A Response to “Thank You for Smoking” (2005)
Taylor Nettle
Comm 270-Summer 2022
Bonus Point Film Review
Jun. 27, 2022
“Thank You for Smoking” is a story of the struggle to withhold personal ethics and ideals that are and how they are disregarded in the real world. Where is the fine line drawn between someone being morally flexible until it is unethical? The movie explores a different side to an industry of harmful products like cigarettes and most importantly, what goes into selling them. Following a chief spokesperson and lobbyist, who happens to be the Vice President of the Academy of Tobacco Studies, “Thank You For Smoking” introduces Nick Naylor as the protagonist.
Nick Naylor has several ethical downfalls. He is not necessarily concerned with the safety of what he’s promoting, but just that it succeeds. This is because in Naylor’s mind the success of the product is money for himself and his family, not a representation of his own personal ethics. He has very selfish personal ethics, often not thinking about those around him or the public. Naylor has no issue stretching the truth and constructing falsities to whatever it was he needed to sell. “Thank You For Smoking” stands out as it takes a satirical approach to reveal the dark side of humanity. The film attacks such a heavy topic with light-hearted humor and successfully touches on the ethical views of the audience through jokes in the dialogue and scenes that pull at the viewers' heartstrings and make them ethically think about a situation.
A memorable phrase in this movie is “paying the mortgage”. The phrase “paying the mortgage” is also used as a justification for manipulation and unethical actions done by characters, such as the Marlboro Man accepting the money, Heather Holloway seducing Nick Naylor to retrieve full coverage to report on, and Nick Naylor for working so hard to market something so harmful and deny to the public that it is unsafe. When these characters do something unethical they refer to “paying the mortgage” meaning that whatever unethical action they take is done to pay off whatever they may consider their personal “debt” and help them succeed. These characters and their actions are perfect examples of the poor personal ethics of several characters in this film.
The use of film grain is used several times throughout the movie to show the passing of time from the Hollywood perspective and the spread of news and branding. The dialogue of the whole film remains mostly satirical and sarcastic. The scenes where Nick Naylor was using his “bullshitting” skills to convince someone of what he was trying to say or do are all shot with several cutaways, quick cuts in editing between shots, and the dialogue was delivered quicker to show the urgency of persuasion on Naylor’s behavior. Every second when persuading someone must be taken advantage of, Nick Naylor portrays this perfectly by never letting the person he’s persuading realize they’re being persuaded. The significant moments that changed the direction of the film or characters often lacked dialogue and used quick edits between shots to show how fast word traveled from the news. For example, Holloway’s article about Naylor and the time spent on a CU with a zoom shows true contemplation of the character’s values like Nick Naylor in the courtroom as the Senator asked him questions.
Overall, this film was enjoyable to watch because of the witty dialogue and satirical style, and also because it handles a side of humanity often ignored. This film shows the ugly side of humanity and acts as a call to action for viewers to self-evaluate themselves and their personal ethics. The film also shows the character development of personal ethics in the protagonist Nick Naylor. For example, the questions Nick Naylor is asked in the courtroom towards the end of the movie are shot in a very specific way to show Nick Naylor contemplating his personal ethics and morals and leaving viewers hoping that Naylor finally chooses the morally right thing to do. By leaving such long pauses in the dialogue and edits, along with the use of extreme close-up shots with slow-scale movements on them, the suspense and importance of the answers build. This scene shows how Naylor grew in personal ethics, along with his denial of the job at the end of the movie. This leaves the audience with a refreshment of the personal ethics of the characters and provokes the thought for them to review their own personal morals.
