Re: Let's Go To The Movies

Vanessa – thank you for commenting! A fine example of the spirit we need if going green’s going to make any difference: as long as you’re doing something positive to help the environment it doesn’t matter if you don’t live in a house made from recycled milk cartons or eat only vegetables grown in your own allotment. Whatever eco-warriors say, offsetting is better than nothing at all. Even if we don’t reap the benefits instantly, ideas like this will make a real long-term difference to the environment - good things come to those who wait. Even I realise this, and I’m the kind of gal who expects her Asos dress to arrive as soon as she’s clicked ‘Proceed to Checkout’'...

Let's Go To The Movies...

Thank you for your comment, Anonymous. You make a really good point – how much are we really doing for the environment when we recycle our tin cans and let our hair dry naturally instead of using the hairdryer? Are we being hypocrites, or is there only so much we can do for the environment without totally disrupting our day-to-day lives?

But we’re not alone – it’s a question that plagues even Hollywood’s big cheeses. Apparently, films’ resources aren’t spent entirely on furnishing trailers with mini-gyms and bowls of red M&Ms, or on ensuring that Demi Moore’s plastic surgery stays in place, but on the sets themselves. Now, a lot of films are shot on location, but for sci-fi flicks and the like an alternate universe obviously has to be created. Film and television sets are created from scratch and at the end of filming they’re often just burnt or thrown away – but that isn’t the only problem. Sets require a lot of energy, and not just of the creative ilk. Lighting, air conditioning, special effects: they all contribute to making the industry second only to petrol manufacturing in terms of air pollution contributions, according to a study by the University of California. It even tops hotels and clothes manufacturers.

Industry bods responded to the report (carried out in 2006), and gave examples of what production companies are doing to reduce their impact on the environment. The makers of the Matrix films recycled 97.5% of their sets and even donated some of the material to help house low-income families in Mexico, and the makers of The Day After Tomorrow – a film with lavish special effects – planted trees to offset its production emissions. I know that offsetting isn’t the best way to help the environment, as my last blog mentioned – but the point is, what else can the production companies do? They are an industry, after all, and my guess is that most people would prefer to keep their big-budget, effects-tastic films than breathe cleaner air. This middle way, with its set recycling and tree planting, is really the only option for them until movie-goers realise that saving the planet is more important than another film about the end of the world/aliens/supernatural occurrences etc. And although our eco-predicaments aren’t exactly on the same scale as Hollywood’s, it’s encouraging to know that they’re taking green concerns on board. Perhaps it would be a good idea to inform viewers of what their favourite TV shows or films are doing to counterbalance their emissions, either in the form of script running across the screen at the start of the piece or an actor telling us what the producers are doing – I’m sure we’d all listen if Clive Owen was speaking about recycling timber and reducing air conditioning on set…