Four stars. Rated PG, for no particular reason
By Derrick Bang • Originally published in The Davis Enterprise, 8.11.17
Accidentally or intentionally,
justifiably or unfairly, in the moment or only through the lens of history,
great events of progressive socio/economic change often become associated with
a single individual.
 |
| Standing at the foot of Greenland's rapidly dwindling Russell Glacier, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore sadly contemplates the implication of all this ice melt, and the impact that so much water will have, throughout the world. |
John Muir, and the modern
environmental movement. Upton Sinclair, and working-class labor reform. Mahatma
Gandhi, and nonviolent civil disobedience. Rosa Parks, and the civil rights
movement.
Al Gore, and climate crisis.
That modifier is intentional and
preferable, because the phrase “climate change” isn’t getting the job done;
it’s much too passive. Human beings don’t respond to “change,” because it
sounds slow, and therefore easy to ignore. Why bother, folks are inclined to
think; it won’t matter during my
lifetime.
A crisis, however, is an entirely
different issue ... and the climate situation definitely is a crisis. At this
point, nay-saying ostriches have about as much credibility as the Flat Earth
Society, or those who believe Elvis still lives, or those who insist that the
Moon landing was concocted on a secret Hollywood sound stage.
And yet there are so many nay-saying ostriches.
Everybody associates former U.S.
vice president Al Gore with 2006’s An
Inconvenient Truth, although director Davis Guggenheim certainly deserves much
of the credit; he’s the one who carried home an Academy Award, a Humanitas
Prize and dozens of film festival and Critics Circle awards. But Gore remains
most associated with the film — no surprise — because it profiled his
relentless march on the lecture and conference circuit, sounding the alarm
about the dangers of global warming and climate crisis.
For the most part, he preached to
the converted; the film frequently was ridiculed, in many cases reflexively,
along political lines ... as if a pending global crisis were something that
affected only Democrats and liberals, and could be ignored safely by
Republicans and conservatives.
But the mere fact that An Inconvenient Truth provoked debate,
was good enough. There’s also no question that the film played an important
role in what has come to be known as the “sustainability revolution.”
Plenty of people also jeered at
1989’s Roger & Me, but —
similarly — there’s no question that Michael Moore started something, and
opened a lot of eyes.
An Inconvenient Truth was slightly more than a decade
ago. Some things have changed for the better — progress definitely has been
made — while other things have become deplorably worse. The latter shift
justifies the subtitle of this sophomore documentary: An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power.
As even cursory involvement with
current events demonstrates — and as Gore notes more than once, during the course
of this film — American democracy has been hijacked by über-wealthy individuals
and corporate entities that have rigged the game, and obfuscate crucial issues
by overwhelming them with “alternative facts” (read: lies).
It has become necessary — nay, vital
— to speak truth to power.
Co-directors Bonni Cohen and Jon
Shenk have assembled this sequel much the way Gore structures the seminars he
gives to large lecture halls throughout the world, crowded with concerned
individuals determined to join the ranks of his “climate leaders.” He starts
with the “bad stuff” — the setbacks, the current climate crises — and concludes
with his optimistic insistence that time has not run out, and that boldness, political will and smart
investments still can turn the tide (literally).
Because, frankly, the situation
has become impossible to ignore.
Cohen and Shenk begin this global
journey with Gore’s visit to Greenland’s Russell Glacier, which is diminishing
at a catastrophic rate. He stands, precariously, at the edge of cracking ice
and watches the rushing arctic river pour incomprehensible amounts of water
into the surrounding ocean. (The filmmakers wisely avoid any mention of polar
bears or other wildlife, thereby avoiding accusations of shamelessly
sentimental manipulation.)
I can anticipate the rolling eyes
and snickers of contempt that this sequence will provoke from naysayers. Another melting glacier? Boo-bloody-hoo.
It’s just water; who the hell cares?
Yes, it is just water. But it’s got to go somewhere ... and a good portion
of it wound up flooding low-lying portions of South Florida and New York City,
as dramatically revealed via newsreel footage. Huge swaths of Miami are shown
inundated by surges of water deep enough to kill ... while Florida Gov. Rick
Scott continues to ban the terms “climate change” and “global warming” by all
state government entities, insisting that sea-level rise is merely “nuisance
flooding.”
