Hyland,+Six+Degrees

Title: National Geographic’s // Six Degrees could Change the World // Director: Ron Bowman Release: 2008

The National Geographic documentary // Six Degrees could Change the World // deals with the issues of global warming and discusses the immense impact that each of the next six degrees of global temperature increase could produce. It starts by discussing the changes we have already seen since the global temperature has already gone up by one degree over the last decade. It then postulates the various effects of the next five temperature increases, each one leading to more catastrophe than the prior. The documentary’s main point is that carbon dioxide emissions are the primary contributor to this global climate shift due to its role in the greenhouse effect. Additionally, the film gave mention to other greenhouse gasses such as methane, land development which leads to depleted top soil and creates spaces which reflect heat from the sun into the atmosphere instead of absorbing it into the earth, and energy consumption as a catalyst for these other harmful effects.

The documentary was effective in two ways. First was the organization or the information. Each degree set up a stopping point in a sort of doomsday timeline, however it made clear that we are still in the early stages on this timeline, and there is still time to intervene and fix what has gone wrong so far. Another effective aspect was the impressive visual display put on. Elaborate animations of the consequences of our not only keep the user interested in the film, but also provide a piece of shock value and sobering images which really force the viewer to ponder what could happen over the next century if we do not slow our greenhouse gas production.

The film loses most of its effectiveness in the quality of information it provides. Most of the experts it provides are what could be considered “celebrity experts” – those that the viewer like and like to accept what they have to say even though a lot of the information and speculation seemed either obvious or poorly thought out. This style was matched with the visuals which, while impressive, were likely pretty extreme and even on effects which we can see starting to take place today, the director chose to go with animations which more graphically represented the problem. This made the overall presentation seem a little more dressed up than a viewer who had a fair amount of knowledge would need to get the information they were trying to convey.

This movie was made to be aired on the National Geographic Channel which means most of its viewership could be considered people who likely already have a pretty firm idea about the issues of global warming and a few of the causes and consequences. From this and the Hollywood caliber effects, this documentary could be considered – for the most part – a piece of entertainment. Its educational value is apparent, but also shallow for the intended audience. It seems like it would function best as prime time program where a few members of a family can watch and while they may know most of the information presented at least vaguely, they are at least presented with a creative new lens through witch to look at the problems as well as deliver the information to their peers.

Most of the points of intervention in the documentary were vague. Most of the film was presented as an expose so the potential solutions were things like reduced carbon emissions from factories limit deforestation, however there was very little presented that the view could do individually. This is unfortunate, because the nature of the film is that it is something that will reach a wide audience of people and if they could have included some small thing that every viewer could do his or herself, they could have produced some significant action to slow the amount of carbon dioxide being released.