SAM ALLEN EATING PIZZA

here's something I wrote to go with this video, a project done for class:

With the desire to inform an uninterested public, I chose to create a short film. Films are a simple and easy way to get a message across, as they do not require large amounts of work from an audience and can often be entertaining. Almost all advertisements today are seen or watched, and as mentioned those advertisements are often more important to society than the actual product itself. Without being too abrasive, I wanted to have the audience of my film consider what goes into the foods they eat.

At first I turned to Andy Warhol eating a hamburger. The monotonous aspect of eating a commercial product on film really causes the audience to completely consider the act, which is also commercial in itself–the real strength of Warhol’s work, laying everything out to be seen (Twitchell 153). Although hamburgers are popular, I decided to eat a slice of pizza with a fork and knife, as pizza seems more the ‘mass food’ of choice when regarding the circles I am affiliated with. By using the fork and knife the act of eating is exaggerated and emphasized, as pizza is not commonly eaten in such a way. With the audience enticed to consider what is happening, I chose to show them some of the information I want them to think about. By placing footage of production of food (which exists in my slice of pizza) above the footage of me eating the food, the audience sees the action and immediately is shown the actions which had to take place in order to allow my actions. These actions shown are the actions which are normally not thought of by the public: the actions which I want the audience to think of: the actions which produce food.

The film starts with fairly tame images of grain production, adding to the monotonous feel of the film, before moving into milk and later pork production, which although grotesque in many ways can also seem equally monotonous when paired with the other footage. In this way the audience is able to consider both on the same level, rather than thinking about slaughter houses as far and away from grain production. Still, when paired with such familiar and harmless images, the pork production is emphatically seen as it is a violent contrast to the calm cultivating of wheat. Moreover, I would argue that although difficult on their own, the images of the slaughtered pigs are even more upsetting when paired with the film of me calmly and somewhat uninterestedly eating them (mirroring society’s actions when considering such things) below as the audience is forced to not only witness the killing of animals but also internalize that those animals are suffering simply for food, a food that I am certain most of the audience enjoys.

The film thus informs the audience of actions which have to take place in order to create food, and also informs them that their eating of the food requires those actions to take place. It does so without abrasively pushing them away at first, but by welcoming and drawing their passive eye to visual information (the film is silent to allow the focus to stay on the visuals). Although the film is most likely longer than the modern attention span of the audience (adding to the monotony and also realistically representing the consumption of pizza with a knife and fork), it is not necessary that the entire film be viewed in order for the purpose to be exposed to the viewer. The message exists there for the viewer to see at anytime, although by viewing the whole film the audience will experience the contrast of wheat vs meat.

Although ideally projected on a wall to a captive audience–the images exaggerated through projection and size–by placing the film on YouTube it is possible that the film will get a larger audience than on a physical wall as it exists virtually for possibly anyone to see. YouTube also has the advantage of allowing the audience to view the film comfortably when they wish and more importantly YouTube must be the most common space any video is watched in our culture (at least by the university and youth populations) and thus serves as a perfect platform for the film.

The goal of the film is simply to have the audience ask the questions which Pollan ends his book with: What is it we’re eating? Where did it come from? How did it find its way to our table? And, what did it really cost (411)? I believe that by engaging the audience the film is able to create such questions within them, and is thus a success. With such questions planted, and some answers shown on the screen, it is hoped that an audience member will become curious and continue to find more information on his or her own, leading to a more informed public.


Pollan, Michael. Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. London: Penguin Books Ltd, 2006.

Twitchell, James. “Boxed In: the Power of Packaging.” Lead Us Into Temptation: The Triumph of American Materialism. New York: Columbia University Press, c1999.