“An Inconvenient Sequel” is among the most controversial and polarizing titles of the year. Because of the politics surrounding Gore and climate change, the film divides men and women, critics and fans, and even people who saw the movie and people who are just rating it.
Gore is a capable documentarian, but he’s also a guy for whom 51 million Americans voted and 50.4 million other Americans voted against1that one time. Climate change is equally divisive. And those politics are coloring the film’s internet reception. Of the 2,645 IMDb users who rated the film as of August,2 over 38 percent gave the film a 1 out of 10. Of those same 2,645 IMDb users, just under 34 percent gave the film a 10 out of 10. In short: 72 percent of people who rated the movie gave it an extreme score, a 1 or a 10...It’s frankly impressive for a single film to stand astride so many fault lines.'
A growing body of research suggests that perceptions of climate change are influenced by experience with climate-related natural disasters. A 2016 analysis in the Journal of Environmental Studies and Science found that, between Hurricane Katrina and the pre-election Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the public discourse surrounding extreme weather shifted dramatically from a purely economic and energy discussion to one focused on climate. And a 2013 study by the Association for Psychological Science found that direct experiences with intense events like Sandy and Hurricane Irene were more likely to re-orient survivors toward "green" and climate-positive political stances.
Huffington Post: “He is a flawed character,” Stephen Lacey, editor-in-chief of the magazine GreenTechMedia, said on his podcast “The Energy Gang” last month. “We’re in an era of backlash against elites, so Gore, a guy who bought a 6,500-square-foot seafront home in California for $8.8 million, and who hangs around with other celebrities who talk big on climate but who live lavish lifestyles, is the perfect target at this point in time.” ...
“Many people out there simply cannot compartmentalize and say, ‘I loathe and detest Al Gore the politician because of his liberal politics, but when he talks about climate change, he’s got a real point,’” Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, told HuffPost. “As a messenger, he makes it too easy for conservatives to reject the entire concept of climate change, let alone the policies that might address it.” But by not addressing his wealth head-on, Gore does little to assuage critics who may not be partisan but read mendacious motives into his climate gospel.
Gore's 2006 'An Inconvenient Truth' served 'as a catalyst in the polarization of American public opinion on climate change.'
'Republicans may have taken an oppositional stance on climate change, at least partly, in response to signals from Democratic elites.'
The original Gore film 'likely played a role in turning Republicans against that message, since to them, Gore was simply a Democratic politician they disliked.'
'It’s highly unlikely that the release of Al Gore’s sequel to An Inconvenient Truth will have an impact similar to the original. The movie is generating significantly less traction in the box office and in the media. Furthermore, climate change has already become one of the most polarized issues of the day. Sadly, there is likely no way to turn back the clock. But it should serve as a warning for the future. It is not only important to pick a salient and informative message, but also an effective messenger to deliver it.'
Climate skeptic Steven Hayward comments on the new study: 'I had occasion to ask a straight-shooting 'mainstream' climate scientist I know slightly what he thought of Gore’s  film: 'I wish he’d made the film with John McCain.' In other words, Gore should have tried to make it a bipartisan effort.'
'GORE: THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING' - 'This study suggests is that Al Gore is the best friend climate skeptics ever had.'
'The best way to stop climate action is to give Gore more air time. And memo to Hillary Clinton: please please please make a movie about climate change. It would probably kill off the issue once and for all.'
A new study, published in the open-access journal Frontiers in Psychology, has uncovered a connection between changes in temperature and voting behavior in the United States of America.
"Voter behavior influenced by hot weather - Higher voter turnout and an increase in votes for the incumbent political party are linked to state-level increases in temperature during US presidential elections"
Al Gore's latest flick, "An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power," is now being shown in movie theaters across America. Yes, I didn't notice either. And the same goes for the millions of Americans who took in a movie this past weekend. Of the estimated $121 million Americans spent at the movies last weekend, less than $1 million was spent on the Gore's sad grab at political relevancy. Perhaps Gore can take solace in the fact that he narrowly edged out for 15th place another liberal-biased movie, "Cars 3," which targets children with fossil fuel lies via cute talking cars. No word yet on whether Gore is going to demand a recount. Despite tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars in free promotion offered by the left-wing media for Gore, Americans didn't take heed. And after eight straight miserable years of the Obama administration misusing its control of government bureaucracies and schools, assisted every step of the way by the government-aligned left-wing media, the purveyors of climate doom thought they had won the battle of public opinion.