Mo Gilligan eats fried chicken for 28 days. That is the premise of Big Chicken: A Fast Food Conspiracy, a 99-minute documentary directed by Liana Stewart, and it is either the most honest food film in years or the most expensive stunt ever staged in a bucket. The answer, mostly, is the second. Gilligan tours the UK and US on a fried chicken diet, and the film uses his body as the experiment while a row of experts explains what the industry is doing to everyone else’s.
Trailer, via Netflix.
Mo Gilligan, Self, 28 Days
The structure is simple. Gilligan is credited as Self, and the film follows him across both countries as he eats. The craving is the hook. The industry is the target. Stewart keeps the comedian at the center, which is the right call and also the film’s main problem. Gilligan is warm and watchable, and the camera trusts him. But a man eating chicken is not a finding. The film knows this, which is why it keeps cutting away to people who can tell us something.
Those people are the reason to watch. Marcus Collins is credited as Self – Interviewer, and he does the work of pressing the case rather than letting it sit. Enam Abood appears as Self – Medical Expert. Alice Driver is Self – Investigative Journo. The cast is stacked with specialists, and each one gets a slot.
Enam Abood and Laura Schmidt
Laura Schmidt is credited as Self – The Health Prof. Ashley Gearhardt is Self – Professor of Psychology. Philip Lymbery is Self – Sustainable Farming Advocate. Magaly Licolli is Self – Human Rights Activist. Michael Payan is Self – Pollution Hunter. Matthew Glover is Self – Investigator. That is a lot of titles for 99 minutes, and the film does not give any of them room to breathe.
This is the central flaw. Big Chicken: A Fast Food Conspiracy has assembled a genuine range of expertise — health, psychology, farming, human rights, pollution, investigation — and then treats each expert as a beat rather than a voice. Gearhardt on psychology could carry a film. Licolli on human rights could carry a different one. Here they are bricks in a wall, and the wall is built to hold up Gilligan’s 28 days.
What the Experiment Actually Shows
The experiment is the marketing. The film says so plainly: a bold 28-day experiment. Gilligan eats the diet, the cameras roll, and the audience waits for a number. The film is careful about what it claims and what it shows. That restraint is to its credit. A lesser documentary would hand you a diagnosis in the first act and spend the rest proving it. Stewart does not do that. She lets the days pass and lets the experts talk.
But the format has a cost. When your lead is a comedian on a diet, the audience is primed to laugh, and the film keeps half-winking. The tone drifts between alarm and bit. David Ajao, credited as Self – The Wingman, signals the drift. The Wingman is a comedy role in a documentary that wants to be taken seriously. The film never decides which one it is.
Darren Watkins Jr. and the Archive Footage
Darren Watkins Jr. appears as Self – IShowSpeed (archive footage). It is a single credit and it tells you where the film’s head is. The archive footage is there to connect the subject to the online culture that made fried chicken a performance. It is a smart instinct. It is also the only moment the film looks at the machine rather than the meal.
The UK and US tour gives the film its geography but not its argument. Both countries eat the same way for the same reasons, and the film does not draw a sharp line between them. The travel is texture. It is not evidence. A tighter cut would have dropped half the road and kept the interviews.
Running Order
| Block | Focus | On Screen |
|---|---|---|
| Opening | UK and US tour begins, diet starts | Mo Gilligan |
| Medical | Health segment | Enam Abood, Laura Schmidt |
| Industry | Farming and investigation | Philip Lymbery, Matthew Glover |
| Rights | Human rights and pollution | Magaly Licolli, Michael Payan |
| Psychology | Craving and behavior | Ashley Gearhardt |
| Close | Interview and archive | Marcus Collins, Darren Watkins Jr. |
That table is the film. One comedian, a stack of experts, and a countdown. It is clean and it is watchable and it is not enough. The running order shows a film that knows its subject is too big for one diet and tries to fit it anyway.
What the Film Gets Right
Big Chicken: A Fast Food Conspiracy is a good documentary trapped inside a stunt. The stunt is what got it made, and the stunt is what holds it back. Gilligan is the reason people will press play. He is not the reason they will remember it. The experts are.
The film’s best asset is its range. It brings health, psychology, farming, human rights, pollution and investigation into one room. Very few food documentaries bother. Most pick a villain and shout. This one builds a case out of many hands, and the case is stronger for it. The problem is that the hands never get to finish a thought.
What matters here is not the 28 days. It is the fact that a film with this much access still needed a comedian to sell it. That is the real story about the industry, and Big Chicken: A Fast Food Conspiracy gets close to saying it without ever quite landing the line. The archive footage of IShowSpeed is the closest it comes. It should have been the spine.
What is noise: the tour, the countdown, the comedy beats, the Wingman. What is signal: Abood, Schmidt, Gearhardt, Lymbery, Licolli, Payan, Glover. Seven people who know things, arranged around one man who is eating. Stewart made a film about a system and sold it as a film about a meal. The meal is fine. The system is the film.
It is worth watching, and it is worth watching with a finger on the fast-forward. Skip the road. Keep the room.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
