In my evaluation, what should have been a very enlightening film about one issue that troubles our planet turned into a sappy over-the-top portrait of Al Gore’s “perfection” and ends up being what I believe it the first film equivalent of the Presidential Campaign Book typically written by so many candidates. On that level, alone, the film was a genius piece of campaign strategy. For the environmental cause, it was a travesty.
WD
While I do agree that is could be seen as (and probably is) a very good way of unofficially kicking off his campaign for ’08, I do not think that this aspect in any way minimizes the environmental message. Frankly, I want to be sure that any elected leader takes this and other environmental issues seriously, and since Gore is a natural leader in this field, I see no problem in combining his activism with a new dive into politics.
Celeste
I agree with WD. When Gore first began to talk about this issue his ideas were not well received especially by his opponents. It did not help him with his last run for president; which ended up to be a very painful experience, not only for him, but the rest of us.
I don’t think this movie was initially thought of as a tool for a run for president. Gore had been giving this talk internationally for many years before making a movie. The movie turned out to be very successful on the commercial level (third highest grossing documentary ever). I was very surprised and encouraged that Americans went to see it! An issue who’s time has finally arrived.
Another point of interest regarding this movie is that the producer offered 60 thousand free copies to the NSTA (National Science Teachers Association) and it was declined. I wonder why?
I agree with Celeste that Gore’s priority over the long term has been his commitment to fighting global climate change. In many ways, which he nearly admits in the film, politics was simply a tool for him to advance that goal through the system. To tell the truth, I doubt Gore will run in ’08 as the potential field is already crowded with shining stars, and despite his merits he has a bit of a tough hurdle to overcome.
Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons the NSTA declined the DVDs – politics. Gore’s association with the film, while raising it’s stature and exposure, has also ladened it with “political” overtones. Anyone but the most cynical reactionary knows that global warming and climate change is a serious issue worthy of much attention, but having Gore as the movement’s mouthpiece allows people to call it a “blue state” issue. I think it would be a bit too much to call this a “travesty” though.
WD.. totally unrelated to post.. I sent you some mail two or three weeks ago, did you get it? And can you email me your mailing address so I know where to send your next piece of mail?
I know what Romerican’s saying about the sappiness. I thought his mixture of down-home tales with environmental facts were a bit over the top myself. However, this is a guy who has a (perhaps undeserved) reputation for being a robot, and people go for the sentimentality – Professor Gore lecturing the masses on facts and figures wouldn’t have the same popular appeal as ol’ Al talking about his days on the farm.
Besides the sappy parts, I thought the film was very well done as far as explaining the global warming situation in understandable terms. There will always be people who claim that anyone with environmental concerns is Chicken Little, but that point of view is becoming less and less defendable as the evidence mounts.
In my evaluation, what should have been a very enlightening film about one issue that troubles our planet turned into a sappy over-the-top portrait of Al Gore’s “perfection” and ends up being what I believe it the first film equivalent of the Presidential Campaign Book typically written by so many candidates. On that level, alone, the film was a genius piece of campaign strategy. For the environmental cause, it was a travesty.
While I do agree that is could be seen as (and probably is) a very good way of unofficially kicking off his campaign for ’08, I do not think that this aspect in any way minimizes the environmental message. Frankly, I want to be sure that any elected leader takes this and other environmental issues seriously, and since Gore is a natural leader in this field, I see no problem in combining his activism with a new dive into politics.
I agree with WD. When Gore first began to talk about this issue his ideas were not well received especially by his opponents. It did not help him with his last run for president; which ended up to be a very painful experience, not only for him, but the rest of us.
I don’t think this movie was initially thought of as a tool for a run for president. Gore had been giving this talk internationally for many years before making a movie. The movie turned out to be very successful on the commercial level (third highest grossing documentary ever). I was very surprised and encouraged that Americans went to see it! An issue who’s time has finally arrived.
Another point of interest regarding this movie is that the producer offered 60 thousand free copies to the NSTA (National Science Teachers Association) and it was declined. I wonder why?
I agree with Celeste that Gore’s priority over the long term has been his commitment to fighting global climate change. In many ways, which he nearly admits in the film, politics was simply a tool for him to advance that goal through the system. To tell the truth, I doubt Gore will run in ’08 as the potential field is already crowded with shining stars, and despite his merits he has a bit of a tough hurdle to overcome.
Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons the NSTA declined the DVDs – politics. Gore’s association with the film, while raising it’s stature and exposure, has also ladened it with “political” overtones. Anyone but the most cynical reactionary knows that global warming and climate change is a serious issue worthy of much attention, but having Gore as the movement’s mouthpiece allows people to call it a “blue state” issue. I think it would be a bit too much to call this a “travesty” though.
WD.. totally unrelated to post.. I sent you some mail two or three weeks ago, did you get it? And can you email me your mailing address so I know where to send your next piece of mail?
Love,
Calla
I know what Romerican’s saying about the sappiness. I thought his mixture of down-home tales with environmental facts were a bit over the top myself. However, this is a guy who has a (perhaps undeserved) reputation for being a robot, and people go for the sentimentality – Professor Gore lecturing the masses on facts and figures wouldn’t have the same popular appeal as ol’ Al talking about his days on the farm.
Besides the sappy parts, I thought the film was very well done as far as explaining the global warming situation in understandable terms. There will always be people who claim that anyone with environmental concerns is Chicken Little, but that point of view is becoming less and less defendable as the evidence mounts.