I don’t even remember why I decided to watch Thank You for Smoking, starring Aaron Eckhart. But the film absolutely blew me away: the main character is a lobbyist for the tobacco industry. Everyone hates him and sees him as another Goebbels, yet he participates in all the talk shows with a charming smile and almost always manages to sway the audience’s opinion.
I’ve watched this film about five or six times, and I recommend it to friends. For a long time, I wanted to read the novel on which the film is based. I even started reading the Russian translation, but I dropped it after about ten pages because it was so poorly translated. So, in the end, I read the book in its original language.
Of course, when you’ve watched a movie so many times and love it, you can’t help but compare the book to the adaptation. In the case of Thank You for Smoking, the differences are quite significant.
The main storyline remains the same. The protagonist, Nick Naylor, is a lobbyist for the tobacco industry and sees it as just a job. He’s friends with two other lobbyists—for the alcohol and firearms industries. Together, they often discuss common problems and fight against the attacks of the public and senators, who build their careers on fighting “killing” industries.
It’s both a sharp satire on political reality and a unique perspective on the “merchants of death,” as the lobbyists call themselves in the book.
But, as they say, the devil is in the details. In the film, Nick Naylor is a master of words, able to turn almost any situation to his advantage. He doesn’t try to prove who’s right or wrong; he manipulates opinions and the mood of the crowd—and he does it masterfully. Even his personal problems end up working in his favor.
In the book, however, he’s somewhat different. At times, it feels like he’s more lucky than skillful. He often succeeds due to luck, and some of his clever moves are just suggested to him (yes, it takes a top-tier talent to play it out for the public, but the impact isn’t quite the same). In other words, I liked the book’s version of the character significantly less than the movie version. Nick, in the film, has a clear understanding of what he’s doing, how, and why. For him, it’s a science. The book’s Nick, on the other hand, constantly emphasizes, “I do this to pay the mortgage.”
The film and book also differ in terms of the main conflict. In the movie, the story of Nick being kidnapped by adversaries is a brief episode, whereas in the book, it’s a major part of the narrative.
As I read, I often wondered which version I liked more. I even read some passages aloud to my wife to compare them with the film’s portrayal. In the end, I realized that while the book is very good, the movie version of the character appeals to me more—he’s more well-rounded and stronger. But both versions are worth watching or reading.
P.S. In 2019, a new Russian translation of the book was released. I haven’t tried reading it (since I already read the original), but the fact that there’s a new translation might suggest they aimed to improve upon the earlier version.
My rating: 4/5
