The Greatest Movie Ever Sold Essay Writing

POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold

Directed by Morgan Spurlock

Starring Morgan Spurlock, Ralph Nader

and Paul Brennan

Released in the UK on 14 October

For someone who calls himself a film director, Morgan Spurlock spends a lot of time in front of the camera. He’s really a showman; you can tell by his Zapata moustache. But he’s also a one-trick pony. It is an entertaining trick nonetheless, thanks partly to the faux naïf charm with which it is performed: he likes to “go native”.

With his first film, Super Size Me (2004), he did the unspeakable and ate only at McDonald’s for a month, “supersizing” whenever it was suggested to him. With his latest film, POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, he has funded a documentary about advertising and product placement entirely through income he raised by advertising and product placement. The film therefore contains three commercial breaks for various sponsors, all of them featuring Spurlock, and is full of shots that contain prominently positioned brand names.

During the course of POM Wonderful, as my local multiplex insists on calling it (thus delivering value for money to Spurlock’s sponsors), we see him talking to public relations executives, businessmen, academics, communications experts and assorted celebrities such as Donald Trump, Ralph Nader, Quentin Tarantino and Noam Chomsky. So brief are these soundbites, and so detached are they from their context, that they are virtually meaningless. Even the more interesting of the talking heads do little more than state the obvious. They serve the purpose of granting Spurlock the credibility he would otherwise lack.

One of the more worthwhile, Nader, observes Spurlock’s dilemma: “Out of this film may come a transformed, corporatised Morgan Spurlock. That’s your challenge.” At which point Spurlock tries to sell Nader a pair of shoes made by one of his sponsors.

Chomsky, too, recognises the challenge facing the film-maker, and warns him that, should he resist the temptations dangled in front of him, “you’ll end up in Montana growing your own food!” Growing one’s own food is not regarded as a virtue in the US, and the compulsion to sell one’s soul as a means of avoiding such a fate extends even to state schools, which are obliged to supplement their dwindling funds by selling advertising space on outside walls.

“At what point do I let myself do everyone else’s bidding?” Spurlock asks at one stage, anxious as to where his sponsors’ demands will end. His desperation to sell himself makes the problem a pressing one. Even so, the question of how implicated he becomes in the act of selling is less important than it appears, because the sheepish grin on his face indicates that the enterprise is ironic. Spurlock sets out to discover whether the businesses he approaches are publicity-hungry enough to fund a film documenting the absurdity of product placement in our lives. Of course they are. But I wonder whether it was something he needed to prove.

Spurlock’s theme isn’t original, but then none of his films has had anything original to say. I’m not sure it really matters, because he’s a winsome presence, and the sight of him baiting his prey is the principal attraction of his films. POM Wonderful (pomegranate juice, in case you’re in doubt) is apparently 40 per cent as effective as Viagra. It is amusing to watch Spurlock pitch a commercial to the POM chief executive – one in which, he says, he will sport a huge erection that demonstrates the beneficial effects of her product.

“Well,” says the CEO, “you could make the point with more subtlety.” Indeed. Spurlock is second cousin to Louis Theroux, with the same ability to insinuate himself into people’s good graces before killing them with kindness. Except that killing isn’t what he goes in for.

As the consumer’s champion, Spurlock lacks the fangs of, say, Michael Moore. Where Moore sets out to nail the bastards, Spurlock just wants to roll around on the carpet. His portrayal of the hard-nosed businessmen at Sheetz, the petrol-station chain, for instance, has the effect of humanising them. He cannot help it because his principal object is to entertain – something he does with brio.

POM Wonderful will change nothing. It will tell you nothing you don’t already know, nor will it make you more aware of the extent to which advertising has permeated the culture. It won’t even make you less susceptible to its effects. Let’s face it, some members of its audience may even, having noted the “beneficial effects”, rush from the cinema to bulk-buy supplies of a certain pomegranate drink – in which case POM Wonderful will have served as nothing more than a 90-minute commercial break.

A white male, 25-54 years old, middle class and clean shaven, stands at a Sheetz gas pump, eating a fresh Sheetz sandwich and filling his car with reliable Sheetz fuel. He's centered in the frame, being peppered with questions from an interviewer and pondering aloud over whether product placement is evil and what constitutes selling out. But his words are, secretly, just background noise, a muzak soundtrack to the visual. In reality, he's the scenery; after all, he didn't pay to be in the film. Sheetz did.

It's about two thirds into Morgan Spurlock's "Pom Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" that the filmmaker's point about the overwhelming presence of marketing in movies, and his clever way of making it, truly clicks. A deviously meta moment, it follows a large chunk of the "Supersize Me" documentary filmmaker's attempts to sell advertising in a film to finance a film about advertising.

After hustling between boardroom meetings filled with cautious corporate executives and paranoid PR reps, Spurlock has convinced enough sponsors -- Ban deodorant, Sheetz, Mini Cooper and Pom amongst the most prominent -- to buy product placement in his documentary, which, of course, was being filmed as they speak, right there in that boardroom.

It's a whole new terrain for those gutsy corporate suits; normally, they pay cash not to be the core of the existential dialogue of a scene, but to exist as subliminal, incidental background influencers. It was when advertisers began to go from bit part to driving the story that Spurlock decided that, after "seeing tons and tons of terrible product placement in film and TV for years," he needed to draw the curtain back and show the public just how often their eyes and minds were being sold.

"The inciting incident, for me what was the straw that broke the camel's back was watching 'Heroes.' Now, 'Heroes,' I loved it -- season one of 'Heroes' was one of the best TV seasons I've ever seen in my whole life. Season two, the wheels started to fall off the bus quick," Spurlock remembered in an interview with The Huffington Post. "It was an episode in which Hayden Panettiere's character is depressed about a lonely birthday, only to be cheered up by a gift from her father.

"He reaches into his pocket and pulls out something and it cuts to the front of the car, the camera dollies past, the Nissan logo goes through the frame, it cuts back in, holding the keys in front of her face, rack focus on her face and she goes, 'Ahh! The Rogue! The Nissan Rogue! Oh my god! You got me the Rogue! I can't believe it's the Rogue!'" Spurlock laughs incredulously. "And I was in shock. I was like, wow, that really just happened, I really just saw a commercial right there in the middle of the show."

The film, borne out of a chat with his equally baffled producing partner the next day, opens with a montage of product placement throughout the years, from fully bought and paid for 1950's TV shows to ET's fondness for Reese's Pieces to the everything but a Coca Cola tattoo Simon Cowell wore on 'American Idol' for nine seasons. The pattern firmly established for even the most dense (or blissfully unaware) consumer of media, Spurlock sets out to get his own, unique piece of the pie. So, he sets off to sell brands on joining a documentary about, in part, selling brands on joining a documentary.

As a filmmaker, Spurlock understands issues of financing and the high cost of creating television and film. Morally, he has great struggles with the concept of selling out the viewer's mind to subconscious cravings for certain brands, giving them unnatural desires to spend money -- in one scene, he watches ads and undergoes advanced brain scans to prove their secret impact on the human psyche. But artistically, he's not against any and all product placement -- "I'm much more distracted when I see someone drink something that says 'beer' on a white can, something straight out of 'Repo Man,'" he said -- but the issue for him is when it becomes craven and exploitative to the point that those ad-induced brain waves are the norm, and when the advertisers begin to drive a story in a direction that a writer had not intended to travel.

"I also don't want to suddenly feel like like I'm watching a 90 minute commercial," he reasoned. "I think there's a fine line, and ultimately, one of the biggest things is that you have to kick all these companies out of the writers' rooms. Let the creative people do their job."

