真的,我們生活中的某一個(gè)部分是由謊言構(gòu)成的.
或是 我們寧愿生活在謊言里
我只能說(shuō), 我是絕對(duì)不會(huì)去消費(fèi) 快餐的了 太恐怖了

實(shí)在太恐怖了

男主人公實(shí)在是太有社會(huì)責(zé)任感了.佩服

以前看過(guò)另外一片子：

一個(gè)國(guó)外的美食節(jié)目主持人也發(fā)現(xiàn)學(xué)校給學(xué)生提供的伙食很多不健康食物，就去跟學(xué)校的食堂倡議，多給孩子們提供健康飲食。
可是食堂的工作人員說(shuō)，自己人手少，不用加工食物的話，根本忙不過(guò)來(lái)，而且基本沒(méi)有孩子抱怨過(guò)他們的伙食。要做什么健康食品，就讓那人自己做吧，然后讓孩子們選好了。

后來(lái)，那個(gè)人自己在學(xué)校食堂做了很健康又營(yíng)養(yǎng)好吃的午餐，在中午的時(shí)候，和學(xué)校本來(lái)的吃的一起提供給孩子們選擇?？墒?，不管他怎么向孩子們推銷自己做的東西，大部分孩子還是選擇了自己以前吃的那些東西。他還是很努力地堅(jiān)持到了午餐時(shí)間結(jié)束。

再后來(lái)，他到學(xué)校的草坪邊上哭了。

我淚腺就被按下開關(guān)了。

可以說(shuō)是我看的第一部紀(jì)錄片？
簡(jiǎn)直是值得學(xué)習(xí)的樣本，引經(jīng)據(jù)典、動(dòng)畫、采訪、旁白blablabla~
拍攝是不是不難學(xué)，我就要開始了~


Laptop播著小J的Make Me Wanna Die，今天一下就看了兩部~
夠了吧？夠了吧？
導(dǎo)演這下賺得盆豐缽滿，名利雙收，不知道是不是很劃算呢~
高調(diào)是現(xiàn)實(shí)世界的必須啊~

總之是很精彩的紀(jì)錄片，絲毫不煩悶，感覺(jué)食品類專業(yè)還是會(huì)很跑火，不錯(cuò)~

看起來(lái)很驚人。
但是，這位仁兄的醫(yī)生不止一次告訴他，你每天都吃了5000大卡。

一天5000大卡，基本上只有腦殘才會(huì)這么吃東西。
而且，就如紀(jì)錄片《胖頭》所說(shuō)，一天5000大卡的任何東西都能把任何人吃成肥豬。

何況，根據(jù)計(jì)算，只算三餐的話，你怎么也到不了5000大卡。不信？你可以去任何在米國(guó)的麥當(dāng)勞，然后點(diǎn)幾份套餐。除非你一餐吃兩個(gè)套餐，就算是大號(hào)套餐，你的熱量計(jì)算也只會(huì)在3500大卡左右——雖然也會(huì)慢慢地把你變成肥豬，但是毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，Spurlock夸張得明顯。

