Independent Viewing Post 2

In the film, the filmmaker claims that the involvement of scientific experimentation amongst the foods we consume is destroying ones cultural value of such food. The film focused on how the people of Mexico in the year 1998 banned the planting of GM crops to protect their cultural heritage. Along with that, they too banned importing crops from the States. Buying food from the States is much cheaper says a local mexican farmer who claims that consuming their own food is expensive and affecting them economically. However, this proves that civilians, such as those in Mexico would go to a great extent to subject themselves from GMF. The filmmaker ends this segment by filming a mexican celebration where local civilians celebrate their culture by dancing and consuming natural foods. From viewing this film, I agree with the filmmakers claim and hope that one day the US population will stand up against GMF to regain their title of being the nation of farming. 

Independent Viewing Post 1

In the documentary The Future of Food, money hungry corporations are destroying the future of natures gift. Taking over the food supply, companies are injecting pesticides, genes, and versus into the food human and animals consume daily. New engineered foods are destroying the need for farms. Some companies have gone to the extent of legal threats, bribery and other tactics to gain control over the global food supply. In this film, independent farmers are interviewed as they reveal their hardship feelings against the deterioration of their life's work.Todays Big Agriculture has sold out the future of human civilization for top dollar. Hearing the words of the these farmers opens the eyes of viewers and has them rethink the food that they bring home and serve on their family table. The food that that people think they are consuming are composed of manmade chemicals and thick coatings of pesticides. Todays children being tomorrows future are consuming this “fake food” that may one day result in harmful side affects. Parents claim that “are children are not lab rats.” 

The filmmaker of this piece incorporated a multitude of rhetorical devices to appeal to his audience. He opens the film with concerns of local United States farmers and their feelings of betrayal as they watch the future of the farm  crumble into the hands of the money hungry industry. Seeing the faces of these farmers appeals to pathos which causes the audience to immediately side with the famers. The filmmaker established his ethos by interviewing multiple scientist who based their life career around the study and effects of Genetically Engineered Food. Not only does the filmmaker discuss farming in the past 20th century, he dates back to the time of the early Mayans and discusses their ways of farming. Through past history, the filmmaker states that the United States, once being known as a nation of farming, farming currently takes up 2% of the population. To support his claims, periodically the farmer displays interesting facts that relate to the topic. 

Throughout the film, music is playing in the background continuously. However, the tone of the music changes. When displaying images of our beautiful homeland before it had been destroyed by harsh chemicals, the music is subtle and peaceful. When focusing on the corruption of business and their results, darker, more intense music is played. One last strategy the filmmaker uses is he opened with a young female farmer who protests GM Foods and strictly farms organic produce and closed with the same women as she described how it is up to the people to make a change.