An Inconvenient Truth | 
| Director: Davis Guggenheim
Actors: Al Gore, Billy West, George Bush, George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan
Studio: Paramount
List Price: $29.99
Buy Used: $8.95
You Save: $21.04 (70%)
New (44) Used (26) Collectible (3) from $8.95
Rating:  1121 reviews
Sales Rank: 1153
Format: Color, Ntsc, Widescreen
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled)
Rating: PG (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.66:1
Number Of Items: 1
Running Time: 100 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.1
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5.5 x 0.2
MPN: PARD348084D
UPC: 097363480846
EAN: 0097363480846
ASIN: B000ICL3KG
Theatrical Release Date: 2006
Release Date: November 21, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: Disc and cover in very good condition, all sales guaranteed
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
With the fate of our planet arguably hanging in the balance, An Inconvenient Truth may prove to be one of the most important and prescient documentaries of all time. As he jokingly refers to himself, "former President-elect" Al Gore felt an urgent personal calling to draw attention--as he had been doing throughout his political career--to the increasingly desperate crisis of global warming, and this riveting documentary is basically a filmed version (by respected TV director Davis Guggenheim) of the PowerPoint lecture that Gore has presented (by his own estimate, well over 1,000 times) to attentive audiences all over the world. Considering Gore's amiable, low-key approach to charts, graphs, statistics, and photographs that leave no room for doubt regarding the reality (not "theory") of global warming as Earth's ultimate environmental crisis, many viewers will be surprised by just how fascinating and convincing this no-frills film really is. As we learn about the milestone events that shaped his character (including his sister's death and young son's near-fatal injuries after being struck by a car), Gore sheds the stiff demeanor of his 2000 presidential campaign and impresses us as a man with a mission, transcending partisan politics with an impassioned plea for common sense, ethical forthrightness, and passionate purpose in reversing the harmful effects of global warming through personal and political responsibility. Some may accuse Gore of exploiting global warming as a Democratic platform, but his honest conviction regarding this "inconvenient truth" (i.e. overwhelming evidence of global warming that's troublesome to those whose interests are threatened by Gore's irrefutable message) is likely to silence all but the most obtusely stubborn detractors. By taking the high road and discreetly avoiding a full-on assault against the George W. Bush administration (which has steadfastly avoided "the inconvenient truth" with obfuscating spin control and policies favoring the oil industry), Gore effectively rises above political differences with a stern but hopeful eye toward a better future for our children.--Jeff Shannon
Product Description
Former vice president al gore presents a frightening view of the future of our planet - and our civilization. Studio: Paramount Home Video Release Date: 11/21/2006 Starring: Al Gore Run time: 96 minutes Rating: Pg Director: David Guggenheim
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 1116 more reviews...
 Go See It. Go. Right Now. May 30, 2006
thornhillatthemovies.com (Venice, CA United States)
1019 out of 1287 found this review helpful
Ok, let me get this straight. They made a documentary about Al Gore giving a lecture? About global warming? Okay, I'm already asleep. Snore. Yawn. Why don't I just stay home and save the money I would spend to take a nap.
All kidding aside, if you know anything about Al Gore, you know this is a subject he is extremely committed to and passionate about. Very passionate. And after five years of some of the worst, most harmful environmental policy to ever come out of Washington, DC, there is no better time for "An Inconvenient Truth".
I know many consider Gore to be less than a captivating speaker. But in "An Inconvenient Truth" he comes across as a different man because he is so passionate and committed to the subject of global warming, he comes across as a different man. Informed, knowledgeable, conversational and persuasive, if he were like this during the election, there would be no Florida Recount in our history books. Okay, so that didn't happen. But the result is that Gore, much like Clinton and Carter, are trying to do something with their status to help better the world. Gore has long been an environmental advocate and it shows. He knows the facts inside and out; people have provided him with statistics, graphs, charts and more, and he uses them in this presentation.
As Gore states, he has given the lecture more than a thousand times around the globe. Because of this, he is extremely comfortable addressing large audiences, giving them a lot of scientific research to digest. Remarkably, he makes it easy to understand, pointing out key facts, walking us through some of the more difficult to understand ideas and problems. He also knows when the audience needs a break and interjects humor here and there. At one point, he shows a spoof of an educational film animated by the people at "The Simpsons". At others, he makes fun of himself and his political ambitions and woes.
Davis Guggenheim, the filmmaker, has apparently presented Gore's lecture virtually intact. As Gore moves around on a dais, clicking for the next slide, he makes persuasive points. But he also reaches a couple of key points. When this happens, the filmmakers smartly pull back from the lecture, giving us a portrait of a few key moments in Gore's life. The argument he makes in his lecture is persuasive, intelligent and well thought out, but because we learn more about the man making the presentation, these points have even more resonance. Not only do these moments give us more details about Gore, they also provide a respite from the scientific data, allowing us to absorb what we have learned.
