in 2017. On
review aggregation website
Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 80%, based on 159 reviews, with an average rating of 6.5/10. The website's critical consensus reads: "
An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power makes a plea for environmental responsibility that adds a persuasive – albeit arguably less effective – coda to its acclaimed predecessor." On
Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating to reviews, the film has a score of 68 out of 100, based on 36 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. John DeFore of
The Hollywood Reporter gave the documentary a positive review, while writing that it is not as effective as the original, saying: "it finds plenty to add, both in cementing the urgency of Gore's message and in finding cause for hope". In
Nature,
Michael Mann wrote that "[Al Gore]'s up against arguably the most entrenched, wealthy and powerful industry the world has ever known:
fossil fuels. [...] This sequel is deliciously inconvenient, and for several reasons. It is inconvenient to the vested interests who had hoped that Gore would just give up. [...] Knowing that Al Gore is still optimistic is a shot in the arm at a time of uncertainty."
Skeptical Inquirer editor
Kendrick Frazier writes that
Truth to Power spends little time explaining what climate change is, though there are some good summaries, but more time on the effects. Gore goes to a lot of trouble not to allow the movie to be a "downer" and shows what nations and U.S. states have done to fight climate change. Frazier states that a "skilled politician can get things done in ways that scientists can only imagine", and though he would have liked to have seen less Gore talking and more scientists on camera, Frazier writes that the movie is effective. Conversely, conservative magazine
National Reviews film critic
Kyle Smith called the film misleading, saying that it gave the false impression that recent storm activity (such as 2012's
Hurricane Sandy) was more frequent than usual, falsely gave credit to both Gore and the company
SolarCity for convincing India to sign the Paris Agreement, exaggerated the importance of the Paris Agreement, and neglected to mention Gore's financial ties to SolarCity. Writing for
RogerEbert.com, Nick Allen also gave the film a negative review, specifying: "The documentary follow-up proves to be less about global warming than propping up a hero awkwardly desperate to captivate audiences again like he did eleven years ago. It's like the
Zoolander 2 of global warming documentaries." ==References==