environmentalism Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Cinematical has just received this exclusive new poster for No Impact Man, a documentary directed by Laura Gabbert and Justin Schein. The film follows Manhattan-based author Colin Beavan as he makes a life-changing decision that affects not only himself, but his wife and infant daughter as well.

Researching his next book, he founded the No Impact Program in November 2006, and pondered what he could do personally to help end the environmental crisis. What would have the greatest impact -- or, rather, what would allow him to have the least impact? From the official synopsis: "A newly self-proclaimed environmentalist who could no long avoid pointing the finger at himself, Colin leaves behind his liberal complacency for a vow to make as little environmental impact as possible for one year. No more automated transportation, no more electricity, no more non-local food, no more material consumption...no problem. That is, until his espresso-guzzling, retail-worshipping wife Michelle and their two year-old daughter are dragged into the fray." No Impact Man is "a film about a couple, more than a movement," wrote John Anderson in Variety. It's "the best kind of propaganda, as well as a very entertaining movie."

Oscilloscope Pictures will open No Impact Man in New York on September 11 before expanding it across the country in the following weeks. Check Oscilloscope's site for more information on playdates, and head to Beavan's blog to read much more about his experiences.

You can also watch the trailer at Moviefone, which gives a good idea of the film's lively spirit.

Good ol' Al Gore has some such a very long way. After being Bill Clinton's Vice President, he "lost" to George Dubya Bush in his own Presidential bid and slipped off the radar. Who would have ever imagined that a few years later, he'd make waves with a Power Point presentation-turned-super-popular documentary called An Inconvenient Truth, win an Emmy, and Oscar, and now, the Nobel Peace Prize. Yes folks, The Age reports that his Nobel nomination came through with a co-win that he shares with IPCC chairman Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.

He is, of course, "deeply honored" to win the $1.5 million prize, and will be giving his share to the Alliance for Climate Protection, which is a non-profit organization he founded last year. Gore says: "We face a true planetary emergency. The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level."

Not everyone agrees, and Australian Age includes a rather amusing run-down of their own country's political responses. Prime Minister, John Howard refused to watch the documentary and wouldn't take policy advice from films. Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane said: "There are three places I do not go for advice on climate change," and proceeded to list the Labor Party of Australia, the movies, and "unsuccessful candidates for the US presidency." Obviously, not everyone shares their opinion, and it's pretty impressive to see continued recognition coming from one small film. So, how long will it take for the next round of presidential hopeful buzz to fade, or will this actually convince him to try again?

Celebrities all over the place are going green. Every day there is a new eco story popping up. Cate Blanchett has become an environmental stickler in her home, with efforts that include installing 2-minute timers on on her shower. (This attempt is, no doubt, helped by the fact she has stylists and the like to keep her looking fresh.) There's Sarah Michelle Gellar who rides a pink bike around, and uses reusable bags for Whole Foods discounts. And some, like Adrian Grenier, coach others on how to be more green, like his tutorials for Paris Hilton. But I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees these stories and spots the imbalance between an actor's work and their personal causes.

The Telegraph posted an article yesterday calling Hollywood out on being one of the biggest polluters in soCal, whilst performing "eco-friendly gestures [that are] simply showy stunts that make little difference." It sites a two-year study performed by the University of California at Los Angeles, which found that production aspects like explosions and idling vehicles are only beat by the oil industry in regards to polluting emissions. But there's also the garbage -- the sets that get built and destroyed and everything else that's necessary to create a faux world.

Warner Brothers is finally starting to recycle sets, which is a plus, and other productions try to balance their negative environmental impact with positive action -- the Evan Almighty production planted "2,000 trees to 'zero out' its greenhouse gas production." But as Ed Begley Jr. says: "If you're going to drive around in a big ol' Hummer and then buy carbon offsets to mitigate that, that's like getting drunk on the weekends and throwing some money through the window of an AA meeting and thinking you're doing something." What do you think? Do the environmentalist acts of actors mean anything when they're in a resource-sucking industry? What can Hollywood do when it relies so much on energy and materials?