Ja, nu har jag kommit till ett mycket intressant kapitel i det här Super Size Me!-projektet. Nämligen tiden då jag med egna ögon faktiskt kan se att min kropp förändras. Och nej, jag har absolut inte gått upp tio kilo sen i somras, så stor skillnad är det inte…!

Men! Plötsligt har jag inga magrutor kvar längre… Missförstå mig inte, magen är inte stor eller “fettig” på något vis men den är bara väldigt, tja, vad ska man säga…? Mjuk liksom… den putar inte ut men det går heller inte att urskilja några muskler – hur mycket jag än klämmer på den.

Musklerna är finoto. Puts väck. Alldeles borta.

Även armarna har tappat sina former. Det är nu bara mjuka. Inte hängiga och dallriga (även om säkert vissa anorektiker nog skulle hävda det) men liksom bara “vanliga” armar. Vet inte hur jag ska förklara det bättre, dem bara är liksom…

Samma sak med benen och låren såklart… finns ingen struktur kvar utan de mest bara har återgått till att vara vanliga kroppsdelar som aldrig någonsin verkar ha sett skymten av någon träning.

Det är med blandade känslor som jag skriver det här som ni säkert förstår. På ett sätt är det såklart väntat, det är nämligen min 16:e träningsfria vecka. Såklart att man borde kunna se och märka skillnaden nu. Kanske borde den här upptäckten väcka mer ångest än vad den faktiskt gör men det är som att jag inte orkar bry mig.

På ett sätt påvisar det här experimentet hur enkelt det faktiskt är att komma både i form och ur form. Därför är jag snarare mer fascinerad av hur snabbt som kroppen kan förändra och anpassa sig. Dessutom känns det betydligt enklare att äta mer varierat (både nyttigt och onyttigt) nu när jag inte har någon elitkropp längre. Ju mer jag tänker på det desto mer okomplicerat känns det att kunna unna sig själv onyttigheter som den här godbiten till exempel när kroppen ändå inte är i toppform.

Med andra ord, en viktig slutsats so far i det här projektet är att ju mer “onyttigheter” som man vågar smyga in i sin kost desto enklare blir det att slita sig loss från ätstörningen. Jag har sedan starten, mentalt försökt förbereda mig så mycket som möjligt på hur jag kommer att reagera den dagen när jag upptäcker att mina magrutor är borta (har alltid haft dem och varit en viktig del av mig o min personlighet).

Den dagen har kommit. Den är är idag. Och vet ni vad?

Jag är rätt cool med det. Jag accepterar det. Det är ok för mig med en mjuk kropp just nu. Jag har inget behov av en stenhård och vältränad kropp.  Inte till det priset som jag fick betala förr i tiden i alla fall.

Efter att ha testat på en period med betydligt mindre asketiska inslag än vad jag har varit van vid så är det inte så svårt att  istället välja en mjukare livsstil. Jag orkar inte längre vara sträng mot mig själv, vilket jag dock fortfarande är i många avseende, det ska påpekas, men inte i samma omfattning som förr.

Om priset för att slippa tänka på mat, träning och hälsa är en mjukare kropp så är detta faktiskt fine med mig. Det innebär nämligen att jag kommer kunna ha samma måltidsrutiner som alla andra och därmed slippa krångla med tider, restauranger, maträtter, tillagningsssätt, dyra livsmedel samt slippa dyra gymkort, träningstillbehör, inte behöva dusha och byta underkläder stup i kvarten. Jag har minst tusen argument för varför jag hellre väljer att minska min relation till ätstörningarna.

Jag förlorar ju ingenting på det förutom den där fitnesskroppen och helt ärligt om jag skulle bli sugen att börja träna så kan jag ju alltid börja igen fast i mycket mindre omfattning. Det behövs ju inte särskilt stora mängder för att träningen ska ge resultat. Det är en nyttig läxa, hör ni det alla träningsfreaks? Förmodligen slösar många  av er onödig tid på träning som egentligen inte ger mer resultat än om ni skulle gå dit 3ggr/vecka istället för 6-7 gånger. Tänk på det!

Det är enklare att bryta sig loss från ätstörningen om du bestämmer dig för att helt sluta med träningen och samtidigt börja införa normala måltider. För mig har det varit betydligt enklare att äta “allt möjligt” sedan jag la av med träningen eftersom träningen ger en känsla av att du inte vill “förstöra” kroppen efter att du har renat den på gymmet. Om du undviker motion slipper du känslorna av att vara “ren” och det blir lättare att välja annat än bara soppa och sallad. Så det är mitt guldtips, SKIPPA TRÄNINGEN HELT. Inte bara delvis , under den här tiden måste du sluta helt, det är min åsikt i alla fall.

Så, hur gick det igår då? Jo jag åt typ en smootihe, 100 gr choklad, 50 gram nötter och en muffin. Någon ångest då?

Jag tänker inte ljuga o säga att jag inte fick någon ångest, jag har varit på dåligt humör hela dagen och jag vet att det har att göra med gårdagens kaloriintag som blev högre än vanligt. Men positivt är att varje gång jag utmanar mig själv så här så minskar graden av ångesten. Om jag åt samma sak för ett år sen skulle  jag ha fått tokpanik och spendera hela dagen på gymmet efterråt, idag kan jag hantera ångesten annorlunda. Det är inte bra att den finns där men samtidigt är den inte lika kraftig som förr. Mitt mål är såklart att kunna äta vad jag vill och aldrig någonsin känna ångest.

Så ja, idag har jag varit ett litet åskmoln inombords men det är rätt väg att gå. Jag måste utmana anorexin ibland, annars blir det aldrig någon förändring.

Det är skillnad på graden av ångest, kom ihåg det och se inte ångesten som ett nederlag!

Picture from Pebbles From Paradise

McDonald’s, the fast food chain known worldwide, is updating its logo. The signature plastic red backdrop will now be forest green in some countries in Europe.

In an attempt to remodel the chain’s image, restaurants in Europe have changed the classic red McDonald’s sign to green. Apparently this color change makes up for the misguidance in McDonald’s ethical policies. A british blog, Guardian, has more information about the re-branding of the famous chain that sells heart congestion in hamburger boxes.

“Tim Lyley, a goldsmith from London, is one of the cynics. He says: ‘It’s just a marketing thing isn’t it? What McDonald’s do is so ingrained in people’s psyche that no amount of rebranding is going to change what people think about it.’

The group’s financial results seem to disprove that sentiment. In April the company reported an 11% rise in global first quarter sales to $5.5bn, and a 22% increase in net profits to $762.4m. This was put down to surging sales in Europe and strong demand for new menu in the US.”

I find the sales increase frightening. If people are so easily duped by a marketing scam and would actually start going to McDonald’s because of the logo color change, then society has bigger problems than rampant obesity.

The thing about McDonald’s is that its image is directly correlated to the actions of the company. Since the company’s debut in 1940, increasingly larger portions of the signature greasy, high in fat food have been promoted. Though it is ultimately up to the individual to decide what is best for her own health, a restaurant should not wield its power so irresponsibly. McDonald’s was often accused of contributing to the rise of childhood obesity and was said to be marketing to young children with the introduction of Ronald McDonald in 1963.

Marketers use re-branding as a tool to change the image and oftentimes the values of a company. When a company needs to associate itself or distance itself from a particular image, a revamp of the logo is usually indicative of re-branding.
However far McDonald’s feels it needs to run from the greasy environmentally corrupt image it was linked to, will not change the fact that it continues to serve these same products under the same conditions.

McDonald’s Facts

-There are McDonalds restaurants in 119 countries.
-The “play-place” first appeared in 1987
-Six weeks after the film Super-Size Me came out, McDonalds elimianted the super-size option.

