No or even as recent as License to kill, or the audience wouldn't object or think nothing of it

    maybe one day in the not too distant future they will abolish drinking any liquor for bond and instead of Vodka Martinis it will be just Ice Water or a herbal tea for 007

    so what if Bond smokes, Craigs given up anyway, so it's doubtful any such instances will see the light of day in the next feature

Sign In or Register to comment.