Uh, WHAT?!

[ironphoenix]

Who the ____ thought that this could possibly be a good idea?!

(The film clip doesn't play automatically, which is a Good Thing; take the warning about it being disturbing seriously before deciding to play it.)

Comments

[con-girl.livejournal.com]

One of the commentors noticed that one of the film makers said: "Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that's not worth jumping up and down about, I don't know what is. We 'killed' five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change," she adds.

As he said, "This should have been said in the clip. It wasn't. That is a major flaw."

I think it would have worked then. They have pulled the ad - why I don't know. They knew people would be upset. That was the POINT, wasn't it?

[blinkus2000.livejournal.com]

I automatically assume that no matter what you do someone would be upset, but I thought the "point" was humor.

[con-girl.livejournal.com]

It's offensive, strong humour - some will like it, some will hate it, and the people who hate it are who will get it talked about.

[blinkus2000.livejournal.com]

Honestly I find most social and environmental reform messages just preaching to the choir, this was not one of those.

[blinkus2000.livejournal.com]

I agree with the fact that it is offensive, strong humor. I do not agree that the point of offensive strong humor is to upset people, the point is to be humorous.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

Well, the point was what you quoted in your first paragraph. Having failed to make it in the video, they lost the momentum, and editing the video to add that in now would just seem lame, so pulling it was the right thing to do. They coulda been contenders, but they botched it.