ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

11 years, 3 months ago - Marlom Tander

I have no idea what price various brands are. I doubt that many non smokers know much more than "proper cuban cigars are expensive".

In fact I've just done a quick run through of brands I can name off the top of my head.

Woodbine, Camel, Marlboro, Bensen and Hedges, Silk Cut, John Player. That's it, Their price points? Absolutely no idea, though I'd guess that Woodbines and Camels are cheaper than the others, none of them strike me as an expensive or premium item.

11 years, 3 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin

Festival curators are a funny bunch, but rest assured all will accept your submission fees without qualms. If you're picky or considerate about who you submit to, you're likely fine. If you submit to the emphysema charitable film festival they may find it unsuitable. Legally your biggest hurdle would be if any of the brands thought you were painting them in a worse light than they're already in, but that would have to be petty specific I suspect. More specific and disparaging than 'this product will kill you', which is tough.

11 years, 3 months ago - Tim Keeling

Just wondering about the legalities here. Thanks.

11 years, 3 months ago - Tim Keeling

Thanks Paddy.

I won't hold my breath on the emphysema festival.

11 years, 3 months ago - Marlom Tander

Legalities re use of brands are simple - you can use the brand names. It only becomes a legal matter of the brand owner decides to to make it one.

But festivals/distributors/tv channels etc are nervous beasts, so that's why most film makers follow standard rules - no logos, lots of releases - when filming. So as not to give them a spurious reason for rejection.

If your movie is rejected because of the brands, any claim that the use of brands presents legal difficulties is tosh, (so long as you are not libellous). What they mean is, "it would be theoretically possible for the brand owner to injunct/seek damages and frankly, we can't be arsed to take a view as to whether or not existing case law would support the brand owner, so we'll just decline the film."

11 years, 3 months ago - Marlom Tander

20% of brits smoke. 80%, inc me, don't. I think that any character message that is dependent on brand of cigarette will be missed by the majority of your audience. So I wouldn't talk brands.

11 years, 3 months ago - Marlom Tander

What does work for non smokers is the TYPE of smoke - cig, roll up, pipe, little cigar, big cigar, and maybe it's container - beaten up pack, neat and tidy pack, ciggie case.

E.g. "Fade in, rough cottage bedroom. A couple in bed, obviously having just finished having sex. She flips open her delicate silver filligree ciggarette case, while he picks a battered rollup from the bedside ash tray." You've instantly set the audience up for a story that hinges on their relative status, even if the audience are all non smokers :-) And all done by tobacco choice and set, before a single word has been spoken.

11 years, 3 months ago - Tim Keeling

The characterisation is through the price point of a given brand. I'm attaching meaning through how much they're willing to spend. Fictitious brands in that sense could work so long as their fictitiousness did not draw attention to itself.

thanks all.

11 years, 3 months ago - David Roberts

I agree with Marlom Tander and Andrew Morgan. Why not use fake names that describe the characteristic of the cigarette as well as the character? I would have thought a lot of people aren't going to know Marlboro Red is a rough as fuck but if you have a brand called "Death Valley" or something like that they might have more of a clue.

11 years, 3 months ago - Andrew Morgan

So you're not showing smoking but mentioning real cigarette brands? Hmm... personally I'd avoid it - typically movies/TV shows use fictional brands of cigarettes since they don't want to be seen to be 'endorsing' them. The only legal implications you're opening yourself to are from the brands themselves who most likely won't know or care about what you're doing - but why take the chance? Is it that vital to your script?

11 years, 3 months ago - janus avivson

forget it man, the anti-smokers league is crazy, smoking kills and that's it. By the way Mr Hitler was a fanatical anti-smoker.
I think that if you do it you ruin your chances for exposure. Why not discuss a carrot juice versus oranges?

11 years, 3 months ago - Tim Keeling

Thanks Marlom.