To make his point, the filmmaker pulls a quote from a colleague. "There's a great line in the film from JJ Abrams that I really agree with, which is 'I believe in storytelling, not story selling.' He says it so succinctly, where he says listen, I just want to believe these characters are real."

As he ponders in the film's third act, through interviews and confessionals, whether it's moral or not to use product placement, Spurlock also fulfills his contractual obligations to place the products of his sponsors prominently in the shots of his film, like when he films at that Sheetz or in the very clearly labeled Jet Blue terminal at a local airport. It's both dizzying and brilliant -- depending on whether he can keep his integrity. For all the money companies put up for the film -- more than $1.5 million, including promotional tie-ins -- the real question is what it will cost Spurlock. After all, corporations that pay for exposure want to get their money's worth.

For Spurlock, giving that money's worth while keeping his integrity is a tricky proposition because the very essence of his film is product placement; it exists entirely because it will service different companies and brands. Maintaining the independence of the movie, then, took some quick thinking and finessing. The brands wanted to see the final product before it premiered at Sundance over the winter, but he knew their executives viewing them in their offices, in those sorts of corporate environments, would damn the movie before it could see the light of day.

"The last thing that I would want is them sitting in their conference rooms, watching this movie through the prism of a long, tiny tunnel with blinders on, where the only thing they were seeing is their own brand and how they were seen in the movie and that's it," Spurlock explained. "And by having them come in the Sundance, which they all agreed to, so 11 of the 15 brands came to Park City, they watched it with the likes of people who would want to see it and go see it anyway, would want to go see a documentary, would be supportive of a doc and an idea like this to begin with. [The companies] got to see it as their involvement as a part of a whole. So by their seeing the audience's reaction, seeing themselves alongside all those who helped make the movie, it didn't give them pause. It reinforced why they did it to begin with."

With that victory, he was able to keep final creative control of the film, so while he does place those products, sometimes in very, very clever ways, he never hides the placement to the point that he truly is selling to the hidden crevices of our minds instead of to our capable, intellectual awareness. Without that power, he would have had to produce that dreaded 90 minute commercial.

But isn't it all, relatively speaking, inconsequential? With a down economy, multiple wars and natural disasters punishing the planet for its misuse, why would people care about whether their entertainment has made some compromising choices? His answer comes, in part, during the film, as he ventures off past Hollywood and Madison Avenue to prove that there's more than just a tenuous link between working Americans' livelihoods and what they see on TV. The very idea of product placement and advertisement, it turns out, is spilling over from our TVs and big screens to the vulnerable eyes of children in a place that should be sacred.

Spurlock notes a particularly upsetting sequence of the film in which he visits a school district in Florida that, because of incessant budget cuts, is forced to sell advertising on its busses, chain-link fences, classroom televisions and any other surface that a local dentist's logo or chain restaurant can be slapped down on. Highlighting the continuing rise of in-school entertainment production companies such as Channel One, a company that provides TVs to schools in exchange for captive audience for their ad-filled morning content, Spurlock notes that minds are truly for sale.

"Ultimately I think you want to keep stuff like this out of schools. Schools is a big one," Spurlock said, shifting to a more passionate tone when asked where he drew the most important line. "I think you do want schools to be a sacred place, I think you do want school to be a place where, the girl [interviewed in a classroom] says such a great thing in the movie, she says, 'School should teach you how to think, not what to think.' And I loved that she said that, because she's spot on. That's exactly what a school should be. But I think from Channel One to what's happening now with corporations and advertisers wanting to come in, kind of capitalizing on these cash strapped school districts, is problematic."

It may seem like long leap from a car logo in a TV show about super heroes, but Spurlock has at least illuminated the path. Whether the writer's room can grab control of the ending could determine whether we one day end up with General Electric Presents Recess. But at least there's some good news for Spurlock: he's now a pretty good business man.

"Pom Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" opens in limited release on Friday, April 22nd.


0 thoughts on “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold Essay Writing

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *