The Greatest Movie Ever Sold (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
46 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
A Brilliant Satire of Product Placement
JustCuriosity13 March 2011
Morgan Spurlock has delivered a fascinating satire of the process of placing products into movies and the ubiquitous nature of advertising in our society. He takes us inside the process by showing us what it takes to make a movie and to gain corporate sponsorship for it. He allows us to see the process by getting corporations to underwrite his movie about product placement. He uses humor – as he did with fast food in Super Size Me - to point to the insidious way into which advertising has slipped into film-making and become a major part of its profit model of film making. He isn't the first one to do this, of course. Feature films like Thank You for Smoking and The Truman Show have pointed out this phenomenon. Steve Colbert has also does so regularly on his show. Still by putting it into a documentary form, Spurlock has taken the critique to a new level. The sponsoring companies will likely benefit through their association with his humorous critique of corporate America. The movie-going public will benefit if they become more cognizant of the pervasive nature advertising in films. Spurlock has shown us yet again that it is much easier to get the public to listen to critiques our economic system if they are delivered with a good-natured sense of humor.
95 out of 113 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A good idea
nick-vittum6 May 2011
Some people would have you believe that Spurlock is trying to dupe his audience and exploit advertisers for profit, like this is a BAD thing. But that's just it - it's not. After you see this movie, you might actually notice the subtle, insidious advertising which is omnipresent in our society. he rubs your face in it, exposes some of the inner-workings of the ad-market and tries his hardest not to look like a whore all the while.

Let's not forget Spurlock's masochistic endeavor to eat McDonalds 3x daily for a month. Is that not genuine? This time he lays his reputation on the line instead of his health, and to those who are offended by it: are you less offended by movies that use product placement shamelessly without informing the audience? Spurlock had to walk a thin line to make this movie, and I think he walked it beautifully.
40 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Ad Nauseam - Morgan Spurlock cashes in on commercialism
ezrawinton11 November 2011
At the 2011 Hot Docs opening and Canadian premiere screening of Morgan Spurlock's POM Wonderful Presents the Greatest Movie Ever Sold the peppy logo-clad filmmaker told the audience his film will have the effect of changing the way we look at advertising, TV, and films. Maybe Spurlock has been hanging out with a different crowd recently, because his grasp of audience intelligence—especially a doc audience—is certainly off the mark in terms of advertising savvy. While his film, as hilarious and entertaining as it is, won't be affecting the way I look at advertising, it definitely changes the way I now look at Morgan Spurlock.

Spurlock is a master story-teller to be sure, and this was readily apparent in one of the funniest, rollicking Q&As I've had the pleasure to sit through. Story after story rolled off his lips in all manner of imitation and animation – and had pretty much all in attendance slapping knees and grabbing sides in fits of laughter. His 2004 doc-buster hit Super Size Me told the story of one man's experiment to eat only McDonald's food while suffering the consequences. His 30 Days television series was a masterpiece jewel in the cheap tin crown of reality television fare. With all these storytelling accomplishments and talent under his belt his most recent work, a 90 minute celebration of advertising, marketing and commercialization bereft of any engaging narrative, comes as a whopping disappointment.

Don't get me wrong – if you want funny, entertaining, inquisitive Spurlock you'll get your dose in this documentary about sponsorship in film. But if you're looking for critical analysis or an investigative lens you'll be very disappointed. Spurlock's film is the ultimate postmodern documentary – a film paid for by corporate sponsors about the business of financing films through corporate sponsorship. On the surface it's a great idea, but Spurlock doesn't scratch that surface to reveal the real "inner workings" of the business or the consequences of a social reality dominated by advertising and marketing. As one audience member said to him, the film is all joy – where are the questions? Spurlock, predictably upbeat responded that if the audience is uneasy about these things after watching The Greatest Movie Ever Sold than the film has done its job. Right.

