Cosmoeticadotcom The Future Of Food, an 88 minute long documentary, released in 2004, and directed by Deborah Koons Garcia, wife of the late founder of the 1960s rock band, The Grateful Dead, Jerry Garcia, is a film that rehashes many of the same points made in the earlier films, yet also goes a bit more deeply, penetrating into the web of how Monsanto, and other agribusiness giants weave a web of control and oligopoly that reverberates up and down the food chain, and puts the squeeze on the small, family farmer, even waging a war on them. The film shows how a Canadian farmer named Percy Schmeiser stood up to Monsanto and was ruined by a corrupt Canadian judiciary (although, if one follows the link provided, it seems that Schmeiser actually got the upper hand in 2008!).The film also details how these corporate thugs, mostly in the petrochemical and insecticide and herbicide industries, have cornered the market in the seed industry, and how ridiculous patent laws have allowed the first company with the idea to patent natural plants to do so, and how they have tried to standardize patent laws worldwide so that an American or French company could somehow dictate the agricultural and food policies of developing and Third World nations, in a sort of corporate colonialism that is bound to engender not only health, but political, problems in the future. The destruction of native cultures is just part of the problem, for the larger issue is the absurdity of patenting life itself, and stating that Crop X belongs to a foreign company, thus allowing foreign interests to lay economic and legal rights to products they had no part in cultivating, while also allowing these unevolved and monoculture crops great range and susceptibility to droughts and pests they cannot fight off, for even Monsanto's Round Up Ready soy beans are showing their limitations as a food source, whereas Mexico's natal and diverse forms of corn, which occasionally remix with wild and progenitor breeds prove hardier and more resistant than the genetically modified corn from north of the border.The film also brings to light what is called the Terminator Gene that has been developed in certain crops, which was designed so that limits on crops could more easily maintain crop process. The utter folly of this, were these strains to become dominant, is that famine would be rampant, and the very development of such a gene, alone, should be enough to convince any legislative body of the folly of allowing corporate empty suits to have any say in the vital national security issue of feeding the masses. All in all, The Future Of Food is likely the best and most information rich of these documentaries in conveying the scope and depth of the issues surrounding America's insane agricultural process.

stenlis I really wanted to like this film. It deals with a topic of great importance and generally propagates ideas that I agree with - like the dangers of corporate behavior, the threat to biodiversity that GM products pose and the absurdity of patenting life.So what's the problem? Let me sum it up:most of the movie is comprised from old footage cuts accompanied by a rather dull commentary. Not very captivating.the commentary is badly written. It's repetitive and often fails to make a point. For instance, it cites three methods for genetic modification of a cell. Dramatic music, the 'expert' says that the procedure is very invasive to the cell and that it mimics the behavior of a virus and... nothing more. I wanted to know what problems can arise from the treatment but there was no explanation. Is it really surprising that overwriting the DNA is 'invasive' to a cell? Yet, this treacherous 'invasivness' is mentioned several times through the film (with no additional information).important information is left out. For example, the movie mentions the Supreme Court's decision on the Monsanto vs. Schmeisser trial but fails to mention the Court's reasoning that sheds a different light on the severity of the ruling. On top of it the court denied any compensation to Monsanto. This clearly didn't fit the film's agenda.the choice of the talking heads is poor. When compared to the respectable lineup that producers of other documentaries were able to accumulate (e.g. The Corporation, The Power of Nightmares) I can only assume the creators of The Future of Food just didn't make their homework. Where are (ex)employees of the bioengineering companies, politicians that took part in creating the regulations for GM and where are the representatives of the regulatory government bodies?

greenfreaks This movie was truly shocking. I had no idea what was really truly happening with our food supply, I mean I had an idea, but I didn't think it was this bad. Makes you wanna run out into the streets and shout. I agree with the previous previewer, it is totally watchable for kids, and actually this should be shown in schools, libraries, where ever you can get a group together to see it. This info has got to get out there. WOW! What do we do? How do we do it? What do you eat? Where do you shop? Think about those things. See the movie and then make some changes! Maybe plant your own garden, or join a local CSA... do something!

louknees "The Future of Food" is a documentary that deals with the history of the agricultural industry and the development of genetically engineered food. It delves deep into the topics of patenting these genetically engineered creations by huge corporations and how the FDA's and EPA's regulations aren't strict enough and how food that has been genetically engineered in the United States does not have to be labeled. This is all valuable information.Then the movie spends the rest of the time bashing a corporation "Monsanto" for destroying the lives of all these farmers and potentially they will bring the end of the world. Phrases like "if 60 genetically altered salmon are entered into the mainstream population, the salmon species COULD be extinct within 40 generations," are all fine and good, but there's no flip side of the coin. There's no one from Monsanto backing claims. There's no one saying, "Genetically engineered salmon could increase population growth." It seems that many documentaries recently have become witch hunts against multinational corporations, which I think are great if both sides are presented. Maybe Monsanto didn't want to talk to the filmmaker, but if that was the case, let the viewer know that at least they tried to show both sides of the story. Show the filmmaker calling or have a graphic saying "They declined comment." "The future of Food" is a great idea, with a lot of great information, but it ultimately fails because it only shows 50% of the story, hence my 5 out of 10 rating.