Food, Inc. Rhetorical Analysis - Digital Portfolio

"slow food" activists and concerned consumers cited in the new documentary Food, Inc., ..

Food, Inc. Movie Review - Common Sense Media

Cattle have been trained to eat corn instead of grass, their natural food. The Marlboro Cowboys should be riding through cornfields. Corn, in fact, is an ingredient in of supermarket products, including batteries and Splenda. Processing concentrates it. You couldn't eat enough corn kernels in a day to equal the number of calories in a bag of corn chips. Corn syrup can be addictive. And then there's fat and salt. A fast-food meal is a heart attack in a paper bag. Poor families can't afford to buy real food to compete with the cost of $1 burgers and $1.98 "meals."

Documentary Analysis: Food Inc. | Diana's Blog

The movie, Food Inc | Premium Essay Help

This review doesn't read one thing like a movie review. But most of the stuff I discuss in it, I learned from the new documentary "Food, Inc.," directed by Robert Kenner and based on the recent book by Michael Pollan. I figured it wasn't important for me to go into detail about the photography and the editing. I just wanted to scare the bejesus out of you, which is what "Food, Inc." did to me.

Feb 24, 2013 · One Response to Documentary Analysis: Food Inc

Introduction
The movie, Food Inc. is structured to consist of two parts; one bears the convincing aspect of the film while the other part carries the discussion of the thesis. The main concept addressed by this film is the food consumed by American people and the risks that people are exposed to through consuming the food. It is important to note that the film indiscriminately acts to critique the agricultural sector with which people are made to believe that the food they consume is safe and nutritious and therefore fit for consumption. This movie therefore aims at challenging the agricultural sector for being insincere in accomplishing its role to satisfy and protect the people that it is obliged to serve.
For the film to be successful enough in convincing its audience, there are various assumptions that have been put in place. The most noticeable of this is the idea that poultry and animal products are grown in a manner that to enable them fit the machines through which they are processed. This assumption is enhanced by making the use of graphically designed animations to show the standard sizes that the animals have to attain to be viable for the processing and subsequent sale and success in the market. This is realized as an assumption and not a fact owing to the fact that it is practically impossible to have a standard size for all animals reared by man for them to be acceptable in the market.
Another assumption lies on how fast these animals grow and the reasons for this process. The script writer argues that the animals grow at such a fast rate that it is noticeable to human eye on the growing process of some of the poultry animals. It is further argued that the factors that are used to facilitate this growth have solely to do with the type of food the animals consume. These factors are not factual owing to the fact that the fast growth is dependent on other factors, including the climatic conditions surrounding the rearing of the animals, as well as the breeds of the animals in this case. Even with all these factors kept constant, the rate of growth is not as fast as suggested in this film and the graphic work used is overemphasized upon. However, the graphic work used is important in making the concept that the creator wants to put across to his audience: that the agricultural sector is failing in securing the health of the individuals served.
The rhetoric appeals that recur in this film entail use of persuasive scenes based on the real life scenarios. This is successful owing to the fact that the locations that are used are existent and some of the people in the film are experts that have factual information based on findings from research. Farmers are also used to provide information about the types of products they use on the crops grown and back up the information about figures provided regarding durations that the farm products require. The use of verbal and visual appeal is used throughout the movie and is helpful in persuading the audience of this film owing to the fact that the people that view and listen to the individuals in the film can relate directly with the people in it. Examples of these appealing instances include scenes of harvesting of wheat with incorporation of a voice that describes the instance and persuades the audience that the produce has to be added chemical products to be sufficient and to serve the numerous purposes for which wheat products are used. The film is successful in its role to convince the audience that the products that are produced in the farms are harmful to human health. This is enhanced through the information provided about the tomatoes that look pleasant to the eyes yet have the good appearance only due to the chemicals used to attain and maintain this. It is also noted that these tomatoes are also maintained for months with their pleasant and attractive qualities to allow for export into international markets. To the audience, it would be a definite fact that it is not possible to have preservatives that maintain a natural products’ freshness for such a long duration of time without putting the consumer’s health for such a long duration of time.
Another purpose of the movie is therefore creating awareness concerning some facts kept secret therefore providing avenues for the intervention of the concerned authorities. Another instance in which visual appeal is used is the use of an image of dry cells in a comparison with the type of food that people are sold for consumption. It creates the notion that the food people consume consists mainly of chemicals. This factor also enhances the thesis of the film and makes the audience agreeably argue for the film.
This film is not specific on the audience for which it aims at capturing due to the fact that anyone can watch and relate with the field regardless of age, occupation, gender, or political position. However, the film is more specific on factors that directly affect the consumer and is therefore for viewing by any individual who is thinks is safe when consuming food produced from the farms in America. This mainly entails adults owing to the fact that they are the main individuals who purchase food for their families. Another factor that enhances the idea that the main audience of this film is the adults is the fact that the latter is the only group of individuals that would find importance in the other main factor addressed by the film. This factor is that the happenings in the food processing happen with the knowledge of the government regulatory agencies such as the FDA and the USDA. It is also made known to the audience of this film that the farmers are not allowed to air the grievances for the benefit of the consumer owing to the fact that the huge firms would file lawsuits against these individuals, making them lose the source of their livelihood. It is for this reason that this issue is reserved and only known to the sufferers and the profit makers.
Conclusion
The movie, Food Inc. is a masterpiece that is successful in its own mission to create awareness and persuade the public against believing so much in what they have to depend on everyday for their livelihood. This movie challenges the agricultural sector for its work in sustaining the masses while putting their health at risk. It seeks to have the government’s intervention in matters relating to the health of the masses and this is achieved through the rhetoric appeals that are used in the entire film.
Work cited
Robert Kenner: Food Inc.: you’ll never look at dinner the same way. 2008

Introduction The movie, Food Inc