impact of making the film?


As green as I try to be, even if the family in the film successfully made no impact for a year, didn't the making of the film & it's distribution just offset all that? No it wasn't a blockbuster but some kind of crew was brought to the locations, boarded, feed, etc. The film was edited and prints sent out. As green as filmmakers tend to be, the craft is probably one of the worst offenders of negative impact.

reply

[deleted]

I too would like to ask the same question. My friend asked me how does no impact man feel about the movie being made and the dvds and such.

______
Last Move Seen:
"Pretentious Foreign Film" by Guy You've Never Heard Of. 10/10

reply

The film could arguably be carbon negative due because of its net effect in reducing carbon emissions via the people it will influence.

I don't think the subject of the film ever claimed that that achieved 100% no impact did they? I understood the whole time that they were just making every reasonably effort to get as close as possible.

reply

"Laura Gabbert and Conlin were friends who first met in the 8th grade. The filmmaker had been following Beavan’s career, and when she heard about the project she pressed the couple to let her make a film. At first, Beavan said no. Gabbert kept at it until Beavan made her agree to shoot the film sustainably—no lights, cars, or new equipment. She had to ride a bicycle and shoot film at the same time.

Directors Gabbert and Justin Schein shot 150 hours of footage over 16 months with an old DV camera and no sound person. Instead of throwing a bunch of batteries away, they used four rechargeable ones. Their subjects were sophisticated, and quickly figured out what they needed, calling to let them know when something had come up. “I knew things weren’t comfortable,” Gabbert says. “That worked to our advantage. I knew the dynamic was, Colin was gung ho, Michelle was the skeptic. We had conflict and humor.”"

http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/2009/09/21/no_impact_man/

reply

Even if they impacted the environment, this is a false, childish (though obvious) argument. It's the equivalent of Al Gore flying around the planet to promote his work. Every action increases the carbon footprint of the individual, but if the individual can decrease the footprint of countless others, the net is actually negative. By your logic, we could never learn anything because no one could effectively broadcast on tv or be in schools, etc.

reply

They could at least try to offset it further by planing trees and such.

reply