The Future of Food

Last updated
You may also be looking for Future food technology.
The Future of Food
The-Future-of-Food-2004-Documentary.jpg
DVD coverart
Directed by Deborah Koons Garcia
Written byDeborah Koons Garcia
Produced by
  • Catherine Lynn Butler
  • Deborah Koons Garcia
Starring
Narrated bySara Maamouri
CinematographyJohn Chater
Edited byVivien Hillgrove
Music by Todd Boekelheide
Production
company
Lily Films
Distributed by
Release date
  • May 30, 2004 (2004-05-30)(United States)
Running time
88 minutes
CountryUnited States
Languages
  • English
  • Spanish
Budget$750,000 (est)

The Future of Food is a 2004 American documentary film written and directed by Deborah Koons Garcia to describe an investigation into unlabeled, patented, genetically engineered foods sold in grocery stores in the United States for the past decade. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] In addition to the US, there is a focus on Canada and Mexico. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

Contents

Synopsis

The films voices opinions of farmers in disagreement with the food industry, and details the impacts on their lives and livelihoods from this new technology, and the market and political forces that are changing what people eat. The farmers state that they are held legally responsible for their crops being invaded by "company-owned" genes. The film generally opposes the patenting of living organisms, and describes the disappearance of traditional cultural practices.

It also criticizes the cost of a globalized food industry on human lives around the world. It states that international companies are gradually driving farmers off their land in many countries, that monoculture farming might lead to global dependence of the human race on food corporations, and that there is an increased risk of ecological disasters caused by a reduction of biological diversity. For example, the local varieties of Mexican corn are being replaced by subsidized US corn.

The film also describes a fear of major losses to local food systems and states that these gene banks will no longer be available to save global industrial agriculture when a new pest arises, and that if they spread to plants in the wild, terminator genes could lead to a widespread catastrophe affecting the food supply. Legal stories reported by the film related how a number of farmers in North America have been sued by the Monsanto Company. [2] [3] [8] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18]

Cast

interviewees
archive footage

Production

Cover-dvd-thefutureoffood.jpg

The film was written and directed by Deborah Koons Garcia, produced by Catherine Butler and Koons Garcia, and premiered on September 14, 2005 at Film Forum in New York City to a full house. It has since been released on DVD in both NTSC and PAL formats.

Reception

Critical response

On Rotten Tomatoes the film has a score of 81% based on reviews from 26 critics. The websites consensus states: "The Future of Food is a one-sided, but revelatory documentary about the dangers of genetically modified food." [19]

Wesley Morris of The Boston Globe made a tongue-in-cheek comparison to the horror genre by writing "Anyone looking for a more practical horror film than The Fog should try The Future of Food, a new documentary about the slippery slope of genetic modification in agriculture", [8] and shared that in 1998 Monsanto publicly abrogated any responsibility for ensuring the long-term safety of their GMO products and passed that responsibility to the Food and Drug Administration. [8]

Variety wrote that the film "is a disturbing—if somewhat bland and partisan—study of agribusiness' aggressive push for genetically-modified food," [4] and expressed "it's a shame writer-director Deborah Koons Garcia opts to show only one side of the argument". [4] They also felt that seen as "a rallying cry for organic and slow-food fans everywhere", [4] the film would find a large audience "in public interest tube play and activist vid circulation." [4]

Stephen Holden of The New York Times called the film a "sober, far-reaching polemic against genetically modified foods". [1]

The Georgia Straight speaks toward Deborah Koons-Garcia's advocacy and her opposition to the genetic engineering done by Monsanto. While noting the film's beginning awkwardly with Koons-Garcia's pointing the finger of shame at the political motivation of Monsanto, they concluded it "gets slightly more hopeful as it goes along". [11]

San Francisco Chronicle wrote the filmmaker "has taken a complex subject and made it digestible for anyone who cares about what they put into their stomachs," but also noted that "Monsanto will attack Garcia's documentary as a piece of unbalanced journalism". [5]

Victoria Gilman of Chemical & Engineering News criticized the lack of balance in the film, noting that Garcia defended farmers being deprived of the ability to raise non-GMO canola oil despite canola oil itself being a creation of a sort of "genetic engineering" (not to be confused with GM technologies) using the science at the time. [12]

New York Post called the film "enlightening", noting it "takes dead aim at genetically altered food, [by] arguing that grocery shelves are filled with potentially dangerous items." [6]

New York Daily News gave the film 3 stars and spoke toward the film's tone, writing "Garcia's somber narration is a turnoff, but this plucky little diatribe gets you thinking about the larger implications facing future generations". [7]

The Hollywood Reporter wrote the film "is a powerful, if one-sided, attack on the GM food industry," because the filmmaker "builds a strong case against GM food and its producers", but a "major weakness is that the GM producers are not given time to explain their side of the story." [3]

Seattle Times noted that the film used "every propagandist trick in the book", [14] supported by "foreboding background music", [14] and a "relentlessly downbeat tone and gloom-and-doom hand-wringing over the way corporate greed is poisoning the globe" [14] to force their point across, and wrote "Most of us have some awareness about the debate over genetically engineered food. But it's a good bet that far fewer people know how insidious these possibly dangerous man-made organisms have become as their invasion into the world's food supply grows". [14]

The Denver Post referred to the film as a "propaganda documentary", [2] and commented that while the film's concept had great possibilities with hopes that it would "become a worthy champion of the little guy" [2] in its covering of Percy Schmeiser's battle with Monsanto, the film failed because "filmmaker Deborah Koons Garcia isn't much of a journalist" [2] and she "strays from this fascinating case to a generalized attack on biotechnology and corporate farming", [2] through using "loose accusations and emotionally dishonest footage to argue her cause". [2]

Awards and nominations

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified maize</span> Genetically modified crop

Genetically modified maize (corn) is a genetically modified crop. Specific maize strains have been genetically engineered to express agriculturally-desirable traits, including resistance to pests and to herbicides. Maize strains with both traits are now in use in multiple countries. GM maize has also caused controversy with respect to possible health effects, impact on other insects and impact on other plants via gene flow. One strain, called Starlink, was approved only for animal feed in the US but was found in food, leading to a series of recalls starting in 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vandana Shiva</span> Indian philosopher, scientist and environmentalist

Vandana Shiva is an Indian scholar, environmental activist, food sovereignty advocate, ecofeminist and anti-globalization author. Based in Delhi, Shiva has written more than 20 books. She is often referred to as "Gandhi of grain" for her activism associated with the anti-GMO movement.

The Monsanto Company was an American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri. Monsanto's best-known product is Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide, developed in the 1970s. Later, the company became a major producer of genetically engineered crops. In 2018, the company ranked 199th on the Fortune 500 of the largest United States corporations by revenue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food</span> Foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA

Genetically modified foods, also known as genetically engineered foods, or bioengineered foods are foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using various methods of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering techniques allow for the introduction of new traits as well as greater control over traits when compared to previous methods, such as selective breeding and mutation breeding.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Percy Schmeiser</span> Canadian farmer, businessman, and politician (1931–2020)

Percy Schmeiser was a Canadian businessman, farmer, and politician. In 1954, he took over the operations of the family owned farm, gas station, and farm equipment dealership. He renamed the farm equipment dealership Schmeiser's Garage and added a second farm equipment dealership in Humboldt, Saskatchewan in 1986 and oversaw their operations until their sale in 2003.

<i>Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser</i> Supreme Court of Canada decision

Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser [2004] 1 S.C.R. 902, 2004 SCC 34 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada case on patent rights for biotechnology, between a Canadian canola farmer, Percy Schmeiser, and the agricultural biotechnology company Monsanto. The court heard the question of whether Schmeiser's intentionally growing genetically modified plants constituted "use" of Monsanto's patented genetically modified plant cells. By a 5-4 majority, the court ruled that it did. The Supreme Court also ruled 9-0 that Schmeiser did not have to pay Monsanto their technology use fee, damages or costs, as Schmeiser did not receive any benefit from the technology. The case drew worldwide attention and is widely misunderstood to concern what happens when farmers' fields are accidentally contaminated with patented seed. However, by the time the case went to trial, all claims of accidental contamination had been dropped; the court only considered the GM canola in Schmeiser's fields, which Schmeiser had intentionally concentrated and planted. Schmeiser did not put forward any defence of accidental contamination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified crops</span> Plants used in agriculture

