The Al Gore Show

All about me

“The Al Gore Show”

A Review of An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power by Nick Olszyk

MPAA Rating, PG

USCCB Rating, NR

Reel Rating, Two Reels            

            A decade ago, Al Gore and director Davis Guggenheim produced the documentary An Inconvenient Truth. It made the case that global warming was real, man-made, and a threat. Many embraced the film, which went on to becoming one of the highest grossing documentaries of all time and won two Academy Awards. Critic Roger Ebert went so far as to remark the following in his review: “I have never said these words before, but here they are: you owe it to yourself to see this film.”

Of course, An Inconvenient Truth had its doubters, who lodged two main complaints: first that it was boring – just a powerpoint slide on steroids – and second that it was an ego project for Al Gore who would soon win the Noble Peace Prize and was courting another presidential run in 2008. These critics were wrong. Truth succeeded because it had a story to tell and used compelling visual graphics that everyone could understand. It stayed true to the science and largely avoided politics. Lastly, ended on a hopeful note that just as humans caused this mess, they could clean it up. Sadly, it seems that Al Gore – now without his talented director – has created the film to meet the expectations of his enemies. An Inconvenient Sequel is boring and a power trip. The first film was a masterpiece. This one would barely justify a two-second glance in a Netflix column, mostly because Gore just can’t get out of the way.

Although Sequel has an important theme and some compelling moments, it has no central plot or direction. The film assumes that the whole world has (or should have) accepted all the arguments Truth asserted and instead focuses on creating potent legislation to reverse climate change. Most of the “action” involves Gore leading climate leadership camps and hobnobbing with the rich and powerful, although it is private companies rather than government directives that make the most difference in the end. Gradually, these vignettes culminate in the Paris Climate treaty, although we all know how that story eventually ends. Probably the best scene occurs when Gore visits Greensburg, Kansas – the largest town that is 100% powered by renewable energy. The mayor explains that although he and the town are mostly Republican, that wind and solar energy made more economic sense with the bonus reducing pollution. His approach had both the compassion and humility that Pope Francis advocated in Laudato Si. This was the perfect opportunity to develop a vision of ecology that includes everyone – left and right, business and government. Yet while the mayor was cheerful and gregarious, Gore was reserved and awkward, almost embarrassed a non-Democrat was taking up his cause.

In Truth, Gore was the narrator; now he is the protagonist. His figure dominates every frame of the film, usually in a medium or close-up. Nearly everyone from prime ministers to sycophantic interns still call him “Vice President” and more than one person asks if he plans to run for president again. He has aged significantly but has not tired in his environmental mission. Yet the cost of this endless crusade weighs on him. He looks longingly on family photos from decades prior as if they were pictures of an entirely different person. While social causes are important, they can never replace family obligations or individual dignity.

Despite the film’s poor quality, the question it poses is important: now that the world knows the facts, what should be done? Gore’s vision almost exclusively involves the reduction of carbon emissions, despite the fact that research shows a variety of causes from agriculture to volcanos. He believes this can be achieved through legal restrictions of fossil fuels and greater funding for renewable sources. Yet many third world countries – wanting the same industrial success as American – want to invest in these carbon based energy sources because they are cheaper and more widely available. Gore uses his political clout to broker deals between solar companies and these poorer nations. These exchanges are not visually compelling but the positive outcomes they bring are real.

The great director Frank Capra remarked that “there are no rules in cinema, only sins, and the cardinal sin is dullness.” An Inconvenient Sequel is dull, really dull. This film was not a good decision and, in the long run, may hurt Gore’s goals rather than help – though I doubt enough people will see it to cause that much difference. In the last scene, the villain arrives: Donald Trump, a worthy foe who shares the same girth and egoism though an ideological opposite. The only thing lamer than a liberal trotting out Trump is the film’s subtitle: Truth to Power. Who is in power? Climate change deniers? Hardly. The movie ends, and the credits roll up full of hashtags and fortune cookie sayings. This is an issue that deserves serious contemplation and action, but Gore is preaching not to “power” but the choir, and a sleepy one at that.