Herbal Cigarettes on Stage

[CurtainsUpat8]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 10:27am

I have seen several shows recently, most recently These Paper Bullets, where the characters smoke. They used Herbal Cigarettes and always put that in the program or there is a board as you walk in with the information. I don't get it. You can still smell the herbal smoke in the audience and they are as strong as a tobacco cigarette. I don't think they are "healthier" than tobacco cigarettes for the actors or the audience, so why don't they just use tobacco cigarettes? I guess herbal cigarettes might be a sweeter smell, but it still smells like smoke. As a former smoker, I would rather them just smoke a tobacco cigarette. I don't see the difference.

[LarryD2]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 10:37am

The use of tobacco products in any public, contained space is illegal in New York. Thus, herbal cigarettes. It has nothing to do with the smell.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 10:37am

It's not just about the audience, it's the actors.  Likely an AEA issue.  Tobacco contains a powerful addictive drug, nicotine. Herbal cigarettes do not.  I don't believe producers could demand an actor smoke an addictive substance even once (for a film) let alone eight times a week.  Real cigarettes are not used in TV -- "Mad Men" -- or film for the same reason (SAG-AFTRA weighs in).  I do know that Liev Shrieber had special dispensation for "Talk Radio" on b'way, and the use of (real) tobacco smoke was posted at the box office. (OT: I hear he has sense quite smoking, as many parents do.)

Updated On: 12/29/15 at 10:37 AM

[CurtainsUpat8]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 10:46am

After I googled I found Herbal cigarettes are not addictive in the sense that they don't contain nicotine. Here is what one site said.

Toxins

Nicotine is not the only dangerous substance in cigarettes. Cigarette smoke contains tar and other toxins, and herbal cigarettes also generate tar, carbon monoxide and other toxic materials as they burn. You do not get addicted to herbal cigarettes, but you face health risks from the toxins for as long as you continue to smoke them.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 1:38pm

Some shows might be better if they used pot . It might help. 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 2:06pm

The note in the On the Town playbill stated that the actors were using e-cigarettes. Why isn't everyone using those now? Assuming they are nicotine free, wouldn't the vapor be less harmful than the herbal cigarette smoke?

[billyelliotfan123]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 2:38pm

Actually electronic cigarettes are just as harmful because they cause pneumonia and the ingredients used to flavor it eats away at your lungs leaving holes

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 2:55pm

I've heard of actors refusing to smoke at all on stage and they simply hold a fake cigarette and mimic the motions. 

I once saw Agnes of God in a TINY store-front blackbox and the actress chain smoked throughout the entire play. Half the audience spent the show coughing and fanning their faces and the poor actress could barely speak by the end. I know it says she chain smokes in the script, but it was still rather annoying.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 3:02pm

I've seen a bunch of shows with these too, they don't bother me as an audience member. 

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 3:09pm

They're definitely not as annoying as actual cigarettes, which are like boarding an express train to Sinus Headache Mountain.

Updated On: 12/29/15 at 03:09 PM

[xxdrewboy85xx]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 3:34pm

I direct a lot of shows in black box and store-front theater's and have had quite a few shows with cigarettes needing to be smoked. Because of the realism of the scripts and the close proximity the actors are to the audience, using fake cigarettes is not an option. 

 

There are many companies that make herbal non tobacco cigarettes like Ecstacy and Honey-Rose. They are made with different blends of herbs. For example Honey-Rose uses a blend of honey, Rosemary, and marshmallow. Ecstacy has ones that try and resemble the taste of actual cigarettes if they actor is a smoker and prefers that. I always let the actor pick what flavor they prefer.

 

When I directed Annie Baker's   The Aliens,  The actor playing Jasper was a smoker and smoked reds so we got him Ecstacy Reds. The actor playing Evan was a non smoker and an 18 year old high school senior, and he preferred Honey-Rose and didn't fully inhale. 

 

The smell (and taste from what I've been told) is not pleasant but smells more like burning paper to myself. The main difference (well aside from no tobacco or nicotine) is the smoke doesn't linger as long and the smell doesn't stick to the space, fabrics, costumes, etc. . Actually, the actor playing Jasper started sneaking in his real cigarettes one performance thinking I wouldn't notice, but I did and flipped out. His excuse was that the audience was complaining about the herbal cigarettes and "everyone prefers the smell of the real ones".... Right.

 

Honey-Rose actually makes fake marijuana that looks and smells (kind of)  like real marijuana which is great for plays that have weed smoking in black box spaces!

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 4:26pm

xxdrewboy85xx said: "I direct a lot of shows in black box and store-front theater's and have had quite a few shows with cigarettes needing to be smoked. Because of the realism of the scripts and the close proximity the actors are to the audience, using fake cigarettes is not an option. 

"

Sounds like bull to me. Give your audience more credit. I'm sure they are capable of suspending their disbelief over something as trivial as a fake cigarette, even in a tiny storefront theatre.

I have no problem worth smoking herbal cigarettes in a play if that is the row everyone involved decides to take, but don't tell me that the realism of the script combined with the theatre size demands it. 

