ÉVALUATION IMDb
7,3/10
1,1 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAn investigation into the possibility of addressing climate change with a move away from fossil fuels to nuclear power.An investigation into the possibility of addressing climate change with a move away from fossil fuels to nuclear power.An investigation into the possibility of addressing climate change with a move away from fossil fuels to nuclear power.
- Director
- Writers
- Prix
- 1 victoire et 1 nomination au total
Avis en vedette
Nuclear molecules were from Uranium and Atoms. They talk about that and how it was around in WW1 through submarines. It became more useful over the years and the Uranium is healthier to run other engines than coal. It's a lot of information though. They discuss the pros and cons of each country and certain gases and electricity are harming our world and burning more coal, yet coal is still important because of fire without arson fires. He says China is using too much coal sent to America. The irony is, firefighters won't have a job without out of control fires unless alarms go off without fires.
A bit American centric, but otherwise extraordinary. Is obviously biased, but hopefully so and the bias is well justified.
I run a company that focuses on energy storage technologies and have been looking at grid storage systems and applications... Following this, we will abandon that and focus on mobile energy applications where batteries, supercapacitors etc are really important and the best type of solution to address the challenges.
Have to admit that I watched this on a plane, turned me into a blubbering mess. Bravo Oliver, I'm a big fan, but this is your most impactful work to date.
Strongly recommend to anyone, very easy to watch, understand and follow the arguments.
I run a company that focuses on energy storage technologies and have been looking at grid storage systems and applications... Following this, we will abandon that and focus on mobile energy applications where batteries, supercapacitors etc are really important and the best type of solution to address the challenges.
Have to admit that I watched this on a plane, turned me into a blubbering mess. Bravo Oliver, I'm a big fan, but this is your most impactful work to date.
Strongly recommend to anyone, very easy to watch, understand and follow the arguments.
This well-organized argument for the increased use of nuclear energy, to cope with the climate change problem, could be shown as a part of a double feature with Al Gore's far more popular film, "An Inconvenient Truth" (2006). Oliver Stone confronts the old objections to nuclear power plants and points out the increasing need for this type of energy production going forward. He points out the minimal effect of so-called clean energy and dispenses with the problem of nuclear waste. He points out that China, with its 1.5 billion population, pledges, by going nuclear, a carbon footprint of zero by 2060. This convenient truth is convincing.
I have always been curious about why we don't build more nuclear reactors. One of my main concerns has been the issue of nuclear waste and the limited lifespan of these reactors. However, after watching this insightful documentary, narrated by Oliver Stone, I have come to appreciate the potential benefits of expanding nuclear power. Stone's argument that increasing the number of nuclear reactors can effectively address global warming seems to hold merit. This documentary delves into many aspects beyond what I have mentioned here, making it a truly engaging watch. I highly recommend it to open-minded individuals who are willing to approach the subject without injecting politics into the discussion. True to Oliver Stone's reputation, the film's quality is unquestionable. What I particularly enjoyed was how the documentary acknowledges the possibility of viewer bias, stemming from Hollywood's portrayal of events, and guides us through facts. While I eagerly await the emergence of the next breakthrough in power technology, the urgency of the issue at hand necessitates that we base our decisions on information rather than misguided beliefs. It is crucial that we proceed with a well-informed approach to address the challenges of our energy needs.
I recently watched an interview with Oliver Stone on Breaking Points, and it piqued my interest enough to pay $3.99 to watch his movie on Amazon Prime Video. I am even considering purchasing it for $12. The movie is available on various platforms, including YouTube. It adopts a sober, somber, educational, and calm tone. It is highly informative and makes an effort not to denigrate other forms of energy. Instead, it highlights how there has been a lot of misinformation about nuclear power, and how many people are confused, believing that nuclear power is more dangerous than coal, gas, pollution, climate change, or oil. This is not the case, as is evident even in the events of Chernobyl or Fukushima. The movie presents its case persuasively, seeking your support without being overbearing or aggressive. I urge everyone to support this film and Oliver Stone for his courage and for epitomizing the true essence of a heterodox hero.
Le saviez-vous
- Anecdotes"In Memory of Vangelis 1943-2022"
- ConnexionsFeatured in CNBC's Sustainable Future: Oliver Stone and Joshua Goldstien (2023)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Nuclear Now?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 48 064 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 9 814 $ US
- 30 avr. 2023
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 70 675 $ US
- Durée
- 1h 45m(105 min)
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant