Please allow me to indulge you in a
bit of logical philosophy for a moment. First, let’s determine
the purpose of The 11th Hour, the latest
documentary advocating the importance of American
Eco-Friendliness to see theatrical distribution. Was the film
made in order to pat the backs of those who have already gone
green, as the euphemism goes? Perhaps the makers of The
11th Hour saw a need to preach to that choir in
order to ensure its success at the box-office—liberal moviegoers
eat this type of project up—but that certainly couldn’t be its
purpose for existing. Presuming that the film’s central
goal is to denote polluting the environment, we can therefore
assume that its purpose is to convince those who practice
environmentally-damaging behavior to change their habits.
All right—now
we’re on the same page in understanding why The 11th
Hour exists in the first place. How unfortunate that this
understanding provokes the realization that the film is entirely
ineffectual. In this respect, the main problem with The 11th
Hour is simply that it puts the cart before the horse, so to
speak. It shows the viewer many ways of how to lower their level
of environmental consumption, but never explains why these
practices are necessary. It isn’t likely that those who need to
be swayed to consume less believe the reason for which The 11th
Hour asserts they should do so: the “fact” that human
activity has caused at least a portion of the process of global
warming. The movie’s narration merely accepts that “irrefutable
evidence”—a term it throws around quite frequently—supports that
humans are, indeed, responsible for global warming. However, if
this statement is not accepted by the viewer, they will view the
rest of the movie (which deals with how to slow down the warming
process) as invalid.
Personally, I
believe that global warming is a natural process that has little
to do with human-created emissions. However, I am still willing
to acknowledge that environmental pollution is a bad thing; it
damages air and water qualities, which unquestionably make the
world a less healthy place to live in. Still, The 11th
Hour’s arguments did nothing to convince me to use cloth
grocery bags instead of plastic ones or buy a hybrid car. They
are entirely based around the human cause of global warming,
which brings a strong degree of exclusivity to the film’s
arguments. Most of the people who believe in the movie’s basis
have already adopted the solutions it offers. Because it doesn’t
put forth a strong argument that global warming has been caused
by the earth’s inhabitants—something that Al Gore’s An
Inconvenient Truth at least tried to do—the skeptical
will not likely come to believe the theory while viewing the
film.
And then there’s
the Leonardo DiCaprio issue. DiCaprio appears here as narrator,
in a totally ridiculous and self-promoting turn. His onscreen
participation in the project (he’s also onboard as a producer)
adds nothing to the picture but an endless supply of chuckles.
The 11th Hour somewhat randomly cuts to
sensationalist, long-lasting takes of DiCaprio spouting
environmentalist-jargon that he clearly only half-understands.
There’s no reason for the narrator to appear in the film at all;
voice-overs would’ve sufficed. DiCaprio only appears here due to
the studio’s hope that viewers uninterested in the film’s
subject might see it because they recognize the famous actor’s
face, an unlikelihood at best. Like the rest of the 11th
Hour, DiCaprio seems so conflicted about the nature of the
material that his work proves ineffective and often laughable.