|
Grex > Cinema > #62: Grex goes to the movies-- the Spring Movie Review item | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 278 responses total. |
richard
|
|
response 88 of 278:
| 
May 9 03:03 UTC 2004 |
SUPERSIZE ME-- This is the new documentary by New York filmmaker
Morgan Spurlock, about the epidemic of unhealthy eating habits in the
U.S. The specific targert of Spurlock's investigation is McDonald's.
It is pointed out that McDonald's says its food is healthy. So
Spurlock decides to test that claim himself. He decides that for one
month, thirty days, he will eat nothing BUT McDonald's food. For
breakfast, lunch and dinner every day for a month, he will eat only
super sized McDonald's meals.
So we watch as every day, Spurlock eats double quarter pounder value
meals and big mac value meals, and big n'tasty value meals, and filet
o'fish value meals and .etc We see him going in for breakfast and
having the McGriddles and the Egg McMuffins. And always the giant
sodas and giant fries.
As the month goes by, he gains twenty five pounds, suffers depression
and sickness, starts to smell, loses his sex drive, and starts to
seriuosly gross out his strict vegan girlfriend. Three weeks in, his
girlfriend and his doctor are looking at his health stats and begging
him to quit. But he vows to keep going for the whole month, because
this is McDonalds and McD's says their food is healthy and everyone can
eat their food.
In true Michael Moore style, Spurlock tries to call McDonalds
management, and tries to get an interview, to confront them with the
stats and ask why they continue to offer super sizes and say their food
is healthy. But of course, the corporate McD's people won't return his
calls.
We also are shown some of the history of super sizing. How what we now
know as the small sizes at McD's used to be the large sizes, and how
companies like McD's have spent billions in advertising to manipulate
people-- mostly kids-- to eat larger and larger sized portions. We see
obese kids eating huge portions of fries and quarts of Coke. We see
fat kids coming out of 7-11 with Double Big Gulp 64-oz cokes.
We are shown some alarming stats about the rising levels of obesity
among kids under the age of 18 in the U.S. The U.S. is the fattest
country in the world and is getting fatter. And it is all a result of
manipulative advertising, and the use of high levels of salt and sugar
in fast food. We see a group of kids shown pictures of famous people--
George Washington, Jesus Christ, George Bush-- and not recognizing any
of them. But they all immediately recognize the picture of Ronald
McDonald. They can't recite the pledge of allegiance from memory, but
they can recite various fast food ad jingles.
Spurlock, in between his McD's meals, visits school cafeterias, where
we see that the kids are often being fed pre-packaged sugary, starchy
food because its much cheaper than to cook anything fresh. And how
many schools are cutting back on P.E. classes because the principals
would rather have the kids in class studying for those standardized
tests that determine funding, than being out getting exercise.
We even get to see how they make Chicken McNuggets. After seeing this
movie, I never want to eat Chicken McNuggets again. In fact after
seeing this film, you won't want to eat at McD's again, or even eat
agalin at all. You certainly won't be able to eat without thinking
long and hard about your food and what is actually in it again. This
film is a eye-opener, a fine documentary. It is pointed out that
after "Super Size Me" showed at the Sundance film festival, McDonald's
did announce that they are phasing out super sizes) It is opening
nationally and I recommend "Supersize Me"
(p.s. Morgan Spurlock, the director/star, showed up when the credits
were rolling in the theater to answer questions. It wasn't any kind of
special screening, but he lives a couple of blocks away and he said he
wanted the exercise, as he's been trying to lose weight ever since
filming ended. He talked of how his vegan girlfriend put him on a de-
tox vegan diet after he'd gotten so fat from eating nothing but big
macs for a month. He looks a lot better in person than he did at the
end of the film when he was all bloated, so that diet must have worked.
He says he wants kids to start being educated to eat better and to eat
smaller portions.)
|
klg
|
|
response 89 of 278:
|
May 9 03:13 UTC 2004 |
(Yet still another example where Herr richard takes an uncritical look
at an item that appears to confirm his perconceived notions without
attempting to learn any background as to the actions and underlying
motivations.)
|
richard
|
|
response 90 of 278:
|
May 9 04:01 UTC 2004 |
klg why are you blaming me? this is was the filmmaker that came to those
conclusions. are you saying you never come to your own conclusions? or that
you somehow do more research than anyone else? how conceited can you get?
klg you are a narcissist!
|
klg
|
|
response 91 of 278:
|
May 9 14:48 UTC 2004 |
(Herr richard's undies must be too tight. And he ought to look up
bigs words before he uses them.)
|
twenex
|
|
response 92 of 278:
|
May 9 18:14 UTC 2004 |
Takes one to know one.
|
realugly
|
|
response 93 of 278:
|
May 9 19:15 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 94 of 278:
|
May 9 20:08 UTC 2004 |
re #93: I give it a thumbs down. The plot wasn't much and the ending
was completely predictable.
|
klg
|
|
response 95 of 278:
|
May 9 20:42 UTC 2004 |
re: "#90 Herr(richard): klg why are you blaming me? this is was the
filmmaker that came to those conclusions. "
Oh come on, now, Herr richard!! You unequivically recommend the film
without so much as a word of critical comment. Don't disavow what you
said. Stand up like a man (figuratively speaking, of course).
|
fitz
|
|
response 96 of 278:
|
May 9 21:50 UTC 2004 |
American Splendor: D
Portrays the empty, pathetic life of a would be cartoonist that strikes up
a relationship with Robert Crumb, based on their mutual interests in music
and dispair. This DVD was completely forgettable, which suggests the
possibility that I've surpressed an unpleasant 90 minutes of my life.