Genetically modified crops are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified using genetic engineering methods. Plant genomes can be engineered by physical methods or by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the plant which does not occur naturally in the species. Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, reduction of spoilage, resistance to chemical treatments, or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, biofuels, and other industrially useful goods, as well as for bioremediation.

Since the advent of genetic engineering in the 1970s, concerns have been raised about the dangers of the technology. Laws, regulations, and treaties were created in the years following to contain genetically modified organisms and prevent their escape. Nevertheless, there are several examples of failure to keep GM crops separate from conventional ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food controversies</span> Controversies over GMO food

Genetically modified food controversies are disputes over the use of foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The disputes involve consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population. In addition, products derived from GMO organisms play a role in the production of ethanol fuels and pharmaceuticals.

The United States is the largest grower of commercial crops that have been genetically engineered in the world, but not without domestic and international opposition.

Genetically modified wheat is wheat that has been genetically engineered by the direct manipulation of its genome using biotechnology. As of 2020, no GM wheat is grown commercially, although many field tests have been conducted, with one wheat variety, Bioceres HB4 Wheat, obtaining regulatory approval from the Argentinean government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified soybean</span> Soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques

A genetically modified soybean is a soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques. In 1996, the first genetically modified soybean was introduced to the U.S. by Monsanto. In 2014, 90.7 million hectares of GM soybeans were planted worldwide, this is almost 82% of the total soybeans cultivation area.

Genetically modified canola is a genetically modified crop. The first strain, Roundup Ready canola, was developed by Monsanto for tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the commonly used herbicide Roundup.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mendocino County GMO Ban</span>

Mendocino County, California, was the first jurisdiction in the United States to ban the cultivation, production or distribution of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The ordinance, entitled Measure H, was passed by referendum on March 2, 2004. Initiated by the group "GMO Free Mendocino", the campaign was a highly publicized grassroots effort by local farmers and environmental groups who contend that the potential risks of GMOs to human health and the ecosystem have not yet been fully understood. The measure was met with opposition by several interest groups representing the biotechnology industry, The California Plant Health Association and CropLife America, a Washington-based consortium whose clients represent some of the largest food distributors in the nation, including Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical. Since the enactment of the ordinance, Mendocino County has been added to an international list of "GMO free zones." Pre-emptive statutes banning local municipalities from such ordinances have now become widespread with adoption in sixteen states.

Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010), is a United States Supreme Court case decided 7-1 in favor of Monsanto. The decision allowed Monsanto to sell genetically modified alfalfa seeds to farmers, and allowed farmers to plant them, grow crops, harvest them, and sell the crop into the food supply. The case came about because the use of the seeds was approved by regulatory authorities; the approval was challenged in district court by Geertson Seed Farms and other groups who were concerned that the genetically modified alfalfa would spread too easily, and the challengers won. Monsanto appealed the district court decision and lost, and appealed again to the Supreme Court, where Monsanto won, thus upholding the original approval and allowing the seeds to be sold.

Genetic engineering in the European Union has varying degrees of regulation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">March Against Monsanto</span> International protest movement

The March Against Monsanto was an international grassroots movement and protest against Monsanto, a producer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide. The movement was founded by Tami Canal in response to the failure of California Proposition 37, a ballot initiative which would have required labeling food products made from GMOs. Advocates support mandatory labeling laws for food made from GMOs.

