It's happening here and now, not elsewhere or in the future. It touches every aspect of life. But that reality is still largely absent from our on-screen stories.
The Climate Reality Check is a simple tool to evaluate whether our climate reality is being represented in films, TV shows, and other narratives. It's inspired by the Bechdel-Wallace Test, which measures gender representation.
The Climate Reality Check is exactly that: a reality check for narratives. You can use it to test any story set on Earth, which takes place now, in the recent past, or in the future. It doesn't apply to high fantasy or to stories set on other planets or in the distant past.
To use the Climate Reality Check, just apply these two statements to any narrative:
This is about highlighting authentic stories that reflect the reality we're all living in and help us navigate what it means to be human in the age of climate change.
The Climate Reality Check does not suggest or require that every story center climate change, nor does it prescribe what kinds of stories filmmakers should tell. It simply measures whether our current climate reality is being reflected on-screen. How that is done, friends, is up to you.
A research team at the Buck Lab for Climate and Environment at Colby College, led by Dr. Matthew Schneider-Mayerson, used the Climate Reality Check to conduct a systematic content analysis of 250 of the most popular fictional films released between 2013 and 2022. The results show that climate representation is on the rise—and commercially successful—but we have a long way to go. Filling that gap presents a unique creative opportunity.
Note: Since the Climate Reality Check is intended to check whether films are reflecting the reality of climate change, films that are high fantasy, not set on Earth, set before 2006, or set after 2100 were excluded.
We found that, of the 250 films studied, climate change was rarely present:
However, climate inclusion is becoming more common:
We also found that stories that include climate change are profitable:
Meanwhile, testing the second part of the Climate Reality Check revealed that the demographics of characters who are aware of climate change on-screen do not accurately reflect our climate reality:
The results paint a clear picture: including climate change in films is profitable, and it’s on the rise. There are so many interesting (and realistic) ways that climate can show up on-screen that have yet to be explored. The creative possibilities are endless.
Climate change is the backdrop and impetus of billionaire Miles Bron’s (Edward Norton) untested hydrogen scheme. He claims the fuel is “radically efficient, zero carbon emissions, and it’s derived from abundant seawater. I call it Klear, with a K.” His villainy serves as a warning against relying on tech gurus for a “silver bullet” or quick tech fix to solve the climate crisis. It illustrates how complicated this issue is — in a way that fits organically into this wildly successful whodunnit. Climate change is also mentioned explicitly by Governor Claire DeBella (Kathryn Hahn), who is running her election campaign on a climate platform, with the intention of supporting Miles’s hydrogen fuel: “I’m a hardline on climate change. If that scares you, go stick your head back in the sand.”
Glass Onion was Netflix’s best-performing theatrical release at the time, and received 209 million hours of viewership in less than two weeks. The film’s writer and director, Rian Johnson, received an Oscar nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay.
At the frenetic start of the film, a man interviewing a group of male models says “hashtag climate change.” It’s a quick joke said in passing, but it’s enough to set the stage for the themes of the film and the world we’re about to enter—one in which greed and the wealth gap (arguably the causes of climate catastrophe) break down in the face of disaster on the high seas. The film serves up a wide-ranging and scathing societal critique (and has so much fun doing it), not least aimed at climate injustice. Triangle of Sadness was nominated for three Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay.
Happy Death Day is a time-loopy “Groundhog Day” thriller about Tree (Jessica Rothe), a college student who must relive her birthday — and the day she was murdered — over and over until she solves the mystery of her own death. One of the people she encounters repeatedly, each time she repeats the day, is a climate activist who asks passersby if they would like to help “stop global warming.” Audiences are reminded of the climate crisis repeatedly—a total of six times in the film — in a way that is organic to the world (a college campus). The movie, which grossed $125 million worldwide on a $4.8 million budget, is a fun and lighthearted example of how climate can be woven into any genre.
Last year was the hottest year in recorded history, and our planet is currently warmer than it's been in at least 125,000 years. We wanted to know if the most critically acclaimed films of the year reflected this reality. To find out, a research team led by Dr. Matthew Schneider-Mayerson used the Climate Reality Check to analyze the films that received Oscar nominations in 2024.
