Rhetorical Analysis Of Fast Food Nation

Fast Food Nation Rhetorical Analysis

In the film “Fast Food Nation” there are some obvious goals here. This film gives you an insight of what a fast food corporation is really like, and how they aren’t as great as they seem to be, as well as the problem with illegal immigrants coming over to America, being token advantage of, and mistreated. This film tries to make you more conscientious of what is going on behind the closed doors of America’s fast food industry. Don, who is Mickey's hamburger chain marketing director who helped develop “The Big One”, is sent to Cody, Colorado to inquire about the meat being tainted at the UMP packaging plant. The writer, uses some rhetorical appeals, as well as some common topics in order to make these points.

UMP packaging company gave Don a
tour, but he doesn’t feel as he got to the bottom of what’s going on, like they didn’t show him everything. He’s already talked to a mickey’s franchise owner, Tony. It seems like he was holding out on him too. Tony eventually tells Don about his wife’s uncle that used to deal with UMP. His name is Rudy. Rudy is a credible person in this film because he used to sell cattle to UMP, so you could infer the writer is using the common topic testimony and authority. Rudy seems like a guy that won’t conform to the big corporations. He said “ My Grandfather went up against the meet packers in 1919”, he has history with the industry;therefore, he has vast knowledge of the workings in the meat packing industry. The writer is showing the audience how corporations are taking over, and making the audience aware of the problem that big corporations are posing in America.

In this scene, the problem displays with Mickey’s new Hamburger “The Big One” again.
Don Anderson goes to his friend/associate Harry to inquire about the problem. The writer uses Cause and Consequence here to get his point across. Harry seems to be a credible guy at the beginning of the scene, but you can see him start to turn into a bad guy as the scene progresses. Harry mocks the situation, Don said, “You know they have un-trained people working at the gut table?” which could be a possible factor of the tainted meat. He also said “Your test say that the meat we’re getting from UMP is clean, it’s not, I’ve seen independent test that say it’s not”, Harry goes on to not deny the facts of which Don presented to him, but expresses to Don that nothing illegal is going on and the meat is perfectly fine because it is being cooked with “grills that are calibrated carefully to make sure it kills every little bit of the bad stuff.” Harry already knew that the meat was actually tainted. By using the common topic appeal the writer made it possible for the audience to infer that the factory is not functioning right; consequently, making the meat inedible, but they are still selling it
anyway.

When the writer included very emotional imaging in this scene, right away you can infer that pathos is being used. The ways they treat the animals in plants like that are unethical. Someone who is not used to seeing that type of behavior toward animals would be sadden; just like the women Sylvia. Deep depressing music was playing as she walked, seeing all of the guts and blood pouring out, as it was just being washed from the floor, skin being pull from the carcasses of dead cows. In addition, at the end of the walk, Mike showed her what her job would be. As she saw the piles of guts just coming down the chute, and blood splashed on her face, she started to cry. By showing this part of the processing plant he effectively conveyed his goal.

In conclusion, I think this writer conveyed his goals thoroughly, this film could make one much more aware. After seeing this, it would persuade you to take a second look at that hamburger again before you eat it, and not to subject yourself to the greed of fast food corporations like “Mickey’s”.