JessFilmAnnotation7

Film Annotation #7 // What’s on Your Plate? // word count: 1011

1. //What’s on Your Plate?// was directed by Catherine Gund in 2009.

2. The film concentrates on two school girls who are investigating where their food comes from, this includes the food that they eat at home and the food they are served for school lunches.

3. The argument is made by following the two girls on a logical flow of finding information. They ask questions, seek answers and then ask more questions. To answer their questions, they talk to experts in various fields as well as the cooks at their school and local farmers. A lot of scientific information is presented but at a level that children can understand. It is not presented as super scientific but as somewhat simplified. The film has emotional appeal because it is two young girls that people can relate to. It also brings in an emotional value by introducing and following a family of local farmers and a family where the father had a heart attack. This link brings in their audience.

4. The film draws out the political issues of making significant changes in school food. There is a lot of red tape and more organic food is also more expensive, linking the issue to economic issues. It also shows the issues with getting the knowledge about finding and eating healthier food out to the public. By having children investigate the sustainability problems, it brings in educational issues too both in relating to school lunches but also with teaching people and children what is in their food and where that food really comes from.

5. I was most compelled by the logical flow to their arguments. They asked questions and then answered them. A tired brain can appreciate this sort of argument, especially when experts are used to answer the questions. They were effective in showing the differences between easy, inorganic food and organic food. These differences are at the heart of their argument because by convincing people that organic food is truly healthier for them, they can start changing people’s habits. Fast food restaurants on every corner in poor districts are hurting poorer populations, and farmers have very little incentive to keep farming, as making a profit is very difficult.

6. The film seemed a bit dumbed down. It also covered a lot of ground very quickly which meant that it lacked depth in a lot of the topics mentioned. Both of these things weakened the film’s argument because it felt as if things were being left out or that the experts the girls were talking to were not giving full stories or full facts and details into some of the situations.

7. The film best addresses a younger audience. Since the two main characters are both young girls, the film is about their research and discoveries in the food industry. Children can relate to the characters and things are explained at a level that they can understand. Parents can also relate to the situations presented, such as the Angel family and their attempts at farming as well as the family where the father had a heart attack or the adults who have diabetes. In all of these cases, they can see the effects of improper and proper diets and can try to change their lives as well as the lives of their children and are provided with the resources to do so. Since the film takes place in Manhattan, residents can see and then access the healthy cookbook, and become aware of where their local farmer’s market is.

8. To enhance the film’s educational value, I would have liked it to extend past school lunches into the college lunch setting and into the business workplace lunch setting. There are cafeterias in these scenarios too, but the customers have more of an ability to change what they are eating. The film could have also presented things in their more complex versions before simplifying them to a child’s level.

9. The film shows interventions that can be done in Manhattan. By simply finding out and attending farmer’s markets, you can get fresh produce to aide a healthier diet and help local farmers. One can also participate in a cropshare, where local farmers are able to be paid all year round by people who have in essence pre-ordered crops. The film does show the difficulties in changing school lunches, but also shows what a little bit of parental support can do to create action. Parents can also simply send their child to school with a healthy lunch from home. The film shows that another level of intervention is simply showing people where the resources are, such as the cookbook and the farmer’s markets.

10. The film compelled me to look into Sodexo’s sustainability practices. They report that they have made significant efforts to reduce the about of water consumption used when washing sheets and linens. They have also made efforts to reduce the number of trays used in campus dining halls which greatly minimizes the amount of water and chemicals used. They state that forty percent of their campuses now have trayless systems, and have seen a thirty percent drop in food waste. They are present on more than 600 campuses across the country and so have the ability to implement large changes. They also claim to have local sourcing efforts that find food that is from the same state or region as the campus. “Sodexo North America: 2008 & 2009 Corporate Citizenship Report.” []

This, however, may not be the case in the United Kingdom. Sodexo works to keep prices low, but therefore has to cut costs in other manners which lowers the quality of the food and of the staff. They also show that while Sodexo provides healthy food, they also provide unhealthy food, meaning that people can still choose the unhealthy option. “Sodexho: A Corporate Profile.” Corporate Watch UK, 2004. []

What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out? (Provide at least two supporting references.)