James Cameron’s long awaited Climate special on Showtime will premier April 13. I’m told it’s pretty good.
Have reservations about Hollywood stars as messengers, but it seems to work for some.
The Showtime documentary series “Years of Living Dangerously,” executive produced by James Cameron, features an exclusive interview with Barack Obama, Mashable has learned — a segment that may provide rare insight into the President’s thinking on climate science and policy.
The interview was taped during the week of March 16, individuals with knowledge of the segment said. The show premieres April 13.
While he has given speeches on climate change, including one address in June at which he rolled out the administration’s Climate Action Plan, Obama has not given lengthy interviews solely on this subject.
The White House has not responded to a request for comment.
The interview is in keeping with the mission of the series, which is to take a science-based deep dive into the multifaceted threats climate change poses, as well as the array of available solutions. The series, which was funded in part by Cameron, was shot in far-flung locations as varied as the Greenland ice sheet, Indonesia, and the burning forests of the American West.
Episodes feature celebrity correspondents including former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who also is credited as a producer, Matt Damon, Ian Somerhalder, Jessica Alba, and TV newscasters Chris Hayes of MSNBC and Leslie Stahl of CBS’ 60 Minutes
wIll any interviewee not own a SUV or twenty?
Do you have reason to believe any of them other than Schwarzenegger own more than one SUV? Or even one?
Mandatory motorcade aside, Obama’s trips are emitting additional co2 from beer bottles consumed by drunkard CIA agents who then have to be sent home using fossil fuel guzzling flights (twice this month alone).
The President ought have his own seat at the ipcc as am sure he emits more ghgs than Burundi.
Drunken CIA agents? Did you mean Secret Service agents?
Do you ever bother to get anything right before you run your mouth?
whaaaat
Yeah, whaaaat is the operative word.
The word “agent” is obviously something you don’t understand (or you are too lazy to try).
Will auto manufacturers make an SUV that is both electric AND has enough power to pull something if needed? Some people need vehicles with power, so why aren’t manufacturers catering to these folks?
That was meant as a reply to omnologos.
I’ll buy one of those as soon as I can afford it.
In the meanwhile I can only laugh at motorcaded Obama and multi-Humvee Arnie lecturing with landgrabber Cameron, plus Matt Damon and why not.
Yeah,it’s like if Ted Bundy had come out against serial murder…I mean,come on! Who’s gonna buy into Bundy’s message?
Do you realize that electric motors have far more torque than an ICE, pound for pound? The Tesla Model S has about 450ft/lbs of torque and it only needs ONE GEAR. Trains are electric. The diesel only generates electricity.
Neil is correct. The issue is energy storage and range, not “power” delivered to the wheels. You can store way more energy in a tank of petroleum-based fuel than you can in batteries.
That may be, but where do I find an electric SUV right now that has power?
More character assassination from Omnoblecchh. Nice!
I would not call it character ‘assassination’…nothing in my writing suggests they are ‘bad’ people. Surely though Mr Cameron could have found someone more suited to talk about subdued emission-free lifestyles.
You just don’t interview Scarlett Johansonn to talk about how hard is the life of ugly people. Michelle Obama doesn’t harangue people about rising two kids as a single mom on a meager salary. The Sultan of Brunei is not the go-to person in matters of homelessness. Etc etc.
And Lord Monckton is surely not a person who should testify before congress about climate change.
“I would not call it character ‘assassination’…nothing in my writing suggests they are ‘bad’ people.”
No, they are just hypocrites if they drive a gas guzzler (do they??) and therefore their opinions are less than valuable, according to you. Which seems to me a pretty decent definition of character assassination – the classic ad hominem attack.
Once again, you don’t contribute to a conversation, you pounce in with some manufactured criticism, something negative – anything negative – to say about anyone who might offer a validation of the true danger of AGW, or ultimately, the journalistic integrity of the author of this blog.
Predictable. And oh so very very boring.
Hey. here’s an idea – why don’t you make some snide comment about Roger Pielke Jr’s car?
GBaker – not sure what pills you’re taking but they don’t appear to tbe right ones.
You have now added an accusation of hypocrisy I have not made. Says a lot about the sorry state of your mind. My Scarlett Johannson example was too much for you to understand. Likewise for Michelle Obama and the Sultan of Brunei.
I’m looking forward to these Cameron videos for the parts that don’t show people who cannot be possibly know how to do what they’re asking people to do. It’s a matter of being able to do something in fact more than being willing to do it…the President of course needs a motorcade and several airplanes and a lot of other co2-emitting stuff simply because he is the President.
Likewise an Arnie in a Fiat 500 would lose a lot of the fact of being the Arnie. Etc etc.
We all have to make choices. If we all believed co2 is bringing out the end of the world, we would make different choices.
maurizio,
I’d like to know whom, precisely, would you think worthy to speak, in a public way, about the risks of climate change?
Do you have any evidence or reason to believe that the people you dismiss as unworthy to speak on whatever issues, have not made such choices to reduce their own carbon footprints, where they can, that don’t undermine their abilities to act in the world, as it is and not as you fantasize it to be? Or are you just pulling crap from your nether orifice?
The last is a rhetorical question.
jp – Cameron had 7 billion people to choose from and he went for Arnie. Come on, even McKibben would be a more suitable interviewee.
Does this not make Arnie a wee bit more suitable, in light of your supposed ‘argument’ against his suitability?
Or this?
First link starts with “spent a fortune”. Good. Perhaps Schwarzenegger can do educational videos for multimillionaires.
Second link is a piece of legislation a few years old. Let’s hear it from others who’ve been trying to copy it.
Once again Arnie has a lifestyle and choices profoundly different than a normal human being and for good reasons. Interviewee of choice to explain what to do on global warming? No thanks.
since thomas friedman is wrong about everything, why would james cameron include him in this documentary. weren’t william crystal or dick cheney available?