Al Gore says we're in deep environmental do-do.

	Brian Buell, front left, Al Gore and Lesley Chilcott consult with Dan Goldrich, back left, Davis Guggenheim, Lawrence Bender (producer) on location for the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Click photo for larger image.

Fair enough -- an opinion shared by the political left, expressed in the current documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth." So what does the other side have to say? What hot-button issues from the political right are being tweaked by conservative documentary filmmakers?

If you're drawing a blank, it's because with a few exceptions, documentary films endorsing conservative viewpoints rarely make it into theaters. And it's not just a Pittsburgh thing. Even in conservative hog heaven, the Southern red states, there's a dearth of documentary films from the right.

Independent film documentaries aren't necessarily political. But for every "Fahrenheit 9/11," "Super Size Me" and "An Inconvenient Truth," which would seem to endorse views generally embraced by the left (if not rank-and-file Democrats), where is the corresponding feature-length documentary treatment of issues held close to the conservative Republican heart?

Jargon grows dicey when labeling films "liberal" or "conservative." Is "Super Size Me" about a corporate monolith getting rich from selling harmful foods or about the personal decision to scarf Big Macs at the drive-thru? Is "An Inconvenient Truth" about environmental statistics that are "inconvenient" to business, or the "truth" contained in Gore's personal conclusions? It's easiest, perhaps, to categorize the films based on the politics of those who oppose them.

No matter how you define them, it's clear that anti-establishment and populist voices dominate the world of independent documentary film. In the years since George W. Bush entered the White House, more documentaries have leveled attacks against conservative views. When a documentary is released from the right, it usually counters a specific high-profile title from the left.

Douglas Tesner, Traverse City Record-Eagle Michael Moore of "Fahrenheit 9/11" fame can be counted on to give the liberal point of view in his films. Click photo for larger image.

Months after the premiere of Michael Moore's Bush-bashing antiwar flick "Fahrenheit 9/11," a conservative group produced and distributed the less enthusiastically received "Celsius 41.11: The Temperature at Which the Brain Begins to Die," which never made it to Pittsburgh screens. "Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry" barely camouflaged its mission as a pro-Kerry campaign vehicle and inspired the pointed counterpoint "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal." It wasn't screened in Pittsburgh, but excerpts aired in modified form on Sinclair Broadcasting television stations, including Pittsburgh's WPGH and WPMY. All of those films were released during the run up to the 2004 presidential election.

Some conservatives charge that in traditionally left-leaning Hollywood and at important film festivals, their films hit a brick wall that blocks distribution to markets like Pittsburgh. But is resistance to the films necessarily political?

Filmmaker Patrick Wright said he encountered what he perceived as partisan opposition to "Is It True What They Say About Ann?" his short documentary film about conservative agitator Ann Coulter.

"Ann elicits such strong emotion, either love or hate, and we thought she'd make a good film subject," he said, "We don't editorialize, we tried to do something relatively neutral -- not a complete love-fest or a complete attack. We took it to some of the festivals and found something of a double standard from the left: diversity, diversity, diversity, until it comes to people who don't think like you."

But movies are business. How fiscally smart is "diversity" if there's not an audience for it? In Pittsburgh, where "An Inconvenient Truth" is playing to good crowds for the second week, house managers and film buyers say they're doing well with documentaries that preach to a liberal choir.

	Conservative commentator Ann Coulter is the subject of Patrick Wright's documentary short "Is It True What They Say About Ann?" Click photo for larger image.

"Ten days after 'Fahrenheit 9/11' was released, Disney put out 'America's Heart and Soul,' which was sort of a right-wing Americana feature embracing American values," said Jared Early of The Oaks, one of the local moviehouses playing films that go beyond the mainstream. "It played in Pittsburgh. The audience simply wasn't there for that. I look at our audience, at people who come in to see a movie once a week, and I try to bring in movies they'll like. People like to have their views reaffirmed."

Attempts have been made to cater to conservative tastes, with documentary titles including "Death and Taxes" (1993), about a notorious tax resister; "The Clinton Chronicles" (1994), about alleged crimes of the former president; and "Cochise County" (2004), about illegal aliens. None have played here. Conservative film advocates say that many more such films are rejected by national film distributors. Most go straight to DVD and are sold on the Internet.

By comparison, the small but thriving national infrastructure that nurtures and supports independent film presents many titles that are generally or pointedly from the left. The Oaks and other Pittsburgh theaters -- the Manor, Squirrel Hill, Regent Square, Harris and Melwood Screening Room -- are served by that infrastructure. In addition to screening mainstream and independent dramas and a broad range of nonpolitical documentaries, they screen many films that might be considered "liberal," including "Fahrenheit 9/11," "Bowling for Columbine," "Roger & Me," "Outfoxed," "The Yes Men," "Uncovered: The War on Iraq," "Horns and Halos," "The Hunting of the President," "The Corporation," "Control Room," "CSA: Confederate States of America," "Why We Fight," "Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room" and many more.

Why so many from the left and so few from the right? Leonard Maltin, the resident movie geek at TV's "Entertainment Tonight" and author of the definitive film directory "Leonard Maltin's Movie and Video Guide," had no more to offer than a virtual shrug of his shoulders.

"I don't think I'd be a good interviewee on this subject," he wrote via e-mail, "because I don't have any answers -- or even solid speculations -- on the whys and wherefores you've asked about."

Some sources have been more willing to hypothesize. When they do, liberals and conservatives agree upon a short list of possible reasons for the absence of conservative documentaries:

The movie industry has identified an audience for left-leaning documentaries. No such audience currently exists among conservatives.

Conservative advocacy groups choose to invest in other media to spread the word, while liberal voices have effectively embraced indie film.

Many filmmakers tend to endorse liberal policies, and their work reflects their views.

Many Hollywood distributors support liberal policies and prefer to handle movies they agree with.

And no matter who you talk with -- avowed Democrats, secular Republicans, Greens, libertarians, social progressives, fiscal conservatives, the Hollywood left or the Religious Right -- they agree that independent documentary film is the art medium of the minority, and all of them claim their side is the cultural underdog.

"Conservatives are making films," said Jason Apuzzo, cofounder and codirector of the Hollywood-based Liberty Film Festival, which has screened collections of conservative-minded movies since 2004. "The first stop for most indie films is usually a festival. Critics get a peek, and maybe the film can begin to generate some buzz. But all of the big festivals -- Cannes, Sundance, Toronto, the Los Angeles Film Festival -- tend to lean very much toward the cultural left. We wanted to create a place where documentary filmmakers could bring their films and not feel that there was an ideological barrier."

There's an artistic barrier, too, of minimal production values that filmmakers of all ideologies have to surpass. Blaine Greenberg, a Los Angeles entertainment lawyer and self-described fiscal conservative-cultural liberal, is cofounder of On the Fence Films. He says too many right-leaning filmmakers self-servingly blame their rejection on politics.

"It's true, and I've seen it from the inside, that the studio system is willing to back some very liberal projects and not too many conservative films, and distributors are often more interested in movies that support their personal views," he said. "But we've been involved in conservative film festivals for two or three years now ... and by and large, the work we've seen has been pretty poor. Some of what was getting out on the circuit was embarrassingly amateurish work. The conservative documentary film movement is still very new. The stuff Sundance was getting in Year 1 was probably not as impressive as what they were getting 20 or 30 years down the road."

Greenberg says he's confident in the production values of his new film, "Indoctrinate U," which is about political correctness on American college campuses. He thinks it will test the ideological barriers of Hollywood distributors when it's finished this year or early 2007.

Jeffrey Jacobs, film buyer for the Manor and Squirrel Hill theaters, says the distribution pipeline is primed for left-leaning films because conservatives embrace other media.

"The right doesn't need the specialized theatrical exhibitor because they own the rest of the country's media," he said. "I think people on the left use movies as a way to expose political concerns that otherwise aren't getting expressed in the mainstream media. ... I've been a film buyer since the 1970s [and] I've never been presented with these [conservative documentary] films. And if you did book them, I think in general no one would come."

But Gary Kaboly of Pittsburgh Filmmakers, which programs the Regent Square, Harris and Melwood screens, speculates that film distributors are banking on a more sophisticated marketing plan:

"The greater percentage of a smaller group will generate more income than a smaller percentage of a greater group," he said. "When you're the minority, you're more willing to support the cause, because when you're in the majority you know someone else will."