I’m anxious to see the movie Super-Size Me, about a guy who ate at McDonald’s three times a day for a month and put his body through hell doing so. As someone who rarely eats at fast food restaurants (that means once or twice a month, and then usually only because I must), I don’t need a wake-up call that fast food is bad for you, but the film may be enlightening to a good many people and I’m sure I’ll learn something from it. (I’m not intending to sound like a know-it-all. It’s just that as a tubby guy who has nutrition on his mind for the last five years, I’m keenly aware of all this already.) I don’t know when the movie will be available nationwide, or if it will even be hitting the major theaters. Most documentaries don’t. However, Roger Ebert’s review is out.
Here’s the weird thing: after relaying the premise of the film, Ebert spends the rest of the “review” going on about McDonald’s nutrition and winds up talking about his own diet. Shouldn’t there be SOMETHING about the actual movie in a movie review? I mean, what does he think of the way it’s filmed, or the way the documentary is assembled, or how well the director/star makes his points?