A McDonald’s in Islamabad, Pakistan. Picture from Wikipedia.com

I’ve been on a bit of a documentary kick lately. I’ve already talked about I.O.U.S.A. and I just finished Maxed Out, which takes on personal debt and the credit card companies as opposed to the national debt. Just like I.O.U.S.A. it serves as a wake-up call for financial responsibility. I first had this wake-up call after attending a Dave Ramsey, Financial Peace class about a year ago and I can’t stress enough how important is for the individual to maintain financial responsibility. Debt is crushing people out there so I suggest you take control before it comes down on you. One probem I had with Maxed Out is that they never told the consumer to take control of their finances. All the film did was points it’s finger at the big, bad credit card companies and debt collectors and while I agree that these companies take advantage of consumers, I also believe that these consumers have the opportunity to avoid a lot of this if only they would take financial responsibility and control

Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room was another pretty fantastic film. It seems like between this one, I.O.U.S.A. and Maxed Out we cover governmental financial irresponsibility, corporate financial irresponsibility, and personal financial irresponsibility. So that makes for a nice trio. It’s a very interesting film and it leaves you with a pretty good understanding of why that company was destined to fail.

I also just recently saw Harvard Beats Yale 29-29. Certainly an interesting little documentary about an extremely interesting football game. It’s wild how many people are mentioned as being associated with the team, who went on to become quite famous. People like George W. Bush, Al Gore, Meryl Streep, Tommy Lee Jones, and Garry Trudeau. I also was very impressed to learn about Brian Dowling. Dowling was the inspiration for B.D. in Trudeau’s Doonesbury comic and up to the point of that tie, there had not been a game in which Dowling had started and finished and been on the losing team since the 7th grade. That is just amazing. I do not know how he fared collegiately from a W-L standpoint after the Harvard game, but that’s a remarkable feat. He didn’t fare too well in the NFL though.

I also just watched Super High Me, which chronicles comedian Doug Benson’s “investigation” into the affects of marijuana on the human body and mind. Inspired by Morgan Spurlock’s Super Size Me, Benson takes it on himself to not smoke marijuana for 30 days while undergoing a litany of tests. Then he follows that up with 30 days where he smokes so much that he’s high during pretty much every waking hour. I think he could have done more in the way of medical testing. I exaggerated when I used the term “litany”. There is also a point where the DEA is raiding and shutting down medicinal marijuana dispensaries and I believe he should have done more to show the legality of those actions. Yes, the filmmaker did point out it was legal with a quick message on the screen, but no one ever dared argue with the protesters who were acting so offended or even ask those tough questions to play devil’s advocate and inspire the protesters to choose their words wisely. At one point you hear a protester yell (Or maybe this is a combination of two quotes) “The DEA isn’t doing their job! Their job is to stay out of California!” …uhhh, how remarkably stupid is that? That is the DEA’s job? Well why isn’t someone paying me? I’ve stayed out of California my whole life. In this film we also see Sarah Silverman, Patton Oswalt (of Big Fan fame), Dave Navarro, and the apparent Prince of Pot, Marc Emery. (Who knew?)

So do I feel more educated? Well, I dunno. I certainly prefer the classroom. Not in the sense that it’s more enjoyable, or easier to have a conversation about. But in the sense that if you take a class on a topic you should leave it with a pretty solid foundation of knowledge. These films are great for digging that hole for you to pour that foundation, but they are not a foundation. For one they are almost always biased. Maybe the bias is subtle (I.O.U.S.A.) or maybe the bias is obvious (Super High Me). Either way it exists. Yes, I’m sure it exists in the classroom also, but in the class room you spend much more time on the topics, also you are usually sent out to write things like research papers, which encourage you to do your own fact finding. This leads to a more rounded informational intake. Which in itself is probably the main reason the class room is a better way to learn. The breadth of information is much wider. That can’t even be denied so I’m not gonna to even explain myself.

I have another batch of documentaries lined up to watch so maybe in a couple weeks I’ll be doing this again. I don’t see why not. I would suggest all of these if you have plenty of time. It just turns out that the way I ordered them in this blog is probably the same order I’d suggest watching them.

Ja, ni är många som undrar “MEN HUR GÅR DET FÖR DIG?!”

Sedan den 4/8/2009 har jag varit helt träningsfri. Jag körde då igång ett projekt som jag kallar för “Super Size Me!”. Mer om det kan ni läsa här.  Mitt allra första inlägg finns här – “mitt första inlägg“.

Statusuppdatering 15/11/2009

Träning: Noll (inga gymkort, inget hemmagym, inga promenader förutom till och från jobbet)

Mat: Varierar. Jag svälter mig aldrig. Äter alltid minst tre mål om dagen, dock räknar jag nästan alltid kalorier, även om jag inte bryr mig lika mkt längre  så fortsätter jag att räkna. Hur slutar man göra det? Mkt irriterande.  Har också insett att jag måste äta mycket mer för att viktökningen ska gå snabbare. Känns jobbigt! Jag äter redan extra mat och ändå går det så trögt med att öka i vikt.

Ångest: Inte efter vanlig mat och oftast heller inte om jag unnar mig mer kaloririk mat. Vanligast är att jag får ångest när jag ätit “för mkt”  kalorik mat vid ett o samma tillfälle. Dvs hjärnan blir girig och  säger “bäst att passa på nu medan det bjuds” och vill äta mer än vad jag egentligen hade tänkt göra från början. Detta händer inte lika ofta längre som tur är. Under min anorexi var detta något som hände i stort sett varannan dag. Åt jag onyttigt ena dagen åt jag “ren” mat hela den kommande veckan. Sen onyttigt igen på helgen o därefter strikt nyttigt veckan efter (eller veckorna)… ja, ni hör ju själva. En ond cirkel.

Idag försöker jag hellre smyga in något “onyttigt” (men gott!) varje dag för att det inte ska bli extremt åt något av hållen. Har upptäckt att jag mår rätt bra på det. Kroppen o själen får den näring o njutning som behövs för att jag inte ska gå runt o tänka på när jag får äta god mat, godis eller fikabullar nästa gång. Dvs även fast att jag äter t ex 100 gram choklad idag så vet jag att jag får lov att göra om det imorgon igen. På det viset behöver jag inte vräka i i mig flera hekto choklad på samma gång eftersom jag vet att det inte kommer dröja långt tills nästa gång.

Jag kompensationsäter mindre idag och kan tillåta mig själv att “smutsa ner kroppen”, dvs äta gott många dagar i rad. Inte bara 1gång/vecka utan kan se fram emot alla veckodagarnas måltider i större utsträckning än förrut. “Mycket bra, Anna!” *ryggdunk* “Heja, heja, helt rätt väg att gå!”

Vikt: Vet inte. Äger ingen våg. Skönt så. Men, nu vill jag verkligen veta. Sist jag vägde mig hade det inte hänt någonting efter 4 mån. Nu vill jag faktiskt veta. Känns som väldigt lagom att ta en koll igen… det var faktiskt semtember sist. Återkommer, måste bara trixa ut hur jag ska hitta en våg… vill inte köpa ngn.

Kroppen: Åt helvete för smal, tunn, mager, skranglig, svag och klen. Usch, mår illa. Jag vill också ha bröst, är det för sent tror ni? Stämmer det att kroppen slutar utvecklas efter 19-20 års åldern. Isf känns det rätt dystert. Skäms över att ha byxor, dem hänger i baken och kring låren.  Skäms över att ha blusar, de avslöjar bara mina mindre smickrande nyckelben, synliga blodådror och utstickande skulderblad. Verkligen inget att sträva efter!

