Commentary: An Inconvenient Piece of Spinach
Al Gore's movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" continued to do well at the box office in its second weekend; it went into wider release and broke into the top 10 with $1.33 million, though playing in only 77 theaters nationwide. Released by Paramount Classics, the film averaged an impressive $17,292 a theater, compared to $12,410 in 3,070 cinemas for "The Break-Up," which (ironically and pitifully) was the Number One movie of the weekend.
However good "An Inconvenient Truth" is doing at the box office, and however impressive the reviews, I have to say this: I hated the movie.
These are my reasons why:
1) Though this may sound incredibly superficial, Al Gore has a piece of food stuck in his teeth throughout the entire "presentation" part of the movie, which (by my estimation) is over half the film. I sat in the third row of the theater and got way too close to his face to begin with, so you can only imagine my chagrin at having to view what I believe is a piece of spinach lodged in the corner of his lower bicuspid. I googled "Al Gore" + "food stuck in teeth/tooth" and came up with nothing. I can't believe that no one has noticed and/or written about this yet. It is appalling. If movie art directors and special effects folk can make actors look skinnier and taller than they are or create characters like Yoda, then they can get a piece of green gunk out of the former Vice President's mouth before they release a movie nationally.
2) While much has been written about Mr. Gore's stellar use of Powerpoint, I think we need to look at where these kudos are coming from. CNN is not, at least to my knowledge, the arbiter of good design taste. Before everyone starts ooh-ing and ahh-ing over Gore's use of bullets and laser pointers, I suggest they read what Edward Tufte thinks of tons of type on multi-colored slides. Go to www.edwardtufte.com. Please.
3) Okay, so I am not suggesting here that WHAT Al Gore is saying isn't logical and truthful. It is. But it is certainly not the first time anyone has said it, and certainly not the first time it has been the focus of a nationally released film. Hasn't anyone seen The Day After Tomorrow? Same message, better special effects. I don't mean to be flippant here, but what is the new message? That Republican politicians don't believe the numerous scientific reports and overwhelming planetary evidence? Are we supposed to be surprised at this? This is the same administration that believed that they could get Bin Laden and thought that Katrina would blow out to sea.
4) So, the movie concludes with about a 60 second directive on "what we can do to help save the planet." This includes the following:
--try to get a hybrid car
--turn off your lights and get more efficient light bulbs
--go to his website
--write your local/national politicians
and the most self-indulgent directive:
--tell everyone you know to see the movie.
Now. I did not need to see the movie in order to understand what is happening to our planet. I was hoping to learn more about what can be done and who is coming up with new and innovative solutions to our global problems. I was hoping to learn how I could get more involved, to which I didn't anticipate hearing feeble recommendations about light bulbs and websites. I did not go to this movie to listen to Al Gore make a Powerpoint presentation with a conclusion reminiscent of "oh, it was a dream and Bobby is still really alive." There is no doubt in my mind that human beings are destroying the planet. There is no doubt in my mind that we must change our way of living in the world if we want to preserve it for future generations. But there is no doubt in my mind that this film is politicking at its worst: it does a great job of placing the blame and a dire job of suggesting realistic, innovative, non-cliched solutions.
In fact, what I expect is this: "An Inconvenient Truth" is a well-timed movie release to get Gore back in the public eye. Does it have to do with the upcoming Presidential race? Hmmm. It is clear he has had quite a lot of speech coaching, and his clothes are better. Too bad he isn't saying anything new or offering any new suggestions, and too bad no one checked his teeth as he was getting ready for his redux close-up.
However good "An Inconvenient Truth" is doing at the box office, and however impressive the reviews, I have to say this: I hated the movie.
These are my reasons why:
1) Though this may sound incredibly superficial, Al Gore has a piece of food stuck in his teeth throughout the entire "presentation" part of the movie, which (by my estimation) is over half the film. I sat in the third row of the theater and got way too close to his face to begin with, so you can only imagine my chagrin at having to view what I believe is a piece of spinach lodged in the corner of his lower bicuspid. I googled "Al Gore" + "food stuck in teeth/tooth" and came up with nothing. I can't believe that no one has noticed and/or written about this yet. It is appalling. If movie art directors and special effects folk can make actors look skinnier and taller than they are or create characters like Yoda, then they can get a piece of green gunk out of the former Vice President's mouth before they release a movie nationally.
