From my favorite movies..

Charming and brutal

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

The subject of climate change is often covered but rarely brought to the big screen. This ambitious low budget project is well worth viewing because it will make you think just that little more about how we're draining resources on earth.It's a neat idea. The late and much missed Pete Postlethwaite is an archivist who spends the entire film touching a computer screen showing us reasons why the planet ended up in such a desolate state in 2055.Interlaced with six separate documentary stories covering various aspects of climate change are snippets of news recordings, social commentary and animation hybrid. It all works rather well, your interest is kept high and the stories all work the grey matter into overdrive. All held together by Postlethwaite who in reality has very little to do but does it rather well nonetheless. Most certainly worth a watch and just may well tempt you to try reduce your carbon emission. A good effort all round.

This film had some clever portrayals of critical concepts, especially in the animated segments. It initially did a good job of paring down the major issues. The story about the Mont Blanc guide who laments vanishing glaciers was the high point for me. There was dramatic footage of how much a glacier had receded in his lifetime.But the "personal stories" sent mixed messages, seemingly intentionally. They could have used a clearer moral angle. You couldn't tell if the characters were hypocrites or do-gooders. Maybe that was the whole point.Whatever the full intent was, it got lost on me when NIMBY attitudes toward 400-foot wind turbines were portrayed as ANTI-environmental, solely for the climate change aspect. The man pushing turbines had a righteous indignation that was one-sided in this coverage. Was he upset for lack of "greenness" or loss of personal profit? He was living on a farm, but seemed to have forgotten the value of nature itself vs. coddling human needs.Wind power development is often about short term gains for the developers. The outfits who build them are like oil wildcatters; not exactly people who respect nature. The locals end up stuck in an industrial zone when they had hoped for peace & quiet with unfettered sunsets and no shadow flicker or red flashing lights all night. Bird kills still happen with the large turbines, since their blade tips are fast-moving.The film singled out a scenario where a wind farm would be near a noisy speedway, but failed to mention that the cars aren't revving all night while people try to sleep. Turbine noise has been described as an insidious freight train that never arrives. Putting 400-foot structures on the viewshed is no trivial thing. It's an affront to nature in many ways. Those unwilling to cut back on fossil fuels are hypocritical to a point, but many are just tired of seeing the landscape wrecked to reduce our carbon footprint. What type of environmentalist can't see equal tragedy in Man's physical footprint?There was no effort to present solar panels on existing rooftops as a big alternative to wind. This is likely because the segments were done in Britain, which has minimal sunshine, but you can still generate solar power on cloudy days; just less of it. It's all relative. I'm not keen on industrial-scale solar plants that invade desert land, though they are much lower profile than turbines.For people who are tired of watching nature being industrialized, the amount of land being covered by turbines is just as depressing as the prospect of runaway climate change. Wind power seems like a classic Faustian bargain, and its emphasis spoiled this film for me.Piers Guy (the aforementioned wind developer) only had one small turbine on his farm. I wonder how ardent he'd remain if surrounded by dozens of giants? That's the true NIMBY test. Even if he'd personally be OK with it, it's still a travesty when turbines keep popping up in wild or bucolic landscapes, or can be easily seen from wilderness peaks and beaches. Future plans for their mass construction resemble a military invasion scenario.The segments about Nigeria and India (grossly overcrowded places) failed to emphasize the urgent need for birth control, which is arguably the best way to reduce overall energy demand and fix a host of other problems like urban sprawl and desecration of the landscape (see above). Poor people were portrayed as victims of circumstance, but they often dig their own holes by doing nothing to change overcrowded conditions.I did like the irony of the Indian airline entrepreneur, contrasted with flying as a wasteful, carbon-intensive activity.Global warming can be seen as primarily a population problem, and scientists say the Earth may only be able to support 2 billion people without fossil fuels (which the film noted indirectly in an animation). I found the emphasis on consumption vs. sheer human numbers to be overwrought, though still very important. Overall, this film was worth seeing but it sent too many mixed messages.

... and also thanks to the ratings and comments on the message board. (i want to point out that there was a lot more negative ratings/comments about this movie when i first reviewed it)the film shows multiple stories which cover different aspects of how people contribute climate change and how they are affected in return. the nice thing is that it isn't a emotionally distanced documentary that just shows the results in a rather cold manner but also shows motivations of people and parts of their personal life.a similar assumption to the one being made at the end of "diary of the dead" is being made in this movie: maybe humanity isn't worth saving. this thought is underlined by examples of ignorant and egotistical people.some here say the movie is preachy - i think it is not preachy enough. you can't break the brainwashing of stupidity outlets like fox news with just showing facts. there should be texts saying "YOU are killing people right now". well, maybe not quite as harsh but still... the majority of the people need a metaphorical slap in the face to wake them up.which brings me to the way in which this movie has changed my thoughts (and behavior). while watching these idiots protest a wind farm because their precious "view" might be destroyed, something finally clicked. i always knew that the majority of people are like that but the thing is - there is no appealing to them. their comfort is more important than anything else. and because of that, humanity truly deserves to perish. i've always tried to help and my biggest goal in life was to somehow improve life for people - but i now realize that they don't deserve it.

Until I had seen this film I had not realised that propaganda could be all the more painful when it supports one's own cause. I compare it to the experience of listening to a fool who attempts to argue on behalf of an issue one dearly believes in and in the process makes every basic error that allows the utter destruction of an otherwise sensible point of view. I now believe that there is no place for media manipulators, actors or directors in the global warming debate. If ever the argument is to be won it must be by scientists restricted to fact. This film almost swayed me to the opposite pov than was intended, so obvious was its attempt at emotional manipulation and confusion of reality with fiction. So sad considering the gravity of the situation that confronts mankind and the weight of evidence that man is indeed the cause of climate disruption.