<i>GMO OMG</i> 2013 American film

GMO OMG is a 2013 American pseudoscientific documentary film which takes a negative view towards the use of genetically modified organisms used in the production of food, in the United States. The film focuses on Monsanto, a multinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation, and their role in the food industry alongside the effects of GMOs and how they are generated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">GMO conspiracy theories</span> Conspiracy theories related to GMOs

GMO conspiracy theories are conspiracy theories related to the production and sale of genetically modified crops and genetically modified food. These conspiracy theories include claims that agribusinesses, especially Monsanto, have suppressed data showing that GMOs cause harm, deliberately cause food shortages to promote the use of GM food, or have co-opted government agencies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration or scientific societies such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

A genetically modified sugar beet is a sugar beet that has been genetically engineered by the direct modification of its genome using biotechnology. Commercialized GM sugar beets make use of a glyphosate-resistance modification developed by Monsanto and KWS Saat. These glyphosate-resistant beets, also called 'Roundup Ready' sugar beets, were developed by 2000, but not commercialized until 2007. For international trade, sugar beets have a Maximum Residue Limit of glyphosate of 15 mg/Kg at harvest. As of 2016, GMO sugar beets are grown in the United States and Canada. In the United States, they play an important role in domestic sugar production. Studies have concluded the sugar from glyphosate-resistant sugar beets is molecularly identical to and so has the same nutritional value as sugar from conventional (non-GMO) sugar beets.

References

  1. 1 2 Holden, Stephen (14 September 2004). "When Food From the Laboratory Leaves a Bitter Taste". The New York Times . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Booth, Michael (20 October 2005). "Food for lazy thought". The Denver Post . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  3. 1 2 3 Havis, Richard James (28 September 2005). "review 'The Future of Food'". The Hollywood Reporter . Archived from the original on 5 January 2006. Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Koehler, Robert (3 January 2005). "Review: 'The Future of Food'". Variety . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  5. 1 2 Curiel, Jonathan (30 September 2005). "Opening today: 'The Future of Food'". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  6. 1 2 Musetto, V.A. (15 September 2005). "'FOOD' A RECIPE FOR RUIN". New York Post . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  7. 1 2 Bernard, Jami (14 September 2005). "THE FUTURE OF FOOD". New York Daily News . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  8. 1 2 3 4 Morris, Wesley (21 October 2005). "A credible case against genetically altered food". The Boston Globe . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  9. ↑ Gonzales, Ed (1 September 2005). "The Future of Food". Slant . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  10. ↑ Robinson, Tasha (14 September 2005). "The Future Of Food". The A.V. Club. Archived from the original on 2 December 2008. Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  11. 1 2 Eisner, Ken (1 December 2005). "review: The Future of Food". The Georgia Straight . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  12. 1 2 Gilman, Victoria (19 March 2005). "review: 'The Future of Food'". Chemical & Engineering News . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  13. 1 2 Costa, Temra (2010). Farmer Jane: Women Changing the Way We Eat. Deborah Koons Garcia: Gibbs Smith. pp. 68–72. ISBN   978-1423605621 . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 Fry`Ted (23 November 2005). ""The Future of Food": Documentary enforces gloom-and-doom message". Seattle Times . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  15. ↑ Ness, Carol (7 November 2004). "Fighting for the future of food / Deborah Koons Garcia's film documents how genetically engineered foods slipped into our supply". San Francisco Chronicle . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  16. ↑ Scheide, R. V. (11 May 2005). "Green Genes 'Future of Food' sheds light on GMO debate". North Bay Bohemian . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  17. ↑ Albala, Ken (2015). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Food Issues. Media Portrals of Food Issues: Multimedia Food Muckraking: Sage Publications. pp. 952–953. ISBN   978-1483346298 . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  18. ↑ Dayna, Macy (March 2006). "Say no to GMOs". Yoga Journal : 26. ISSN   0191-0965 . Retrieved 29 December 2015.
  19. ↑ staff. "THE FUTURE OF FOOD (2005)". Rotten Tomatoes . Retrieved 18 November 2018.
  20. ↑ staff (2006-11-26). "WOMEN FILM CRITICS CIRCLE AWARDS 2005". Women Film Critics Circle . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
  21. ↑ staff. "Ashland Independent Film Festival 2005 FILM WINNERS". Ashland Independent Film Festival . Retrieved 30 December 2015.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.