2303 words (9 pages) Example Composition in Film Studies
Disclaimer:This function was manufactured by one of each of our expert copy writers, as a learning aid that will help you with your studies. We also have a number of samples, each written to a particular grade, to illustrate the task delivered simply by our educational services.
Virtually any opinions, results, conclusions or perhaps recommendations stated in this material are the ones from the author and don’t necessarily reflect the opinions of UK Essays.
In 2004, the American film-maker Morgan Spurlock made a documentary film “Supersize Me”. Produced in response to the not successful legal fits against McDonald’s fast food, the film brings to light Spurlock’s own experiment with eating fast food and, above all, addresses those Americans who have are obsessed with unhealthy fast food. The film-maker conducted the experiment for any month, during which he ate food from McDonald’s and observed the impact of take out on his physical and emotional well-being. The greater he got in MacDonald’s, the more side-effects he experienced, including major depression, fatigue, sexual related problems, headache, and chest pain. The camera catches all mental and physical changes which in turn occur in Spurlock. The film-maker cooperates with three doctors (a gastroenterologist, a cardiologist, and a general practitioner) who have indicate the alterations in his physical and psychological state (Sheehan, 2005, g. 69). Yet , the principal thought to which Spurlock constantly results throughout his documentary is the fact McDonald’s fast food increases weight problems in the United States (Sheehan, 2005, s. 68). As is shown inside the documentary, the weight of Spurlock ahead of the experiment was 84 kilogram. In a length of one month, his weight improved up to ninety five kg (Lusted, 2008, s. 33). As well as the weight enhance, his cholesterol level transformed from 168 to 230 (Sheehan, june 2006, p. 69). Observing such a damaging what is the volume of a square pyramid impact of take out on person’s health, the doctors suggested Spurlock to quit eating junk food in McDonald’s.
Although a low-budget documented (with price range only $65, 000), “Supersize Me” provides acquired superb popularity among the list of national and international public due to its crucial social commentary on the concern of increasing weight problems (Baym and Gottert, 2013, p. 159). Spurlock’s film consists not simply of his own glare and investigations, but likewise of a series of interviews which usually he took in the process of experiment (Day, 2011, s. 116). Through his selection interviews with nutritionists, gym teachers, doctors, legal representatives, cooks, and also other experts, the film-maker efforts to gather different views on junk food eating plus the fast food culture of modern America. In addition to the selection interviews, Spurlock also spreads a survey between children and finds out that they know perfectly well who Ronald McDonald can be and understand nothing regarding Jesus or George Rose bush. As is shown by Spurlock, McDonald’s encourages children to consume fast food by simply organising birthdays and providing children totally free toys using its Happy Foods. To make his film more vivid, fun, and informative, Spurlock uses cartoon cartoon (e. g. when displaying how McNuggets are produced), statistics, and graphics (Day, 2011, p. 116). Some statistical info are alternatively disturbing; for example, the evidence gathered by the film-maker suggests that above 60 percent of Americans have problems with obesity and diabetes due to eating bad fast food (Fazekas, 2005, p. 144). Besides, 10, 1000 fast food advertising are displayed on television annually, attracting attention of not only adults, yet also children (Fazekas, 2006, p. 144).
Throughout the documented, the film-maker employs the shock processes to evoke highly effective emotions and reactions in his viewers. For example, he depicts liposuction surgery, his very own vomiting throughout the second ingesting of McDonald’s meals, the numerous images of obese Us citizens, and school children’s addicting ingestion of harmful foodstuff. Spurlock also constantly returns to his own junk food addiction, displaying that this individual feels good only when he consumes McDonald’s meals. While at the beginning of his test Spurlock looks and seems healthy, his physical and emotional point out becomes worse with the progression from the experiment. Spurlock’s girlfriend acknowledges that this individual smiles below before, has sexual dysfunction, and depressive moods. Spurlock also illustrates his very own fears above the health problems which occur during the experiment. For instance, he describes that one night time he wakes up because of his inability to breathe. He is so scared of this side-effect that he doubts whether to continue the experiment that threatens his life. Nevertheless , Spurlock determines to finish the experiment possibly at the expenditure of his physical and emotional health. At the end of the film, Spurlock shocks his viewers by simply stating that he restored his physical and emotional health for approximately 14 months. He likewise shows a tombstone intended for the clown Ronald McDonald and requests his visitors: “Who do you need to see move first, you or them? “
In addition to the use of surprise techniques, the film-maker also uses comparison techniques. For example, he contrasts American universities with fast food meals and soda machines to a university for bothered teenagers in Wisconsin wherever fast food was substituted intended for natural foodstuff (Fazekas, 2005, p. 145). As Spurlock demonstrates, this food transform has absolutely influenced children’s emotional health and behavior. The film-maker gathers peoples’ opinions and visits McDonald’s restaurants with Manhattan, yet also in other American urban centers, such as The state of texas and Washington dc. By using both shock methods and relative techniques, Spurlock makes an attempt to engage the public to a dialogue within the issue of fast food consuming. He likewise encourages parents to reevaluate their kids eating in McDonald’s and the own responsibility for little one’s healthy development. As Spurlock clearly shows in his documentary, parents are responsible for developing healthy eating habits in their children; or else, the consequences with their neglect will probably be detrimental for children.
