Re:Supersize Me/Morgan Spurlock
I think Tony's problem with "Super Size Me" is the manipulation that went on both behind the scenes and on screen, and that may have tainted the while film for him.
Film is a medium of editing. You can make something appear to be just by editing two incongruous images together. One of the classic examples came in the early days of cinema when Sergei Eisenstein (director of the silent classics "Potemkin" and "Ivan the Terrible" among dozens of others) shot footage of an old woman staring, expressionless into the camera. He then went out and shot scenes of many different things; a happy baby, a crying baby, a house on fire, a fox chasing and killing a small animal, etc. He then took the footage and alternately edited it together; happy baby/expressionless old woman, house on fire/expressionless old woman, fox killing small animal/expressionless old woman, crying baby/expressionless old woman.
When he showed the finished piece to viewers, they all remarked on what an effective actress the old woman was. She was so delighted with the happy baby, frightened by the burning house, disgusted by the fox killing the animal, and compassionate for the crying baby. The truth was, of course, it was all one shot of the old woman. She never saw any of those things, but when edited together it appeared that she was having those reactions. I contend that Morgan Spurlock similarly edited and juxtaposed certain ideas together to manipulate the way you perceived the film.
While I agree with Spurlock's assertions about fast food eating habits in general, there were many holes and breaks in logic throughout the film. For instance, his experiment with holding unrefrigerated food for a prolonged period of time. As I recall, the sandwiches got moldy and rotted while the fries did not. So what was the point? Was he outraged by the food that rotted or the fact that the fries didn't?
I've only seen "Super Size Me" once, so citing other specific examples is difficult. However, I do remember thinking throughout the film that some of the logic was flawed and it was definitely "artificially" skewed to make his predetermined point about a fast food diet. Again, I agree with Spurlock's assertion that Americans generally have poor eating habits, but there's enough real evidence out there so you don't need to manipulate the way you present your case to the public.