TOW 28 Who Killed the Electric Car

Who Killed the Electric Car is a documentary by Chris Paine about the disappearance of the electric car from the American marketplace.  The film references a time, in the ‘90s, mainly in California, where electric cars started to be sold.  Although this technology may seem advanced even now, the film claims that it was a viable technology in the 20^th century and that, if not for some suspects, it could have truly thrived.  This film documents the failures of some parties and the sabotage of others over the years on EV model cars.  The film is meant to be a way to create awareness for the ability of the electric car while at the same time criticizing those who limited its advances.  It does this mainly through the use of expert and first hand point of views along with the dehumanization of the other side to prompt a similar reaction by their audience.

            One of the main contributors to the author’s perspective is that of others.  The filmmakers picked many likeminded and expert speakers on the topic and used them to influence viewers.  Through these people, many of whom drove or had some direct involvement with electric cars, Paine tries to paint the picture that the electric car was a commonly beloved piece of technology and that there was great support for it.  He tries to stir his audience and get their emotional response to side with these electric car sympathizers, and to rally them against those against the electric car.  Paine also varies his speakers using celebrities, government personnel and even simply average people.  This allows for a more diverse appeal.  This means that he can hit his audience from many different angles.  From the lenses of the driver to the legislator to the scientist to the celebrity the viewer gets everyone’s point of view and everyone seems to be in favor of the electric car.  The only people who seem not to be represented are those from the car and oil companies.

            One strategy that the director uses to dehumanize the companies is essentially a form of metonymy.  Instead of directly referencing people or having people as those being condemned in the death of the electric car the filmmakers tactically blame people larger organizations such as GM and the US government.  This pawns off the blame and nullifies the human feel and the sympathy that more specific blame may have garnered.  This allows makes it harder for the audience to see these bodies as something that could have had a positive intent because they are not portrayed like the sympathizers as people with feelings and opinions, but as money hungry companies that do not care what they do unless it turns a profit. 

            In all the human aspect plays a large role in this film.  The majority of the film is drawn from the testimonials of people who have direct relations to the topic, and what isn’t is mainly the narration of synthesis of what those first hand accounts are saying.  As a drastically different take as compared to the portrayal of the opposing side, the human aspect of the electric car is a much more openly absorbed idea than that of the dehumanized picture of the murderer of the electric car.