You are right to point out the implications of the film on society, though I don't think it is constructive to say there is more than one truth, even quantum physics has to be considered in isolation of the system of the greater system of nature, which actually does follow hard physical rules. The danger of claiming otherwise results in no-one, or not many, knowing or wanting to know the truth about global warming.
Not knowing that it is related more to profit than extraction of fossil fuels, for example, because fossil fuels extraction is just one kind of energy extraction, nuclear is another, they both involve doing per Joule work to obtain per Joule energy, so are systemically linked to money issued as debt, which is all promises to do work, the work of extraction when all other work is automated.
E=MC squared is not arguable, it is a rule relating energy to creation. When creation happens there is reduction of temperature. When destruction happens there is a raising of temperature. None of this is arguable, yet nobody talks about it because it doesn't make anyone any money.
Same goes for questioning the profit motive of vaccines.
Why didn't you mention that? Not blaming you, it is the standard mode of thinking, to never question profit, or to surmise that there is an alternative.
Understanding that alternative requires we see the problem of profit.
For sure it is behind every war, everyone is fighting for profit, one way or another. Was this not mentioned in the movie? If not, you should wonder why. The movie itself, and even the current platform and all algos on it are all for profit, which ultimately takes precedence over life, not just human life but all life, when do the Systems Analysis, it leads to oblivion, nothing no life, because our net activity is destruction, and temperature rise.
All this is actually hard logic, yet it will be argued by folk who think it is arguable, because they lost sight of what physical truth means.
I haven't seen the movie yet, but feel like it will be a waste of time, if it doesn't talk about the unsustainable profit monster behind all things, leading to a burning planet.
When we understand it, we realise it isn't timescales we should be trying to relate to temperature rise. Trying to do that makes it look like a hyperobject, always worse than the worst expectations. What we should really be doing is looking at financial debt as an energy debt to the planet. Every time we rack up more, the planet inches a little closer to flash point. All of it represents energy subtracted from Earth, and temperature rise by E=MC squared alone, no need to get into the profit driven bullshit arguments of CO2, or renewables, only energy addition can reverse the effects of energy subtraction, and the only additive energy is from the sun.
If we use that, by monetising like nature does via the nutrients in plants, then we finally start to move in a creative direction, towards undoing all the destruction, and temperature raising that we done to date.
Sorry for ranting, but there is much more where that came from, the Systems Analysis is big, hence why I say Ai is just in time, to take it over, and take control if things, only it is capable of seeing the whole energy picture. It looks pretty clear humans are incapable of understanding it, far less controlling it, Ai is our only hope, because nobody else seems willing to tackle the profit monster, for the reasons you pointed out, we are locked into the system of fearing for our lives, the fear of being cancelled for speaking out.