One warning should do: Crumb is NOT the disfunctional one.
|
richard
|
|
response 97 of 278:
|
May 10 01:01 UTC 2004 |
re: #96...obviously you disagree with virtually every film critic in the
country, as American Splendor was a widely praised movie. I really liked
American Splendor, I thought it was a fine study of a dysfunctional person
trying to exist in a "functional" world, and coming to terms with life.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 98 of 278:
|
May 10 06:15 UTC 2004 |
re #97: he's perfectly free to express an opinion on a movie whether
or not it agrees with "virtually every film critic in the country."
|
klg
|
|
response 99 of 278:
|
May 10 11:20 UTC 2004 |
(Are you certain of that?)
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 100 of 278:
|
May 10 12:27 UTC 2004 |
Reminds me of Chris Potter reviews in the Ann Arbor News. I could unerringly
spot movies I liked when he panned them. Most of the ones he was excited
about were ones I'd best avoid.
|
remmers
|
|
response 101 of 278:
|
May 10 15:56 UTC 2004 |
Lots of movies that the critics praised I thought were stinkers. I did
enjoy "American Splendor", though. I'm a Robert Crumb fan from 'way back
but pretty much stopped following his career and underground comix
culture after the mid-1970s. "American Splendor" filled me in on later
developments that I managed to miss.
Re "Dogville": I'll second (third?) the recommendations above and add
that I think that the film owes much to Lars Von Trier's fellow-countryman
Hans Christian Andersen, who wrote some pretty dark fables of his own.
|
gregb
|
|
response 102 of 278:
|
May 10 16:05 UTC 2004 |
I never listen to critics. If a movie looks good to me, I'll see it.
Only once has that method failed me (remake of "The Front Page.")
It's funny when someone says, "yah, that looks good," but if they hear
a bad review, they go, "boy, I'm glad I didn't waste my time/money on
that." Heaven forbid they should actually make up their own minds.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 103 of 278:
|
May 10 17:14 UTC 2004 |
I usually only read critics after I've seen a movie. (Though I do look up
spoiler reviews if I'm worried, as I mentioned above.)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 104 of 278:
|
May 10 19:11 UTC 2004 |
I've found it pretty consistent that the movies that get a 1/2-star from
reviewers are movies that I *know* I won't like.
|
richard
|
|
response 105 of 278:
|
May 10 20:12 UTC 2004 |
I always think that a very good sign for a movie is that you have one
critic raving about it, and another hating it. The best movies provoke
strong reactions, they don't provoke yawns and two star reviews. The best
movies you either love or hate. Dogville is like that. Some critics
hated it, others loved it. Very few were on the fence.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 106 of 278:
|
May 10 20:57 UTC 2004 |
I tend to disagree with critics pretty much across the board, but I've decided
that this is because what I look for in a movie is not what a movie critic
looks for. I am looking for something that tells a good story with believable
characters that is not set in current life and which has an upbeat ending.
I do not wish to invest my time in something that will depress me. I want
to come out of a movie with a smile on my face.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 107 of 278:
|
May 10 21:04 UTC 2004 |
Sounds like you should watch movies from the 1930s.
|
tod
|
|
response 108 of 278:
|
May 10 21:05 UTC 2004 |
This response has been erased.
|
fitz
|
|
response 109 of 278:
|
May 10 21:46 UTC 2004 |
Re #97 I don't take it personally. I know that some of my reviews are
heavily weighted around the C average, the pressure for grade inflation being
non-existant. I also knew that American Splendor was rated very highly on
IMDb before I saw the movie.
Nevertheless, I have a modest value to the other grexers who think that
they agreed with my evaluation in the past. So, I simply see
it as a matter of trusting a friend and knowing something about where you
and your friend have differed in the past. I guess that this rather
echoes McGee's response #100.
|
bru
|
|
response 110 of 278:
|
May 11 01:21 UTC 2004 |
I don't know, some of the movies made in the 1930's were awful downers
|
rcurl
|
|
response 111 of 278:
|
May 11 01:59 UTC 2004 |
I like tragedies - in movies or in operas. They put me in a more thoughful
mood than comedies or "happy endings", which generally I find pointless or
unrealistic. Also, tragedies have an identifiable *end*, so you are not left
wondering what will happen next.
|
gregb
|
|
response 112 of 278:
|
May 11 14:19 UTC 2004 |
But isn't that why we go to the movies, to get away from our own
reality? I'm with Twila. I want to be entertained, to get my blood
pumping, to cheer for the underdog...to feel good. I want to be part
of a world that doesn't exist yet, or one that has, but twisted around
somewhat.
|