Thank You for Smoking movie review

Thank You for Smoking movie review

Introduction

The movie “Thank You for Smoking” is basically about the jobs and the action of the significant character of the play, Nick Naylor (Aaron Eckhart). The movies by Christopher Buckley is based on an absurd novel which travesties on the government of America and the lobby system that is seen to be thriving on it. It follows Nick Mayors which is the spokesman for the powerful tobacco lobby group as he rises to media stardom whose result In the from kidnapping attempt before becoming embroiled in the massive conspiracy of the Washington (Buckley, 25).  Nicks work is to acknowledge the people of the research and the real outcome of the study on the effects of the cigarettes. The company he defends is financed mainly by the other organization of Tobacco, and they do have a claim to have no defective association between smoking d the significant diseases. What they are actually involved in is speak on behalf of the cigarettes (Reitman, 18).  Nick’s primary role is focusing on the promotion as well as encouraging the use of cigarettes in order to continue gaining more financial gain from the companies for the company that he works for. As a result, he retaliate that everyone has their individuals freedom of making choices of whatever they wish to explore. This elicits the question; Is the government of the country is against the use of Tobacco? If so, why does it appear different?

The movie relays one of the most controversial views over the truth in most countries across the world. The employees of the Tobacco industry, shareholders, tobacco farmers, and environmentalist, public hath organization and the government all know the tobacco use is very harmful to human health. The users are subjected to a lot of health-related problems. Despite this knowledge being with all these groups, there is no conclusive theory in making the proving of the universal truth surrounding this issue (Buonanno et al., 15). The critical question again is; why is it happening? The movie here depicts that various organization such an Academy of Tobacco are sin and get financed by the tobacco companies. This is a real irony. It, therefore, means that the tobacco academy is not so committed to having a Tobacco-free country at all. There is no doubt that organization such as the tobacco academy in the movie is just about showing the public an image of goodwill and not helping the people who are directly affected by the use of Tobacco. In addition to this, the academy acts as the principal weapon to them, giving them the power of claiming that research and science did fail to find any harmful effect of Tobacco use. The truth is that this is likely to increase the level of consumption of Tobacco and in the long run, increase the detrimental impact of Tobacco.

According to the Movie, the academy of Tobacco and the various agencies such as the government which we expect to be working on the element of ensuring the people protected against the negative impacts of Tobacco are the same group which are encouraging the use of the tobacco use by supporting the Tobacco companies.  There is the greater conspiracy in the real case as the organization formed to research and come up with recommendations of the mean of reducing the effects of Tobacco through discouraging its use is seen to be financed by the Tobacco companies.  This, therefore, has a meaning that the way on Tobacco is not real. The film brings about the satirical aspects through images selectively used to send a picture of the dangers of smoking. This is portrayed by the character, Nick, as he walks through the journey of life, exposed the more damaging aspects of his work. Reitman presents the issue of exploits of the tobacco industry’s fundamental spokesman (Buonanno et al., 35).

The actual claim of choice is first put forward by Nick Naylor. He is the chief spokesperson and the vice-president of the Tobacco Studies Academy. He is defending the cigarette industry during the situations when the effects of smoke have gone beyond the safety of livings organisms and especially humanity. He claims a choice that everyone has the Freedom of choosing to use whatever they like. Nick Naylor is tasked with the responsibility of spinning the truth behind the research carried out by the company going out in public more so social media such as television question other heath related problems questioning then and advocating for the personal choices. No tobacco organization will try to find flaws and defects in their product. This claim of opportunity that is made by Nick Naylor and other characters in the play and this is not honest (Reitman, 38). The same organization and the urgencies which are supposed to serve the interest of the people to reduce the effect of tobacco use is not influencing the same right choice that people are supposed to make. The claim of choice expressed in the films is not genuine since the actual decision should be affected by the bodies and the other authorities that are a response to this. The government need to inform the people choice towards the use of Tobacco by regulating the use of the same substance. This is not seen happening here (Buckley, 45).

Conclusion

The movie “Thank You for Smoking” as the name suggests is a literal case of how much the government appears to be appreciating and ensuring the consumption of Tobacco. With the higher conspiracy being on the real commitment of the government and the bodies of the other towards the reduced tobacco use expressed in the story, much is happening behind what people do see.  In the film, Nick even goes to LA intending to pitch the cigarettes placement Idea to Jeff Megall, a movie mogul and who loves the idea and is committed to supporting the lousy Idea he is a show of how such influential people are not committed to achieving a reduced use of tobacco use. Reitman also argues about how Nick Naylor appears in the media to protect tobacco companies against the issue of cancer; whereby victims, liberal politicians, and concerned mothers relate it with tobacco smoking. The movie shows how Nick tries to remain a good role model for his young son while using spin tactics to lobby on behalf of cigarettes. All this happens at the face of the government without any other position. The film is a demonstration of the reality that occurs in most countries in dealing with tobacco use and other harmful products. The government which is seemed to be helping its people from the adverse impact of these products does typically very little in ensuring that the actual truth is achieved