Hjärnan: När jag äter bra har jag mkt lättare för att ta in min omgivning. Jag är snabbare på att svara, kommer ihåg fler saker, bryr mig mer om min familj o vänner och skrattar betydligt mer än vanligt. Inte så konstigt egentligen, eller hur? Mat=energi=liv.

Ingen mat=noll energi=död

Jag vill leva!!!

One of the greatest documentaries I have ever seen.  I bet you will never look at fast food franchises the same way again. For some who want better understanding of the phenomena I suggest reading McDonaldization of society by George Ritzer. Real eye opener!

Nu har det blivit kul igen att gå o matshoppa. Hade ju som sagt en liten dipp för en månad sen och funderade på att sluta blogga.

Det var mycket på en gång och jag började återigen fiffla med maten… plötsligt slog det mig en dag att jag inte längre tyckte att det var lika roligt att gå o handla som jag tyckte att det var i början av det här Super Size-projektet. Jag kom på mig själv med att återigen välja produkter efter kaloriinnehåll. Så korkat!

Jag tänkte mindre på hur gott jag tyckte det smakade … det var betydligt viktigare att jag fick i mig färre kalorier och därav skar jag ner rejält på bröd, pasta och “kvällsfika”. Men nu är jag tillbaka igen och hela den här veckan har jag ändrat mina mat- och shopping rutiner. I matbutiken frågar jag mig numera alltid varför jag väljer ett visst livsmedel innan jag stoppar det i korgen. Finns det något annat som jag egentligen hellre skulle vilja köpa? Vad är jag egentligen sugen på?

Det krävs inte så mycket för att pigga upp en grå torsdag. Det räcker med att äga sina egna tankar och göra sina egna produktval inne på ICA. Kan tyckas konstigt för många då mathandlingen säkert är en riktigt trist vardagsrutin för de som är friska. Men för mig som förr begränsat mig till cirka 15% av matbutikens sortiment har nu en helt ny värld med spännande mat att upptäcka.  Skitkul rent ut sagt!

Idag fick jag dessutom massa julkänslor när jag kom in på ICA. Man hade dukat upp med glögg, pepparkakor och lussekatter. Så kvällens fika var givet, ett paket saffransgifflar och ett paket med Kung Oscar åkte fort ner i korgen. Tänk ett stort glas iskallt mjölk till detta..?! *mums*

Är jag nu inte lite väl tidigt ute tycker ni? Julfika så här dags?! Jo, kanske lite tidigt är det nog. Tycker jag oxå.  Men jag måste ju faktiskt! Hur ska jag annars hinna med att smaka mig igenom butikernas gigantiska utbud… Det är snart december och detta lilla projekt kommer ju att ta sin lilla tid förstår ni väl

Må gott!

Tanto e tanto tempo fa, è uscito un docu-film dal titolo  Super Size Me che trattava della mala alimentazione professata ed esportata dalla catena di fast food McDonald’s. Io e Andre boicottiamo quella catena da un pezzo, più o meno dal 2000, da quando, cioè abbiamo scoperto le condizioni vergognose in cui operano le persone che vi lavorano, dello sfruttamento delle colture incentivato dal marchio e, non ultimo, dalla scarsa qualità del cibo offerto.

Siamo stati contenti, quindi, che una persona qualunque, un uomo comune e per giunta americano, abbia avuto il coraggio di sottoporsi ad una dieta mensile esclusivamente McDonaldiana per dimostrare attraverso esami clinici, il reale rischio di quella alimentazione.

Dopo avere visto il film ci siamo sentiti sconvolti; sì, sapevamo l’entità del male, ma non immaginavamo le conseguenze che la catena aveva sul suolo americano. La pubblicità ed il merchandise vario sono talmente radicati e potenti da occultare le informazioni, dimostrare di essere al di sopra del bene comune e distorcere la realtà.

La scena che mi ricorderò sempre con maggiore dolore (più o meno a 4 minuti e57 di questo filmato, anche se vi consiglio di guardarlo tutto) sono le interviste ai bambini. Dimostra chiaramente come e quanto questa catena alimentare  influenzi le menti di chi non ha ancora gli strumenti per sciegliere consapevolmente.

Il McDonald è arrivato nella nostra città quando io avevo più o meno 16 anni, quando cioè, la mia famiglia mi aveva già alimentato in modo sano per un sacco di tempo; queste personcine però, soffriranno terribilmente per le conseguenze della loro mala alimentazione. Noi pensiamo che McDonald sia come il cancro nascosto nelle sigarette, un male latente, che non si percepisce finchè emerge all’improvviso, sottoforma di malattia rovinando la tua vita e quella dei tuoi cari.

Basta McDonald!

Elly

Nota: avrei voluto aggiungere nel post che ogni singolo pezzo di carne (hamburger, mc nuggets etc.)  è composto da MILIONI di pezzi di animali diversi, cioè da più parti di animali della stessa specie e “corretto” con conservanti,  acidificanti e zucchero (aspartame)  per il sapore. Questo significa che chi mangia da McDonald ingurgita tutto, ma proprio tutto dell’animale: pelle, cartilagini varie, un pochino di carne  e probabilmente non lo sa. Ma fa troppo schifo per dirlo.

In 1996, years before Morgan Spurlock’s Super Size Me, Chuck Klosterman ate nothing but Chicken McNuggets for a week. His experience is chronicled in “The Amazing McNugget Diet,” which appears in Chuck Klosterman IV. In the introduction to the piece he says:

One could argue that McDonald’s is the vortex of American society. Granted, this would be a horribly weak argument. But McDonald’s is the epitome of fast food, and fast food is the epitome of accelerated culture. It is the intersection of obsessions: a media-driven chain restaurant that tries to feed America as fast and as often as possible. For seven consecutive days, I embraced this theory with every fabric of my existence. With the exception of McNuggets and sauce, no solid food entered my body. I ate absolutely nothing else.

This Halloween I’ve decided to follow in Klosterman’s footsteps. Sort of. Today I will eat nothing but sugary treats (with a special emphasis on Peanut M&Ms).

My sweet tooth didn’t develop until I hit twenty-two, so when I was a kid, I’d go trick-or-treating and end up giving my haul to my mother or just letting it go stale in my bedroom closet.

I’ve never had a cavity.

But this year I plan to make up for all of that by eating large quantities of candy and handfuls of Halloween themed sugar cookies. I will also be watching episodes of Count Duckula, Eerie Indiana, and of course, It’s the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown.

Even though this is primarily just an excuse to pig out and lie around all day, if I had to place my plan within some sort of intellectual context, I’d say that this is an attempt to revert back to a state of mind when I didn’t obsess over consequences, when I didn’t know what a calorie was, and when I didn’t consider the social or intellectual merit of anything.

I don’t know what the end result will be—perhaps vomiting, perhaps swearing off of sweets forever, perhaps unparalleled joy—but I’ll be checking in over the course of the day to update my progress.

*Update: 5:22 pm*

Hours 1-3

Sweets Consumed:

1 Pumpkin Shaped Sugar Cookie

1 Black Cat Shaped Sugar Cookie

2 Fun Sized Peanut M&M Packs

2 Halloween Betty Crocker Fruit Snack Packs

1 Standard Sized Sandwich Baggie Full of Peanut M&Ms

DVDs watched:

Disc 2 of Count Duckula

Comments:

As a kid you think that it’d be fun to be given a sack of candy and carte blanche; as an adult you see all of the problems inherent in this sort of scenario. I started eating at 2:00 this afternoon with child-like enthusiasm, gobbling down treat after treat, ignoring everything I’ve come to understand about the world. About an hour ago the inside of my mouth dried up and right now I can literally feel the sugar clinging to my tongue and the back of my throat. I know that if I tried to eat regular food—not that I’m going to—I wouldn’t be able to taste it. I’ve decided to take a break from the candy while I watch Eerie Indiana. Downstairs there’s this chocolate chip cookie cake that everyone is going to eat after dinner—we’re sort of sponsoring a little get together for all of the smaller members of the family. Since I won’t be eating dinner, I think I’ll use the time to drink plenty of water, maybe brush my teeth again, and hopefully in an hour or so I’ll be ready to enjoy that cookie cake.

*Update 8:08 pm*

Hours 4-6

Sweets Consumed:

2 slices of Chocolate Chip Cookie Cake

DVDs Watched:

Discs 2 and 3 of Eerie Indiana

Comments:

I feel as though my stomach is full of air. Unfortunately, it isn’t. It’s all cookies and chocolate and candy-coated shells in there. I’ll probably be falling into some sugar-induced coma soon, so I won’t have to worry about continuing with the experiment. There is an upside to this, though, and that’s Eerie Indiana. I don’t think I understood how smart this show was when I was a kid. I rented The Secret World of Alex Mack last year and I couldn’t believe that I’d ever liked it; it’s horrible. But Eerie Indiana really holds up. I wonder what ever happened to Omri Katz. Not only does he have an awesome first name but he’s totally adorable with that 1990s haircut of his.

Bet you didn’t know that Tobey Maguire was in an episode of Eerie Indiana…

or that his character wanted to get it on with an old lady.

*Final Update 10:56 pm*

Hours 7-9

Sweets Consumed:

1 Slice of Chocolate Chip Cookie Cake

DVDs Watched:

It’s The Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown

Final Comments:

I don’t think I really proved anything with this experiment but I do feel kind of cheerful. I must be experiencing the “sugar high” that Coyote Shivers and Renée Zellweger sang about on that roof in Empire Records.  My mouth tastes gross. My teeth feel weird.

1. Se vcs assistirem Paixão de Cristo de trás pra frente, o filme conta a história de um bando de fanáticos religiosos que pegam um cara morto, colocam numa cruz e revivem ele num ritual sangrento. Então esse zumbi começa a falar com pessoas boas, contaminá-las com doenças horríveis, transforma vinho em água, deixa um cara cego e transforma as pessoas em pagãos materialistas.

2. Se vc assistir Cloverfield de trás pra frente, o filme conta a história de um monstro criado pelas forças armadas dos EUA que anda por aí consertando a cidade, construindo prédios, etc. Então o mostro resolve dar um mergulho, o pessoal faz uma festa e vai dormir.

3. Se vc assistir Pinóquio ao contrário, é sobre um menino que se transforma em um boneco de madeira.

4. Se vc assistir Matrix de trás pra frente, é sobre um cara que vive no mundo real combatendo máquinas e lutando kung fu, mas descobre que existe um mundo virtual onde ele pode trabalhar numa empresa de programação e vender programas ilegais. Então ele combate vários agentes, dá um pé na bunda em sua namorada, usa um computador para esquecer tudo que sabe de kung fu, e tem ajuda de um negro para entrar nesse mundo virtual.

5. Se vc assistir um dos Star Wars ao contrário, é sobre um jovem que descobre que um homem vestido de preto é seu pai. E passa a vida toda tentando matá-lo por isso. Outro Star Wars conta a história de um jovem que descobre que uma mina é sua irmã, mas ele quer dormir com ela mesmo assim.

6. Se vc assistir O Exterminador do Futuro 2 ao contrário, o filme conta a história de uma poça de metal derretido que dá origem a dois robôs. Então esses robôs vivem reconstruindo um ao outro para que eles possam ficar pelados e voltarem para o futuro.

7. Se vc assistir o filme Alien ao contrário, é sobre um monstro que diminui de tamanho e acaba entrando na barriga de um homem enquanto acalma a tripulação.

8. Se vc assistir Sexta Feira 13 ao contrário, é sobre um cara legal que cura aleijados com uma serra elétrica para que eles possam acampar no verão.

9. Se vc assistir O Resgate do Soldado Ryan ao contrário, é sobre um soldado que se junta a outros para executar o plano do Dia-D: o dia em que tropas inglesas e americanas escaparam da frança pela normândia, levando vários zumbis consigo.

10. Se vc assistir Tubarão ao contrário, é sobre um tubarão que vomita várias pessoas até que elas decidam se reunir em uma praia.

11. Se vc assistir O Curioso caso de Benjamin Button ao contrário, é sobre uma criança que cresce, fica velho e morre. (O Curioso Caso de Todo Mundo Menos Benjamin Button)

12. Se vc assistir Scarface ao contrário, é sobre um cara que larga o vício de cocaína e larga a vida do crime para seguir seu sonho de virar um trabalhador honesto e conseguir dinheiro para visitar Cuba.

13. Se vc assistir O Poderoso Chefão ao contrário, é sobre um cara que fica ordenando que seus capangas tragam as pessoas de volta a vida.

14. Se vc assistir Pimp my Ride ao contrário, é sobre um cara que pegar carros tunados de pessoas felizes e devolve o carro todo acabado.

15. Se vc assistir Super Size Me ao contrário, é sobre um cara que vomita McDonalds durante um mês até perder 20kg e ficar saudável.

16. Se vc assistir Karatê Kid ao contrário, é sobre um campeão de karatê que depois de um duro treinamento consegue virar um zero à esquerda e vai pra Jersey.

17. Se vc assistir Torres Gêmeas ao contrário, é sobre um prédio que se ergue do chão para que um monte de gente suba para construir dois aviões.

18. Se vc assistir Homem Aranha ao contrário, é sobre um cara numa fantasia que solta criminosos em Nova York, porém ele perde sua namorada e resolve virar um nerd excluído. Então um dia, ele é picado por uma aranha, que tira seus poderes.

19. Se voce assistir Titanic, é sobre pessoas que surgem da água, construem duas metades de um navio, que se juntam para quebrar um iceberg e ir para a terra

20. Se vc assistir kill bill ao contrário é sobre uma mocinha que revive muita gente e depois se casa no final

21. Se você assistir O Náufrago ao contrário, é sobre um homem que é deixado sozinho numa ilha em sua jangada por um navio. Ao chegar lá ele desmonta sua jangada. Com o tempo ele começa a cansar de viver em cavernas, entra em desespero, vai morar perto da praia, joga uns pacotes no mar e subitamente um avião que sai do fundo do mar pega o homem e o leva pra terra firme.

Via Highsnobiety

I just watched “Super Size Me” for the first time, and I am sufficiently haunted. It made me grab my spare tyre and hang my head in shame. I don’t think I can ever eat a nugget again, let alone eat at a McDonald’s patio.

- E.M.Shutterwar

(P.S. has anyone else watched this?)

Why is it that things which are bad for you must always look so damn good? Here, homemade pizza has just enough cheesy, meaty, doughy badness to make you drool — and clog an artery. I ate some anyway.

*

One of the movies that I never watched — even though friends kept telling me that I should, even though I knew I would enjoy it in that appalled and horrified way that is the proper reaction to most good documentaries, even though I was interested in the subject — was Super Size Me. I’d describe it, but something tells me that the majority of the world has already seen it and is on to pondering other things, like Obama’s new Peace Prize and their strawberry cow on Farmville (and, oh gods, can you tell I’m back in the U.S., with access from everything from the Internet and Netflix to the New York Times and Rolling Stone?).

Point. I’ll get back to it eventually. Or, rather right about now. So I saw that YouTube has started doing movies, and when I realized that Super Size Me was one of their movie options (along with, oddly enough, Cutter, which I actually could not stop watching. I have no idea why, considering it’s a movie about… uh…. mowing the lawn ala Best In Show.), I decided I would watch it. (Also, another note: I just opened up YouTube to get the link for Cutter, and what should be across the top, but a banner ad for Wendy’s Fast Food. Go figure.).

