http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQj2u4ap5bo
Super Size Me is a 2004 American big hit documentary film which was directed by and starred by Morgan Spurlock who is an American independent filmmaker. The documentary was nominated for an Academy Award for Documentary Feature and it has even been reported that a comic book version of the movie is being planned with ‘Dark Horse’ as the publisher.
Spurlock's film follows a 30-day trial period from ‘February the 1st, to March 2nd, 2003’ in which he eats only food from McDonald's. Spurlock dined at McDonald's restaurants three times per day, eating every item on the chain's menu. Spurlock consumed an average of 20.92 mega-joules or 5,000 kcal (the equivalent of 9.26 Big Macs) per day during the experiment. As a result, the then-32-year-old Spurlock gained 24½ lbs (11.1 kg), a 13% body mass increase, a cholesterol level of 230, and experienced mood swings, sexual dysfunction, and fat accumulation in his liver. It took Spurlock fourteen months to lose the weight gained from his experiment using a vegan diet supervised by his future wife, who is a chef specialized in vegan dishes and gourmet.
Example of Vegan cookery dish enthused and inspired by by Morgan Spurlock's wife...
"This is the very first thing I made from ingredients from our very first bin, and it was sooooooo good that my husband and I ate the entire pan of soup in one meal. My mouth still waters just remembering it. I found the recipe online , and discovered that it had been adapted from a recipe by Alex Jamieson, vegan chef and wife of Supersize Me documentarian fame, Morgan Spurlock."
'blending it all together really helps combine all of the flavors. One thing that you should add to your kitchen collection, if you don't already have one, is an immersion blender. Mine has changed my life--it is so useful and handy, especially for making soups.'
This is a brilliant example, of a person of an anonymous vegan enthusiast. My point being is, that it very evident that the prime focus, in Super Size Me' was the focus on how unlhealthy...Mcdonalds food is, the affects and how you can avoid it and should be more aware. However, one thing i believe could have contributed in a postive influential way, if other options of eating lifestyles has been introduced even more, even if it was on a seperate CD...never the less i can understand why it wasn't focused on hugely...with Morgan Spurlock not being sponsored for his documentry theres a limit to what you can delve into at times.
Prime example of what excess indulgence in mcdonalds can do to a person, in an animated comical form:
The camera pans across a graphical ‘pinky-purple’ landscape, with graphical special affect mist which adds a majestic vibe. The camera continues to pan…across an animated car onto a big sign that reads ‘Roadside Attractions.’ This quirkily and logically fits. ‘Roadside Attractions’ is a theatrical film distributer which brands this documentary, hence showing legitimacy.
The logo of ‘Samuel Goldwyn films’ appears as if being written onto the screen, against a blue background. This is simple, yet stylish and this is done to show authenticity, of the documentary. There is some cheerful guitar music in the background, which gives an optimistic jolly vibe to the audience straight away. The music also draws the audience in so that their attention is focused on the logo, therefore making it more memorable.
Then there is a shot with another logo ‘The Con’ which shows up in white lettering against a black background, with a white line, acting like a mirror line underneath, with red lettering reflected underneath of the line. This is a rather professional and serious looking design of a logo. Perhaps this has been integrated, to show that there may be seriousness to this documentary. The colour scheme, of black white and red, connotes this seriousness. A gold star slides through the line, and this can be interpreted as depicting high-standards. The variety of the logo’s shown, indicates that this piece of film is professional and has been worked on by various parties.
A black screened caption comes up with ‘Roadside Attractions / Samuel Goldwyn films and Showtime Independent Films’ in case some of the audience didn’t remember the company and distributor names from the first time around. This repetition is a device to reinforce the information and give it more weight.
While this caption is still being shown, within a few seconds a chorus of children from a range of ethnic backgrounds are shown chanting ‘Pizza hut,’ to show that these children are enthusiastic about Fast food restaurants. Because the children have not been visually revealed to us, as the camera is still showing the caption, this gains the audience’s attention, and feeds the curiosity of the audience who don’t yet know where and who the sound is emanating from. By including children from a range of ethnic backgrounds the documentary reaches out to all sectors of society. It is a programme which a large demographic can relate to and therefore it engages their interest.
The camera then zooms into a shot and we see school children, on some sort of a trip singing ‘Pizza hut, Pizza hut, Kentucky fried chicken, and pizza hut.’ This drives a very effective media tool as it’s immediately, shows how impressionable young children can be, and how songs and chants like this can lure children into thinking about fast-food more and therefore making them wanting to eat it more. Also the camera tactfully focuses in a medium shot, on an overweight young boy, smiling and enjoying himself while chanting this catchy ‘fast-food’ song. The camera focuses in him saying ‘pizza hut’ twice with a big grin…and even after the camera has switched to a long shot to display all the children were signalling the signs to the fast-food names, the camera cuts back to him (the overweight boy). As to emphasise, how this enthused type of chant can impact physically on a young child, as they are sheltered from the knowledge of the harmful effects that over-fatty foods can have - the most in excess consummation.