Additionally to parents’ irresponsibility, Spurlock also talks against frequently increasing advertising and marketing of fast food. Although McDonald’s claims that the company will not bear responsibility for householder’s decision to enjoy fast food, it spends immeasureable dollars on advertising usana products (Fazekas, 2006, p. 144). To make things worse, Spurlock compares how much money which junk food companies dedicate to advertisements to the amount of money which usually healthy food organisations spend on advertisements. The characters he produces in the honn�tet� clearly display that the spending budget of healthy food choices organisations is significantly lower than the budget of fast food businesses. In addition to his attracts parents, advertisers, and the public, Spurlock as well appeals to the American govt which fully neglects the causes for people’s visits of McDonald’s and consumption of unhealthy junk food. For instance, this individual shows the city which has no playground for children; therefore, parents go to McDonald’s because it has a playground. In other displays, the film-maker focuses on university meals, displaying that universities often buy fast foods for youngsters because it is more affordable to buy junk food than to arrange fresh meals. In view of this kind of limited choices, children have to consume take out instead of eating healthy how do you find the volume of a square pyramid food. Each one of these examples described in Spurlock’s documentary represent that the two government and educational establishments take care of the fast food culture to gain their own profits.
Spurlock’s documentary consists of several areas, each which brings to mild a new factor for his criticism of fast food consuming. The film-maker often employs humour and satire in his discussion of a serious issue. On the one hand, this makes his documentary drastically entertaining. On the other hand, Spurlock succeeds in producing a black funny which intensely relies on the elements of humor to pass on some important messages. This is especially evident in the landscape when the American family tries to perform the Pledge of Allegiance close to the White House, but does not remember the words and starts performing McDonald’s music. Although this sort of scenes stimulate laugh, additionally they make people believe. Spurlock purposely introduces funny elements to destroy peoples’ barriers and encourage them to understand crucial info. As “Supersize Me” provides clearly shown, such a strategy is really effective as persons tend to create barriers to somebody else’s views and opinions; they have a tendency to understand these views with extreme care and doubt. However , when views and opinions happen to be presented in a light, funny, and enjoyable manner, individuals are more willing to accept them and, most importantly, believe the speaker. The film-maker as well integrates music (e. g. Fat-Bottomed Girls by Queen) and new phrases (such as McStomach Ache or McTwitches) into his documented to create suitable mood and atmosphere. Besides, Spurlock pays great attention to details (e. g. a hair in his food), uses entertaining photographs when changing the scenes, and effectively combines video and graphics. The use of all these tactics signifies that Spurlock efforts to produce not only a reflexive film, but also a highly fresh and active film. Because of a outstanding juxtaposition of techniques, Spurlock gradually activates viewers in to the discussion.
However , instead of offering a balanced viewpoint, the film-maker expresses a significantly biased view on demand for fast food eating in the United States. Consequently, the benefits of Spurlock’s nonscientific experiment can be encountered with some criticism. For instance, Guy Russo, the chief executive of Australian McDonald’s, opposed the view outside the window expressed by Spurlock by simply claiming that people do not eat fast food daily for three instances (Gumbel, 2005, n. p. ). Russo also criticised Spurlock’s decisions not to do exercise routines and dual his normal food intake throughout the experiment. In the viewpoint, this sort of irresponsible and extreme activities, but not take out eating acquired detrimental results on Spurlock’s physical and emotional health and wellness (Gumbel, 2005, n. g. ). Klosterman (2006, g. 65) items at the fact that Spurlock exaggerates the unfavorable impact of fast food in the health because it is impossible to “sell a movie about eating fast food and feeling fine”. Klosterman (2006, p. 65) also asserts that rather than putting the rap for consuming fast food with an individual person, Spurlock puts the major fault on McDonald’s and the American government. Yet , in the perspective of Klosterman (2006, p. 66), McDonald’s only offers “people the merchandise they want”.