Thirty-one fictional, feature-length films received Oscar nominations in 2024. Of those, thirteen fit our inclusion criteria: stories set in the present or near future, on Earth, in this universe. Those films were: Barbie, American Fiction, Anatomy of a Fall, Past Lives, May December, Nyad, Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One, The Creator, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, Io Capitano, Perfect Days, The Teachers’ Lounge, and Godzilla Minus One. Each film was coded by two researchers to ensure accuracy and reliability.
This is the first Oscars year coded using this test, and the results are surprising—in a good way.
Of the nominated films coded, 23% (3 films) passed the Climate Reality Check! Those films were: Barbie, Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One, and Nyad.
In Barbie, nominated for eight Academy Awards, we see a quick mention that ties the climate crisis to consumerism. Teenage Sasha (Ariana Greenblatt) lays into Barbie (Margot Robbie): “You set the feminist movement back fifty years, you destroyed girls' innate sense of worth, and you're killing the planet with your glorification of rampant consumerism.” Though the words “climate change” aren't spoken, the tie between “rampant consumerism” and “killing the planet” evokes the climate crisis and connects climate change to one of its root systemic causes. And by juxtaposing feminism and climate concerns (“sexualized capitalism!”), the film makes the intersectional argument that it's all connected, all the same bad guy.
In Mission Impossible, nominated for two Academy Awards, Eugene Kittridge (Henry Czerny) warns Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) that “the next world war isn't going to be a cold one.” He goes on to say, “It's going to be a ballistic war over a rapidly shrinking ecosystem. It's going to be a war for the last of our dwindling energy, drinkable water, breathable air.” Ethan is hunting a rogue AI, a cyberweapon originally developed by the US to prepare for the climate chaos Kittridge evokes. One of the AI's key features is its ability to predict probable outcomes, a skill we might all wish we had as we enter the uncertainty of our climate future
In Nyad, nominated for two Academy Awards, climate change is explicitly mentioned as an obstacle to Diana Nyad's attempt to make history by swimming from Cuba to Florida. On Nyad's third try, she is stung by a box jellyfish, which almost kills her. Her friend and coach, Bonnie Stoll (Jodie Foster), tells a dazed Nyad (Annette Bening), “So the UMiami folks think that the box jellyfish came up off the shallow reef when we left Cuba. Global warming.” Earlier, the team on the boat accompanying Nyad say the box jellyfish “can kill you” and “shouldn't be” in this part of the ocean. Through dialogue in two scenes, climate change is linked to changes in marine animal ranges, which pose threats to individual species, ecosystems, and human health—and threaten the life of the film's protagonist.
For the second year, we used the Climate Reality Check to analyze Oscar-nominated films, building a picture of how the year's most critically acclaimed movies reflect our climate reality.
From Hurricane Helene to the LA fires, we're all feeling and reeling from the impacts of climate change— heightened by the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement. But let's not forget it has also been a year of wins, innovation, and compassion—like wind and solar reaching all-time highs and communities uniting and centering care in the face of disaster.
In this climate-critical year, including Hollywood's own frontline experience, there is an ironic downturn in Oscar-nominated climate acknowledgment compared to last year. This year, DreamWorks' The Wild Robot, written by Chris Sanders and Peter Brown, was the lone Oscar nominee that passed, with its stunning portrayal of our watery future.
But we aren't disheartened! In fact, several big films from the past year included the climate crisis, but happened not to win Oscar nominations: The End, The Room Next Door, Furiosa, and Twisters.
Of the 30 scripted, feature-length films that received Oscar nominations in 2025, 10 fit our inclusion criteria: stories set in the present or near future, on Earth, in this universe. Those films were: A Different Man, A Real Pain, Anora, Conclave, Emilia Pérez, Inside Out 2, Sing Sing, The Seed of the Sacred Fig, The Substance, and The Wild Robot.
1 of the 10 eligible films passed, reflecting a 10% passing rate.
Have you ever imagined whales swimming over the Golden Gate Bridge? That's the world we enter in The Wild Robot, where climate impacts and situations—from sea-level rise to hints that humans have isolated themselves in climate-safe, domed cities—are subtly woven into the fabric of the storyworld. When robot Roz tries to shoo away the gosling Brightbill, she sets down a pamphlet whose cover reads "Fly South — Florida — More Shoreline Than Ever," saying, "Perhaps tips for your next vacation?" The image on the pamphlet closely resembles a map of sea-level rise.