Additionally, while the camera zooms outwardly to exhibit all the other children visually chanting, like touched on before, it does become very blunt that they know the signing to the song as well in terms of the symbolic gesticulations, for ‘Pizza Hut’ and ‘Kentucky fried chicken’ and other main fast food restaurants like ‘McDonalds.’ So to an extent, this part of the video shows the hypodermic needle theory, as these children think of what they’re singing as a positive thing, and are totally unaware of the health risks of such fattening poor dietary food, due to their age of innocence. In other words their lack of experience and knowledge is evident.
Then the next line of the song is integrated ‘McDonald, McDonalds’ which adds to the focus of the documentary itself, as well as showing they’ve taken time to learn the action to the McDonalds line too, by simply touching the head with both hands making the M shape for McDonalds.
The camera also cuts to a boy who’s smiling while he sings, which shows that this is subconsciously a lot of fun for them, which was the purpose of the song being written. The song itself is a marketing and advertising device to make McDonalds more children friendly and memorable.
Next a medium shot shows a boy laughing while he says ‘I like food’ ‘I like food’. His actions are humorous (as he is pointing to himself, repeatedly). The shot signifies how children think of take away food as a means of comfort, and how there is a trend that such take-aways can be food for celebrations. This is evident from the song too. Obviously the negative aspects of the effects of eating high fat foods are not included in the song as it’s a device, for promotion and is hence biased.
Subsequently there’s a cut to an ironic, (worded) quote: “Look after the customer, and the business will take care of itself” by ‘Ray kroc’ the ‘Mcdonald’s founder’ – the irony in this is that the food, is processed, has preservatives, and isn’t very good for a person or ‘customer’ at all, so the company isn’t truly ‘look[ing] after the customer’
this quote is purposely shown when, the children chant ‘you like food, you like food’ for scare factor and to get the target audience thinking. The language used suggests that the company have the customer’s interests at heart and are not a profit based company! Which in conclusion in evidently untrue, in my opinion.
In the next sequence of shots there’s a flute instrument that begins to play, with one long whistle, while the children are still chanting, then the flute playing takes over, in an amateurish fashion, and drum beat as well. The amateurish fashion brings the documentary to a ‘down to earth’ level allowing us to feel that the documentary is more about realism and is not trying to over impress us. It seems to imply that it is a random person filming who is not a professional and therefore it bring the documentary down to earth and gives it authenticity. This is a very ploy in misleading the audience.
There is an extreme close up shot of the American flag suggesting that American are the people who love these fast foods the most. While a voice-over Spurlock says ‘everything is bigger in America’ a montage of images are initiated, the first shot shows a medium long shot of a limousine in the background, with a tiny car going passed. This is done to exaggerate the differential size proportions, and make it seem like America is in competition to have everything the biggest and best, in terms of materialistic objects and items. Spurlock says, ‘we’ve got the biggest cars,’ while showing the shot of the car, to develop a trustful overlook of him, in terms of how the audience view him, in terms of belief. Next he says ‘the biggest houses’ cutting the camera to a massive mansion. To serve as again filmic proof giving a more impressive example which makes it seem as if Spurlock is levelling up, the audience’s attention with more interesting examples. When he says ‘the biggest company’s’ he shows us ‘Wal Mart Supercenter’ from the front, to show us the sign, so that we have a name that the audience can research. This shows professionalism, in terms of the shot taken, and on the degree that because we see the ‘Supercenter’ from the front it makes what the audience see’s appear more authentic and truthful. He is giving us examples visually, as evidence rather than just verbally telling us… without proof. Spurlock validates what is being said and allows the audience to judge what is being publicised to them.
Then he cleverly interlinks these large items with food saying ‘the biggest food’ while showing us an image of a big circular plane of dough with a small sign in the background that reads ‘world’s largest cookie.’ This would be more hard-hitting and shocking example to digest for the audience, due to the unusualness, and shows that to some scope that there’s definitely some competition, in terms of breaking world records, to gain fame and recognition. Again adding the visual proof adds impact because the audience get to digest what they see. The inclusion of these scenes seems to back up the views presented.
But then as a finishing climax Morgan Spurlock says ‘and finally, the biggest people. By ending on this example this message stays with the audience. This is a clever structural device to engage the audience’s attention as it focuses on “people". The shot of a person who has reached obesity from the back, keeping the person anonymous, and further emphasizing the weight, this shown here as it is at this point that we realise that Morgan Spurlock is trying to make a valid point about obesity, and people being large in this physical sense, and that it being more common in the United States of America. The audience are drawn in due to the impactful last image, as we know that in this case, it’s not a materialistic item, or place that’s massive, it’s a person, a life that is at risk.
