The Way the Future Was

Apr 24, 17:01 by IROSF
Thread for the discussion of MaryAnn Johanson's film column.

The article is here.
Apr 25, 08:54 by Adrian Simmons
I think that climate change is one of those things... it's very hard to address. It's kind of like a really fat guy who keeps saying that he has a glandular problem or sleep apnea or something. You want to shake him and tell him that, no, the problem is that you eat a spoonful of sour cream with each bite of nachos.

But when you say that, he gets all sulky and adds some cheese fries to those nachos.

And that awkward analogy is how I see climate change. It isn't any person or small group's fault so there is no 'enemy' to fight. Heck, if there were a string of catastrophic and unprecedented volcanic activity, we could rally our resources and will around it. But the enemy is us, and we know it. We've know it for a long time, and like that fat guy, we just don't really want it to be our fault, and we'll start to take the bus tomorrow.

And the solution is not going to be something that can't be passed on to a particular group of people or industries- it's going to affect every one of us.

So, not a lot of entertainment value in that. Which may explain why no movies have been made that deal with the transition period- which is what we've been in for a while- they deal with the big aftermath. YOu know, where the characters have to fight off starving hordes instead of screw up their courage to take the bus.

Would the late 70s movie VIRUS count as an eco disaster flick? It's more of a man-made supergerm disaster movie, but it does make most of the earth's surface unihabitable. And then there is the inevitable nuclear exchange as the automated national defense systems hammer at each other, triggered by an earthquake.

It's the kind of movie you want to wash down with a cup of broken glass.
Apr 25, 13:33 by Michael Andre-Driussi
Did the theory of "nuclear winter" spawn a movie or three, or did it die before that was possible?

That is, are there no movies about a human-made ice age?

Altman's QUINTET comes to mind, but that was slightly before the nuclear winter period (which makes it prophetic!). And I don't recall if any reason was given for the snow.

I vaguely recall there being something icy in the future of "13th Monkey" or whatever the remake of classic "la Jetee" was called, but perhaps I'm mistaken there.
May 4, 14:12 by Brian McCarthy
Global warming is still in the controversial stage. That means the characters have to be persuaded of it each time, and much of the drama has to concern what happens to people who don't believe.

That kind of movie cannot be made too frequently, or the result will match the response to sharks.

Perhaps by the time it's possible to make the next controversial movie then threat will have disappeared, to be replaced by another.

The campaign to encourage mass transit has its work cut out, but, like many other causes advocated in the movies, this is a determination that knows not time.

[Mass transit is chosen for effect. The changes demanded by those advocating global warming are far more ambitious.
Whether the current situation is an ordinary, brief shift from warmer to cooler or a more significant (and more rare) warm shift, and whether either is affected by human activities remains to be determined by objective evaluation of evidence.
Recent admissions that the evidence for human induced global warming will never be definitive are a good indication that another threat may soon arise.]
May 5, 10:16 by Bluejack
FYI: Global warming is not in a controversial stage. Of 928 abstracts published in referreed scientific journals from 1993-2003, Science Magazine found 0 departures from the scientific consensus that global warming is, in fact, happening. [ reference ]

What is controversial are the mechanisms by which global warming happens, the limits to climate change (if any), and the short and long term consequences of climate change.

May 13, 05:21 by Brian McCarthy

I'd add to your list of controversies whether human activities are a significant part of the reason for warming.
That's not at all easy to determine because it's necessary to guess what would be happening otherwise.

Even if there were some way to isolate human impact and find it to be significant, the movies would still be in the controversy stage, selling the problem, and will remain stuck there until - and if - a consensus exists.

That consensus need not be objective and accurate, but it does have to be widespread. And human global warming does not now have a popular consensus.

Feb 1, 01:43 by M Elron H
I came across this forum by doing Google searches trying to find out the name of the 1970's short film about the man who is tending the greenhouse-- the people outside seem to be living in toxic environment in hazmat suits then smash their way in, destroying the greenhouse... at least I've come across some other living soul that remembers being shown that film in school, but what is the name of the film? I am hoping to maybe track it down on YouTube if I could come up with a title or something better to go on. Anyone remember?

Want to Post? Evil spammers have forced us to require login:

Sign In




NOTE: IRoSF no longer requires a 'username' -- why try to remember anything other than your own email address?

Not a subscriber? Subscribe now!

Problems logging in? Try our Problem Solver