Friday, June 02, 2006

Roger Ebert: I want to have Al Gore’s baby

Al Gore's liberal porn fantasy - see corrected poster a few items down - opens today and to the shock of no one with IQ above room temperature, the overwhelming reaction of film critics has been to blow a collective load in their pants, as all good porn inspires one to do.

Hot Air's story which provides this post's title quotes Ebert's overheated review which reads, "In 39 years, I have never written these words in a movie review, but here they are: You owe it to yourself to see this film. If you do not, and you have grandchildren, you should explain to them why you decided not to."

Allahpundit retorts:

Let’s try that again. If you don’t see Al Gore’s movie, you should justify your actions to your lineal descendants.

“What should we do today, grandpa?”

“Well, Billy, I suppose we could see ‘An Inconvenient Truth.’ But frankly, I find Al Gore sour and pedantic, and whatever the merits of his argument, I’d prefer not to subsidize the work of a cretin who thinks nothing of undermining our government overseas by groveling to primitive Wahhabist degenerates. Also, my prostate hurts.”

“Duly noted, grandpa!”

By the way, not once since 1967 has he told his readers “you owe it to yourself to see this movie”? They didn’t owe it to themselves to see Star Wars or The Godfather? If I have three hours left to live, I’ve got to go pull An Inconvenient Truth down off the shelf instead of The Empire Strikes Back?

Ebert does cop to being a liberal at the beginning of the review, though. As they say, the first step is admitting you have a problem.
"An Inconvenient ManBearPig" is rocking a tidy 89% at Rotten Tomatoes and it's already being favored for the Best Left-Wing Political Oscar. The pull quotes are pretty nauseating and the rare countering reviews, like the one from the NY Post...
But much of what Gore says in this slide show he gives to people whose minds are not yet fully formed (undergraduates, actors) is absurd, and his assertions often contradict each other.

He implies that no reputable scientists dispute anything he says...But there is wide disagreement about whether humans are causing global warming (climate change preceded the invention of the Escalade) and about whether we should be worried about the trends. Look carefully at Gore's charts and you'll see that the worst horrors take place in the future of his imagination.

His implication that he is our only hope - every ticket bought for this movie amounts to a soft-money contribution to his 2008 campaign - is ridiculous. He and his friends were in charge for eight years. His charts say global warming got worse in that time. The environment doesn't seem to care whether the president is a Texas oilman or the Man from Hope.

Global warming hasn't noticed that we got the lead out of our gasoline or that Stage One smog days in Los Angeles fell from 121 in 1977 to zero in 2004. All regulations and taxes to date have done nothing. Does this hint that pollution isn't the cause?

Gore claims, with pie-chart-in-the-sky dreaminess, that unspecified measures can reduce emissions to 1970 levels. He assesses the tradeoff between the economy and the environment with the kind of buffoonery you'd expect in a Marxist comic book, displaying a cartoon of a scale with Earth on one side and bars of gold on the other. "OK, on one side we have gold bars," he says. "Mmm, mmm, don't they look good!"

Why doesn't he get specific and replace the "gold bar" side of the scale with, say, a $50,000 tax on SUVs? The ensuing destruction of the car business would hurt blue-collar workers, not the rich. What if global warming continued unabated? Gore's faith-based pessimism would lead him to call for even more taxes.

People are skeptical about global warming because it builds up to the same chorus as every other lefty hymn: more taxes, more hypocritical scolding (the film is the brainchild of Larry David's wife, Laurie, part of the community of people who drive a Prius to the private plane) and especially more America-bashing.
...and Film Threat...
Silly me – I went into “An Inconvenient Truth” expecting a serious, provocative documentary on the damage created by global warming. Instead, I got a 96-minute commercial on the deification of Al Gore. Talk about a bait-and-switch!

What is missing from “An Inconvenient Truth” is the inconvenient truth that global warming actually accelerated during the 1990s, when Gore was the number two man in the Clinton White House. The film also omits that the U.S. auto industry (including the auto workers union) have repeatedly and successfully fought against energy standards during the 1990s – and that Clinton and Gore never forced them to acquiesce since they were profiting from their financial campaign contributions.

“An Inconvenient Truth” is something you rarely see in movies today: a blatant intellectual fraud. Shame on all of the people involved in this travesty.
...will be disregarded because the former paper is owned by the same parent as owns Fox News Channel and the latter is a genre zine site, not a member of the crix elite.

"Al's ManBearPig Dreamland" won't make a fraction of what the latest "X-Men" movie will make, but the crucial difference between them is that audiences going to see Wolverine and Magneto throw down know going in that what they're seeing is a work of fiction.

No comments: