"The Future of Food" is a documentary that deals with the history of the agricultural industry and the development of genetically engineered food. It delves deep into the topics of patenting these genetically engineered creations by huge corporations and how the FDA's and EPA's regulations aren't strict enough and how food that has been genetically engineered in the United States does not have to be labeled. This is all valuable information.
Then the movie spends the rest of the time bashing a corporation "Monsanto" for destroying the lives of all these farmers and potentially they will bring the end of the world. Phrases like "if 60 genetically altered salmon are entered into the mainstream population, the salmon species COULD be extinct within 40 generations," are all fine and good, but there's no flip side of the coin. There's no one from Monsanto backing claims. There's no one saying, "Genetically engineered salmon could increase population growth." It seems that many documentaries recently have become witch hunts against multinational corporations, which I think are great if both sides are presented. Maybe Monsanto didn't want to talk to the filmmaker, but if that was the case, let the viewer know that at least they tried to show both sides of the story. Show the filmmaker calling or have a graphic saying "They declined comment." "The future of Food" is a great idea, with a lot of great information, but it ultimately fails because it only shows 50% of the story, hence my 5 out of 10 rating.
Then the movie spends the rest of the time bashing a corporation "Monsanto" for destroying the lives of all these farmers and potentially they will bring the end of the world. Phrases like "if 60 genetically altered salmon are entered into the mainstream population, the salmon species COULD be extinct within 40 generations," are all fine and good, but there's no flip side of the coin. There's no one from Monsanto backing claims. There's no one saying, "Genetically engineered salmon could increase population growth." It seems that many documentaries recently have become witch hunts against multinational corporations, which I think are great if both sides are presented. Maybe Monsanto didn't want to talk to the filmmaker, but if that was the case, let the viewer know that at least they tried to show both sides of the story. Show the filmmaker calling or have a graphic saying "They declined comment." "The future of Food" is a great idea, with a lot of great information, but it ultimately fails because it only shows 50% of the story, hence my 5 out of 10 rating.