La verdad incómoda 2

Would have been better if it was more like the first one - like a straight up lecture full of evidence. The subject matter is very important, of course; however the editing of the film is sloppy and all over the place up until the final 20 minutes or so when then start showing how India more or less held the world hostage and got advanced solar technology patent rights out of it. In a funny twist of fate, after this movie was released India went back to going full Industrial and has beaten China when it comes to smog. Lol, this world is doomed.

While the scientific consensus is in favor of mankind's role in causing or at least strongly contributing to global warming, some scientists point to increased solar activity or the natural cyclic effect of climate change as the cause. Others claim that computer models have left out "the complex interaction between warm southerly winds, variations in cloud cover, and sunlight reflection from open water." According to 1,300 independent scientific experts from countries all over the world under the auspices of the United Nations, however, there is a more than ninety-five percent probability that human activities over the past fifty years have warmed our planet to the point that we must take steps to curtail the emission of greenhouse gases before we reach a point of no return.

In An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, Al Gore returns to center stage updating and expanding on Davis Guggenheim's ("He Named me Malala") award winning Oscar-winning 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, a film in which Gore raised public awareness about climate change. The sequel, directed by Bonni Cohen and Jon Shenk ("Audrie and Daisy"), replaces the multi-media presentation and lecture-hall atmosphere of the earlier film with a broader, more cinematic effort. Focusing more on the personality and accomplishments of Al Gore, a former Vice-President and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, the camera follows Gore around the world where he confronts rapidly melting glaciers in Greenland, wades into flooded streets in Miami, Florida, and visits areas of recent climate disasters such as Hurricane Sandy, the Fort McMurray Canada, and Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines.

We learn that the predictions that Gore made eleven years ago have happened at a faster rate than thought possible at the time - bigger and more destructive storms, the drying of once fertile lands, and the flooding of the 9/11 memorial in Manhattan. Gore is shown training supporters to take up the cause and act as his surrogates in climate change and advocacy. Although the film is more disjointed than the 2006 film, one of its cohesive points takes place in December, 2015 when world leaders meet in Paris to hammer out an agreement aimed at restricting the rise of global temperatures to less than two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Here Gore spreads the message among world leaders and attempts to broker an agreement with India by persuading the CEO of the American company SolarCity to grant India the right to patent a type of solar technology.

Although an agreement was eventually reached, the accord failed to mandate the rapid severe cuts to global emissions that were needed and fell short in many eyes. The agreement, however, did create a feeling of hope but that has taken a hit with the election of Donald Trump who announced in March that the United States will withdraw from the Paris agreement, saying the deal is bad for America. While there is little in the sequel that is new, Gore speaks with passion and increasing anger as he talks about how the environmental choices we have made have contributed to the current climate crisis.

While the film hopefully will inspire a new generation to understand and act on the climate crisis, what it does not say is that to reduce carbon pollution, we may also need to curtail consumption, reduce air and auto travel, and limit the production and consumption of meat. Even beyond that, however, the film does not discuss that the problem may not only be one of technology but a crisis of the human spirit, one that requires a transformation in lifestyles and values, perhaps a reorganization of society. As author Richard Heinberg ("Peak Everything") notes, "In order to save ourselves, we do not need to evolve new organs; we just need to change our culture. And language-based culture can change very swiftly, as the industrial revolution has shown," Although it stops short of proclaiming those goals, the film is a timely reminder of the life and death choices we face. In his book, "How Soon is Now," author Daniel Pinchbeck attempts to wake us from our stupor.

"We have," he says, "unleashed planetary catastrophe though our actions as a species. We have induced an initiatory crisis for humanity as a whole. I think that on a subconscious level we have willed this into being. We are forcing ourselves to evolve – to change or die – by creating this universal threat to our existence. We will either squander our chance and fail as a species, or we will seize it, making a voluntary, self-willed mutation in how we think and act. This is the choice that faces us now." An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power may help us make the right choice.

this guy is just using this subject and topic to make himself richer and more famous. After his first film won him an Oscar, his bank account has increased beyond any average American could fathom. I think using this trendy topic to enrich himself and afford him and his wife, a two-member family, live in an over 10,000 sq.ft mansion, is just one of the evidences to expose him as a typical shameless opportunist among other similar smart entrepreneurs who could foresee and predict what's the next business opportunity to make more dineros for years to come.