Yes, I am the Queen of Segues today. You may call me Queenie.

Back to what’s bad for me. Fast food is, apparently, very bad for me. I knew this already and have mostly boycotted fast food places ever since my first semester of college, when I wrote a paper on how McDonald’s was killing the rainforest (raising cheap cows + cutting down trees for grazing land = buh buh rainforest. yes, this was the whole extent of my paper. What do you want? I wrote it at two in the morning.). Not walking is bad for me. I knew this too.

But the movie got me thinking about what else I do that’s bad for me. How would it affect me if I gave them all up for a month? (Because I’m not about to imbibe in them solely for a month). And, it got me thinking about education and fault, since much of the movie asks: Whose fault is it that we’re fat? Ours? Our parents? The companies? Can you sue a company for offering something that you want? Can you sue them if they target toward children? I mean, really, Facebook is making me fat. Don’t I get some kind of monetary compensation here?

But in truth, I’m a smart, educated, aware person. And yet, I do things that are bad for me. Things that I KNOW are bad for me. My fault? I have to say, “Hell yes!” If I have all the facts and I do something anyway, then I am the only one that can be held responsible (Okay, not the only one, but I do think that most of the onus falls directly into my lap — or my stomach, as the case may be).

My list of things that I know are bad for me, but which I do anyway:

• Sitting on my butt for a job. I love writing, but I was a much healthier creature when I was tending bar. Okay, maybe not healthier — second-hand smoke – odd hours – strangers grabbing my ass + all the walking I was doing = high stress levels + bad lungs + really great legs.
• Guilt. See the rest of this list.
• Internet surfing. What a gloriously bad waste of precious time.
• Caffeine. I love my coffee and the occasional glass of diet soda (ack! ack! chemicals).
• Dairy. I gave up dairy once, to see if it would help my rosacea. It did, but it also made me an insane person, the kind who would call friends up and say, “Hi! I would kill you for a cookie! Or ice cream! Oh my god, I would kill the whole world for a lick of Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough ice cream!”
• Dairy+. Ever notice how dairy goes best with things that are bad for you? Sour cream on nachos. Cheese on pizza. Ice cream on, well, anything and everything.
• Meat. Oh my god, I love me some meat. Especially, dare I say it?, pork. Mmm… pork. (Notice I started this blog at 5 pm, and you’re not seeing it until now? That’s because in the act of writing pork, I remembered that there was said pork in the fridge, marinated in Jack Daniel’s sauce, and I went off to cook it and eat it. And now my fingers are sticky on the keys and my teeth are full of whiskey-flavored meat.)

Things I’ve given up that were bad for me:

• Smoking. And breathing second-hand smoke.
• Most drinking.
• Stress. How can you give up stress, you ask? Well, obviously, you can’t. But I’m working on making my life as stress-free as possible. As one of my favorite people says, “Is it a little rock or a big rock in the rock-filled jar of life? Because you only get to stress if it’s a big rock.” (Only she says it much more articulately that I just did.).
• Venomous people. They are gone, buh buh. Just like Micky Dee’s rainforests.
• Watching TV. See: Internet.

Now, on to the important list. The things I do right now, at this very moment, day-to-day that are good for me:

• Morning cocktail: multi-vitamin + good bacteria + cranberry pills.
• Orgasms. Oh, yes, these are so so so very good for you. Trust me. I’m not a doctor, but I play one on the Internet.
• Walking for pleasure.
• Writing. It’s good for me. I can’t explain it.
• Floss.
• Fruit and veggies. Nom nom nom.
• Talk to friends, really really talk to friends and tell them that I care about them. Hokey? Yes. Good for me (and for them)? Hellz yes.

And you? What do you do that’s good, bad or ugly? Surely I can’t be the only one who’s beating up my body and mind, even though I know better.

Far and fast, s.

*

“I think the saturated fats are cutting off the blood flow to his penis.” ~Morgan Spurlock’s girlfriend, as quoted in Super Size Me.

]]> http://nationalworld.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/documentaries-on-trial/ Mon, 12 Oct 2009 03:19:50 +0000 joedowit http://nationalworld.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/documentaries-on-trial/

Are his movies even worth it?

I keep waffling on the issue of documentaries.  I hate the, except when I love them.  There seems to be little middle ground, based on my own personal reactions.

The Evidence for the Prosecution:

1.  Documentaries can be boring.  An Inconvenient Truth – This has to be the worst quality documentary made.  I don’t like getting political when I rate movies.  Even when it concerns politics I agree with.  You cannot give me enough money to say a poor movie is interesting when it isn’t.  This is why this type of review is worthless. A perfect review of this type of movie is only a political move.  This movie is boring, and not boring in the deliberately slow-paced manner, which I typically enjoy.  It’s just not good.  It is a glorified PowerPoint presentation.  It is surprising, shocking, and meant to be moving; on most counts it fails because it does not engage me.  At all.  This first type of documentary is all too common.  It’s the reason most documentaries go on the shelves of stores…and stay there.  No one’s interested in being bored.  The coffee table edition is more interesting.

2.  Documentaries as propaganda.  Triumph of the Will – Probably the best example of propagandism, the film by Leni Riefenstahl (spelled right the first time!) about the rigid professionalism, determination, and divinely ordained nature of the Third Reich I have had to watch three times for classes.  The first time was in high school, just a clip of the beginning.  The second for a class called The World between the Wars in college.  The third was for another college class: The History of Film: Part II.  I’ll admit.  The film isn’t that engaging, but it’s one hell of an interesting movie.  It was interesting all three times.  Not exactly documentary, incredibly staged and all factual, but technically documentary.  Because we know it is propaganda, its value as a piece of recorded history is lost.  As a piece of fiction, presenting the fictionalized version of a true event is great.  As a documentary is cannot be taken with much seriousness.

3.  Documentaries as a time waster.  The Up Documentaries – This set of documentaries is amazing.  Other people know this. You should know this.  If you don’t–watch them!  But be prepared to waste a lot of time.  The problem is this series is well edited, but takes footage from people’s lives when they are 7, and revisit their lives every seven years, from 7 to 42.   This is the straightest set of documentaries I have ever seen.  I think they are revealing, interesting, and engaging on every level.  But be prepared to use up about 10 hours of time watching these documentaries.  Which is the problem.  As documentaries are generally a labor of love for the directors, there is so much content that they do not want to sacrifice that they should.  Information that seems unnecessary, out of place, or useless is included.  Why?  Because the director understands why it fits it.  The director has hours of footage for every minute in the films.  Why not include a little extra?  But still, 10 hours?

The Evidence for the Defense:

1.  Documentaries can be really interesting. Spellbound – I will never be able to get past this documentary.  I think this is the first documentary I truly thought was amazing.  It was shameful to watch because I saw glimpses of how nerdy I was as a child, I saw the way parents drive their children just to win, and I saw how cruel children can be on themselves.  But mainly I just laughed out loud at the absurdity of the nerdiest thing on ESPN–the fierce competition for the title of Spelling Bee Champion.  This documentary you must watch.

2.  Documentaries as understanding.  Hoop Dreams – I knew when I started working with disadvantaged youth, the realities of their lives were disastrous.  The problem was I never thought about it in the long term.  Even after the first year, I never thought about where those students I taught would move after I was done teaching them how to use a comma with nonessential information.  This documentary reminded me of what issues they face: standardized test bias, social pressure, rough neighborhoods, limited resources, poor education, and institutionalized practices that look a lot like discrimination.  The scene where, after a student has made it to college, but lives in a house removed from the main campus where other athletes live–all black, all removed, all separate–is shocking.  These events are not from the sixties, or seventies.  They are from the ’90s.  They could be from today.   The movie made me understand, again, what issues really plague urban youth.

