Why do they keep pushing the boundaries and keep forcing me to write stuff like this? Is there some sort of conspiracy to somehow force me to become the posterboy against political correctness gone mad or is it just some sort of illusion of grandeur on my part? Regardless, I present to you the latest bafflingly interventionist nonsense courtesy of the BMA, brought to my attention by Monsieur Bergs.

You may or may not be aware of the recent film detailing the life and times of Coco Chanel, the icon of the fashion world entitled “Coco before Chanel”. Now, I’m not going to comment on the film as a whole as I haven’t seen it and, quite frankly, have no real wish to see it barring the detail that the lead role is played by the same girl that place Amélie in the film of the same name. (I quite like her – she’s a good actress and attractive to boot.) However, I do have to comment on the blatant censorship involved in the film’s posters. Regard:

Original film poster
Edited film poster [1]
Edited film poster [2]

You don’t have to be an expert at spot the difference to be able to judge what has gone amiss. What’s even more infuriating is that this isn’t just some poor photoshop job (the pen one, admittedly, is very well done but still not more permissable) but the actual edited poster. In the words of the BMA: “Film stars who smoke on screen should attract the attention of the censor in the same way as they would if they were engaged in extreme sex or violence”. Alright, so most people in today’s day and age would agree that smoking is damaging to your health and should not be condoned. However, I’m also a stickler for historical accuracy and – guess what? - people smoked in the days of Coco Chanel. Coco died in 1971, long before smoking was popularly lambasted as a cause of cancer and many people smoked in those days. Hell, while we’re at it should we remove the drinking and swearing from the film as well, lest we all turn into potty-mouthed alcoholics. If nothing else, it just looks plain silly. For example, regard Coco sans cigarette and instead appearing to be doing a poor impression of the Queen:



Reductio ad absurdum, you may cry. But I regard this as a serious step. I agree with not being able to smoke inside and not being able to advertise for cigarettes, though an attempt to completely remove them from the past is stupid. Ought we go back and remaster Casablanca to remove the cigarettes as well? What about Breakfast at Tiffany’s? Both are iconic, the latter perhaps specifically for the shot of Ms Hepburn with a cigarette in hand.

Whilst we’re at it, a related point: I’m fairly sure that, given the end of the world, someone somewhere will swear at one point or another. Call it a foolish hunch if you will, though I’m pretty certain there would be the odd cuss word floating about as an asteroid or nuclear bomb headed towards earth. I digress, though. Smoking may not be condonable, but that certainly doesn’t make it editable. Let’s put a bit of money into schools and start teaching common sense, shall we? Just because it happens on the big screen doesn’t mean it should happen in real life. I would have thought that the veritable lack of supervillains might have taught us that.

Gaz out.

[Source for the BMA: http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/storymf00261.htm ]