2) While much has been written about Mr. Gore's stellar use of Powerpoint, I think we need to look at where these kudos are coming from. CNN is not, at least to my knowledge, the arbiter of good design taste. Before everyone starts ooh-ing and ahh-ing over Gore's use of bullets and laser pointers, I suggest they read what Edward Tufte thinks of tons of type on multi-colored slides. Go to www.edwardtufte.com. Please.
3) Okay, so I am not suggesting here that WHAT Al Gore is saying isn't logical and truthful. It is. But it is certainly not the first time anyone has said it, and certainly not the first time it has been the focus of a nationally released film. Hasn't anyone seen The Day After Tomorrow? Same message, better special effects. I don't mean to be flippant here, but what is the new message? That Republican politicians don't believe the numerous scientific reports and overwhelming planetary evidence? Are we supposed to be surprised at this? This is the same administration that believed that they could get Bin Laden and thought that Katrina would blow out to sea.
4) So, the movie concludes with about a 60 second directive on "what we can do to help save the planet." This includes the following:
--try to get a hybrid car
--turn off your lights and get more efficient light bulbs
--go to his website
--write your local/national politicians
and the most self-indulgent directive:
--tell everyone you know to see the movie.
Now. I did not need to see the movie in order to understand what is happening to our planet. I was hoping to learn more about what can be done and who is coming up with new and innovative solutions to our global problems. I was hoping to learn how I could get more involved, to which I didn't anticipate hearing feeble recommendations about light bulbs and websites. I did not go to this movie to listen to Al Gore make a Powerpoint presentation with a conclusion reminiscent of "oh, it was a dream and Bobby is still really alive." There is no doubt in my mind that human beings are destroying the planet. There is no doubt in my mind that we must change our way of living in the world if we want to preserve it for future generations. But there is no doubt in my mind that this film is politicking at its worst: it does a great job of placing the blame and a dire job of suggesting realistic, innovative, non-cliched solutions.
In fact, what I expect is this: "An Inconvenient Truth" is a well-timed movie release to get Gore back in the public eye. Does it have to do with the upcoming Presidential race? Hmmm. It is clear he has had quite a lot of speech coaching, and his clothes are better. Too bad he isn't saying anything new or offering any new suggestions, and too bad no one checked his teeth as he was getting ready for his redux close-up.
posted by debbie millman at 6/04/2006 11:32:00 PM
2 Comments:
hello, the food stuck in the tooth got to me also. My husband says I am petty...and maybe it was put there on purpose. O well... I also remember the dirty fingernails of Truman Capote. But, I did like Al's movie..no beach front property for me.
I would hate to think what you would have to say about Abraham Lincoln if he was on TV :)
He was not in any way considered attractive, yet a great leader in our history. I personally think he was a fine looking man. Character is what gets me always.
Personally, i think maybe you could just write a letter to the film editors. But maybe, you are too passionate about the issue presented that you want it to be portrayed perfectly. I get that.
I thoroughly enjoyed Gore's movie, even applauded with others at the end.
I didn't want to see the movie at first because as much as I like documentaries, I wanted something cheerful. I am glad I did. It was well done.
It does make you wonder. Too often the press just throws out the term "global warming", but to actually see it talked about in depth, with pictures to back it up, was quite interesting. There needs to be a follow-up film that focuses on the solutions, what countries are doing what and what we can do realistically.
And I want to see pictures of all those oil company CEOs on that screen as well. I know there are people getting rich and couldn't care less how. I want to know. I am glad he is doing something about it. I think he came off as quite sincere. Whether he is trying to be public again...hey why not. Let's see what he hs to offer.
Thanks, take care, MN.
Post a Comment
<< Home