Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
Alderman Brendan Reilly (42nd) really is the bad boy of City Council: Not only does he flout Mayor Daley's wishes, but he also smokes! He even believes the smoking ban was never "intended to limit artistic expression. It would be wise for us to ... allow theater productions to obtain a special waiver when smoking is a critical component of their performance." While Reilly wants the cast of Jersey Boys to be able to light up, as scripted, Alderman Ed Smith (28th) disagrees, and the council specifically did not approve an exemption to the ban for live theater.
So now we're wondering: What about TV shows or movies filmed in Chicago? (The Trib's Chris Jones is wondering about that, too.)
As far as we can tell, the Smoke Free Illinois Act does not make exemptions for "fake" or herbal cigarettes. The law says "'Smoke' or 'smoking' means the carrying, smoking, burning,
inhaling, or exhaling of any kind of lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette, hookah, weed, herbs, or any other lighted smoking equipment." So, for example, in a movie about let's hypothetically say Chess Records, and by hypothetically I mean its opposite, if interior shots are going to be filmed in Chicago, no one can smoke? All those famous smoke-free jazz clubs from the 1950s?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Such BS. This is like someone complaining about nudity on statues and suddenly putting a Speedo on David. "It's illegal in public why not on art?" ARG.
Many of this city's smoking restrictions seem to be devoid of any common sense. Geez...New York and LA have had smoking bans for years? Are actors prevented from smoking there?
I've said it before...and I say it again now. When are the people of this community going to rise up and say "ENOUGH ALREADY!?"
100 years from now, people will look at us & wonder why we ever let people poison others with their cancer sticks.
If the movie people want this crap in a movie, that's what CGI was invented for.
@Scooter Libbby
Oh, come on, I support the smoking ban, but clearly there needs to be an artistic exemption - maybe ONLY allowing herbal cigs... I've smoked one for a theater production, and they smell and taste terrible, but look like the real thing.
You can't just pretent, especially in historical pieces, than no one does or ever did smoke. You can't CGI into a play. Indie filmmakers can't CGI at all. I'm all for eliminating second-hand smoke, but let's be honest: there's a difference between art and life.
Are you joking? How fucking stupid.
@Scooter Libbby
You're an idiot.
Lets just go ahead and outlaw everything that has the potential to cause harm?
-Smoking
-Drinking
-loud Music - "I hear loud music in clubs and concerts may harm your hearing. Better get rid of it."
-Cars, Buses - It's rumored the fumes from these can cause all kinds of health problems, not to mention if you get hit by one."
-Fast Food
And the list goes on and on...
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences."
C.S. Lewis
At first read of the headline, I thought this article would be speaking along the lines of Movie studios losing money.
And by losing money, I mean, that movies in the future, were going to be made shorter in length because too many people were looking at times of movies (60 minutes, 90 minutes, etc) and going, 'Fuck, I can't go that long without a cigarette! Let's wait until it comes out on DVD and rent it."
Ha ha