3.  Documentaries as entertainment.  Super Size Me - The movie was done to entertain.  Without the cameras there, would the man have undergone his personal experiment to eat McDonalds every meal of every day for a month?  Doubtful. It was only done to be filmed.  A staged documentary, just not staged like Triumph of the Will, so I’m willing to go with it.  This movie is just funny.  Interspersed with interesting facts about the fast food industry, and one man’s body decline because of the food he eats, the movie was made to demonstrate a point.  It demonstrates that people need to eat less fast food.  It makes it’s point.  I still eat fast food, and will always go for a Whataburger Honey Chicken breakfast sandwich whenever I get into a town that actually has a Whataburger.  But the movie did make its point.

Verdict:

The drawbacks of documentaries are just too much to risk.  I have trouble enough finding a good documentary.  The semi-interesting facts of the History channel work like 60 Minutes reports rather than historical research.  And while I wanted to be fair by presenting an even number of documentaries for both side, the fact of the matter is I could come up with several more documentaries that I did not enjoy, and had trouble coming up with three that I did enjoy.  The sheer enjoyment factor should win, but I won’t let it.

Documentaries do one thing, generally, very well: they tell a good story.  When they fail to do that they are awful.  A movie, after all, exists to tell a story.

All of the bonuses of movies, like cinematography, direction, editing, acting, etc. are lost in the necessity of a documentary.  Almost never will a documentary be able to demonstrate artistic merit and the factual entertainment that defines its genre.  Because I stake so much of what a movie is based on what a viewer can see, I must dismiss documentaries, generally speaking, as a failed genre.  There are just too few good documentaries to make the genre worthwhile.

Feel free to point out an excellent documentary.  I have a feeling that means I’m not going to get very many comments on this post.

Qu’est ce que vous dites aux inconditionnels du McDO. Vous leur tenez le discours habituel “C’est pas bon pour la santé” “ça fait grossir”  “c’est de la malbouffe”!

Alors vous vous êtes sûrement frottés les mains lors de la sortie en salle de “Super Size Me” de Morgan Spurlock (Where in the world is Osama Bin Laden ?). Dans ce documentaire, Morgan s’impose de manger 3  repas par jour au McDonald’s et ce pendant 1 mois. Le but de la démarche ? Mesurer l’impact du fast-food sur le poids mais surtout sur la santé !

Tout le monde a salué la démonstration et pointé du doigt les fast-food qui contribuent (selon certains) à l’augmentation du nombre des personnes en surpoids aux Etats-Unis mais aussi dans le reste du monde notamment en France.

Mais on peut aussi prendre ce documentaire comme un bon divertissement. Un film où l’on voit un homme s’empiffrer, vomir, grossir, détruire sa santé… Après tout si on a un peu de bon sens on ne mange pas 3 fois/jour au McDo !

Je sais bien qu’il faut manger sainement, ne pas manger trop gras, trop salé, trop sucré ! Comme toutes les filles j’essaye de résister aux tentations pour ne pas prendre du poids mais il est  parfois difficile d’être raisonnable quand de bonnes odeurs vous chatouillent les narines !

En ce qui me concerne et pour ne pas être hypocrite, si je pouvais manger du chocolat et des gâteaux sans prendre un gramme je le ferais ! Un McFlurry ou des frites me font plus  rêver que 5 fruits et légumes par jour !  

A voir donc cette virée au coeur du bacon, de la mayonnaise et des menus XXL !

Pour info McDo a retiré le fameux menu super size de sa carte et à introduit des salades, des compotes… McDo a voulu redorer son image (même si la compagnie nie toute corrélation entre le film et sa nouvelle politique) .

Mais on a vite retrouvé notre tonton Ronald. En effet, de nouveaux sandwiches plus gros et plus riches ont fait leur apparition . On peut citer le Angus Third Pounders , en vente aux Etats-Unis.  Ou comment se faire plaisir pour moins de 4$ et un peu moins de 800Kcal !

You may be familiar with the 2004 Academy Award nominated documentary titled Super Size Me, in which the creator Morgan Spurlock decides to film his 30 day journey of eating McDonalds (MCD) for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, making sure he samples every item on the menu. In addition, any time a McDonald’s employee asked Mr. Spurlock whether he wanted to “Super Size” his beverage or french fry order, he complied by ordering the larger size. What was the result from this gluttonous, month-long, fast food binge?

Mr. Spurlock ended up gaining about 25 pounds in weight, his cholesterol sky-rocketed, his liver function deteriorated dramatically, he experienced heart palpitations, and became depressed, among other symptoms. At one point a doctor told him if he continued overindulging at the same pace, he could die.

Well, over the years, investors, governments, and corporations have been doing their own form of “Super-Sizing,” but not by eating Big Macs, Apple Turnovers, and Fish Fillets, but rather consuming too much debt, real estate, and other risky assets, like stocks and hedge funds. Now, like Morgan Spurlock, investors are “de-toxing” by saving more and creating a better balanced portfolio diet. Investors have learned their lessons from our “Great Recession” and are dieting on lower risk assets  and consuming a broader set of asset classes. An investor’s diet should cover a broad spectrum of options, including diversified choices across asset class, size, style, and geography. Alternative asset classes, like real estate, commodities, and loans should be evaluated as well.

After the massive crash post-Lehman Brothers, many investors and academics have cast doubts about the relative benefits of diversification, arguing there was no investment class or segment to hide – everything fell equally. There is some truth to the argument, with some exceptions like treasuries, cash, and certain commodities. Globalization and the tighter inter-connectedness between countries can shoulder part of the blame of the synchronized freefall in late 2008 and early 2009. Nonetheless, unless you were short the market, even if you were relatively diversified, pain was spread out generously across many investors.

What countless investors fail to recognize is the constant variability in historical relationship data (e.g., correlations, standard deviation, and covariance) – all the better reason to be broadly diversified. Nobel Prize winners Robert Merton and Myron Scholes know first-hand what can happen when you rely too heavily on historical correlations. Their over-reliance on their quantitative models led to the economic collapse of Long Term Capital Management, which nearly brought the entire economic globe to its knees. Importantly, the magnitude of diversification benefit varies throughout an economic cycle. Since the market rebound in March of this year, we have clearly seen the advantages of diversification.

From a geographical perspective, emerging markets like Russia, which is up over +117% (excluding dividends), are trouncing the domestic averages. Diversification benefits across particular industries and sectors are also evident in areas like technology. For example, the NASDAQ and IIX (Internet Index) are up about +34% and +52% in 2009, respectively. In relation to style characteristics, “Growth” is trouncing “Value” as measured by the Russell 1000 Growth and Value benchmarks. “Growth” is up +25% this year, more than double the appropriate Russell “Value” benchmark. It comes as no surprise that the conservative investments that outperformed in the market collapse, like fixed income and utilities, have generally lagged the other segments.

Like Morgan Spurlock, investors need to resist the “Super Size” temptations in their concentrated portfolios and learn from the binging mistakes experienced by others. A more balanced investment diet across asset class, size, style, and geography will lead to a healthier portfolio and steadier return profile. Now if you will excuse me, I would like to get a bite to eat – perhaps a wholesome McGarden Burger.

Wade W. Slome, CFA, CFP®

Plan. Invest. Prosper.