As a postmodern self-reflexive work there is surprisingly little self-reflection in PWPTGMES. Spurlock is in almost every frame of the film – flogging his film idea to ad execs, flogging products, and making light of critical voices like Ralph Nader. Between getting free stuff, zipping around the country meeting rich people (why Donald Trump's opinion was sought in this film remains a mystery), and drinking litres and litres of POM juice, Spurlock apparently has little time to really critically explore the nature of what he's doing and what the whole thing is about. Sure he has his moments of wondering aloud if he's going too far down the rabbit hole, but they feel as forced and staged as his meetings with CEOs and marketing gurus (all shot with atrocious camera work it has to be said). One senses that he went into this much like he went into Super Size Me: as a personal challenge and experiment, just to see if he could do it. And, lo and behold, of course he can – he's Morgan Spurlock after all.

The first half of the film had me in stitches as he set up the gag. But by mid-way I was bored of watching Spurlock in predictable scenarios flogging everything from shoes to under-arm deodorant to airlines. I kept waiting for him to go deeper, to really provoke some critical thought on the issue of advertising and marketing. By the end of the film, this craving went unabated, much like my new craving to drink POM juice – thanks to what has to be the best marketing coup for a juice company since Dole colonized Carmen Miranda.

So if you're looking for a funny, intelligent, provocative and critical documentary on advertising and marketing I highly recommend seeking out the wonderful 2004 Czech film Czech Dream. If you want to laugh with and at Morgan Spurlock as he makes a mint from celebrating crass commercialism, check out POM Wonderful Presents The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, that is, if you have the stomach for it.
13 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Where's the Beef?
ferguson-61 May 2011
Greetings again from the darkness. This is billed as "a documentary about branding, advertising and product placement that is financed and made possible by branding, advertising and product placement". My issue with the movie is that it's not really ABOUT anything! It's really more of a "How To Raise Money For Your Movie By Selling Advertising". And that does have some funny scenes and provide a glimpse into how the leaders of companies think.

Morgan Spurlock hit the big time in 2004 with his Oscar-nominated "Super Size Me", in which he filmed himself eating only McDonalds food for a full month. The difference in that movie and this one is that previously, he did much research and explained to the viewer the significance of cause and effect. In this most recent film, he promises insight into the abundance of product placement in the entertainment world, but really we get only a mish-mash of images and scenes.

The segments can be divided into these categories: conference room presentations, celebrity talking heads, industry experts, and Mr. Spurlock's own ruminations. Each of these segments are entertaining ... heck some are laugh outloud funny ... but in the end, we are left holding an empty bag. We have no more understanding of product placement than when we started. What we do have is a better feel for how desperate companies are to find new ways to advertise their products.

Some of the products featured in the film are: Hyatt, Jet Blue, Mini Cooper, Merrill shoes, Sheetz (gas and convenience) and of course, Pom Wonderful - the 100% pomegranate juice whose President and Owner ends up spending $1 million for above the title sponsorship. Some of the talking heads include Ralph Nader, Noam Chomsky, Paul Brennan and Donald Trump. We get brief chats with film directors Peter Berg, Brett Ratner and Quentin Tarantino. Throw in a couple of lawyers, musicians and some industry experts and you get the impression that Spurlock did his homework.

I have spent some time thinking about this and I will stick to my conclusion. What the movie doesn't do is provide any insight or detail into what drives product placement in entertainment. However, the movie does a decent job showing us how presentations are made to advertising managers at companies, and it leans heavily on Mr. Spurlock's often-hilarious viewpoint of situations (Mane & Tail shampoo). When you get right down to it, isn't this just a glimpse at one segment of capitalism? When you have a product to sell, you are constantly looking for the most effective way to advertise that product to potential customers. Sorry, that's not insight, that's just Marketing 101.
52 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This is the greatest movie review ever! It's thoroughly original.
MartinHafer30 August 2011
Morgan Spurlock has returned with another documentary--and this one is one of the most original and clever ones I have ever seen. What I liked about it in particular is its nice sense of humor and it did not come off as a preachy agenda picture.

