Critique faite en anglais en Terminale (et qui m'a valu 20 (...))

An important message, but the execution's sometimes lacking

An Inconvenient Truth is a good documentary, despite the fact that it needs to take a step back, which doesn't need a gargantuan production to still be relevant 15 years after its release. After seeing the trailer of the film, I expected an anxiety-causing and fatalist film (it says in the trailer that it is "by far the most terrifying film you will ever seen"), but, apart from Al Gore's mistakes, I can testify that you can watch this film without fear of a heart attack.

Released in 2006, directed by the little-known Davis Guggenheim, the film centers around a lecture by Al Gore. The former Vice President of the United States of America estimates that he has given more than a thousand times at the beginning of the documentary. Gore's environmental activism is not new: from the carbon tax, partially implemented in 1993 in the USA, to the international tour "The Slide Show", which gave rise to the presentation that has become the guiding thread of An Inconvenient Truth, we already knew that this involvement went far beyond politics for him, and this documentary is in line with that. In that context, I thought of An Inconvenient Truth as a summary of The Slide Show, trying to get us to learn more about the project and the environmental issues that Gore outlined.

Throughout the 1 hour 38 of the film, Al Gore delivers his speech, focusing on the direct consequences of global warming. Supported by scientific studies such as those of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the University of Bern on the concentration of carbon dioxide in Antarctica, or by scathing photographs (the famous before and after on the glaciers), Al Gore's presentation leaves no one unmoved, not even the High Court of Justice in London, which provides a necessary counterpoint to Gore's speech. Indeed, while the aim of the documentary can only be welcomed, with a success which will undoubtedly allow the democratisation of the ecological issue in the political debate, a few errors sparks some reactions. In view of the proportion of Guggenheim's work, it needs to be corrected by an authority like the High Court of London: for example, the link made without proof between Hurricane Katrina or the drying up of Lake Chad and global warming.

Beyond the veracity of his words, Al Gore, who is the only actor in this documentary, fulfils his role perfectly, bringing a touch of humour necessary to make his hour and a half monologue, impeccable in form, more lively. Interspersed with scenes from Gore's personal life, between his childhood and the 2001 presidential election, which help us understand the process that led him to construct this ecological speech, Guggenheim's film does not let the viewer fall asleep, as I might have feared. The pace is still sometimes a bit slow, and I have occasionally been bored in front of scenes taking place outside the conference room, where Gore takes a much more serious tone. The atmosphere of the room is not heavy, the audience accompanies Al Gore without encroaching on his speech, oblivious to the impressive graphics of the speaker.

In conclusion, I can say that Al Gore's mistakes are regrettable because you are even more disappointed to discover them after having spent a good time in front of An Inconvenient Truth. If you are looking for a sacred text on which to base your environmental struggle or if you are very ticklish about it, I don't think this film is for you. However, Al Gore's ease and the atmosphere that emerges from his lectures lead me to advise you to give this film a chance. An Inconvenient Truth is a project that was bound to divide,because it was released only five years after Al Gore's retirement from politics. Even if it is not free of all reproaches, this documentary has succeeded in its challenge. Bringing people together despite political quarrels, which are inevitable when we know how Al Gore cleaves, around a common struggle, global warming.