本片出發(fā)點(diǎn)值得懷疑，而且充滿謊言。

哦對(duì)了，別提垃圾食品垃圾的事情。這個(gè)地球人都知道。

1.段落式的結(jié)構(gòu)，某種程度上類似于一篇論文，覆蓋了許多論題，但同論文不同的地方在于沒(méi)有另一方的觀點(diǎn)或者理性思辨，即這背后的原因是什么。2.戲謔、諷刺及富含表現(xiàn)力的畫面，確實(shí)比網(wǎng)絡(luò)上的文章更能突出陰謀論的優(yōu)勢(shì)，盡管這個(gè)基本不算陰謀論吧。3.此類紀(jì)錄片一大特點(diǎn)是行動(dòng)，他們不僅要搜集證據(jù)，他們本身的行為就是證據(jù)。4.這帶來(lái)的結(jié)果就是，這些紀(jì)錄片都是由自己的觀點(diǎn)出發(fā)的，一切行動(dòng)與證據(jù)都圍繞著自己的觀點(diǎn)展開。5.本片最傳奇的地方在于它成了，圣丹斯6周之后麥當(dāng)勞取消了Super Size套餐。6.妹子真不錯(cuò)，借本片推出的時(shí)機(jī)還出了本減肥書。她講他們性生活的時(shí)候太生動(dòng)了。
值得記憶的場(chǎng)景1.開場(chǎng)小孩喊著pizza hut玩耍2.伴著查拉圖斯特拉如是說(shuō)的曲子做又惡心又諷刺的手術(shù)3.其實(shí)每章的標(biāo)題都很有趣，小丑徹底成為邪惡的化身啊。

The fast food restaurants business should be blamed for the global scale of obesity, especially the young obese children. Some may argue that adult individual persons should be hold responsible for their own reckless attitudes towards their food choice. However, according to Brownell and Nestle (2009), Human biology is omitted in this kind of argument: “Humans are hardwired, as a survival strategy, to like foods high in sugar, fat and calories.” Although the consumers should be responsible for their choices to some extent, but in many cases, the fast food restaurants are the root causes. Buying food products in modern society can be very complicated, and the notions of the calories and nutrition are confusing to some of us consumers. This complexity has placed the consumers in a vulnerable and disadvantageous position because of the lack of certain information or technical expertise. Consumers’ rights of knowing what’s in their food, the autonomy to choose different food, fair trade, could be harmed. The inequality embedded in the fact that the marketers of the fast food usually have a comprehensive technical knowledge about the product, the market, the consumer psychology, and marketing strategies. On the other hand, the consumers usually don’t have sufficient information about the food they are going to purchase to make a healthy choice. Naturally at the receive end of the information, the consumption information is usually subjective even biased.
Besides, the authority of the society should hold fast food companies responsible for the growing obesity epidemic. Due to the inequality of the power dynamic between the consumer and the manufacturer, laws and regulations pertaining to consumer protections are necessary. There are laws and Acts concerning smoking and tobacco Control, a statute about fast food should also be passed to regulate controversial products like empty calories food, which are disastrous to heart health and so on. Those regulations should make sure the public get the fair and truthful information to protect the public health and control the children obesity.
The ethical responsibilities of the fast food companies are to campaign about their food fairly and objectively. They should not only depict the delicious, joyful side of their food, but also the ugly sides, such as the heart disease and diabetes that might be caused by those high calories food. Brownell and Nestle showed us with the number that “In the same year that the government spent $2 million on its main nutrition education program, McDonald’s spent $500 million on its We Love to See You Simile campaign. With this drastic different amount of input to people from the two perspectives, there is no wonder how consumers are deeply brainwashed into certain unhealthy lifestyle that maximum the profits of the fast food companies. People should be made aware of what they are eating, and what would it cause in a long term. The government should stand aside with the public health instead of the big corporation profits.
They are not living up the responsibilities sufficiently. They prioritized their profits over the public health. I think the critics claiming that the fast food companies are no more ethical than drug dealers do have some merit. Fast food has been scientifically proved to be related to multiple kinds of health issues. Some of them are very dangerous, and others are even fatal. They make use of the weakness of the human being, and profit from it at the expense of the public health. To make the matters worse, the whole process usually happens in a long term. People don’t become overweight overnight, and people don’t develop diabetes immediately after a delicious sundae. People are hardwired to prefer those kinds of food and also tend to ignore the risks when it’s not an immediate danger.
 
Work Cited
Brownell, Kelly. & Nestle, Marion. “Not If Blaming the Victim Is Just an Excuse to Let Industry Off the Hook.” Element of Argument. Ed. Annette T. Rottenberg, Donna Haisty Winchell. 9th ed. Boston: Bedford St. Martins, 2009. 319-320. print.