The film begins with Spurlock discussing just how ubiquitous commercials have become in our lives--particularly the phenomenon of product placement in films. His contention in this film is that even tiny independent documentaries COULD pay for themselves if they, too, jumped on the endorsement bandwagon. And so the film chronicles his pursuit of just about any company willing to finance his film. And, in the process he learns about the loss of control and other problems with this. But, throughout, he maintains a wonderfully wicked sense of humor--and many times I found myself laughing--especially at the miniature horse. I don't want to spoil the film, so I won't say any more about the content. But I loved how this film could appeal to anyone on the right, left or in the middle--clever, very well-written and fun. It also had a gentle sense of humor and never took advantage of the products or companies--so instead of laughing at them, he laughed with them....and the audience. See this one.

By the way, the film featured some great graphics and I loved its style. I sure can't wait to see Spurlock's next film. Also, I stayed at one of the hotels that Spurlock approached for an endorsement deal--and they put him and an ad for the movie on each room key card!
25 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Truth be told, it's not that great.
Ryan_MYeah22 September 2011
Director Morgan Spurlock analyzes the world of product placement and advertising in film, transportation, and cities, but in an ironic twist, needs sponsors of his own to finance the film.

He's very gleeful in giving the film a quirky, humorous tone (Especially commercials for his sponsors that randomly interject every now and then), but I think he was so focused on the humor of his film, he didn't properly tune his information.

The facts come fast and furious, and are very dense in explanation. Spurlock adds a seemingly endless trail of self references and humor, when he should be drawing more focus on his points within the film. And on top of that, none of it is really all that enlightening.

Hopefully I find better documentaries this year, because after an unusual high from last year, this year starts off not with a bang, but more of a whimper.

**1/2 out of ****
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Cleverly making you feel like an idiot!
thomaswolfe1215 August 2011
The Brilliant thing Morgan Spurlack does with this movie, is he throws in your face, what advertisers and movie executives have hidden, (in some case very poorly) in the movies they produce. The Transformers all being GMC for example. Spurlack satirises the whole idea of advertisements and sells out his own film in the process, though he sells out only to buy in, so he doesn't really sell out. Its this ingenious and hilarious concept to the movie which makes you think "holy cow I'm an idiot" and Morgan pushes his film to show the manipulative ways of commercial giants. Another clever trick Morgan uses is the, documentary within a documentary style. The film follows Morgan as he attempts to get advertising for his film which is going to be a documentary on advertising. So essential what we see is the pre-production of a movie which then becomes the movie. This gives a real insight in to how the big Hollywood blockbusters are able to get such high budgets by selling to advertisers.

This film only really appeals to people who are interested in how the media is able to have control over consumers, as we are pretty much witnessing a prolonged documentary on how Morgan Spurlock can find a million dollars to make a pretend movie.

A cleverly put together gem that manages to patronise an audience in to realising just how we can be manipulated by the big name brands.
22 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I'll buy in
gizmomogwai25 August 2011
Futurama had an episode that submitted in the year 3000 advertisers will be able to send signals in the air that put commercials into people's dreams. Funny that Ralph Nader mentions sleep as the last place you can go to escape ads. In today's world, they're pervasive. It's a good topic for an amusing and entertaining filmmaker (Morgan Spurlock, who previously had success with his anti-fast food pic Super Size Me). Much as with Super Size Me, Spurlock pulls a stunt; this documentary is funded by product placement.

There are certain limitations inherent in such a project. Make a film against product placement, and the worst offenders will not want to help it. In the end he mostly finds businesses I've never heard of (Ban, Sheetz). So we don't see how the bigger corporations go about product placement. That said, we see a bit of how it works, as Spurlock's sponsors send him contracts making various demands.