DISCLOSURE: Sidoxia Capital Management has a short position in MCD at the time this article was originally posted. No information accessed through the Investing Caffeine (IC) website constitutes investment, financial, legal, tax or other advice nor is to be relied on in making an investment or other decision. Please read disclosure language on IC “Contact” page.

By Rory Reynolds

SUPER Size Me star Morgan Spurlock has revealed he is hooked on deep-fried Mars bars after trying the Scots delicacy on a recent holiday.

Food freak Morgan – who famously lived off three McDonald’s meals every day for a month – described the dish as “absolutely fantastic” after trying it as he filming in Scotland.

The Oscar-nominated American filmmaker was researching the Scottish roots of Simpsons character Groundskeeper Willie for show’s 20th anniversary when he stumbled upon the artery-attacking treat.

The 39-year-old – who previously gained two stones in weight and suffered liver dysfunction after binging on Big Macs – said: “Deep fried Mars bars are absolutely fantastic.

“They don’t look like much, but the taste is great.”The deep-fried dishes have been blasted by health professionals as encouraging people to eat high fat, high sugar foods, and contributing towards Scotland being the fattest nation in the world after the United States.

But despite his abusive culinary past, Morgan wasn’t put off by the fact that the dish contains almost double the number of calories that a Big Mac does.

And Morgan admitted he was excited when he found out that Scotland had more deep-friend delicacies to offer than just the Mars Bar.

He said: “Somebody told me that I should try deep-fried pizza and I definitely will the next time I am in Scotland.”

Tom Wilson’s fish shop in Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire claims to be the birthplace of the deep-friend Mars Bar, which first surfaced in 1995.

Tom said he was delighted that the chocolatey battered message was spreading abroad.

He said: “We sell more than 100 friend Mars bars every week and people come from a far away as Japan to try them.

“We’d be delighted to serve Morgan with the original and best the next time he’s over.”

Morgan’s previous production, ‘Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?’ saw the bonkers filmmaker attempt to hunt down terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.

See more of our pictures at our Flickr site and videos at our dedicated channel,  Deadline TV.

Will you go meatless for a day?

Today is World Vegetarian Day. A day to promote the benefits of a vegetarian lifestyle. There are many benefits of a vegetarian diet for you – from your health to your pocket book – and for the world – from saving the environment to reducing worldwide famine.

Here are 22 reasons to go vegetarian that are very compelling. Here are more reasons to Go Vegetarian.

Take the challenge and go vegetarian for a day or a week or a month.

And while we are talking about going vegetarian we might as well talk about a Vegan lifestyle also. Here is a great brochure that explores WhyVegan.

Here are some resources to learn more:

Article

Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler

Movies

Food Inc. -    Watch the Trailer

Fast Food Nation -    Watch the Trailer

Super Size Me -     Watch the Trailer

Books

Here is a great list

5) The Corporation

The Corporation è un documentario canadese del 2003, diretto da Mark Achbar e Jennifer Abbott e tratto dall’omonimo libro di Joel Bakan. Il documentario analizza il potere che hanno le multinazionali (quelle che in America vengono chiamate corporations) nell’economia mondiale, dei loro profitti e dei danni che creano.

Le corporation sono oggigiorno persone giuridiche che hanno l’obbligo di mettere la tutela dei loro azionisti, cioè la realizzazione di un profitto, al di sopra di ogni altro obiettivo. Per questo, esse non hanno alcun interesse a salvaguardare la natura o il benessere dei lavoratori: ad essere danneggiata dall’opera delle multinazionali, quindi, è la società. Il documentario spiega questo fenomeno e lo illustra con vari esempi, che comprendono, fra l’altro:

• lo sfruttamento della manodopera, specialmente nei paesi centroamericani, portato alla luce dalle indagini del Comitato Nazionale Americano per il Lavoro;
• la sintetizzazione e la diffusione di sostanze chimiche pericolose per la salute, come il DDT e l’Agente Arancio, prodotto dalla Monsanto e usato in Vietnam dall’esercito americano;
• la somministrazione alle mucche di un ormone (l’rBGH della Monsanto, detto anche rBST o Posilac). Questa sostanza ha provocato una infezione batterica del latte. Un programma di Fox News ne avrebbe dovuto parlare, ma la Monsanto, con l’appoggio della Fox stessa, l’ha censurato;
• l’inquinamento delle fabbriche e di allevamenti animali;
• la pubblicità rivolta ai giovani di oggi, più sofisticate e create appositamente perché i bambini condizionino gli acquisti dei genitori;
• la diffusione di pubblicità occulta per introdurre un marchio nella vita quotidiana;
• le privatizzazioni dei beni pubblici e servizi essenziali come quelli di approvvigionamento idrico;
• la collusione fra le corporation e i regimi dittatoriali nella storia.

4) Super Size me!

Super Size Me è un film-documentario del 2004 diretto ed interpretato da Morgan Spurlock, un filmaker statunitense indipendente.

La pellicola segue un esperimento portato avanti dal regista: per un mese (30 giorni) ha mangiato solamente cibo della nota catena mondiale di fast food McDonald’s, tre volte al giorno, ogni giorno – interrompendo contemporaneamente ogni attività fisica – e documentando tutti i cambiamenti fisici e psicologici avvenuti. Oltre a questo, Spurlock esplora l’enorme potere della catena sull’industria dei fast food e come questa incoraggi un’alimentazione povera per massimizzare il proprio profitto.

Il tutto prende le mosse da un episodio di cronaca del 2002: due ragazze statunitensi citarono in giudizio la catena di fast-food McDonald’s dichiarando “se siamo obese è colpa sua”. La difesa della corporation puntò sul fatto che non c’erano prove che un’alimentazione basata esclusivamente o principalmente sui fast-food avesse effetti simili. Per contrastare quest’osservazione e questo vuoto, Spurlock, scrittore e produttore fino ad allora noto soprattutto nel circuito televisivo, decise di diventare una cavia di un folle esperimento: un mese di solo cibo McDonald’s, il tutto davanti ad una telecamera 24 ore al giorno.

Spurlock, 33 anni, era in salute e magro, 188 centimetri di altezza per 84 kg di peso, prima dell’esperimento. Dopo 30 giorni ha guadagnato 11 kg ed ha incrementato la sua massa corporea del 13%. Ha anche provato improvvisi e repentini cambi di umore, disfunzioni sessuali, e danni irreversibili al fegato, che lo hanno portato in condizioni gravi alla fine dell’esperimento.

Ha ricevuto la nomination come “miglior documentario” per gli Oscar 2005.

3) Confronting the Evidence

In Italia l’ha trasmesso Report, ed è stato subito un caso mediatico, l’abbiamo preso come simbolo di tutti i documentari, più o meno seri (Sono centinaia) prodotti a partire dal 2001 per cercare in modo convincente o creativo di ricostruire la realtà dei fatti avvenuti negli Stati Uniti in quella fatidica data di Settembre. Il documentario, datato 2004, è prodotto da Jimmy Walter ed è un collage strutturato intorno a un convegno tenutosi appunto nel 2004 negli Stati Uniti, al quale hanno partecipato i nomi più noti del complottismo. Le tesi sostenute sono ormai note al grande pubblico e cercano di coprire le maggiori lacune della versione ufficiale del post-11 Settembre: Nessun aereo è caduto sul Pentagono? Le torri sono state fatte brillare appositamente? Il “Pull it” di David Silverstein è effettivamente autentico? I dirottatori sono ancora vivi? Il documentario prova a rispondere a questi interrogativi cavalcando le teorie più diffuse, ma devo ammettere che risente in modo vistoso del passare del tempo; a 5 anni dalla sua uscita le carenze che mostra non sono poche e il suo filo logico comincia a mostrare la corda.