That level of arrogant
intransience defies description. And people re-elected this clown?
As we soberly contemplate these
newsreel images, Gore reminds us that his previous film took the most heat for
a computer-generated model that predicted ocean overflow could fill the streets
of New York right up to the site of the 9/11 Memorial, soon (at the time) to
begin construction. “It’ll never happen,” people jeered.
He takes no pleasure, in this
sequel, displaying newsreel footage that depicts precisely that catastrophic
event.
Until recently, what already has
happened in South Florida and New York — not to mention low-lying island
countries such as the Maldives, in the South Indian Ocean — often has been
described with the term “unprecedented.” But it’s increasingly obvious — from
footage that depicts these and other catastrophes, such as the 2013 typhoon
that devastated Tacloban, Philippines — that such events are the new normal.
2014 was the hottest year on
record, globally ... until 2015, which was just shy of twice as hot. 2016 was
hotter still. There’s a direct link between our atmosphere’s increasing carbon
dioxide levels, and rising and warming oceans, and devastating drought, and the
destruction of croplands and forests, and the widening swaths of dangerous
insect vectors (Zika-bearing Aedes mosquitoes, as just one example).
These images of Nature’s fury are
intercut with Gore’s facility for presenting facts and figures in an easily
digestible manner, during his seminars; and with his activities during the slow
march to the United Nations’ COP 21 climate conference, in Paris. The always engaging
footage ranges from the amusingly intimate, to media-savvy interviews, to
remarkably candid power-brokering conferences.
Gore is forced to peel off soggy
socks prior to a presentation, after his boots weren’t nearly tall enough
during a wade through Miami’s ocean-flooding streets. He spars with Telemundo’s
Vanessa Hauc and Miami Herald journalist Jenny Staletovich. He speaks
passionately during private meetings with UN Climate Chief Christiana Figueres
and New York Attorney Gen. Eric Schneiderman.
We can’t help being impressed by
the fact that all these people consented to being filmed (although it’s obvious
that some on-camera subjects remain uncomfortable).
The most intriguing subplot,
leading to the Paris climate conference, is Gore’s struggle to accommodate the
argument put forth by Indian politicians who object to the obvious inequity.
The United States and other “modern” countries built their glittering cities
and economic prosperity by burning coal. Why shouldn’t India be allowed to do
the same?
Gore extols the wisdom of
investing in solar energy, pointing to this industry’s great strides throughout
the United States (with notable, frustrating exceptions in states such as
Florida and Nevada).
“I’ll do the same thing after 150
years,” replies Piyush Goyal, India’s Minister of Energy and Power. “After I’ve
used my coal. After I’ve got my people jobs. After I’ve created my
infrastructure.”
It’s a compelling argument.
Gore’s response, depicted on camera, is fascinating. (No spoilers here.) I will
note, however, that this is one time that Cohen and Shenk let us down a bit; we
don’t get full closure on the outcome of this stalemate.
Even so, as the 98-minute film draws
to its conclusion, we realize that the tone has
shifted. Solutions do seem possible, via
collaborative efforts that simply ignore even powerful holdouts. Gore’s
encounter with Dale Ross, the Republican mayor of Georgetown, Texas, isn’t
merely uplifting; it’s refreshingly charming. When Ross says “We got something
in common,” it’s hard not to cheer.
The film concludes as Gore
demonstrates his most powerful weapon: the passion and sincerity with which he
delivers this message, day after week after month after year, and the charisma
that helps it go down smoothly. He’s a helluva speaker.
He jokes at one point, while responding
to a question, that he only “embraced” this calling after his first-choice
career was thwarted by the U.S. Supreme Court.
But I can’t help feeling — as
this film repeatedly makes clear — that God opened a window when that door was
closed. Al Gore is absolutely in the right place, at the right time. And if
this film, like its predecessor, preaches mostly to the converted ... well,
“mostly” is better than “only.”
And this one’s similarly
guaranteed to further the debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment