An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power

Too much Al Gore focusing on Al Gore.

Here is the problem with Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, a follow-up to his 2006 Oscar winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. Except for intellectual shut-ins, nearly every person recognizes the colossal consequences of poisoning our atmosphere with greenhouse gases. Unfortunately, this film gradually loses its meaning when you have to repeatedly listen to Mr. Gore’s monotone speeches.

It’s not that the film itself lacks significant moments. To begin with, there are some devastatingly wonderful scenes of ice melting in Greenland where large rivers are formed. Furthermore, the most meaningful moment in the film occurs at its conclusion when you watch Mr. Gore and others work to get the Paris Climate Pact signed by all countries. It leaves you in bitter agony as you watch Donald Trump withdraw our country from this pact for reasons that defy any meaningful explanation.

The film also hits a high note as it centers on the increasing use of solar power and wind energy to reduce our addiction to fossil fuels. Various cities in our country as well as countries like Chile are making gigantic progress in this area. Sadly, you can’t help but cringe in disgust as you watch a state like Florida, “The Sunshine State”, all but ban their use.

Having said that, what robs this film of its strength is its constant focus on Mr. Gore himself. While you have to honor his commitment to help our country adopt a policy of clean energy, the film becomes a bit annoying as it centers on the self-glorification of Mr. Gore.

But let’s not ignore the central point of this film. Wealthy corporations and individuals like the Koch brothers are doing all they can to prevent our country from tackling global warming on a meaningful level. If our president and his EPA Director Scott Pruitt want to cater to the coal industry, I suggest that they take a good look at India and Beijing where smokestacks have blotted out the sky for weeks at a time. Is that really what we want to happen in our country?

While I feel a bit guilty criticizing Mr. Gore, I was left reflecting on how I would have responded 2000 years ago if I was watching Jesus give his Sermon on the Mount. Though I am clearly not comparing the two individually, I wonder if I would have been looking at my solar dial if the Good Lord had largely focused on himself for 1 hour and 47 minutes.