Summary of the Documentary “Super Size Me”
In the documentary “Super Size Me, ” independent filmmaker Morgan Spurlock documents himself each day for a month. During that month, he consumes nothing but McDonalds’ food. For breakfast, lunch and dinner he orders off the menu of the fast food restaurant, making sure that he tries every last thing on the menu before the end of the month. He would super size his meal only when asked, which was pretty often. He also makes sure to not exercise any more than the average sedentary individual. He limits himself to engaging in only light physical activity, walking sporadically throughout the day. Thus, he is consuming over 5,000 calories a day and he is working off very little of it. By the end of the month, he gained an average of a pound a day. The large amounts of fat and sugar intake created irregular heart palpitations and resulted in a decrease in his sex drive. Throughout the movie, we see him visit his doctor, who repeatedly warns him that he must quit this month long experiment if he wants to avoid any long term and serious residual health consequences. Spurlock, however, perseveres and lasts the entire month. It takes him over a year to get back into his original shape. And he never stepped foot in a McDonalds again.
So what is the point?
At the beginning of the movie, Spurlock cites the court case Pelman v. McDonald's Corporation, where two teenage girls sued the McDonalds corporation for making them fat. Although the girls did not win the case, Spurlock states that he believes this can be one of the first steps towards ending the rising obesity epidemic that is growing in the country. Since the year 2000, the largest growing obese population is that of adolescents. Spurlock’s goal is to bring a stop to this epidemic and to teach America the harmful effects of fast food like McDonalds.
The Chicken or the Egg: Who is to blame?
With that being said, is Spurlock blaming corporations like McDonalds for the rising epidemic? What does he wish to accomplish? Does he want to end the success of these fast food chains? Or does he want to teach people how to make healthy choices? There is a clear difference here.
When watching the movie, I see McDonalds being cast as the evil victor. Spurlock goes on about the growing portions and the new innovative and fattening choices that they add to their menu. He highlights the number of times that the server asks him if he would like to super size his meal. Spurlock seems to believe in the validity of the court case made against McDonalds. It seems as though his goal is to bring down the corporation.
But in doing so, however, I believe that he is ignoring the real problem. How can McDonalds be at fault for the rising epidemic in this country? Are they forcing us to eat their food? By placing McDonalds as his target, is he really going to end the rise of obesity in this country? Who is to say that we are not going to go eat more pie instead of cheeseburgers? Bringing down one corporation will not stop people from making bad choices.
The Target Audience
The first time that I watched this movie was in my health class in high school. I remember watching it in the gym and hearing all of the girls groan in disgust. Spurlock would show himself stuffing his face with food, grease and cheese dripping down his chin. Every girl in that class swore that she would never eat at McDonalds again. But did that solve the problem?
Yes, Spurlock does demonstrate how the high amounts of saturated fats and cholesterol in McDonalds’ food has a drastic and negative effect on his health. However, he does not clearly distinguish these effects as a separate problem from McDonalds specifically. Spurlock spends the bulk of the documentary placing a dark shadow over the fast food corporation. He leaves his audience running away from the golden arch and toward, well toward anything else that looks appetizing. McDonalds may be bad, but what is wrong with that pumpkin pie?
Goodbye to McDonalds?!
Spurlock suggests that he is mimicking those people who are addicted to fast food. He states that he is hoping to raise the warning flag for those people who walk in and out of the fast food revolving door. Yet, studies show that even the greatest fast food attics limit themselves to fast food only about 4 times a week. There are very few people who eat McDonalds everyday, let alone for every meal of the day. Thus, it could be seen that his attempts are too unrealistic. Ninety-eight percent of his audience could cast off his antics as being too extreme. The problems that he faces are not applicable because his habits are not the same.
Still, did Spurlock put a stop to the evil empire? Did he successfully get those fast food attics to step away and take a bite of an apple for once?
Well, Spurlock did start the wave of a new change in fast food. Since he created this movie in 2004, the super size option has faded away. All fast food restaurants, including McDonalds, have started to include healthier options in their menus. There are now things like apples, orange juice, water, and yogurt being offered. McDonalds has started to create a healthier vision and they are still a successful and growing corporation. They have taken the advice of Spurlock and offered their customers a variety of options: both healthy and otherwise.
Despite the changes that have been made however, people go to McDonalds to get greasy hamburgers and fries. While, yes, an apple or two may sliver down the occasional throat, McDonalds is not in business because of its healthy options. It is the go to place for that yummy and greasy comfort food. No matter how many options they have, people still want the fries.
Furthermore, despite the changes that have been made, there have been no signs of improvement in the obesity epidemic. Childhood diabetes has been growing as obesity has been spreading. Despite the occasional apple being offered, there have been no clear signs of keeping that doctor away.
Thus, the success of Spurlocks’ documentary lies in his intent. It cannot be said that he failed, because his movie did create a spiral effect of changes. He did help bring down, or at least modify, the giant corporation he was after. He poked a hole in the evil empire and forced them to swat at the tiny little fly of “Super Size Me.” If Spurlocks intended audience was the McDonalds corporation, then he was a success in relative terms.
In a final analysis of the documentary, I think that Spurlock did a fantastic job of disgusting his audience. By providing close-ups of his throwing up and forcing his audience to see crumbles of chewed up slime fall across his face, he successfully fought against the appeal of fast food. However, his focus was too immediate. The frequent doctor visits and the tracking of his weight gain provided the audience with the sense of what the food was doing to his body, but he was too focused on the disgusting factor of fast food. His priorities and plan of attack did not seem clear. Spurlock failed to take his documentary into the broader context of reality. He failed to fully demonstrate how his agenda related to his audience as a whole. He became isolated within his documentary, leaving the facts of life somewhere in between his movie and the audience.
Teaching Idea: Fighting Against the Fight
For this activity, students will watch and analyze a documentary of their choice. When watching the documentary, they must provide an introductory paragraph that explains the goals and intended audience of the documentary. They must then outline the key arguments that the documentary makes in supporting their claim.
After this is done, the students will go one by one and contradict each argument. They must flip the coin and support the other side. The students do not need to have a central focus or counterclaim as a whole; instead they are to be looking at many different viewpoints that are left out by the documentary. They are to focus on each single argument and provide a discussion for what sides are left out and how these ideas could be looked at from a different angle. Thus for each argument that the documentary makes, the student is to take on a different perspective. This different perspective may vary from argument to argument.
The purpose of this activity is to simply have students look at how a documentary frames its audience. As students come up with counterclaims, they will be able to see how viewers may respond or interpret the film. They will also realize what discussions were left out and they will begin to understand how these perspectives may strengthen or broaden the discussion.
Excellent post!
ReplyDelete