Home > Documentary >

Cool It

AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

Cool It (2010)

November. 08,2010
|
7
|
PG
| Documentary
AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

A documentary that takes an alternative approach to dealing with the global warming crisis.

...

Watch Trailer

Free Trial Channels

AD
Show More

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Limerculer
2010/11/08

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

More
Chonesday
2010/11/09

It's one of the most original films you'll likely see all year, which, depending on your threshold for certifiably crazy storylines, could be a rewarding experience or one that frustrates you.

More
Rosie Searle
2010/11/10

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

More
Scarlet
2010/11/11

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

More
projectorion
2010/11/12

The basic idea of this movie is that it points out the costs of different environmental proposals for dealing with global warming, and points out that the ideas proposed by most American liberals such as "Cap and Trade" are far more expensive than other alternative solutions, and are also relatively ineffective at solving the global warming problem compared to these other alternative solutions.This is not a movie that is setting out to "deny" that anthropogenic global warming is a real problem. This is a movie largely aimed at doing a cost-benefit analysis of various proposals for solving environmental problems like global warming, and that's a distinguishing quality it has that most other anti-environmentalist movies lack.In that way, this movie provides a critical third point of view for the debate between environmentalists and conservatives which is desperately needed.

More
Canyoneer
2010/11/13

Great documentary! It will make likely make you reconsider some of your established beliefs for the topic. Science based but still entertaining (as far as documentaries go). Those who believe that global warming is a myth will reconsider their paradigm and the believers that are praying for a local windmill farm might reconsider that stance. It also tells the story of how Lomborg was booted from the scientific community for political reasons and then returned to his position when an independent review/investigation found that his work is indeed fact based.Inspired me to get his first book "Skeptical Environmentalist". It is too bad that this topic is so divided and emotional as it will prevent many from viewing. I recommend watching no matter what your current paradigm.

More
MonganD
2010/11/14

I saw this on cable, twice now. The first time it was on in the background while I was working and I found that I couldn't work; it was just too interesting. The second time I sought it out, set a reminder to ensure I didn't miss it, and set aside undisturbed time so I could pay attention and LEARN.Unlike most modern documentaries, which contain barely disguised sarcasm (think Michael Moore) rather than factual discussion, or which lecture without informing (think Al Gore) this film is a combination of facts (with references) and lectures with a common sense approach rather than Al Gore's "I know more than you do" doctrinal catechism.Starting with his own background and disfavor in the mainstream climate change community, the film agrees that climate change is a problem to address, but then moves through several climate change "remedies" which have been proposed, looks at the cost, and then uses the same amount of money to address the climate change issue as well as hunger, education and disease. Turn off the lights for an hour? It's a great feel good remedy but it doesn't do a thing to help the planet, and lighting a candle is actually worse. Buy a hybrid? It has almost no impact.The gist of the global warming debate, we learn, is fear. And taking on Al Gore point by point we learn that our fear is misplaced. Hurricanes cause more severe damage nowadays, but there's more people living at the beach and more high rise buildings to be damaged too. Was New Orleans flooded because of a global warming induced Hurricane Katrina, or because a levee was poorly designed? Moving on to solutions, we learn about alternative energies, alternative strategies, and more, and finally the final cost for all these strategies is so low that other world issues like hunger and disease are easily paid for with the same investment that Al Gore would ram down our otherwise-frightened throats.Before you pay a "carbon tax," and buy a Prius, see this movie. And don't be afraid anymore.

More
Joe Smith
2010/11/15

After reading the first 3 reviews I decided that a review from someone who has read Bjorn Lonborg - who is an economist (not "a poly-sci guy" as one newspaper reviewer referred to him) - and who has studied the science of global climate change for more than a decade might be helpful.First off, Lonborg is not a GW skeptic: he thinks it is real, but that the severity has often been greatly overstated, which even the scientists at IPCC will admit. Also, he does not mean that if we spend a few trillion dollars and deprive (by creating large deficits of energy) poor people all over the world of the few things they currently get to enjoy (like adequate food) we will decrease global temperature by 1 degree: he means we will limit the increase by one degree. Big difference. He is pointing out that taking a sledge hammer to the world economy will not really make much difference in temperature, but a big difference to people who will not be able to buy energy at the intentionally increased prices.Lonborg points out that we will be able to adapt to the climate change, as people and animals have been doing throughout history, as we gradually change from fossil fuels as more desirable technologies mature. Some parts of the world - equatorial zones - may change drastically, but those nearer the poles (Minnesota, Canada) will likely gain a longer growing season and more tillable land. But, Lonborg's main point is that if we spent these large sums of money and resources on things we can change: hunger, diseases like malaria and AIDS, and clean water, we could bring about some real improvement in the lives of millions of people world-wide.My studies, which include a discussion with one of the leading scientists at IPCC, lead me to think that Lonborg makes a very good case. I don't know why so many reviewers ridicule Lonborg. This movie, if you really watch and listen, does not deny climate change. It does state that global poverty is not the best way to counteract global climate change.

More