At times it seems this movie is more about itself than product placement generally, but we do have some good discussions spread throughout the film. It is true blatant advertising is insulting, yet the film poses the question of whether subtle advertising is more dangerous. The presentation is funny, including with the Mane 'n Tail material. (Why didn't that company pay for the publicity? They even got a Wikipedia page because of this movie). The film has some good music and I can testify that it looks great on Blu-ray. The Greatest Movie Ever Sold may not be the greatest documentary, but it's worth a look.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
sell everything
lee_eisenberg25 May 2011
Having taken on the McDonald's diet in "Super Size Me", Morgan Spurlock now turns to advertising. "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" is a look at product placement, completely funded by product placements. Much of the documentary features Spurlock asking people about how product placement works, as well as inquiring about the ethics of it. The big surprise to me is just how prevalent product placement is (you're going to be hard-pressed to find a Hollywood movie that doesn't feature it).

Since a lot of the documentary features talking heads -- among them Noam Chomsky and Quentin Tarantino -- it's a little repetitive at times, but it's mostly a good look at the extent to which commercialism saturates our lives. And very funny every step of the way! And remember: always drink POM!
10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Commits the greatest sin in cinema - it's boring.
RandyL71231 August 2011
The film follows Spurlock as he seeks out funding for the movie, which is ostensibly about product placement. However, the plot gets dull as we already know the ending, that the movie gets funding and gets made. There is no arc, no interesting advances. And talking to industry hired guns (i.e. analysts and advertising folks) gets droll and repetitive. So, the movie was simply dull and uninteresting after a while.

I had hoped that, like most documentaries where the star is the producer/director, there would be two concurrent story lines running throughout - one with the contrived plot of finding sponsors, the other with a great inner-workings of the beast sort of thing where we learn something about product placement. Instead we are shown a dozen 3-second product placement clips and told that it's everpresent. This is not new information to anyone with a working brain stem. We are not educated on the topic. It's a real shame. I'll give an example of this done correctly - most any Michael Moore film. There's the "plot" of Moore going here, doing that. But there's also an entire portion of the film where you learn a lot about the topic of the film. Be it gun control, or health care, you come away with more knowledge and certainly at least a rudimentary understanding of the broad system at work. This movie, you know nothing more than you went in with, other than you can monitor someone's brain with an fMRI machine whilst they watch movie trailers.

A serious miss, and a serious missed opportunity for Spurlock. This could have been fantastic, but his personal role in the movie took over and destroyed the entire concept. Pass.
12 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Kind of a letdown.
gtmail7720 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I was expecting something different...perhaps a more snarky look at the placement biz and how audiences react, companies profit and actors struggle with fake looking/sounding/feeling products jammed into scenes. Instead we get him putting the movie together as he's putting the movie together. I fun idea but then it gets derailed with too much info and pointless interviews...Trump, Tarentino, JJ Abrams and a few others that left me wondering if Spurlock sold out in order to cash in a favor for this movie or his next. Had he not reached so high this would have been a fun ride from start to finish. Instead we get a mish-mash of jokes, setbacks, ads, info, boring mtgs and happy teachers. huh? If he sold out as part of the joke, the movie lost out on entertainment value. Altho the shampoo ad almost makes it worth it.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I'm not sold.
jdesando19 May 2011
It's time for me to downsize my adoration of Morgan Spurlock, director of the Greatest Movie Ever Sold. His Supersize Me introduced me to the horrors of too much fast food, although I suspected that were so anyway. In Greatest, I learned nothing new about product placement in movies.

Despite his vigorous pursuit of companies to sponsor his film totally in product placement, I knew it all from the beginning. Much revenue is derived from an actor holding a Coke or a Pepsi. But then I knew that the minute I heard of the idea decades ago, and Spurlock adds zero insight, such as what marketing agencies or manufacturers really think about the idea other than their fear of Spurlock trashing them.

I did learn that Morgan Spurlock is as much the center of attention as Michael Moore. Spurlock seeks it out, guaranteeing his premier place by doing the film himself and showcasing his highly-developed sales skills.

