not exactly thorough with its science, nor honest in depicting the full spectrum of problems associated with the electric car. they paint the car as a panacea and ham up its “death.” they don’t give an honest assessment of the electric car’s impact – from batteries in landfills to increased strain on the power grid. that said, the film does point out the inevitable reluctance of society when it comes to change. it also shows hydrogen fuel cells as the false hope that they are: too expensive, no fuel station infrastructure, hybrid technology is already more viable, etc. ultimately there are some good points to the film, but i didn’t like that they played a little fast and loose with some of the facts, glorified the electric car too much, and simplified the entire debate. for example. they pointed out that the short range (70-80 miles) of electric cars means they aren’t for everyone, only 90% of the population which commutes under 60 miles a day. while this is probably true it assumes that all people do with their car (their second largest investment, behind their homes) is commute to and from work. i fit into that 90% because my commute is less than 10 miles a day, but, like many people i know, i like to take an occasional trip to lassen, tahoe, los angeles, etc. and all those places require travel through hills over distances much greater than 80 miles. it’s kind of like saying the average person watches 4 hours of tv a day so they only need a tv that can play programs for 5 hours a day. what about july 4th when there’s a twilight zone marathon or the times when they want to see the unedited version of das boot, which is over 5 hours long, or the times when there are back to back football games? who wants to spend $34-44,000 (the cost of the car according to wikipedia) for a car that only works for most of your uses? perhaps with time demand will increase and costs will be driven down. hopefully range increases as well and then the electric car will finally be truly viable.