Despite the described critical comments, Spurlock provides succeeded in producing a extremely important documentary which questions raising popularity of take out eating besides making the public as well as the American federal government reflect on the problems of junk food and unhealthy weight. The film-maker has considered active stages in recognising a critical problem and stirring up people’s psychological responses to the problem of unhealthy fast food and overweight. Throughout the documentary, Spurlock attempts to convince viewers that junk food is a genuinely bad choice; by delivering to mild his recollections of child years eating habits (e. g. the moment his friends and family gathered jointly and consumed home-made food), the film-maker demonstrates that such ways of eating are drastically healthier and benefit children more than trips to McDonald’s restaurants. As for Spurlock’s prejudiced views on fast food eating, you ought to take into account that the film-maker attempts to produce a viewpoint documentary which draws on the subjective way and “is strongly skewed toward a particular viewpoint” (Lees, 2010, s. 99). Relating to this specific viewpoint, it is not only detrimental menus of McDonald’s and also other fast food restaurants that create a risk to the physical and mental well-being of kids and adults, but the impact of junk food culture about people’s ideals and lifestyles. Spreading fast food culture throughout America, companies serve their particular interests, although fully missing the demands and hobbies of common people.
Although McDonald’s fast food is relatively cheap and delicious, the increased consumption of the food (as Spurlock features clearly shown in his documentary) may be dangerous to the physique of an adult, let alone for the body of the growing child. Spurlock’s decision to focus on McDonald’s restaurants does not mean that the film-maker has a personal dislike to get McDonald’s. His choice is the result of the fact that McDonald’s may be the largest organization in the American fast food industry. Hence, by attacking McDonald’s, Spurlock communicates his criticism of the complete fast food sector which manipulates people besides making them develop unhealthy eating routine. Although at times Spurlock converts to exaggerations, his documented is regarded as a realistic consideration of the scenario with American fast food ingesting. The film-maker intentionally exaggerates some information to accentuate the seriousness of unhealthy eating and unhealthy weight. In response to Spurlock’s documented, McDonald’s features diversified the menu with some healthy food and has taken away the supersizing option (Sood, 2004, n. p.; Lusted, 2008, g. 34; Baym and Gottert, 2013, g. 159). Moreover, McDonald’s has also started to showcase fat content and unhealthy calories so that McDonald’s visitors may decide for themselves what to consume. As such, Spurlock’s film offers inspired moderate changes in the American industry of fast food.
Bibliography
Baym, G. & Gottert, C. (2013). 30 days. Social engagement. In: E. Thompson & T. Mittell (Eds. ), How to watch tv set (pp. 159-167). New York: Ny University Press.
Day, A. (2011). Satire and dissent: Interventions in contemporary political debate. Bloomington: Indiana College or university Press.
Fazekas, I. (2005). The alkalizing diet: You are in the stability. Virginia Beach front: A. 3rd there�s r. E Press.
Gumbel, A. (2004). The person who got McDonald’s. The Independent, 18 April. Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-man-who-ate-mcdonalds–acirc-6167144.html [Accessed 17 April, 2015]
Klosterman, C. (2006). Get rid of Klosterman IV: A decade of curious persons and dangerous ideas. Ny: Simon & Schuster.
Lees, N. (2010). Greenlit: Expanding factual/reality TELEVISION SET ideas from concepts to pitch. Birmingham: A&C Dark Publishers.
Lusted, M. (2008). Obesity and food policing. Edina: ABDO Publishing.
Sheehan, M. (2005). Supersize Me: A relative analysis of responses to crisis by McDonald’s America and McDonald’s Australia. In: C. Galloway & E. Kwanash-Aidoo (Eds. ), Advertising issues and crisis managing (pp. 67-80). Melbourne: Thomson Social Science Press.
Sood, S. (2004). Weighing the effect of Extremely Size Me personally. Alternet, twenty nine June. Available from: http://www.alternet.org/story/19059/weighing_the_impact_of_%26%238216%3Bsuper_size_me%26%238217%3B [Accessed 18 Apr, 2015]
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this information please pick a referencing stye below:
Recent Comments