I didn't see any new input in this so-called sequel, only found this guy appeared in a lot of paying shows to repeat, to reiterate what he had already talked, discussed and written, a more simple-minded bore-you-to-death well-known dried up crap, merely with more crafty film editing and subtle soundtrack. There's nothing new in this film, only showed us an older, fatter, more puffy and bloated white guy who obviously has been affected by the unhealthy global warming and climate change. The only way to avoid his further deterioration is to better stay indoor of his 10,000 plus sq.ft. mansion with 24/7 climate controls.

I've forced myself to sit through watching this deadbeat documentary and have found out nothing new at all. What a phony and a totally unnecessary pointless sequel only with his repetitive complaints of his unfair presidential election loss to that idiotic clown (by the way, similar presidential election outcome repeated in our latest president election; Democratic Party and most of the American voters never learned). If you are smart enough and not certified stupid like me, forget about this pointless film. Don't even bother to rent it in order not to add more dollars to this guy's bank account.

I'm in full agreement with Gore about the gravity of global warming, but I'm not sure if a film like this will sway those already entrenched in denial. He, as messenger, is terminally mistrusted by the simpletons who really need to be swayed. I also don't like him preaching the virtues of the Environmental Industrial Complex, which has abandoned pretenses of protecting nature from human impact and shifted toward grabbing electricity at the expense of natural landscapes.

There's too much talk of how we can save the planet by industrializing Earth's dwindling open spaces, as if everyone agrees it's a necessary sacrifice. There's no proof that wind power, a very diffuse source of electricity, will make much difference. Germany's experience with Energiewende is a good example. Actual CO2 reductions have been scant and the countryside has lost its character via machines dominating scenery that used to host churches as the tallest structures.

Every time I see cameos of giant wind turbines looming over fields and mountains, I think people are making a huge blunder called business-as- usual. Man has a history of trying to solve one problem by creating another; in this case the aesthetic destruction of nature. Wind power also presents growing threats to bird & bat populations and human health via infrasound and other irritating noise. The industry denies that those are significant problems and its devotees claim nothing can be truly ugly except coal mines. Who are they kidding?

It would be much better to see Gore and others focus entirely on smaller footprint technologies like solar, and new prospects like Deep Geothermal which combines the best of oil drilling technology with greener thinking. Instead of desecrating the Earth's surface, we should aim for energy sources that don't occupy more land or ocean space.

I'd have more hope if the average person didn't waste so much energy with things like unnecessary engine idling, and using more lights than needed. They still consume energy based on pricing and don't care how it's being depleted.

P.S. I see several grossly unscientific reviews on this site, like the straw man claim that Gore previously said Florida would be underwater by now, and a major misunderstanding about infrared absorption and CO2 saturation. Those comments show the level of intellect a film like this is up against, including in the nation's highest office.

I thought "The Inconvenient Truth" was well done and stuck to the point. It came at the problem of Global Warming ... or Planetary Hotboxing, like I call it from a logical and scientific direction.

This movie ... I don't know what is was, but it put my girlfriend to sleep in less than 5 minutes. I had trouble staying awake and even making it through this long monotonous, aimless and pointless reminder of the first movie.

What I will remember from this movie is not any facts, or images, or important strategies ... but so many, many scenes of Al Gore's bloated body in all kinds of places. Gore waddling through airports, his whiny, dronying, irritating voice, but mostly all of these shots where Gore is getting make up for the camera.

What kind of an idiot thought this was an important image to include ... ugly old Al Gore sitting there saying nothing while some person applies makeup to his face? The whole movie was putatively about Global Warming, but mostly it seems to be about subliminally showing ugly negative and pointless scenes in the middle of a very tame, bland and old discussion of climate change.

This movie doesn't deserve a 1 ... but it also doesn't deserve much higher. I give it a 2/10 because it is serious and should be about something important.