La Voz

When asked to recall a 2006 environmental documentary, most people think of "An Inconvenient Truth."

Al Gore's mega-popular sermon on global warming remained in the public consciousness long after it had left theaters.

Only a few people will remember seeing a much smaller film, "Who Killed the Electric Car?" that was released shortly afterward.

Writer/director Chris Paine presents an exposé on the rise and fall of plug-in electric vehicles during the late 1990s.

It's possible that Gore's star power simply overwhelmed Paine's smaller film, or that Sony, the movie's distributor, shied away from the media blitz that Paramount initiated in order to support "Inconvenient Truth."

Where Gore's film succeeds, and "Car" fails, is in explaining to the everyday person why our current environmental situation is so precarious, and then offering solutions to that same problem.

Ironically, the exact opposite should be true. On the surface, Paine's film appears to be the more light-hearted and accessible of the two. With an albeit clever concept that recounts the story of the electric car's "demise" as a murder mystery, it's replete with a crime scene, suspects and verdict.

But early into the film's opening scene with a mock funeral for GM's EV1, the electric car at the center of the aforementioned "murder" plot, it becomes readily apparent that everyone in the documentary, including the director, takes this issue very seriously.

They may be right to do so, but the problem with the film is that it fails to explain why. Why do people literally break down in tears at the "mock" funeral? Why do former EV1 owners risk the likelihood of arrest in order to protest in front of GM's impound lot? Why is the electric car so important to the environment?

"Car" could have been a great documentary, as the facts certainly support its case. But the tone of the film is all wrong.

"Truth" worked as a serious feature because it incorporated tearjerker images of glaciers literally falling apart and polar bears drowning in the arctic.

On the other hand, it's difficult to sympathize with protagonists of "Car." The movie includes rich movie stars such as Tom Hanks, Mel Gibson and Phyllis Diller who used to own EV1s, and the scenes in which melancholic music is played over footage of the cars being demolished seems forced.

Had the filmmakers utilized a more satirical approach, like Michael Moore did with a serious topic in "Fahrenheit 9/11," perhaps "Car" could have been able to spread its important message to a wider audience.

But the main problem with "Car" is that it never answers the logical rejoinder to the question in its own title: "Who cares about the electric car?"

Apparently, no one.

Article Tools