Long ago, movie heroes wore fedoras, heroines all had accents straight out of Vassar, and smoking was code for sophistication. The days of Paul Henreid lighting two cigarettes, then handing one to Bette Davis, are long gone. Today directors tend to shy away from depicting explicitly inhaling unless they’re trying to set a rebellious, take-no-PC-prisoners tone. Where would Quentin Tarentino be without his Red Apple brand smokes?

But the flap over the use of cigarettes in the chick flick “He’s Just Not That Into You” involves a few new wrinkles in how the media use tobacco. For one thing, no one in the movie is actually seen smoking. One of the stories does turn on smoking cessation as a plot point, however, when Jennifer Connelly leaves her husband in part because he has lied about quitting smoking.

We know he’s lied because there are some clear shots of a cigarette package onscreen. And while the pack doesn’t get enough of a Hollywood close-up to read the label, it’s as near as can be to the real-life bright yellow packaging of Natural American Spirits Lights.

Not unexpectedly, the American Medical Association is calling for Hollywood to police the placement of cigarettes in movies, arguing that even if no one is sparking up a butt and even if the plot revolves around a fairly negative consequence of smoking–divorce—simply showing the package tends to romanticize tobacco and induce kids to take up the habit.

But pretty unexpectedly, another voice is joining in the protest: Santa Fe Tobacco, which owns the American Spirits brand and maintains that no one from Warner Brothers, the movie’s studio, contacted them about integrating the product into the movie.

“We have to agree that our cigarettes should not be shown in films,” spokesman Mark smith told the New York Times. “It is something we absolutely do not condone.” The AMAA is asking Warner Brothers to certify that no payments were given for placing American Spirits in the movie.

However you feel about smoking, it’s a tricky brand problem. Movie producers have agreed that showing people smoking will be factored into the audience rating system, along with sex, violence and drug use. But both studios and directors have resisted pressure to stop showing smoking entirely, on the grounds of artistic expression.

And as with other forms of entertainment, using real brands lends texture and credibility to a story. That’s one reason brands tend to work well in videogames: They add the look and feel of real life to the streets of Liberty City.

But we expect movies to carry a different artistic weight from that of videogames (although by all accounts, the merits of “He’s Not” don’t raise the aesthetic bar a whole bunch.) Directors will be able to justify showing objectionable or injurious behavior on the grounds that it’s part of their vision or just their story concept. If those depictions earn the movie an “R” rating, so be it; the burden then falls on the theater owners to make sure those age restrictions are enforced.

How hard this movie’s producers would have fought to keep the smoking story line if it also meant a tougher rating than the PG-13 it received is a question that will never be answered, of course. I’m guessing they would have found something else for Connelly’s husband to lie about.

As for the products used in those bad-behavior stories, even directors who stay away from real-world brands are going to want to present something as an effective visual read, and that may mean using packaging that suggests the look of a label found on store shelves.

Is that infringement? It’s a matter for lawyers. But brands may want to keep tabs on what’s showing up in theaters as well as what’s being discussed on the Web. Apparently, there is such a thing as being too recognizable.