By Anders Lorenzen

In Food, Inc. 2, the sequel to the 2008 highly acclaimed documentary Food, Inc., the investigative authors Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser return to warn about our fragile food system that is incredibly vulnerable.

While the film at large points the finger at the global food system arguing that it is geared towards maximising profits rather than delivering good standards and healthy food that does not trash the environment, it is largely focused on the US with a few visits to South America.

The film argues that the global food system is causing a major health, societal and environmental crisis. It focuses on how the system is gearing farmers and food workers to despair with the big food monopolies that control the majority of the food market do not pay a fair wage, food is not produced in a sustainable environmental way and has shifted to an overreliance on ultra-processed foods which starves people of critical fibre, protein and nutritional values.  

It points the finger at decreased regulation which have meant that few companies control the food market and that there is no competition.

Though we do follow some key people trying to change the food system such as Senators Cory Booker and Jon Tester, we follow the tech companies trying to re-engineer and re-innovate food and arguing they’re making food more sustainable and healthier. However, that is an argument the investigative authors don’t buy.

Too much US

This is a powerful film and there are some shocking stats that everyone could do with educating themselves about, such as how ultra-processed foods are tricking the brain to overeat which has serious health and environmental impacts.

This is not a big-budget documentary and I know they had a tight budget, but the film makes the mistake that many other documentaries frequently make – it is far too US-centric. While we see a bit of the challenges in South America it is mainly connected to what is happening in the US. 

In this viewer’s opinion, it is a mixed message to produce a film talking about the flaws of the global food system, but only to show images and stories from the US.

It also follows a familiar model of similar documentaries and with an over-reliance on the bad issues and you have to get into the last 15-20% of the film before there is any element of optimistic rhetoric. Viewers familiar with these issues know a lot of the bad stuff and a bit more focus on solutions, I think would have been more powerful film-making and much more likely to inspire change. That is of course not to downplay the negative elements of the film such as the disappearance of the family farm and the emergence of mega farms.

Cherry-picking solutions

Even when the film appears to go down the positive solution agenda it does not do such a thing, when it interviews food innovators creating solutions that mimic meat and even some who actually artificially grow meat. I understand the argument that a lot of these technologies repeat previous mistakes by having a high reliance on processed food and trying to make meat alternatives rather than reinventing the wheel.

But I personally think we have to be careful about cherry-picking solutions, and we do not get to solve all the problems with one solution, but if we can start to deal with at least some of the problems that’s a start. If we can make alternatives to meat and therefore start to reduce the need for animal agriculture that has serious animal welfare issues as well as climate and environmental issues, that is a start. If we start by rejecting all the solutions that are not perfect we are not moving forward and we should not alienate companies that are putting their heart and mind into changing food products. 

On a positive note, the scenes featuring the passionate campaigns of Cory Booker and Jon Tester’s determination to fight back against vested interests should serve as an inspiration to everyone.

Food, Inc. 2 premiered in the US in April and in UK cinemas from the 7th of June. In the UK it is distributed by Dogwoof.