2) L’Inganno di Obama

E’ il film del momento per i siti di controinformazione di tutto il mondo: è uscito in dvd, ma visionabile anche in rete in alta definizione, il nuovo film di Alex Jones, pilastro della contro-informazione americana più accanita. Jones ha dimostrato negli ultimi anni di essere un prolifero agitatore, mettendo a disposizione di tutti e gratuitamente decine di documentari. I suoi palinsesti Infowars e Prison Planet sono sicuramente due punti di riferimento per chi vuole analizzare da vicino le marachelle dell’elite di potere americana.

The Obama Deception è il primo documentario che attacca apertamente l’amministrazione Obama, a solo pochi mesi dalla sua entrata alla casa bianca. Quello che il radio giornalista texano ci dice, con la sua ormai rinomata verve urlata a squarcia gola da un megafono, è semplicemente quello che tutti quanti, chi più chi meno, hanno temuto: un uomo da solo non cambia nulla, ed il belloccio e moderno Obama è il perfetto pupazzo per permettere all’elite di potere di continuare i suoi sporchi lavori.

Si affrontano i temi più caldi del momento, la crisi economica, lo stato di polizia che lentamente va consolidandosi nelle strade della libera america, gli accordi economici nord-americani e le strategie militari per il controllo delle risorse. È Webster Tarpley che ci illustra per filo e per segno l’agenda “sporca” di questa amministrazione. Vengono rivelati i volti dei bracci destri di Obama, gente direttamente coinvolta nella crisi economica e i legami con il gruppo Blinderberg, il quale ha ovviamente visto nell’abbronzato ex-senatore dell’Illinois il perfetto burattino per portare avanti il grande progetto del Nuovo Ordine Mondiale….

1) Zeitgeist, the Movie

Zeitgeist, the Movie è un web film non profit del 2007, diretto, prodotto e distribuito da Peter Joseph; è uscito in lingua inglese sottotitolato in diverse lingue, tra cui l’italiano ed è da poco disponibile anche doppiato in italiano. È un documentario diviso in tre parti, apparentemente distinte ma rivolte verso un unico messaggio:

• La prima parte tratta della religione cristiana come fosse un mito, comparando la storia del Cristo con quella di diverse religioni precedenti, in particolare con il mito di Horus. Così facendo propone una lettura astrologica della Bibbia.
• La seconda parte rivisita gli attentati dell’11 settembre 2001 in chiave cospirazionista, i possibili artefici dell’attentato, chi possa averne tratto beneficio, e se potevano essere evitati.
• La terza parte traccia un filoconduttore tra i grandi conflitti bellici che hanno coinvolto gli Stati Uniti, partendo dalla prima guerra mondiale sino alla seconda guerra del golfo, riconducendo il tutto alle logiche affaristiche dei maggiori cartelli bancari statunitensi e al ruolo principale della stessa Federal Reserve.

Critiche:

• Anche se il film ha attirato un certo interesse nel pubblico della rete, un articolo di copertina sul settimanale The Stranger di Seattle, ha determinato che “Zeitgeist” si basa soltanto su evidenza aneddotica, mentre altre pubblicazioni l’hanno criticato per l’utilizzo di citazioni di libri, commenti a voce, fonti varie, notizie e video clip senza fornire l’esatta indentificazione della fonte e l’indirizzo librario. Una recensione nel giornale Irish Times lo definisce senza fonti (“unhinged”) e accusa il film di offrire null’altro se non “perversioni surreali di dibattiti su problemi genuini”.

Something strange happens when a guy realizes he has married a wonderful cook: the desire to eat at restaurants starts going away. I began noticing that I was having trouble deciding what to order from the menu when we went out. Not necessarily because the items weren’t presented well or because there were too many things to choose from, but simply because what I would want to order was something my wife made perfectly a few days before, and it just didn’t make sense to overpay for too much of something I can get at home anyway.

In the likeness of Brewster’s Millions and Super Size Me, I had a thought. What would happen if I was made this offer by a magical Eastern European man: For the rest of my life, I would have completely free access to any restaurant in the world, but that was the only way I could get food for the rest of my life.

It would be pretty awesome, no longer having to pay for groceries. No more cooking, no more doing dishes, no more trips to the grocery store. Whatever I was in the mood for, I would simply go to that restaurant and order it. Every meal. Free. At my command. And I wouldn’t have to tip. In fact, the restaurants wouldn’t let me if I tried.

All that money saved on food.

But most restaurants aren’t open 24 hours. So for holidays I would have to order food to-go to plan for future meals. And part of the stipulation is this: If the restaurant doesn’t sell it, I can’t eat it or drink it. No more trail mix. No more Cliff Bars. No more homemade cookies.

If I wanted 4 pickles at once, I would have to go to a place that gave me a pickle spear on the side of the sandwich like McAllister’s Deli does, then specially ask for 3 more. But those pickles are the bland kind.  I like my pickles so spicy that it clears my sinuses.

Or I’d have to order fried pickles from a German restaurant. But I don’t always feel like eating fried pickles. There’s something unmatchable about the sensory involvement of reaching down into the cold yellow vinegar water of a pickle jar.

I would kindly tell the magical Eastern European man “thanks, but no thanks”. Then he would disappear instantly. But I would immediately feel a brief, cold breeze rush past my shoulder. That was the magical Eastern European man, symbolizing both the rejection he felt and the depravity that a “restaurant only” lifestyle would have brought me. No more “covered dish dinners” at family reunions in the basement of my grandmother’s house at Thanksgiving means no more deviled eggs. Bogus.

Missed Episode 3?  It’s right here…

http://nickshell1983.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/pickles-make-for-good-reading-material-episode-3/

Ligia Sotratti

O McDonald’s foi condenado pela Justiça por servir somente seus lanches como refeição para um ex-funcionário.

A sentença do 15º TRT (Tribunal Regional do Trabalho) condenou a lanchonete de Ribeirão Preto a pagar a Rafael Luiz, 22, indenização de R$ 2.000, correspondentes ao valor de cestas básicas durante quase dois anos – período em que ele trabalhou na rede de fast food. Cabe recurso.

Luiz, que trabalhou na lanchonete de 2005 a 2007, disse que recebia como refeição os lanches da rede, e não vale-refeição ou cesta básica. No período, só podia consumir batata frita, refrigerante e sanduíche.

Em primeira instância, o pedido do ex-funcionário foi negado. A Justiça entendeu que, por se tratar de uma empresa de alimentação, ela fornecia refeição. A defesa recorreu com base no documentário americano “Super Size Me – A Dieta do Palhaço”, de 2004.

No filme, o protagonista faz todas as refeições diárias na rede por 30 dias. Após o período, exibe exames em que se verifica ganho de peso e alterações como colesterol alto.

“É de conhecimento público e notório que sua ingestão diária, em substituição a uma das principais refeições do dia, por um longo período de tempo, é prejudicial”, diz trecho da decisão do juiz Ricardo de Plato.

Segundo o coordenador do ambulatório de obesidade e transtorno alimentar do HC de Ribeirão, José Ernesto dos Santos, a alimentação diária com lanches pode causar problemas de saúde. “É muito difícil um sanduíche ter todos os nutrientes necessários. Além disso, é calórico e pode levar ao aumento de peso”, disse.

Nos dois anos de trabalho, Luiz disse que não engordou porque fazia academia.

A rede disse que vai avaliar a decisão e decidir se recorrerá. Diz ainda que, assim como outras empresas do setor, oferece alimentação, “conforme a legislação vigente”.

Em primeira instância, a empresa disse que o fornecimento de cesta básica é obrigatório só “às empresas que não fornecem alimentação aos seus empregados durante o horário de trabalho”.

http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/cotidiano/ult95u623003.shtml