From the very beginning the author tries to show his audience that an electric car was not just a car. The title of the movie, where the word “kill” is used towards the electric car and the initial scene, where people gathered on the car’s “funeral”, shows us that it was not just a car, it was “a special friend” and “an idea”. The fact that the car is animated is aimed to depict the way people appreciated EV1. After looking on all those demonstrations of electric car owners and activists it may seem that they are fighting for some endangered species.

 The author interviews researchers and average electric car users to reveal that the main problem of gas cars is environment pollution, which causes global warming, lung and cancer diseases. No doubt, while interviewing such celebrities as Tom Hanks, Alexandra Paul, Mel Gibson and many others, the filmmakers strived to make their movie more popular among people. Obviously, some people would listen to the movie star with greater interest than to the researchers. Anyway the movie includes both professional and public opinion as regards the usefulness of electric cars. Thus, it could be said that either experienced or unfamiliar person would be satisfied with the arguments provided on this matter. To have the greater target audience is the goal of every filmmaker, and to my mind they achieved that. In the movie “Who Killed Electric Car” the narrator tells us a short, but outstanding history of EV1 produced by General Motors Corp. The innovative concept of a car that does not consume oil and produces no exhaust fumes was initially approved by the government and California Air Resources Board. Proving that, the filmmakers provided some enthusiastic interviews of Arnold Schwarzenegger, George Bush and others. Additionally, they provided video fragment California Air Resources Board sitting, when the head of CARB Alan Lloyd prevents from speaking people who defended electric cars, while their opponents have unlimited time. After all oil companies and automobile concerns won and EV-1s were shredded and recycled. The image of hundreds new shredded cars can impress even indifferent audience and it was probably the most striking scene of the film.

 However, the movie title leads viewers to investigation of the main point – “who did kill the car”? It even looks like a real crime investigation of murder. The filmmakers examined the witnesses, gathered the evidence and determined the guilt. The author created something like a list of “suspects” according to witnesses’ testimony. People called many things killed the electric mobile such as low capacity batteries, preventing from long trips, oil companies and car makers that were afraid of losing profit, customers who were afraid of the new product and the government, especially California Air Resources Board that gave in to oil and car tycoons. Also the author supposes that even high officials were involved in electric car killing. Notwithstanding the strong argumentation, it can be only called a conspiracy theory, which still needs more time to be proved.

 The movie is immensely compelling and thought provoking. It makes to reflect upon why GMC spent so much money and time to develop and produce a car, which was popular enough and environmentally friendly, for shredding and recycling it after 10 years. Thus, in my opinion the filmmakers chose and successfully described the problem of informal prohibition of electric cars. Skillful direction and the manner of narration make the movie to captivate people who are not interested in this matter.

Order now

Related essays