OK, maybe I learned something else: In Sao Paulo outdoor advertising is banned. Although I thought I would be pleased, the city looked strangely vacant, something out of a horror flick. Maybe it's not the advertising I dislike—maybe it's just Morgan Spurlock's advertising himself that turns me off.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very Disappointing
prberg230 April 2011
This movie is really bad. I was hoping there was going to be a deep look at the issue of product placement in media, but I don't feel like the director ever went there. Like his last documentary (Super Size Me), he just states the obvious and doesn't do much real documentary work. We just kept watching these mostly boring scenes without much to tie them together.

I feel like asking the director for my money back that I just spent to see this movie. I suggest you stay away from this movie. It was just frustrating and not really enjoyable at all. Maybe when it comes to rental.. but not worth going to the theater that's for sure!
16 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Greatest ?!
pitryxxl10 August 2011
The Greatest Movie ever sold , this is not a movie or a documentary i have no idea what it is. I got to hand it out to this guy he made his thing whit money from some sponsors and prob some extras but the joke was on them and i think they realize now that was the worst placement , advertisement ever made if i see a pom bottle in the next 2days it will be to soon , it made me hate all the products that took part in this thing i used to like Mini's but now i hate them so much i will never buy one .This review supposed to be about the doc , it's a great thing that shows how desperate company's corporations ... r to advertise their products in any way possible [ the policy is sell>sell>sell ] .
10 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Super 'POM Wonderful' Me!
Hellmant2 June 2011

Morgan Spurlock (writer/director of the 2004 breakout hit documentary 'SUPER SIZE ME') brings us another satirical critique on one of society's most influential evils, advertising. He financed the entire film with product placement while turning the camera (and judgment) on the very companies that support him in the project. He co-wrote the film (as well as co-produced it) with his usual film partner Jeremey Chilnick and interviews such notable and well known filmmakers and celebrities as Quentin Tarantino, J.J. Abrams, Peter Berg, Brett Ratner, Jimmy Kimmel, Donald Trump and Ralph Nader (as well as many others). The film is interesting and very humorous for the most part but it does get bogged down a little in repetitiveness and lack of direction.

Spurlock sets out with a goal of finding enough major businesses to fund the budget of his 1.5 million dollar movie by offering them various product placement deals (according to the size of their investment) in the film while he examines the power of such marketing. The company which invests a million dollars (the 'Pom Wonderful' pomegranate juice company) gets above the title product placement plus heavy advertising in the film (including Spurlock's agreement to only drink their juice while on film for the movie's entirety). The first half of the film he interviews various businesses and pitches them his idea (This part of the film is the most humorous and informative). Many major companies turn him down but several lesser known and striving corporations except his offer. The second half of the movie consists mostly of how the finished product (the film itself) comes together, with all it's marketing tie-ins, and whether the film (and Spurlock himself) can avoid 'selling out'. This portion of the film gets a little slow and uninteresting (in my opinion) and loses some of it's zest.

The movie is not nearly as compelling or educational as 'SUPER SIZE ME', or many other well known documentaries of it's style, but it is pretty entertaining. Although we don't learn a lot of information we didn't already know (or much of anything that's useful) it's still pretty interesting and enjoyable watching Spurlock on his venture (at least for the majority of the film). We don't really have any idea where the film is headed and neither does it, which is probably it's biggest problem. As it sets into it's third act the film begins to feel a bit long and somewhat dull. How the film all comes together might be interesting to some but it's nothing most viewers haven't seen on many behind the scene DVD special features before. The information on the power of advertising becomes pretty repetitive by this point. It does kind of pick up a little at the end though and comes to a somewhat satisfying conclusion. There's also a pretty cool theme song (during the film's climax) titled 'The Greatest Song I Ever Heard' by alternative rock band OK Go, who are also interviewed in the film (proclaiming themselves 'the greatest band to ever write a theme song'). For the most part the film works. Nothing too mind blowing or enlightening but it is very amusing and humorous (for the most part). Another pretty impressive achievement from Morgan Spurlock.