[CurtainsUpat8]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 4:31pm

I hate to say it but I agree that it does take away from the realism. It's like the politically correct version of a cigarette. It makes a difference. It pulls me out of the play. Why are they smoking herbal cigarettes? I ask myself. If a character is smoking, just let them use a damn cigarette, unless the actor doesn't want to. That's just my opinion.

[xxdrewboy85xx]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 4:51pm

 

"Sounds like bull to me. Give your audience more credit. I'm sure they are capable of suspending their disbelief over something as trivial as a fake cigarette, even in a tiny storefront theatre."

 

Speaking for myself, I do give my audiences credit. Never underestimate the intelligence of your audience; which is why I personally put so much attention to detail in even the smallest moments. With Annie Baker for instance, her plays are so realistic in the dialogue and characters that every "um", "like" and pause is important. When working in black boxes its about transforming the space into the world and the audience are like voyeurs watching real people converse.

 

An actor uses a smart phone to make a phone call and let's say leave a voicemail.... That actor is actually calling someone (usually on the SM team) with the name stored as the character they're calling. The  light from the phone that shines on their face is important to me as is the screen going black when it hits their ear. One person in the audience may be able to see the screen and tell if they're fake dialing or able to read the contact name. Maybe 5 people are close enough to hear the voicemail on the phone. Same with reading-- I wouldn't have someone "fake reading" a bunch of scribbles, they are actually reading the words they speaking. To me it's more believable and you can tell by the direction their eyes move when reading. 

 

But that's just me.... I'm pretty stubborn. I may not give as much attention to detail in a 800 seat proscenium auditorium or subtle actions when playing to the back of the house. It's like with the thread about rat in "Curious Incident..." Not everyone could see that the rat was real but for those that could it was important. I for one, sitting dead center in the front row of the mezzanine for that show (best seat in the house) would have been taken out of the moment if I could tell the rat was fake. 

 

[actorsnonactors]

Posted: 12/29/15 at 10:30pm

You could fill an e-cig with a nicotine-free liquid and basically be smoking steam. It would look fine, and contain no carcinogens or other secondary toxins.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 12/30/15 at 4:46am

Auggie27 said: "It's not just about the audience, it's the actors.  Likely an AEA issue.  Tobacco contains a powerful addictive drug, nicotine. Herbal cigarettes do not.  I don't believe producers could demand an actor smoke an addictive substance even once (for a film) let alone eight times a week.  Real cigarettes are not used in TV -- "Mad Men" -- or film for the same reason (SAG-AFTRA weighs in).  I do know that Liev Shrieber had special dispensation for "Talk Radio" on b'way, and the use of (real) tobacco smoke was posted at the box office. (OT: I hear he has sense quite smoking, as many parents do.)

 

Why would Shrieber have special dispensation? I have seen Broadway performers in and around the theatre district (specially on two show days) having a smoke. Yet, they are in a show that uses herbal cigarettes. Hell, a couple of years back I was outside the Music Box after a performance of August. Amy Mortan came out and asked to borrow my light. When I did and she lit up, she had this look of extreme happiness. After complementing her on her performance I asked if she was allowed to smoke a real cigarette onstage. She said that there are rules in place that don't allow that to happen, mostly union. 

Also, the smoke that comes out of an herbal cigarette is much more lighter than a regular one. Regular cigarette smoke is much less thick than herbal cigs. I think that if they did use real ones, the smell would be more potent and travel farther than herbal cigarettes. You'd be able to smell throughout the theatre. You only really notice the smell of herbal cigarettes if you're in the first couple of rows. 

 

[LarryD2]

Posted: 12/30/15 at 7:33am

Why would Shrieber have special dispensation? I have seen Broadway performers in and around the theatre district (specially on two show days) having a smoke. Yet, they are in a show that uses herbal cigarettes.

 

As I said in my initial post, this is a cut-and-dry legal issue. Both New York City and New York State have laws in place that ban smoking in places of public accommodation. The NYC ban actually does have a provision that allows for special dispensations to be given; thus, the producers of Talk Radio were able to petition for (and receive) a waiver that allowed Schreiber to smoke Marlboros onstage. The Lane/Broderick Odd Couple also received a waiver to allow the characters to smoke real cigars onstage. It really comes down to whether or not the producers want to do the work of requesting a waiver, and a request does not necessarily mean that it will be granted. (For example: when Hal Holbrook reprised Mark Twain on Broadway 10 years ago, his producers requested a dispensation to allow him to smoke cigars onstage -- seeing as how Mark Twain was almost never without a cigar -- and were turned down).

 

I think that if they did use real ones, the smell would be more potent and travel farther than herbal cigarettes. You'd be able to smell throughout the theatre. You only really notice the smell of herbal cigarettes if you're in the first couple of rows. 

 

I don't think that's true. I remember sitting in the dead last row of the mezzanine the first time I saw The Light in the Piazza and clearly smelling the smoke from their herbal cigarettes.