Smoking is a greater cause of death and disability than any single disease, says the World Health Organisation. According to their figures, it is responsible for approximately 3.5 million deaths worldwide every year - or about 7% of all deaths.

Before you read any further, I must confess that I cannot abide cigarettes. I fail to see the attraction of inhaling something that has been proven to reduce life expectancy. My views were formulated by two events in my teenage years:

• the contrasting sight at a biology lesson of the lungs of a smoker and a non-smoker
• the death of an uncle of my mother as a result of lung cancer

Naturally I have sympathy for anyone who is addicted to a drug. However I always find myself thinking "Presumably no one forced them to start to smoke?" Perhaps I reflect my Scottish ancestry, when thinking that the cost of the habit would also dissuade me: 20 cigarettes a day can cost £1500 a year. Clearly my thoughts on this film are likely to be swayed by my personal opinions!

Michael Mann was fortunate in getting the agreement of Russell Crowe to appear in this film before the release of Gladiator in which his role as General Maximus Decimus Meridius propelled him to international success and recognition. Mann himself came to film making after success as the director of many episodes of Miami Vice on television in the 80's. Since his debut as a director with Thief, he has also made The Keep; LA Takedown; Manhunter; Last of the Mohicans; and Heat. His most recent film was the biopic Ali, tracing ten years in the life of the self proclaimed "Greatest".

Whilst therefore a respected director who most cinemagoers will have heard of, his films have never managed to be huge blockbusters. Even allowing for its subject matter, The Insider was unlikely to be a big box office success, as its length presented a problem in today's market, where multiplex venues prefer a film they can shown three or four times a day. It is therefore a rarity for a film of three hours (or thereabout) to be a success. In recent years I can only think of Schindlers List and Lord of the Rings as "long" films which have been given a chance in the mainstream cinema.

(With regard to Ali, Mann was perhaps unfortunate in having a film released after 11 September in which the main character converts to Islam and refuses to fight for the American army.

However, I would also question the need for the film in the first place. It was largely because his was the first career to be covered so comprehensively by television that Ali became a world wide celebrity sportsman. As a result we have seen the original and best - the man himself. I personally would rather watch old recordings of Ali fights interspersed with him verbally jousting with Parkinson, Carpenter et al, rather than another person's interpretation of that life.

Some years ago I attended a screening at the NFT of classic Parkinson interviews, about which the presenter was then questioned. The clip where he clearly riled Ali when talking about his faith was shown. Parkinson said that afterwards in his dressing room, his father congratulated him on the interview, but said he should have thumped the world champion!

He also spoke about the Rod Hull and Emu incident but as this is a polite article I'll refrain from reporting his comments!)

In a recent interview on the Parkinson show (seamless link!), Crowe was asked what attracted him to one film over another, and he answered that it was always the script.

Keen to avoid typecasting, Crowe has built up a diverse list of roles in the 20 films in which he has appeared. He first came to international prominence in Romper Stomper. From that film, the New Zealander has become one of the hottest properties in the film industry. His big break came in LA Confidential. After which he was offered the role of Wigand. If The Insider shows his ability as a serious actor, it was Gladiator that created the "cult" of Russell Crowe as action hero.

For his role as Wigand, he gained over 20lbs by consuming cheeseburgers and bourbon for six weeks. As we shall see, such dedication was worthwhile and indeed led to him receiving an Oscar nomination for best actor. His performance manages to convey an underlying tone of power. He captures all of his characters little tensions and stresses, making his scenes highly involving.

It was on the Heat that Mann first directed Al Pacino, and presumably they must have enjoyed the experience to team up again. Pacino appears cautious not to steal those scenes shared with Crowe, but still manages to produce an involving performance.

However none of the crew or the Walt Disney Company, which financed the $68m drama, could have anticipated the ferocity of the reaction it would provoke. Just a week after the film's premiere, Brown & Williamson (the tobacco firm at the heart of the film) appeared to be preparing a huge lawsuit against Disney for libel and defamation.

It conducted an unprecedented poll in at least 8 American cities where the film had been screened, angry at what it saw as suggestions that it had made death threats against Wigand and his family.

Also unhappy was Mike Wallace, the veteran 60 minutes reporter, who conducted the interview with Wigand. He was incensed at being portrayed as having caved in to pressure from anxious CBS bigwigs.

Christopher Plummer received praise for his portrayal of Wallace, "capturing all the craggy prickliness of the news doyen with a satiric touch that is just bliss". "Mike?" he responds to one corporate lackey "Try Mr Wallace."

Despite good reviews and six Oscar nominations for Best Picture; Best Actor; Best Director; Best Director of Photography; Best Editing and Best Sound, the film was not a huge box office success. I suspect that the reason for this was the split feelings of any audience, namely non-smokers care little about the fate of smokers and the last thing smokers want is to be reminded of what goes into their cigarettes.

Interestingly there is very little smoking to be seen on screen; indeed if you spot a glimpse of a cigarette you deserve congratulations. The only apparent addiction shown is the incessant usage of mobile phones.

Perhaps the ultimate message to be gleaned from this film relates to the power of the tobacco industry. After all what happened to those officials who appeared to commit perjury in the congressional sessions? How can officials be allowed to include ammonia in their product to quicken the speed with which nicotine enters the system? I wonder whether Mann might have been better off looking into these aspects?

In this country I would also pose the question - what happened to the pledge of the incoming government in 1997 to cease advertising by the tobacco industry? There was a major fuss when the Formula 1 motor racing industry was granted an extension, which it was alleged followed a substantial donation to the Labour Party from Bernie Ecclestone, the head of F1 (the donation was subsequently refunded). No doubt it is just a coincidence that several tobacco firms are major sponsors of Formula 1 teams?

A cynic could also point out that the UK government (of whichever party) has always left the majority of the funding of research into cures for cancer to be made by charity, whilst at the same time taking millions in tax duty off smokers.

With the UK headquarters of some major tobacco firms located in this area, many local residents are dependent on the industry for employment. I wonder how they would feel if they watched the film? I personally hope it is one more nail in their employers' coffin.

There are believed to be 1.1 billion smokers in the world, 800,000 of them in developing countries. The tobacco giants are alleged to have turned their attention to increasing sales (or depending on your perspective - addiction) in the third world in face of reducing sales in the so called developed world arising from the weight of medical evidence convincing people of the ill health tobacco can cause.

I appreciate that some will no doubt view these comments (as Ben Elton says "a little bit of politics") as provocative, but I reiterate that they are my own thoughts. Others will probably sing "Smoke gets in your eyes"!

If nothing else, this film is a rather rare Hollywood film that is prepared to lift the lid off activities of the media and big industry. As I have demonstrated, it addresses issues that can cause heated debate!

IAIN McGLASHAN

CHAIRMAN