At one point, Gore states that the data is irrefutable and it appears to be. Remarkably, the filmmakers show footage of various people attacking Gore, or claiming the data he is presenting is not based in fact. Yet, we can see it for ourselves, right in front of us. And I am sure Gore could easily provide a bibliography of resources for us to check out all of the facts he uses. What would drive some of these people to attack Gore and this data? Some of the clips are from Gore's days as a Senator and Vice President, so some of that can be contributed to political parties trying to one-up each other. But currently, Gore does not hold political office, yet the current administration seems intent on giving every break to the worst polluters in the country, allowing them to make as much money as possible while they pollute and pollute and pollute. Gore shows a slide about this argument. Apparently, there is the thought good environmental policy will impact the economy. How do these same people explain the relationship between Toyota, Honda, Ford and GM? Toyota and Honda manufacture vehicles with far better gas mileage than their competitors and are much more successful because of it. An argument Gore makes very convincingly.
Thankfully, Gore stays away from political bias. More or less. A couple of times, he makes funny remarks about his failed run for the presidency, or he makes a pointed comment about the current administration, but by and large his comments are directed at us and what we should do to save our planet. The film isn't void of bias, but there could certainly have been a lot more. The fact the filmmaker and Gore showed some restraint makes his presentation even more persuasive.
The film ends with a series of `calls to action' as the credits begin. Frankly, these aren't needed because Gore's arguments are so convincing. But they are effective. As one call to action states "Urge everyone you know to see this film." Well, folks, that's what I am doing. Go and see this film. We need to do something before it is too late to do anything. Hopefully, this film will one day be viewed as a historical document of the beginning of a great change and not as a horror film.
Inspiring and captivating May 28, 2006
Samuel Weber (New York, NY USA)
637 out of 850 found this review helpful
When I was a child, people clapped at the end of movies -- we knew that the filmmakers wouldn't actually hear us, but we showed our appreciation nonetheless. Over the years, it seems that tradition has died out. I don't think I've heard anyone clap at the end of a movie for twenty-odd years. Until, that is, this afternoon.
The entire audience clapped at the end of "An Inconvenient Truth".
It is all too rare to see people act out of idealism and ethics. Those qualities shine throughout this film -- Al Gore has noticed a problem -- a BIG problem -- and he has learned about it, and is trying to solve it. The "news" media gives us little 15-second soundbites instead of news and arguments, believing that we, the American public, are too stupid to comprehend any non-trivial ideas. Gore, on the other hand, clearly has faith in us to UNDERSTAND, to do the right thing, and, above all, to CARE.
See it.
 Inaccurate Depiction of the State of Global Warming Science December 30, 2006
R. Orbin (Pennsylvania)
64 out of 104 found this review helpful
This movie misrepresents and edits the facts and only reports the information that backs up one side of the story while ignoring the information that completely contradicts every claim that it makes.
I can't imagine how anyone with even a middle school science education could be fooled by the junk science used in this film but since so many people seem to have fallen for it I will detail more information below.
(1)Near the beginning of the film, Gore pays respects to his Harvard mentor and inspiration, Dr. Roger Revelle. Gore praises Revelle for his discovery that atmospheric CO2 levels were rising and could potentially contribute to higher temperatures at a global scale. There is no mention of Revelle's article published in the early 1990s concluding that the science is "too uncertain to justify drastic action." (S.F. Singer, C. Starr, and R. Revelle, "What to do about Greenhouse Warming: Look Before You Leap. Cosmos 1 (1993) 28-33.)
(2) Gore discusses glacial and snowpack retreats atop Mt. Kilimanjaro, implying that human induced global warming is to blame. But Gore fails to mention that the snows of Kilimanjaro have been retreating for more than 100 years, largely due to declining atmospheric moisture, not global warming. Gore does not acknowledge the two major articles on the subject published in 2004 in the International Journal of Climatology and the Journal of Geophysical Research showing that modern glacier retreat on Kilimanjaro was initiated by a reduction in precipitation at the end of the nineteenth century and not by local or global warming.
(3) Many of Gore's conclusions are based on the "Hockey Stick" that shows near constant global temperatures for 1,000 years with a sharp increase in temperature from 1900 onward. The record Gore chooses in the film completely wipes out the Medieval Warm Period of 1,000 years ago and Little Ice Age that started 500 years ago and ended just over 100 years ago. There is evidence from throughout the world that these climate episodes existed, but on Gore's Hockey Stick, they become nothing more than insignificant fluctuations (Gore even jokes at one point about the Medieval Warm period).
(4) You will certainly not be surprised to see Katrina, other hurricanes, tornadoes, flash floods, and many types of severe weather events linked by Gore to global warming. However, if one took the time to read the downloadable "Summary for Policymakers" in the latest report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), one would learn that "No systematic changes in the frequency of tornadoes, thunder days, or hail events are evident in the limited areas analysed" and that "Changes globally in tropical and extra-tropical storm intensity and frequency are dominated by inter-decadal and multi-decadal variations, with no significant trends evident over the 20th century."
(5) Gore claims that sea level rise could drown the Pacific islands, Florida, major cities the world over, and the 9/11 Memorial in New York City. No mention is made of the fact that sea level has been rising at a rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past 8,000 years; the IPCC notes that "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected."
