• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 3 hours GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES
  • 6 days If hydrogen is the answer, you're asking the wrong question
  • 2 hours How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 10 days Biden's $2 trillion Plan for Insfrastructure and Jobs
MINING.com

MINING.com

MINING.com is a web-based global mining publication focusing on news and commentary about mining and mineral exploration. The site is a one-stop-shop for mining industry…

More Info

Premium Content

DiCaprio’s New Film Portrays Canada’s Oil Sands As “Terryfying”

Before The Flood

Nearly six months after massive wildfires close to Canada’s oil sands forced one of the largest evacuations in the country’s history, affecting production, Leonardo DiCaprio’s new climate-change documentary threatens to bring unwanted, negative attention to the industry.

Critics are already referring to the scenes shown in the film, particularly an aerial of the oil sands, as “terrifying”.

Fisher Stevens, director of Before The Flood, which has been in the works since 2014, recently told Canadian Press he was "really horrified" by how the landscape looked in north-eastern Alberta.

"It does employ a lot of people," Stevens acknowledged. “Look, we all want work, we all need jobs — God knows. And it would be great if it was like: ‘Now, we take all of these people and we replant all of that forest.’ Wouldn’t that be amazing?,” he said.

Last year, the Church of England threatened to dump about £3m ($3.7 million) in oil shares after the release of Virunga, DiCaprio’s documentary that shows alleged SOCO International representatives taking bribes to rangers to access the park of the same name.

In Before The Flood, to be screened this weekend in 171 countries, in 45 languages, DiCaprio (in a producer role) travels to several continents and the Arctic, meeting with political and religious leaders, scientists and activists.

The Oscar-winning actor, a leading figure in Hollywood’s environmental movement, has said he doesn’t want to point fingers at anyone, but some movie critics are already referring to the scenes shown in the film, particularly an aerial of the oil sands, as “terrifying”.

"My hope is that this film provides a global wakeup call about our inevitable fate should we fail to act," Stevens said in a statement.

By Cecilia Jamasmie via Mining.com

ADVERTISEMENT

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:


Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage





Leave a comment
  • Bc on October 29 2016 said:
    Would love to know the size of his carbon footprint.
  • Kr55 on October 29 2016 said:
    Why doesn't he go to the middle east or Nigeria where they don't give two craps about how much the polute? Canada actually has regulations and emission caps. All he does by hurting Canada's industry is open the window for people with no concern for polution to fill the gap.
  • Mark on October 29 2016 said:
    ......and the winner is Leo DeCaprio again. LOL
    After he pockets his millions of $$$$$$ just like many other "stars", and we go cold and hungry, we should ask Leo ..the all mighty, knowing all GOOF for handout. After all these Hollywood guys are not cheap working for $10, or even $20 per hour. Multiplier of 1000x is on the low side.
    Ask Al Gore, the politician made poor Green actor, how he became a billionaire?
    Is the MANKIND really unwilling and unable to see through this GREEN propaganda to throw this little documentary together with this GLOBETROTTER, PRIVATE JET FLYING, FERRARI DRIVING HYPOCRITE ALARMIST into the garbage, where it really belongs?
    If we don't, then we deserve to be taken to the slaughter by this FOOL.
    Will the whole world be fascinated again with the HOLLYWOOD hypocritical message, or the FOOL messenger, or both?
    Why will LEO not go to Russia, China, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or India to make his documentaries there?
    There are billions of people living there, that have very poor air and water quality, lack of ANY, I say again ANY environmental standards.
    So, there you have it, Hollywood/Green propaganda spoon fed by Leo DeCaprio soon to be billionaire, and the the rest of us with brains or brainless driven to extinction.
  • Rig Pig Petey on October 29 2016 said:
    Di Caprio,………

    he' cute,….. but that's really about it.
  • The Shadow Broker on October 30 2016 said:
    If there was ever a time to kill off the oil sands it would be when they are no longer economically viable.
  • Mikey on October 30 2016 said:
    What a hypocrite. He doesn't say anything about his jet/yacht/car/big mansion????
  • Chuck Burnell on October 31 2016 said:
    "Portrays Canada’s Oil Sands As “Terryfying”

    Also "Terrifying", for those of you scoring at home.

    "Critics are already referring to the scenes shown in the film, particularly an aerial of the oil sands, as “terrifying”.

    "but some movie critics are already referring to the scenes shown in the film, particularly an aerial of the oil sands, as “terrifying”.

    It's just a guess, mind you, but I get the feeling that movie critics are scared of vast, empty spaces. Let's hope they never see any pictures of Western Australia or the Sahara Desert. They'll be paralyzed with fear.

    "My hope is that this film provides a global wakeup call about our inevitable fate should we fail to act," Stevens said in a statement."

    I've done some research on this and, as it turns out, the tar sands people are planning on turning the entire globe into a tar sand pit for the sake of money, which presumably will terrify the movie critics even more.

    I say, stop all tar sand exploration NOW! Save the poor movie critics before it's too late!
  • abinico warez on October 31 2016 said:
    As bad as oil might be, it does not even compare to the carnage caused by the nuclear industry. An oil spill, even a very bad one, begins to self remediate immediately, and after 500-1000 years there will be virtually no sign of the spill. On the other hand, a nuclear incident creates a dead zone that will last several 100,000 years - minimum. Oil might cause smog, maybe even climate change, but these things are not nearly as deadly as plutonium. A single pound of plutonium evenly distributed over the planet would give cancer to every human. Choice is quite clear - oil is by far the best choice along with alternatives like solar, wind, hydro, etc.

Leave a comment




EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News