This is probably one of the funniest articles I've read on substack. As someone who watched the film and quite enjoyed it, it's refreshing to see a different look on it and I have to admit, looking back on the film, I completely agree with you. Although I enjoyed the satire of the film, it was definitely very patronizing in its delivery and didn't really do much to add to the conversation.
I find that a lot of people have trouble understanding the difference between adding to a conversation and repeating it's main talking points. The film does struggle with that and it shows.
I think the film was over simplified in its vision. There are social movements trying to address climate change issues. Also, as you pointed out, it was patronizing. yes there are ignorant and gullible people but there are working people who are concerned about these issues but are not in a position of power. Multinationals that can shift employment from one country to another and investment banks, speculators have too much power, perhaps.
Also scientists are not always benign, eg chemical warefare.
The satire of some media was accurate in the movie and that I found funny.
Some US satire lays it on too thick though and this was an example, (just in my opinion.)
I've heard mixed reviews about this film, but now I have to watch it. I appreciate your discourse on this movie, and it's kind of inspired me to go and consume it critically myself!
"Climate change is irrefutably real and will have disastrous consequences for many millions of people unless real action is taken." Cool story, bro. I'll see myself out.
This is probably one of the funniest articles I've read on substack. As someone who watched the film and quite enjoyed it, it's refreshing to see a different look on it and I have to admit, looking back on the film, I completely agree with you. Although I enjoyed the satire of the film, it was definitely very patronizing in its delivery and didn't really do much to add to the conversation.
I find that a lot of people have trouble understanding the difference between adding to a conversation and repeating it's main talking points. The film does struggle with that and it shows.
I think the film was over simplified in its vision. There are social movements trying to address climate change issues. Also, as you pointed out, it was patronizing. yes there are ignorant and gullible people but there are working people who are concerned about these issues but are not in a position of power. Multinationals that can shift employment from one country to another and investment banks, speculators have too much power, perhaps.
Also scientists are not always benign, eg chemical warefare.
The satire of some media was accurate in the movie and that I found funny.
Some US satire lays it on too thick though and this was an example, (just in my opinion.)
I've heard mixed reviews about this film, but now I have to watch it. I appreciate your discourse on this movie, and it's kind of inspired me to go and consume it critically myself!
"Climate change is irrefutably real and will have disastrous consequences for many millions of people unless real action is taken." Cool story, bro. I'll see myself out.
Dear Substack members,
I am inviting you to visit my page where I reviewing different topics regarding music, books. Recently I have started a serie of reviewing a certain type of books. Thank you everyone! https://jaroslavnovosyolov.substack.com/p/serie-books-from-anton-la-veys-shelf?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2
Great review.