(6) Near the end of the film, we learn of ways the United States could reduce emissions of greenhouse gases back to the levels of 1970. OK. Assume the United States accomplishes this lofty goal, would we see any impact on climate? The well-known answer is no. China, India and many other countries are significantly increasing their emission levels, and global concentrations of CO2 may double this century no matter what we decide to do in the United States. Even if the Kyoto Protocol could be fully implemented to honor the opening of this movie, the globe would be spared no more than a few hundredths of a degree of warming.
In 1998, The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) issued a petition for signature by atmospheric scientists saying there is no scientific evidence indicating that human-created greenhouse gases are causing catastrophic global warming. That petition was signed by more than 17,000 scientists and leaders involved in the issue.
Global Warming scaremongers have tried to discredit these statements from the opposition, saying either they are too old to be counted in today's debate or that they weren't signed by real scientists. Neither is true. One only has to look at the signers on the documents and statements to know who and what they are. The relevance of the documents can be answered in two ways. First, most of the signers of these documents from the 1990's hold the same positions today. Second, as is the fallacy in the Global Warming debate, such drastic climate changes, as described in the scaremongers diatribes, would not come about overnight. Though the proponents would have you believe otherwise, 15 years is but a microsecond in the study of the earth's activities.
"An Inconvenient Truth" is billed as the scariest movie you'll ever see. It may well be, but that's mostly because it is not an accurate depiction of the state of global warming science.
Thank you to Dr. Robert C. Balling Jr. who is a professor in the climatology program at Arizona State University.
How Green was My Planet February 28, 2007
Stephen E. Gruber (Riverside, CA USA)
58 out of 134 found this review helpful
The former "Vice" President jumps from junk philosophy (his commentary on Rene' Descates in his first book was hilarious and thoroughly entertaining)to junk science in his convenient "documentary" which indeed should net enough money as an Academy Award winner to defray the $30-thousand per year electric bill for his mansion. But that's inconvenient to bring up here. True, as one reviewer on this site observed, Gore is truly "passionate," however, pure passion alone without a fair treatment of the evidence is just that, passion, and hardly inductive reasoning (I hear Aristotle throwing up). I have taught philosophy and statistical analysis at university, and Gore makes more mistakes than what can be assessed here. Two immediate logical fallacies are (1) the vast fluctuations in the earth's climate occurred in prerecorded humankind history which hundreds of scientists on the "other" side of the issue have weighed in on, yet somehow are conveniently evaporated from this "documentary", and (2) even if the United States signed the Kioto treaty, yea, this would have absolutely no impact on the current situation of carbon emissions, acid rain, and other contaminants worldwide. If countries such as China, Indonesia and other key players don't sign up for the Program and, more importantly, actually follow through with a demonstrable policy of accountability that can be objectively measured by outside sources, then the whole notion that any combined effort will have any impact on Planet Green is utterly laughable. In addition, Gore is sententious -- a pompous and moralizing egomaniac who apparently needs something to occupy his time with, so why not pontificate on how we Americans are using and abusing the earth. I would hope that the thankfully "former" Vice president and "former" presidential candidate will take his new science fiction apokalypto to, say, China, or to Indonesia, or to India, or to Russia, or better yet, the formerly pro-American, pro-military gulag known as Hollywood. He is good at raising money for the Democrat coffers and should be able to enlist his superior intellectual buddies such as Thetan Tom Cruise, Alec Baldwin, what's-her-name, er, Barbra Streisand, to mention a few. I would give a grade of a mercy C-plus for this "documentary", and a combined IQ of a generous 40 for content, and a straight A for bells and whistles. But none of this really matters, you see, when we all feel so, well...passionate! I look forward to "Inconvenient Truth Part II: The Search for More Money." Widescreen edition, Director's Cut, Two DVD's, Interviews with the whales, of course. Stephen Gruber
P.S. 5-11-07: I see my review accomplished what I hoped it would, viz., a heated discussion. Some Greens have posted, and that's a good thing. FYI: Gore held himself out in his first book as a philosopher, so I posted my philosophy doctorate which is now gone (I was hoping he would feel the "heat" to chime in -- no such luck, maybe when things..."cool" off :))
Blowhard February 27, 2007
Sushi Girl (Gainesville, Florida)
54 out of 111 found this review helpful
I would be able to take Al Gore Seriously if he wasn't such a hypocrite.
He is telling us to change our light bulbs in our houses, "make small changes". The average household uses 10, 056 KW of energy a year, and Al Gores house averages 221,000 KW per year, more than 20 times. He paid over $ 30, 000 for electric and Gas last year alone. He and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va, And he is barely at either!; God knows how much he wastes taking the private airplane around to lecture on conserving energy. His "carbon" footprint basically equals out to 5 normal peoples "footprint".
He just won an Oscar last night, from Hollywood, which is also full of hypocrites. I bet you that if he asked the crowd to give up their Hummers and private planes and gigantic energy sucking mansions they would all turn away and sip their star bucks, but to ask "America" to conserve gets applause. It boggles my mind.
I personally agree that we all need to do our part to conserve energy, use less resources, blah blah blah, but I cannot take Al Gore seriously, I couldn't take any politician or movie star seriously when their own private lives are the direct opposite to what they preach.
|
|
|
