Liberal Film Critics Love ‘Shakespearean’ Gore Saving the World
The country’s top film critics are in love with the liberal agenda of Al Gore’s new Inconvenient Sequel, gushing at the “Shakespearean” Gore “saving the world” “one lecture at a time.” The global warming film has more of a “meh” response overall. It’s at 67 percent on Metacritic and 75 at Rotten Tomatoes. But Rolling Stone, the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times, among others, are fans.
The New York Times’ Ben Kenigsberg on July 27 compared Gore to Shakespeare:
Now gray-haired and at times sounding angrier in his speeches, Mr. Gore, in “Sequel,” takes on the air of a Shakespearean figure, a man long cast out of power by what he casually refers to as “the Supreme Court decision” (meaning Bush v. Gore) but still making the same arguments that have been hallmarks of his career.
The headline of Rolling Stone was similarly effusive: “‘An Inconvenient Sequel’ Review: Al Gore Returns to Save the World, One Lecture at a Time.” Film critic Peter Travers repeated Gore’s bogus information:
Gore recalls how the first film was roundly mocked for suggesting that storm surges could flood the 9/11 memorial site in Lower Manhattan – and as footage here shows, that’s exactly what happened during Hurricane Sandy.