The story is propelled by themes of cooperation and bridging divides, with Roz learning to "speak animal," and the animals learning to accept this strange chrome creature. Beaver, bear, duck, and skunk alike all hunker down together to weather "the worst storm I've ever seen," as Fink says. Each overcomes their instinct (or "programming," if you will) to fear, hate, and "other" the other. Though climate change is not explicitly mentioned in dialogue, one message rings clear: collaboration and compassion are the way to survive our climate future.
In this mesmerizing world, where the only remaining sign of human life are the artifacts we left behind, animals of varied species—a black cat, a dog, a lemur, a capybara, and a secretary bird—must come together to survive a devastating flood. Whether the flood is an outcome of human-caused climate change or a tsunami is unclear. What is clear, as in The Wild Robot, is that our animal heroes must overcome their habits (like the lemur's hoarding, the cat's fearful hiding) in order to survive by working as a community. Along the way, they feed, protect, exasperate, and play with one another while navigating the flood's challenges together.
This post-apocalyptic world, where apes have established societies amid the ruins of human civilization, hearkens to global destruction at the hands of our species—from sea-level rise and floods to viruses that led to talking apes. Spoiler: We're nearly extinct because of it. Nature has rebounded, but the apes are acting more human than ever, with some engaging in militaristic violence, enslavement, and authoritarianism. The film poses a crucial question: Is this new civilization doomed to repeat humanity's self-destructive patterns, or will it resist authoritarianism to forge a future built on wisdom, peace, and reverence for nature?
Dune: Part Two allegorically uncovers the root cause of the climate crisis: the greed of the fossil fuel industry. The imperial forces exploit the planet Arrakis to mine spice, which powers the whole galactic economy. In doing so, they ruthlessly oppress the Indigenous Fremen, who live in harmony with the desert. This story illustrates not only the inhumanity of those in power but also the utter stupidity of their murder-suicide campaign: the more spice they unsustainably mine, the more they annihilate the ecosystem, destabilizing the climate. In doing so, they come perilously close to destroying the only planet in the universe where spice exists, threatening not only Arrakis but the entire galaxy—including themselves.
The themes running through the above films point to a zeitgeist—one that's about overcoming our differences to work together, care for each other, and celebrate the beauty of our Earth amid the chaos—and we are here for it. Two of these films highlight characters banding together across divisions to take on authoritarian or corporate villains that harm nature. Three films take place in worlds where humans are either unseen or nearly extinct—a cautionary common denominator. And, of course, there are all the cute animals.
Good Energy is a nonprofit story consultancy for the age of climate change. Our mission is to support TV and film creators in telling wildly entertaining stories that honestly reflect the world we live in now—a world that's in a climate crisis. We aim to make it as easy as possible to portray the climate crisis on-screen in artful ways, in any storyline, across every genre.
Good Energy CRC team members: Anna Jane Joyner (founder and CEO) is a long-time story consultant and strategist at the intersection of climate, communications, and storytelling. Carmiel Banasky (editor-in-chief) is a critically acclaimed novelist, WGA TV and feature writer, and audio-drama creator, specializing in climate fiction. Bruno Olmedo Quiroga (director of strategy) is a design researcher, strategist, storyteller, IDEO alum, and cofounder of Maybe Ventures. Design: EJ Baker (creative director) is a visual designer and strategist, IDEO alum, and cofounder of Maybe Ventures. Web Development: Claire Niederberger is a software engineer, creative technologist, and Principal at Be Nice Works.
Matthew Schneider-Mayerson, PhD is associate professor of English and environmental studies at Colby College. His research combines literary criticism with communication studies and qualitative sociology to examine the cultural and political dimensions of climate change, with a focus on climate justice. He is the author or editor of four books, including An Ecotopian Lexicon (University of Minnesota Press, 2019) and Empirical Ecocriticism: Environmental Narratives for Social Change (University of Minnesota Press, 2023).
We landed on the two components of the Climate Reality Check after interviewing more than 200 writers, showrunners, executives, and communications experts. Our goal was to ensure the test was easy to use, measurable, and creatively inspiring.