Then Morgan Spurlock informs us how ‘America has become the fattest nation in the world’ and then he adds in a ‘congratulation’ for shock factor, and to show sarcasm, because it’s so terrible.…this form of voice over, is less formalised, to allow us to feel on the speakers level also to give more impact. During the time that he is saying this, he cuts through, a montage, of three examples: of obese people, one lady from behind, a man and a boy standing together, with their faces blurred, to hide their identity, and a very large man sitting on the beach. As a voice over he also says ‘Nearly one hundred million people are overweight or obese, that’s more than sixty percent of all U.S adult’ these types of statistics are incorporated, to show the factuality of the situation. It is also following the conventions of documentary. The range of people portrayed means that a diverse target audience are engaged in the subject matter.
In the following shot, a technical animated diagram of the country America is showing ‘Obesity trend among U.S Adults in 1995’ up to ‘2002’ initiating with some sections of the united States shaded in to imply the level of people being overweight not being as high. With keys that show 10% and 10% -14%. Then afterwards when 2002 is being shown in the animation, it demonstrates the vast degree of obesity heightening showing most areas as having 20 to 24% of obesity, and with three areas having 25% obesity. He tells us from a personal level, how he grew up in West-Virginia the ‘third fattest state’ in America, he talks of how when he was growing up, how his mother cooked every single day, and that most of his memories of her were in the kitchen, and how they rarely ate out, except for those rare special occasions. And all throughout saying this there are scanned photographic pictures, of his mother in the kitchen again. Validating what he’s saying and giving us visual proof. This inclusion of anecdotal evidence gives authenticity and weight to his views.
The fact of people not eating out much while they grew up was common in the 80’s and 90’s but not in this day and age and that’s what he tries to highlight with the next image. While he chooses to pan to the left in a medium close up shot, displaying lots of people sitting and eating in a fast-food restaurant. He states the obvious saying ‘nowadays people do it all the time’ and then continues saying ‘and their paying for it, not only with their wallets but with their waist lines.’ Then he shoots to a medium close-up shot…of a middle aged man’s overweight stomach and waistline. The message of the quick cut from one shot to the consequence shot is clear and effective – it shows cause and effect in a simple manner. By interlinking images, to the impactful, enlightening things Spurlock says.
Audience
The audience of this documentary is clearly a broad demographic audience, as so many people eat fast foods and eat unhealthily, as the documentary exhibits the effects of what can happen to you if you eat poor nutritional food in excess… highlighting the lack of nourishment from eating it regularly. It reached out to those who have little or no knowledge, and even opening horizons for those who have some knowledge of the damaging effects, through shocking statistics and visual proof. I believe, this documentary is targeting middle-aged people, who are in the habit of eating at fast food restaurants at a regular basis… or elderly people who are unaware of the extreme affects. Another target audience would be people who have reached obesity in this way, or just in general…showing them that eating this way, with such a unhealthy diet, can be controlled, and prevented and highlights that there are other pleasant tasting, nutritionally positive foods - that there are other options.
Likewise, from what I witnessed from the children singing, those catchy ‘fast-food’ songs about, from the early time frame of the documentary indicates that it is also aiming at parents who have young impressionable children who they may take to fast food restaurants. And of course it may be aiming at the young pliable children themselves of who are old enough to understand the documentary, maybe from 7 years old onwards. The documentary may even be suited to use in educational institutions to raise awareness of healthy eating and lifestyles.
However the main company that this is aimed at to make the ultimate change would be the fast food restaurants themselves. The main one being McDonalds, as this is diet that Morgan Spurlock undertakes as a 30-day trial period… and he constantly criticises the supersize, portions of drinks, and fries, along with the burgers concentrating on how they’re all far too big and unhealthy to eat in one sitting.
The documentary highlights the negative effects of such a diet, with regular consummation of McDonalds. Even though the documentary exhibits an extreme case of Morgan Spurlock, eating McDonalds thrice times a day it shows the audience how the negative effects of poor diet can be prevented… for example, Spurlock on his way to recovery, after the extreme McDonalds dishes he ate specialised vegan vegetable dishes made by his fiancé, as previously mentioned to return him back to normal fitness. Her cooking being featured in the documentary before he starts the trialling McDonalds diet demonstrates and opens up the idea that there are other life-style choices a person can make to be healthier, even if not through such a specified diet, through achieving balance.
By the documentary being so biased, against McDonalds, and linking obesity straight as being a direct fault of McDonalds, the documentary can be analysed using the hypodermic needle theory as by showing the audiences imagery and montages that will make them accept the logic and links being shown to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment