An Inconvenient Truth Sequel

AninconvenienttruthFrom the “now there’s a surprise” category, Al Gore has announced that he will be making a sequel to his Academy Award winning, Nobel prize winning, An Inconvenient Truth.

Speaking to The Sun last week, Al Gore surprise absolutely no one with his plans to follow up with a sequel. For the moment, I’m going to ignore anyone who says he wants to do it for a) more publicity b) more awards c) more money; you’re all morons!

“I will make a sequel to the 2006 documentary ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ and despite earths ‘rising fever’, I am hopeful for a happy ending,” said Gore. “I have to say the situation has not improved since I made the movie in 2006. Sure, awareness has grown and more people are concerned since scientists said we had just ten years to take action to halt rising sea levels. But the situation has got worse. The entire North Polar ice cap is melting and could be gone in some areas in as little as five years.”

That being said, Alison Lehrer, a spokeswoman for Paramount, noted in talking to the Business & Media Institute that no movie sequel was in the works. “There are no plans for a sequel,” Lehrer said. “That is the official word.”

Now, Gore has been working on the literary sequel to the movie, his book called The Path to Survival, and though it was supposed to be released Earth Day 2008, it has been pushed back to Spring 2009. The publisher of the book, Rodale Books, also notes that there is no film in the works, but that they don’t rule out the possibility a sequel could happen at another studio.

We’d also like to hear what you have to say on this matter, so head along to the official Green Options forum, and answer the question, do we need another Inconvenient Truth?

6 thoughts on “An Inconvenient Truth Sequel”

  1. I am watching “An Inconvenient Truth” for the 1st time. I have an environmental professor who contests the “science” Gore presents in the film, so I wanted to see for myself. I wanted to see the scientific info about global warming, which Gore does deliver on (even if one cannot be certain whether he is actually scientifically correct), but then he also mixes in all the political stuff. Why?? It makes him sound like an inconvenient sore loser – Gore lost; he should get over it already. Making this film political really takes away from Gore’s purported goal of focusing the public on the global warming problem. Gore’s lecture comes off more like a self-serving diatribe by a holier-than-thou preacher. This is actually ironic, considering that Gore lives in a 16,000 sq ft house – how much energy does it take to heat that mansion??? I am very disappointed.

  2. edward luscinskas

    Of course we need a sequel!
    The picture of what is happening to our earth is becoming clearer (& more dire) since the book came out.
    When the book was released we were at 300 PPM of carbon in the atmosphere & going up at a steep rate.When the scientists looking at the early murky picture looked for a threshold to stay under they tried 550 ppm. But they were frightened by the calculated climate effects so they settled on 450 PPM for a time. With a later,clearer, picture it now looks like its imperative to stay under 350- but we’re already at 385 !!!!

    There’s a lot of recent evidence that needs to get out there.

  3. There’s two kinds of people in the world, those who ride bicycles, and everyone else. As we depend on our cars for every trip, it’s hard to see the picture: planet earth is designed for slow, earth-friendly movement. People who ride bicycles are more in-touch with a peaceful planet. Those who race around in cars never see the big picture. The real war is car-wars, 40,000/yr dying for what? Can we embrace mass transit and bicycle paths in our life?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top