Watch our review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Greatest Movie Ever Sold? Not really. Entertaining? Sure.
FatMan-QaTFM24 August 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Morgan Spurlock is a lot like Yahoo® - good ideas (who doesn't want searching, email, sports, personal ads, stocks, horoscopes, jobs, instant messaging, and games all on one site?) with terrible execution (come to think of it, I don't want searching, email, sports, personal ads, stocks, horoscopes, jobs, instant messaging, and games all on one site). I like his ideas, but they're generally are trying to hard to nail everybody on what he perceives are their misdeeds that his films get old quickly.

Despite his normal modus operandi, POM Wonderful Presents The Greatest Movie Ever Sold in Association with Jet Blue, Ban, and Hyatt really surprised me on watchability. He sets out to sell product placement throughout a movie about product placement – good idea. The execution? Not bad, really. There were some very funny segments, like his Mane & Tale Shampoo commercial, to break up all the deadly serious talk about advertising and how it's rotting our brains. I know some people wanted Spurlock to be on a "kickin' butt through the advertising world" tear, but he really didn't have any mysteries to uncover. When someone on TV or in a movie uses a product, no viewer thinks that it was coincidence. We all know, to a certain extent, how advertising works.

What did I learn? You've got to sell out a bit to get money. Spurlock got to make his movie, the products got decent exposure. I had never heard of Ban or Sheetz until I saw this movie. I learned a bit about pitching your story, terms of the sponsorship, and how much legwork you have to go through to get your funding. I think I'll stick to calling up doctors and dentists, thank you very much.

I have two main complaints about the film. First, the camera work was intensely annoying. I started getting furious every time I saw one of the "reality" scenes. Every time someone new spoke it was "zoom, zoom, focus". EVERY. SINGLE. TIME! That's crap. If it happens accidentally as you're trying to quickly get the camera on someone new, so be it, but it's not a shooting style. "Yeah, bra, I shoot soft… it's my style." That's not a style, that's just bad camera work. AUUUGHH!! Second, I don't know why Brett Ratner's bloated corpse has to be on- screen for any interviews about how Hollywood works. That's just something personal – he once struck my mother, and I will never forgive him. He also ruined X-Men. Also unforgivable.

Greatest Movie Ever Sold? Not really. Entertaining? Sure. I wouldn't bother watching again since I know I'll just be screaming mad after remembering the dreadful camera action I'll have to endure.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Boycott This Film
Cinnyaste23 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
While clever in exposing product placement by using product placement to fund the film, the joke is on you. The viewer is assaulted by products in the name of journalism.

The novelty fades quickly because this film is a bitter pill bereft of ethics and accountability. Wearing the unctuous smirk of a charming snake oil salesman, Mr. Spurlock sucks at the teat he condemns.

The contract giving access to $1 million funding from the lead sponsor, Pom, stipulates the film must gross $10 million at the box office, sell 500,000 DVDs and downloads, and generate 600 million media impressions.

This means Mr. Spurlock needs asses in seats. At your expense, he's made a paean to commercialism whose sole financial purpose is to reimburse Pom and other sponsors. Therefore, should the public fall for it, you are paying the corporations, not a sincere filmmaker.

Mr. Spurlock's ethics are already in question:

In this film he wears a suit identical to ones worn in the 1990s by The Art Guys. Ultimately, Spurlock said he hadn't heard of the duo before and the accusations that he'd stolen the idea were baseless.

And the famous "Super Size Me" lawsuits where Spurlock was sued for $40 million by Cast Iron Partners who claimed failure to share the film's profits with them, despite signing a contract promising a 25 percent share.

Deny this charlatan his due. Above and beyond the financing, this is not an entertaining film.
17 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Clever concept; middling to fair execution.
rscowboy200530 April 2011
Let's see. If it's a $1.5 million film and after the title, $25,000.00 is the smallest player level, at most there should have been 20 other partners, but it seemed like hundreds.

