10:10 Campaign -- No Pressure -- Join Us or . . . .

[Jack Springer]

I don't think this is new but, I just came across it this evening.

Not sure what to say but that extremists on the left have no compassion.

Can anyone support this?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx4yr0FFhMQ"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx4yr0FFhMQ[/ame]

 

[akahia]

Wtf? This is disgusting...

 

[Kulindahr]

Someone is just too sick.

 

[andysayshi]

This short film was made entirely as a charity offering, written by the guy who wrote "Four Weddings And A Funeral". It was removed from public release several hours after its launch. The 10 10 organisation have publicly apologised, stating they were wrong to accept and release it.

The charities that backed a Richard Curtis film for the 10:10 environmental campaign said today that they were "absolutely appalled" when they saw the director's four-minute short, which was withdrawn from circulation amid a storm of protest.

10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film-maker Franny Armstrong said tonightCurtis had written what she thought was "a funny and satirical tongue-in-cheek little film in the over-the-top style of Monty Python or South Park". "When the film was released by 10:10 yesterday, lots of people found it funny, but many others were offended. Out of respect for those we offended, we immediately apologised and withdrew the film."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/02/1010-richard-curtis-climate-change

It was just a silly idea, no longer in official circulation, and nothing to get your panties in a twist about. Personally, I think someone deserves a kick in the butt for ever accepting it, simply because I think it pushes the opposite message to that intended. To me, it says "If you don't agree with us we'll blow you out of the way", which doesn't serve to improve, support or justify the cause of reducing carbon emissions.

Stupid concept, stupid film, now gone. Nothing to see here. The anti-climate-changers will jump all over this, but the reality is it was a stupid mistake which doesn't deserve any airtime.

 

[BostonPirate]

It's tacky, but the exremists on the right are far worse.

 

[Kulindahr]

It's tacky, but the exremists on the right are far worse.

If they are, I haven't seen it. They're probably learning from it right now.

What makes it really bad is that it was supposed to be humorous in a Monty Python sort of fashion... fail! If it had shown a touch of that humor (without one having to read that it was supposed to be doing that), I'd be inclined to agree with you. As is, it's worse than anything I've seen the extreme right do because it's not merely hateful, it's impersonally, institutionally hateful, reducing individuals to mere tools of The State or The Programme.

Personally I think it came closer to some of the cheap episodes of the third season of the original Star Trek than to anything Monty Python.

 

[archive]

maybe im odd lol...i thought it was hilarious....people are too easily offended

 

[LoveIsNow]

maybe im odd lol...i thought it was hilarious....people are too easily offended

Agreed. I think it's very silly.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Um... I mean.. it's kinda strange. But nothing that they haven't put on Monty Python.

 

[Kulindahr]

maybe im odd lol...i thought it was hilarious....people are too easily offended

Context may have something to do with it: after working my ass off this morning, and snacking on active-culture yogurt with a fruity dark beer, I found it amusing -- sad, but amusing.

 

[MoltenRock III]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx4yr0FFhMQ

LMAO! That was bloody brilliant!

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

And it's not even original.

Take a look at the first-ever Jim Henson-produced film, featuring Kermit, who at the time wasn't a frog.. just a puppet named "Kermit."

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ky7g1lgTwc[/ame]

 

[MoltenRock III]

And it's not even original.

I don't think the conservative/Republican posters on this thread cared about the inferred violence, what they were pissed off about was kids having the nerve to pressure wasteful mommy & daddy into trying to cut back their pollution. Radical 'ya know.

 

[Joshua_me]

^ Interesting comparison, Jasun.

I dunno, am I offended by the film ? No, I'm too numb and jaded for that...

Will it do any good ? Probably not, it just gives new ammo to the right to blast us "environmentalist wacko's "

We live in a world where suggesting that we conserve energy to help save our planet is thought of as blasphemy. That's basically because the folks that profit from gas, coal and electricity consumption have friends in high places.

Foolish man will never learn - until it's too late, of course.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Will it do any good ? Probably not, it just gives new ammo to the right to blast us "environmentalist wacko's "

We live in a world where suggesting that we conserve energy to help save our planet is thought of as blasphemy. That's basically because the folks that profit from gas, coal and electricity consumption have friends in high places.

Actually, this pigheaded denial is strictly an American phenomenon.

 

[Joshua_me]

Actually, this pigheaded denial is strictly an American phenomenon.

^ Point taken.

Although the U.S. certainly has no monopoly on the abundant overuse of natural resources.

 

[MoltenRock III]

^ Point taken.

Although the U.S. certainly has no monopoly on the abundant overuse of natural resources.

Touché. However, it is the only developed country in the world that still has deniers and apologists. Fortunately, one good thing the SCOTUS has ruled is that the EPA has the power now to regulate CO2 emissions as a pollutant. Otherwise, the US govt would be doing nothing to help curb these emissions. Obama had been trying to get the Energy Reform Act thru Congress, but I think has realized trying to deal with Congress/Republicans is a waste of time, so can just use his executive branch fiat to crush these polluters.

 

[andysayshi]

^ Not true, unfortunately. Australia's recent attempt to introduce a carbon trading scheme was quashed by the conservative side of politics. The leader of the opposition in our government, a devout Christian who considers homosexuals "threatening", publicly stated he considers climate change to be "bullshit".

Whether or not the film is funny isn't the point, in my opinion. From an advertising/marketing point of view, it's message is completely off target. The implication that non-believers will be blown away makes the believers seem like one-minded, pig-headed assholes. "If you're not with us you're against us" should be the mantra of conservatives, not any progressive message.

It actually seems like an anti-climate change message to me. It reinforces the fear that many non-believers have voiced: that climate change is a "bandwagon" type of belief, a popularist attitude that people are a part of without consideration or logic. Veering away from the popularist attitude results in scorn and derision. People who ask questions are to be ignored or removed.

If an agency provided this concept to me I'd fire them. It fails in multiple ways to sell any positive message of reducing carbon emissions, supports a major talking point of the opposition, and alienates a large part of the audience.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Whether or not the film is funny isn't the point, in my opinion. From an advertising/marketing point of view, it's message is completely off target. The implication that non-believers will be blown away makes the believers seem like one-minded, pig-headed assholes. "If you're not with us you're against us" should be the mantra of conservatives, not any progressive message.

And tolerating morons and idiots has gotten the movement where exactly?

Just because you took affront to it doesn't mean everyone got the same message. I've shown the video to 3 others, and they all said, "It's great, and says that just because you don't believe doesn't mean you'll escape the same fate (environmentally)".

In any event it's given 4 (myself and 3 friends here) exposure to a group we never knew existed, so for that I'm glad it's caused controversy. Had Jack never posted this vid, I'd still not know who these people are. Now there's 4 (and counting) more people interested in their organization. *shrug*

 

[andysayshi]

Just because you took affront to it doesn't mean everyone got the same message. I've shown the video to 3 others, and they all said, "It's great, and says that just because you don't believe doesn't mean you'll escape the same fate (environmentally)".

I'm not offended by it in the least. I just think it totally fails to sell emission reductions as a concept, and it makes the climate change movement seem like radical all-or-nothing extremism, rather than a movement based in logic and science.