Scewering a Sacred Cow
Like most partisan documentaries, one's reaction to Super Size Me will be informed both by political and culinary beliefs. A scathing, though surprisingly thoroughly executed piece of movie journalism, the documentary leads its audience to the inescapable conclusion that fast food—McDonald's in particular—is destroying America's health and contributing to the country's dubious honor as the fattest in the world.
Spurred by twin lawsuits brought by two obese teenagers against McDonald's, director Morgan Spurlock not only investigates whether McFood is bad for us or not, but undertakes a month long experiment eating only McDonald's fare morning, noon and night. The results are astonishing. Spurlock, a healthy man in his mid-thirties, gains weight at an alarming rate and destroys the functioning of all of his organs, including his liver, to the perplexity of his doctors (the experiment is conducted under strict medical supervision).
While poisoning himself, Spurlock travels the country—eating at McDonalds all the way—chronicling the stories of other quarter pounder addicts, the desperately obese and the attorneys and dietitians crusading against big food. As he shows it, we and, particularly, our children, are fighting an uphill battle against a corporation whose iconic clown and theme song are better known than Jesus and the Pledge of Allegiance.
But the most damning evidence Spurlock levels against McDonald's is the way its own attorneys describe its food in court documents in the obesity case. These corporate defenders make it clear that McDonald's food not only lacks nutrition, but is bad for us.
Of course, most people already know that greasy fast food is not healthy, and Spurlock clearly has an axe to grind. His goal is to simply show how bad the food is by destroying his health with it. The movie is designed to appeal to the health conscious and those who occasionally scarf down a Big Mac. The addicts won't be convinced.
Super Size Me is fun to watch with colorful graphics and cute camera tricks. The cast of characters from Spurlock's concerned vegan chef girlfriend to the industry flaks to the crusading attorneys to the guy who has eaten more than 19,000 Big Macs (and has a healthy cholesterol reading of 140) are at turns colorful, informative and grotesque. To his credit Spurlock does a good job not making fun of any of the interviewees, particularly those, like the school nutritionists who blandly rationalize serving junk to kids, who should be mocked.
The movie is uneven, however, with a few pointless scenes and tangents. It is also about 20 minutes too long, clocking in at about 1 hour and 40 minutes. But that said, the value of Super Size Me is not what happens during the movie, but what happens afterwards. In the great documentary tradition, the movie is really a jumping off point for audience members to discuss notions of diet, personal responsibility and "corporate responsibility" (e.g. should a corporation be held liable for selling a product it admits isn't good for us).
Spurlock avoids doing much vocal editorializing, building a case against the corporate giant and fast food through the evidence. He does not get McDonalds' side of the story, but he documents his numerous calls to the corporation's media affairs office, which ignores his requests for an interview. He does speak to the head of a food industry trade association, who, through a slip of the tongue, does Spurlock's editorializing for him.
There are no new insights in Super Size Me, but compelling evidence that McDonald's worst conspirator might not be the government or lobbyists, but the consumer—evidence that Spurlock presents while gorging himself with the greasy, sugary fast food.
Spurred by twin lawsuits brought by two obese teenagers against McDonald's, director Morgan Spurlock not only investigates whether McFood is bad for us or not, but undertakes a month long experiment eating only McDonald's fare morning, noon and night. The results are astonishing. Spurlock, a healthy man in his mid-thirties, gains weight at an alarming rate and destroys the functioning of all of his organs, including his liver, to the perplexity of his doctors (the experiment is conducted under strict medical supervision).
While poisoning himself, Spurlock travels the country—eating at McDonalds all the way—chronicling the stories of other quarter pounder addicts, the desperately obese and the attorneys and dietitians crusading against big food. As he shows it, we and, particularly, our children, are fighting an uphill battle against a corporation whose iconic clown and theme song are better known than Jesus and the Pledge of Allegiance.
But the most damning evidence Spurlock levels against McDonald's is the way its own attorneys describe its food in court documents in the obesity case. These corporate defenders make it clear that McDonald's food not only lacks nutrition, but is bad for us.
Of course, most people already know that greasy fast food is not healthy, and Spurlock clearly has an axe to grind. His goal is to simply show how bad the food is by destroying his health with it. The movie is designed to appeal to the health conscious and those who occasionally scarf down a Big Mac. The addicts won't be convinced.
Super Size Me is fun to watch with colorful graphics and cute camera tricks. The cast of characters from Spurlock's concerned vegan chef girlfriend to the industry flaks to the crusading attorneys to the guy who has eaten more than 19,000 Big Macs (and has a healthy cholesterol reading of 140) are at turns colorful, informative and grotesque. To his credit Spurlock does a good job not making fun of any of the interviewees, particularly those, like the school nutritionists who blandly rationalize serving junk to kids, who should be mocked.
The movie is uneven, however, with a few pointless scenes and tangents. It is also about 20 minutes too long, clocking in at about 1 hour and 40 minutes. But that said, the value of Super Size Me is not what happens during the movie, but what happens afterwards. In the great documentary tradition, the movie is really a jumping off point for audience members to discuss notions of diet, personal responsibility and "corporate responsibility" (e.g. should a corporation be held liable for selling a product it admits isn't good for us).
Spurlock avoids doing much vocal editorializing, building a case against the corporate giant and fast food through the evidence. He does not get McDonalds' side of the story, but he documents his numerous calls to the corporation's media affairs office, which ignores his requests for an interview. He does speak to the head of a food industry trade association, who, through a slip of the tongue, does Spurlock's editorializing for him.
There are no new insights in Super Size Me, but compelling evidence that McDonald's worst conspirator might not be the government or lobbyists, but the consumer—evidence that Spurlock presents while gorging himself with the greasy, sugary fast food.