Perhaps that was the intent, but the film's unsteady follows and quick-cuts intensified the effect and left my head whirling.

Fewer scenes, cut 20 minutes from the length and it might be in a class with Supersize Me. I'm disappointed that he trotted out Ralph Nader (or maybe Ralph is a "partner" and paid to be in the film) as some counterweight to what is right before our eyes. The 2 professors got what? 13 seconds? Where are the concrete steps viewers can take?
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I learned nothing
desmei00718 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I had high hopes for this documentary, but I was let down badly; I'm glad I only borrowed it from the library, so I didn't waste a cent on it.

Others have summarized the plot, so I will focus on how it made me feel: let down. I had expectations that Morgan Spurlock was going to take an in-depth look at product placement in media and how it affects the viewers. I thought the most interesting segment of the film was where he was hooked up to the MRI and shown trailers and commercials...but he didn't go anywhere with it! He wanted a Coke? That was it? Did the advertising only work because he DOES drink Coke? How would that ad have affected someone who doesn't want to buy pop? What DOES Shrek have to do with selling cruises? That ad would make me want to run away from that particular cruise line, so how does it influence anyone to choose them? Does Will Smith ostentatiously putting on a pair of Chucks *really* sell more Chucks? THOSE are the questions I was hoping would be answered.

The only positive? I now want to visit Sao Paolo like you wouldn't believe. Cuba is also surprising for its lack of advertising. Really refreshing.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
complete and utter nonsense
randy_kay28 July 2012
It 'could' have been a good idea but he just blew it on every level imaginable. There seems to be a tendency these days for people to think that ANY documentary, no matter what it's about or who does it, is taking the high road. Well this charlatan just proved this is certainly not the case. I was really dubious when I saw his fast food documentary where he overstuffed himself like a foie gras duck just so he could make a documentary about SOMETHING, but now I am positive this guy is just grasping at straws to put out ANYTHING, anything at all. Watching him makes me think he probably saw Michael Moore and thought "Hey, I can do that and make a good buck" and then proceeded to make garbage docs like this one. Honestly, he should be on late night TV selling Sham Wows along with 'Vince'. After doing this piece of %^$#, that's probably where we'll see him next.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Advertising and entertainment go hand in hand!
blanbrn4 December 2011
The man Morgan Spurlock does it again he once again makes a true and informative, fun outrageous documentary that shows just how companies and corporate America really is. The message as seen here in "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" is that money is the main goal of company sponsors, and companies and corporate agencies go hand and hand with the entertainment industry and the movie business. It's interesting to see how all of it is a nice little greedy scratch your back you scratch mine monopoly. As it's so common when you watch your favorite TV shows, and see a big screen movie it's interesting to see the brands and products of companies that are often featured in them. As clearly it's today's media culture the showcase of these products thru film and TV and advertising leads to sales it's a must have society.

Fun and interesting with this doc, is seeing how Spurlock goes inside company boardrooms to see how far that a corporate agency will go to sponsor a film that he wants to make(that's the "Greatest Movie Ever Sold")that's the pitch and catch phrase put the advertising of my product in your movie if you will buy and do advertising for my brand also. Note worthy is the interviews with Hollywood directors saying how true it is that Hollywood entertainment and product placement advertising go hand in hand it makes the business go around. Overall interesting film that proves that business and company and corporate tie ins make the world go around in our media culture advertised driven world it's all about money and entertainment baby!
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It's not a movie
valleyjohn17 September 2011
Morgon Spurlock is the director famous for the documentary about McDonalds . This time he tackles the issue of product placement in the movies. By doing so he get's companies to pay for the making of this film by cramming it with their own product placement brands.

The problem i have is that this is not a film at all. It's not even a documentary really. It compromises itself from the start and therefore it has absolutely no cutting edge. Sure , it gives you some insight into what goes on with companies and how much they are willing to pay to get their products on screen but that is not enough to keep an audience engaged.

