• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rant: IMAX film ruined by continuous environmentalist preaching

glenn1

glenn1

Lifer
Had some "me" time this morning and decided to go see a movie. The local science center had some interesting looking nature films so I decided to go. "Into the Arctic" was playing and definitely appealed to me; I love the Canadian Rockies and Alaska, and going to Churchill, Manitoba to see the polar bears is next on my "to do" list.

So into the movie I go. Wow - opens great, you forget exactly how huge the great north is when you're not there, and seeing it in IMAX definitely puts it in perspective. Reminds me of this photo of Denali/Mt McKinley from 100 miles away:

220px-Denalifromdenali.JPG


Then the narration begins. Merryl Streep - ugh, not my preferred choice, but bearable. A couple minutes in comes the first reference to global warming - okay, that's fine; it's a reasonable point to bring up in a movie about the arctic. Cue the scenes of polar bears; aww, how cute. Second and third references to global warming, and how it's impacting the habitat for the bears and reducing the amount of sea ice for them to hunt on. Yeah, I got it the first time, thanks for the reminder.

Movie continues. Cut to shot of glaciers, mention how global warming is making them melt faster. Fade to scene about walruses, another couple mentions of global warming. Check in with the migration of caribou in northern Alaska, next 3 mentions of global warming. Rinse and repeat for every scene throughout the rest of the movie.

At this point I'm ready to go club a harp seal myself to use the pelt for earmuffs so I don't have to listen to any more references about global warming. And thing is, I'm probably the ideal target market for their pitch - interested in the subject, amenable to the idea of conservation, have the means to make a donation if I cared to. But now because of their continuous browbeating on the subject, I'm completely repelled by them and have even less desire to support their cause than before I started watching the film. Don't these zealots have any fucking clue about just how much they turn off their intended audience with their completely over the top sermonizing?
 
When i see more floods/hurricanes hitting the southeast and more fires consuming the southwest, i do chuckle at the irony of how more of the people affected are probably global warming deniers.
 
Well the description of the movie says its about the changing habitat of the arctic wilderness and its effect on polar bears. So, it seems odd that you'd be surprised they're talking about global warming in the movie consider that's essentially what it's about.
 
I have the same reaction to the "Cars for Kids" radio commercials. Screw them. Donated my wifes car to something else.
 
Are they pitching it as man made global warming or just global warming in general? Yea, things are warming up, but I personally think it's more of a trend/cycle than anything else.
 
I don't think you got the message OP. What you failed to realize is that there is global warming. I would suggest you watch the IMAX film again and pay special attention to the subtle hints throughout the movie. :colbert:
 
Slick5150 said:
Well the description of the movie says its about the changing habitat of the arctic wilderness and its effect on polar bears. So, it seems odd that you'd be surprised they're talking about global warming in the movie consider that's essentially what it's about.
Click to expand...

I'd have to consider that major pwnage of the OP.

I was going to point out the irony in how much he likes seeing polar bears and then complains that the movie points out they were endangered by the very thing he doesn't want to hear about.

But I didn't because it can't compete with your spectacular pwnage.
 
Slick5150 said:
Well the description of the movie says its about the changing habitat of the arctic wilderness and its effect on polar bears. So, it seems odd that you'd be surprised they're talking about global warming in the movie consider that's essentially what it's about.
Click to expand...

This. Seriously, OP, what the fuck? Then again your post just exudes exactly the type of ignorance that I'd expect from someone so offended by a movie being exactly what it claimed to be.
 
zoiks said:
The OP must be a red state hardie.
Click to expand...

You're completely missing the point. I'm not a "denier," my politics are not hard right, and I don't mind or try to avoid discussion of global warming. However I do feel there is a point of diminishing returns , when a movie mentions a subject so many times it becomes counter-productive. Sometimes a bit less is more, and this movie demonstrated that aptly.
 
Reminds me of the ASPCA commercials. Showing me video of dirty, suffering animals in cages does not make me want to adopt one. Show me how fucking awesome having a pet is instead.
 
sandorski said:
It is very appropriate when the scenery you are viewing could be dramatically altered by it.
Click to expand...

BUT, the OP is asking, is it appropriate to continue to repeat the point? It would be like having a couple people next to you, throughout the entire show, poking each other and saying, "No, it's not!" and "Yes, it is!" (or, "He's touching me!" and "I'm not touching you!"). 🙄

Bring the point up, explain the effect, and carry on. Belaboring it only causes people to be turned off to your message.
 
marvdmartian said:
BUT, the OP is asking, is it appropriate to continue to repeat the point? It would be like having a couple people next to you, throughout the entire show, poking each other and saying, "No, it's not!" and "Yes, it is!" (or, "He's touching me!" and "I'm not touching you!"). 🙄

Bring the point up, explain the effect, and carry on. Belaboring it only causes people to be turned off to your message.
Click to expand...

Maybe if it was just a Nature show, but apparently GW was a big part of the reason the show was made.
 
marvdmartian said:
BUT, the OP is asking, is it appropriate to continue to repeat the point? It would be like having a couple people next to you, throughout the entire show, poking each other and saying, "No, it's not!" and "Yes, it is!" (or, "He's touching me!" and "I'm not touching you!"). 🙄

Bring the point up, explain the effect, and carry on. Belaboring it only causes people to be turned off to your message.
Click to expand...

sandorski said:
Maybe if it was just a Nature show, but apparently GW was a big part of the reason the show was made.
Click to expand...

That's fine, as I said I'm not a climate change "denier" and think it's important message that the movie should communicate (and it would have been weird if it didn't). However, when you mention it probably 3 dozen times over the course of a 40-minute movie, that message loses most of its power. What marvdmartian said was very perceptive, after a while the constant repetition did become kinda like hearing kids in the back seat say "are we there yet?" repeatedly the entire trip.

Like I said, I enjoyed the cinematography greatly. Some of the 3d effects were kinda cheesy, and I was "meh" about the Paul McCartney soundtrack although I realize that's personal preference. I don't even mind having the script that's has a strong point of view like this one did. I simply wish they could have been more skilled writers and managed to have some variety in their script and/or trusted themselves and the audience to get the point without having to reinforce it over, and over, and over, and over again. The amazing visuals would have made the point better than anything the writers could have said anyway.


For those potentially interested in the film (and like I said, it's visually stunning and worth the cost for that reason alone), here's a link to a preview:

To the Arctic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top