Two events in the last few days concerning documentary Oscar winners should be of interest to the Motion Picture Academy, though I doubt my fellow members will pay much attention. The first is the debut of a new film about Michael Moore (by left-wing filmmakers!), revealing more lies in Moore’s documentaries. One of the more astonishing is Roger Smith actually was interviewed twice by Moore. (The entire “plot”… and now we see that it is indeed a”plot”… of the documentarian’s “Roger and Me” revolves around the GM chief executive’s refusal to be interviewed. The entire documentary is thus built on a lie.)
Today we find the first inklings of suspicion in the New York Times (of all places) that Al Gore may have exaggerated the dangers of anthropogenic global warming in “An Inconvenient Truth.” I have written elsewhere that film was, to put it mildly, aesthetically weak. Actually, it was like giving an Oscar to one of those didactic movies about tooth decay we are forced to watch in grammar school. Intellectually, it is not dissimilar. It simplifies an important and complex issue and treats its audience like nitwits. No wonder many of the scientists quoted by the Times are getting edgy. Reading the article I thought back to the treatment of Gore on Academy Award night – all those movie stars panting for him to run for president and save the planet from imminent annihilation. Who says they don’t give Oscars for comedy?