Spurlock has a likable air about him but I'm not convinced he is movie maker at all. The title should be reported to the trade descriptions people as it's not great and it's not a movie and i certainly never bought into it.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Great idea that gets a little lost in the delivery but is still solidly entertaining
bob the moo6 February 2012
I first heard about this film in one of the many interviews that Morgan Spurlock did for it – in my case ironically, it was on the radio, so his suit and his props were carefully mentioned on the BBC show. With a proved track record for quirky ideas behind documentaries, Super Size Me's Spurlock sets out to make a movie about the process of selling space inside films to advertisers (what is publicly known as product placement) but he funds it by selling space to advertisers. Indeed, this is an understatement because his film is actually the process of him selling this space – a concept that he struggles to totally explain to those he is selling the movie to (the movie that is being made at the time he explains what he will do/is doing). It is a very clever idea for a documentary and in construct it is the same as the gimmick behind Super Size Me.

Mostly it works well s an idea but the problems start coming in when you look for the film to be as informative and as engaging as Super Size Me was. The contrast between the impact of the two movies actually means it is easier for me to describe if I contrast the two. So with Super Size, Spurlock went on a journey (the gimmick) and this made up that part of his film, but all around this journey was input on the specific journey (the doctors) as well as plenty of facts and discussion about the wider topic (obesity and diet); the combination was good and effective. With Greatest Movie though, this combination doesn't really come off and we have far too much "journey" without enough documentary. It is an understandable failing perhaps because the film literally IS the journey so it is kind of achieving the documentary part while it goes on.

Problem for me was that by the end I felt I had just watched an amusing film about how Spurlock made the film by getting others to pay for it. Along the way it had told me little snippets about the process but it never has the impact that Super Size had in regards its subject – at times it feels like the film is so tied up with the process that it forgot it also needs to step back and look at it from the outside at the same time. This is the film's failing but it is not a killer because what remains is still an entertaining film. It is funny and knowing throughout even if opinion and commentary is not present. I laughed regularly and there is a certain absurdity to it, with Spurlock mocking the process while also engaging in it. The biggest irony (and perhaps part of the filing) is that Spurlock is actually really good at this – indeed the section with Ban Deodorant is painful to watch because he is so much better than that company's trio of marketing reps; he asks them to describe their product in terms of qualities and they stutter and stumble with nothing! Likewise his natural air within the ads is really good.

This is the joke then, and it is a joke that is mostly pretty amusing and interesting. It is a shame that the journey gets so much time and that the documentary aspect and message is rather lost in the delivery, but it does still work. The idea is better than the delivery here, but it still manages to be entertaining and quite engaging.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A movie turned inside out.
flyfermin20 September 2011
What Spurlock wants is to make you see the marketing machinery surrounding our lives. But to get into that machinery and show us how it works in a documentary he had to clear out the movie by selling it completely. There is something really hard to get from this movie that most of the reviews don't see. You never get to see the making off a movie IN the movie. This is an entirely "making off" movie, without the movie. This is a movie turned inside out. Thats the achievement. While we see him selling his movie for product placements, he is actually making it, bumping with contract limits and continuous moral and artistic dilemmas. And somehow, Spurlock made his way out to sell the movie and keep his integrity. So when the movie is about to start, he makes a time jump promoting the movie in talk shows, before the post-production. The movie goes back and forth between edges, from the discussion, interviews, and some statistics, to commercials. It's kind of hard to see at moments, actually. But the movie stands on its complexity, intelligence and great sense of humor.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Puerile and vacuous like the man himself
HaroldNaples19 June 2019
Morgan Spurlock like all of the other desperate Mickey Moore copycats, belongs on YouTube. No, he is not selling out, because there is nothing there to sell out of, just an empty suit and a handful of bad jokes. He is a social advocate in the same way that Tarantino is an advocate against violence. This "film" is a waste of time.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed