Y2Kyoto: To The End

Fox News;

New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s new climate change documentary debuted in movie theaters over the weekend, generating an abysmal $80 per theater.

The new film, “To the End,” was filmed over four years and follows four young women, Cortez, activist Varshini Prakash, climate policy writer Rhiana Gunn-Wright and political strategist Alexandra Rojas, as they attempt to pass sweeping climate change legislation in Congress.

The film currently boasts an 88% “fresh” critic score on Rotten Tomatoes and does not yet have an audience score.

44 Replies to “Y2Kyoto: To The End”

  1. Not to worry. The taxpayers are the only ones out the money. People don’t make garbage when it’s out of their own pockets.

    1. I know many musicians who have boxes of unsold, self produced and financed CDs in their basements. Vanity projects abound and self delusion is as old as humanity. Politicians may be different, however.

      1. $80 per theater that’s a family of six buying drinks popcorn and peanuts.
        The famous movie *Inconveniently Truth* said that Canada wouldn’t have any snow after 2012 I’m so glad that it’s not snowing in Canada anymore. We are planning to take our summer clothes and lay out on the beach.

      1. @Reader – Pass that picture around the halls of Congress and watch all the other members of Congress vainly attempt to suppress snorts and giggles when addressing “The Honorable AOC” or “My distinguished colleague.”

        You just can’t unsee that one.

  2. Rotten Tomatoes is to cinema what Snopes is to fact checking.
    So what do you call a movie/doc starring Ocasio-Cortez? Box Office Poison.

          1. Charlie Sheen always said the crazy ones were the most fun…

            I wonder if that is how he contracted HIV?

  3. Rotten tomatoes is an interesting reflection of today’s “journalism.”

    Critics are overwhelmingly “woke” and reward stories and characters with diversity, climate change and other left-wing themes.

    Audiences, on the other hand, hate this crap. When the viewer ratings come in for AOC’s masterpiece they will be brutal.

    1. What!? You mean the audience isn’t just a bunch of uneducated, unsophisticated, unwashed rubes who wouldn’t know fine art if it hit them in the face? Cause I’m fairly certain that’s how the critics view us.

    2. The value of critics is in either finding one that likes the same things as you and seeking those things out or finding one who hates things you like and doing the opposite of what they recommend.

      1. In the sixties Time magazine gave cheap subscriptions to students. I learned early in my subscription that if a critic liked a movie I wouldn’t.

        That worked as a yardstick.

        Just do the opposite. I assumed their opinions were artistically superior to mine but irrelevant as far as entertainment value.

  4. And each of the four knows the film flopped because, like, there was too much time spent on the other three skanks.

  5. I moved to Vancouver Island in 1995 … for the first few years I was thrilled with the gentle climate. Slightly cooler summers than I like, but no snow to speak of in winter …. Temps rarely dip to zero in winter. Summers were pretty dry.

    Left there last year 2021, the last few years on the Island I saw weather change somewhat … nothing major but much more snow in winter, much colder temperatures, more rain. Not all that pleasant. It looks a lot like our climate is cooling if anything.

    Global warming was promoted but it’s isn’t warming …. so for some reason they tried to pump new life into it by changing it’s name ….. a favorite exercise of the dull witted left …. haha make a superficial change, like the name and then wait for it all to come together on it’s own.. like our economy.

    1. In the 1970’s the flavour du jour was Global cooling.
      We were all going to freeze to death like that movie ‘ The Day After Tomorrow ‘.
      Cant even predict the local weather one week out, one day they will get it right.

    2. Yeah, but the name change was successful. Ask any recent High School or University grad and they will all talk about the need to get rid of evil carbon to save the planet. Not one of them bright enough to figure out why they changed the name.

      I read today that 40 % of the population believes then climate change is natural, not caused by man. Approximately the same percentage of conservative voters in the population. It makes sense to me that anyone smart enough to reject socialism is smart enough to see through the climate change fraud.

  6. Come on now, it’s very socially responsible to make such a bad movie, it keeps people out of their cars and cuts down on the sales of popcorn, which must be like 90% methane. It tastes that way for sure. But then I suppose the five people who went to see the clunker arrived on an e-bike or a rickshaw.

  7. The dialogue, I imagine …

    “Look, it’s getting warmer. It’s his fault. The white guy.”

    “Let’s end his life with a voluntary euthanasia program.”

    “Tie him down in a bike lane, he can die slowly and painfully.”

    “No put him in the solar panel array, he’ll burn, if the clouds clear away.”

    “The earth will be saved. Praise Gaia.”

    “Death to the patriarchy.”

    “Glory to Ukraine.”

    “I am fully boosted. Flu shots too. I am full of helpful substances. I feel a bit off though.”

    “Gotta get me a new gender.”

    “It’s awfully wet, it’s her fault …”

    (and so on and so on)

  8. I wasn’t aware that this movie existed. I learn so much here on SDA.

    I was never going to go see a movie like this and especially since I didn’t know about it. But since I know about it, now I’m boycotting the movie.

    Either way, I was going to be a no-show. But now I can feel good about not seeing it. Boycotting it makes me feel just a little bit superior.**

    **h/t Dana Carvey and “Church Lady”.

Navigation