Choose one image/ad from the film and complete a brief analysis of it. Be sure to consider how your reaction and understanding of that ad is shaped by the way you encountered it. If applicable, be sure to talk about being able to watch the "construction" of the ad in the boardroom scenes for Ban, Sheetz, etc.
due 9/14
In the movie “The greatest movie ever sold” I think what stuck with me the most was how Morgan and the men of Sheetz came up with the cups that people would buy. It is such a ploy, it made me stop and wonder what things am I buying that have that kind of marketing ploys on it? What else becomes a hot commodity that people want to buy once they realize someone “important” is put with the product being sold. I think the company Sheetz is using pathos to have people buy their product. It is using people’s emotion of “I’ve got to have what he has” mentality that most people have now days. It is making people feel left out, if they do not have all four collectible cups with Morgan on it. It is using people’s emotions and fear to make them buy the four cups, that in all actuality they don’t really need. Also, logos is being used because with Morgan Spurlock behind the ad for Sheetz, he is giving them a certain credibility, and that Sheetz is trustworthy. Most of the time Morgan is exposing companies as untrustworthy, and trying to help consumers realize just what they are getting themselves into. So if he is endorsing something and saying it is good, then people will trust him and use those products because he is seen as unfailingly honest about what companies are good and what companies are bad. I thought it was particularly interesting that the men who represented Sheetz, constructed the ads by saying we want our product placed with Morgan when he is having a conversation with someone about advertising. They want their product in as many scenes of the movie as they can get, which is good for them because they are paying to be in the movie, but Morgan is talking about how companies always use product placement in films, and how it tricks people. Sheetz is doing exactly what the movie is talking about and explaining to consumers! They have creative ideas about the cups and product placement, they are just doing exactly what the movie is teaching people about!
ReplyDeleteThe scene that stuck in my mind during the film, “The greatest movie ever sold” was the scene where Morgan meets with the executives of Pom. After an initial great meeting with the same people, Morgan then discusses advertisement in the film. Morgan proposes three different commercials to the Pom executives, each idea that he pitches to the executives gets shut down and the executives give Morgan their ideas on how he should advertise their product. Each time Morgan wants to use his own kind of creativity and bring his own brand of comedy they shoot down his ideas. The executives at Pom then pitch their ideas, each idea that they give Morgan somehow puts a negative image on their competitors and strangles Morgan’s creativity in the movie. Morgan then has a moment where he is trying to decide whether or not he should conform to the executives or whether he should continue to do his own style. In his struggle with this idea he speaks with many Hollywood directors to see how they have dealt with the same compromises that he is now facing with his own movie. Many of the directors say the same thing that Morgan is thinking, too receive the finances and brand you must be willing to compromise, but also there comes a time when the film is more important than just selling a single brand and the directors had to continue on the creative path they had envisioned. Morgan also speaks with a man who deals exclusively with brand name companies and he provides services to see that the brand executives get what they want on the set of the films. The man goes on to tell a story about a time that a director would not change the script that was associated with a brand name and he then took the directors cars away from the set. This was a great scene in my mind because it gave you a look at the real Hollywood and world of advertisement, each brand is very protective and will stop at nothing too only administer the publicity that the executives want the brand to be associated with.
ReplyDelete“The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” showed great examples of how advertising is used throughout the media each and every day. The scene that really stood out to me was when Morgan met with the company, Sheetz. This company was really excited to get their name out there in front of an audience and advertise their products. Once Morgan told them the purpose of the movie and the story line that it would follow, the company was interested in seeing how their name would be involved. Next Morgan went through the slides of exactly how he would place the company’s name in to his scenes and they gave their opinions on whether or not they liked them. The company representatives really liked his idea of using their soft drink cups to be a main source of their advertisement. I completely agree with this idea because most customers are always going to buy a drink and when they do, the cups design will catch their eyes. I also feel that if a certain fast food restaurant is advertising for a movie it’s going to make the customers not only want to watch the movie, but also buy their “collector items”. This example is showing a lot of ethos being used for both the movie and the company that is advertising. The movie is getting good credibility because Sheetz chose to advertise for them and with them, while at the same time Sheetz is getting good credibility because Morgan chose to use them in his movie. I enjoyed the fact that we were able to see the construction of how the ads would be placed within the movie and it really showed how much companies try to get their brand names out there. A lot of times as the viewer, I hardly notice how much movies are promoting certain brands, and now I feel that I will be more aware. All together it’s kind of funny because the movie is talking about how much companies pay in order to get their name out there, and this is exactly what these companies are paying lots of money to be doing in this movie.
ReplyDelete“The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” showed multiple ways that advertising and product placement are incorporated into feature films. Sometimes you never notice the little things in movies, like a Dr. Pepper can here or an iPod there. This documentary points out how product placement makes it into movies and the process one goes through to be granted to use these products or company names in the final cut. The one particular scene in the documentary that grabbed my attention was when Morgan was meeting with the gas station company “Sheetz.”
ReplyDeleteAfter hearing Morgan’s pitch about how he would like to use their company name and products in his documentary, the company was thrilled to be involved. He explained to them how the “Sheetz” name would be placed all over the movie. Between him getting gas, eating the products, and even sticking his face on a “Sheetz” cup the company was sold on his ideas and agreed to participate in his documentary. Ethos is a rhetorical strategy used in this particular scene because “Sheetz” is a credible name brand that people all over the country recognize for not only their gas but their convenient store inside gas station filled with products. Also, Morgan is a credible source because of his past documentaries that people, even the “Sheetz” partners know and recognize.
Logos is another strategy portrayed in this scene because Morgan is showing how the different “Sheetz” products and the name brand will be featured throughout his film. He explains that every time he needs to fill gas it will be at a “Sheetz” gas station, or if he is having a conversation with some one that it will be held inside of a “Sheetz” eating their products. This can also be a cause and effect situation. A cause would be that Morgan needs to fill his gas tank and the effect is that he will be doing it at a “Sheetz” gas station. We see this later on when he is driving the Mini Cooper and filling the tank up at a “Sheetz.”
I never noticed how much detail was put into product placement in feature films. I have however noticed that products have been placed but now I know exactly how those products are incorporated into a film and the process it takes for directors to go through to pitch an idea to a company to be granted permission to use their product. Now I am sure I will be more aware of product placement in movies when I turn on a DVD or visit the movie theater.
Using a completely unique film idea, Morgan Spurlock makes a film about making a film. Though at first, “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” is slightly confusing to watch because the audience is unsure of whether this is behind the scenes or the actual movie, though after a while, it becomes apparent that it is both. Once this is understood, the message that the advertising agencies and product placement has almost more control over the film than Morgan himself is extremely apparent; it may even be infuriating if it was not for the satirical manner in which it is presented. All of these aspects create some extremely memorable scenes, though the most memorable is the first meeting with Pom Wonderful.
ReplyDeleteMorgan presents his ideas for advertising within his movie to Pom using the same rhetorical strategies to persuade the company to advertise in his movie that the company would generally use in an advertising campaign. More specifically, he uses a strong appeal to logos, as does the company. Morgan is specifically saying the ways the he plans to incorporate them, allowing them to make a logical decision as to whether or not it is worth the cost. Pom Wonderful uses this strategy when giving percentages of ingredients (100% pomegranate). Despite the logos, ethos is probably the biggest contributor to the rhetorical devices in this scene. The entire decision of whether or not to fund this film depends on the credibility of Morgan and whether or not this film would attract a large audience. In addition to Morgan’s credibility, the credibility of the company is shown with the concerns of their board. One woman commented that the reason they were attracted to the film was because of the transparency, which is how they aspire to do business. Using this principle in every aspect of their business, including advertising, shows immense credibility.
Seeing all of the behind the scenes work and how rhetoric is as much a part of selling as well as production and a tool for the message to be received well is extremely interesting because it shows that though we can examine rhetoric in a commercial, it is as much a part of every day life as it is a part of advertising.
To me, there is nothing more annoying or distracting than the blatant use of product placement. I feel that it detracts from the integrity of the piece. The fact that we were going to be watching a movie entirely supported and constructed with product placement ads was alarming to me, but I was oddly intrigued.
ReplyDeleteAs Morgan explains, due to the invention of DVR and TiVo, consumers are missing out on commercials that have supported the advertising industry for years. Product placement is creative technique that makes observing their product completely unavoidable. Due to the fact that product placement is so heavily utilized these days, I was shocked by how many companies turned down Morgan. The scene in which he received “no” after “no” stuck out vividly in my mind. How could all these companies be so adamantly against participation in this particular film, while they have no hesitation in others?
Morgan finally breaks through the realm of “no” and finds success with the deodorant brand “Ban’. He enters a conference room that is filled with bright green ‘Ban’ products which is the product placement concept at work. The Ban executives agreed to participate in Morgan’s film because they felt that their company shared several of Morgan’s personality traits.
As Morgan attempts to get a feel for the company he just agreed to promote, he asks the executives, “What is Ban. Ban is ___blank___.” A female executive responds, “Oh, good question” and the room is silent for several awkward moments. Finally, another executive exclaims, “Ban is superior technology” to which Morgan responds “That doesn’t sound like something you want to put in your armpit.” I can honestly say my mouth dropped as I observed this entire painful exchange. How can you, as a top advertising exec, not have a response for that!! I think of several adjectives that would be more than sufficient.
As a graduating senior, professors and advisors and parents have impressed upon me how important it is to be able to describe yourself in one word to reflect quickly on during interviews. After observing this scene, the same should be true about companies that you work for or represent. If you can’t describe what your company is all about, how will any one else be able to connect with you? Sure your fancy commercials, and bright brand colors will help, but it is equally important to find the one word that describes the basis of you mission as a company.
In “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold”, the audience is subjected on a wide array of ads, and images that implement rhetorical strategies. One scene that I found to be particularly memorable, was the one in which Morgan Spurlock attempts to find corporate sponsorship for his movie. In the scene, Spurlock tries to find sponsorship deals by making “cold calls” (unsolicited phone calls) to companies. His calls are presented in a “montage” style, making quick cuts from shot to shot, of Spurlock talking to representatives of several different companies. This montage style, clearly means to indicate that he called a huge number of companies. Segments of each of the conversations he has over the phone are all played one after another, often playing the exact same dialogue, coming from different company representatives. This is a clear use of the rhetorical strategy of logos, as it uses comparisons of the different conversations, to indicate that there is somewhat of a common mindset that permeates the corporate sector of America, almost universally.
ReplyDeleteAs the scene progresses, pathos is used, when a piece of high energy, symphonic music accompanies the shots of Spurlock talking on the phone. As time progresses, the volume, and speed of the music grows in intensity, as a way of making the audience experience a sense anxiety. The scene is made to seem frantic, because Spurlock is in dire need of corporate sponsorship in order to fund his movie, and it seems as though he will be unable to find any willing participants. This is also meant to create a sense of frustration in the audience, as they are hearing the exact same answers, to the exact same questions, over and over again. In some instances, the sales representatives of multiple companies use the exact same phrases, and jargon when they state their companies disinterest in the project. In other instances it is implied that the representatives are saying the same thing, as the scene is edited to have the dialogue from one conversation, finish the dialogue of another conversation in a logical way.
The whole idea of "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" is interesting in the sense that it opens up the private and cutthroat world movie advertising. Thus far, the scenes that stick out are the meetings with the POM executives. The initial meeting went really well for both parties and Morgan walked out with a million dollar sponsorship, but after that the relationship went a bit sour. Essentially, Morgan called what could happen once a company began to sponsor his film—said company would start to percolate through his original vision with their own ideas. This is exactly what POM did.
ReplyDeleteGranted, POM did put up a million dollars for the project, but that does not mean that they should control it. Morgan walked into the boardroom with three commercial ideas and each one was basically shut down by the execs. Not tweaked, not expanded but shut down. Honestly, his ideas were not that bad, but were not really appropriate for POM… its not that surprising that they shut them down. They do have their multi-million dollar company to look after and sometimes all it takes is a single mistake to bring such a company down. It would have been friendlier had they suggested tweaking Morgan’s ads, something along the lines of “instead of the double boobs lets do double XYZ”. This reality represents the logos of the scenes. Both parties are concerned about the well being of their company (or film), which means that each one is going to compare and contrast past mistakes and successes with this current undertaking.
These scenes were incorporated into the film to show the strain put on Morgan to be able to keep this project as personal as he could. This is the pathos appeal of this side story. By now, the audience has already formed an opinion on Morgan, positive or negative, and this setback is going to cause some sort of emotional response to formulate. Morgan’s own dejected response helps influences the audience’s response.
The ethos of these boardroom meetings is the clout that POM Wonderful carries in the health food world. They pretty much own the pomegranate market. Morgan’s credentials as a documentary film directory are once again either going to help or hurt him with his project. All in all, I believe that the struggles he is encountering are only a glimpse into what big budget pictures have to deal with; Morgan carries himself well throughout and follows all the channels. This fact makes the documentary much more believable, realistic and much easier for the audience to connect with him as a man facing a big project.
Personally, I feel sorry for Morgan. As we continue to watch the film, I’ll be rooting for him to regain control of POM’s sponsorship in “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold”.
The scene that stuck out to me from the “Greatest Movie Ever Sold” was the scene in the airport when Morgan is interviewing the executive about overexposure. I loved the part where a ton of things on the screen pop up and pretty much cover the screen. The premise is that companies use sensory overload to get consumers to want to buy their product without really realizing it. Although I think in this instance it was a tad overstated in the movie but in reality it’s also very true. The camera angle used for the scene is a straight wide shot of the two men sitting at a table in an airport (which is specified as a specific airport that is sponsoring the movie) talking about sensory overload.
ReplyDeleteI think the main rhetorical approach to this scene was ethos. There’s an establishment of credibility because the guy Morgan is interviewing is a professional in his field and one of the top advocators of alerting the public to the fact that they are being advertised to without their knowledge. There really isn’t an approach to using pathos because there’s not much of an emotional appeal; this scene is mostly informational. Finally the logos appeal is relevant because using the supporting evidence it becomes clear to the audience that the information being presented is true. Again using the graphic and the evidence provided by the person being interviewed, it proves to the audience that the sensory overload being displayed is what most people see watching daily television.
When I first saw this scene in the context of the movie I simply sat back and laughed at how well representative it was of the daily commercial. Even shows like CNN or Sportscenter do very similar things with sensory overload and although I was aware of it seeing it in this context just brought it to a brighter light.
The film “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” by Morgan Spurlock takes a look at how advertising is almost everywhere we look in today’s world. Throughout the movie he tries to get companies to sponsor his film. One of the scenes shows Morgan calling numerous companies in a video montage style scene. The montage shows him getting rejected by the huge companies: Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nike, etc.
ReplyDeleteHe finally is able to break through with companies such as Ban deodorant and Pom, a company that sells juice. During the meetings the companies agreed to be a part of his film, but Morgan had to advertise those products as much as possible.
One scene that stuck out to me the most was when Morgan was talking to a person outside, and on the table beside them was a stick of Ban deodorant. When I first saw it I laughed, because having deodorant outside on the table next to them looked ridiculous. But then I realized two things. One, even though Morgan wasn’t actually using the deodorant at that very moment, Ban still wanted him to show off their product as much as possible. Morgan had to by contract. The second thing was that it seemed like Morgan was trying to make a point. We see advertising whether, it be big or small, almost everywhere, even when it doesn’t fit the scene it’s in. In American Idol, every time they showed the judges evaluating the singer, you would always see their bright red Coca-Cola cups on the table in front of them. Coke has nothing to do with determining who the best singer is in America, but they knew it was a popular show, so they wanted the judges to have them. Just like American Idol, the scene Morgan is in has no place for deodorant, but Ban wants their product there so it can be seen. This was seen in all the “construction” meetings Morgan went to. Sheetz, Ban, Pom and others all wanted their product shown off as much as possible. And sure enough, almost every scene had Morgan drinking Pom juice, using or showing off Ban deodorant, and eating and getting gas for his car at Sheetz.
There are many different ways companies put out their advertisements, ways we would not even recognize. In the film “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” we see this a lot such as the Sheetz cups or the Pom being on the table in a lot of the movie scenes. That is what really stuck out to me, the products being on the tables “subliminally” or not so subliminally. In one of the scenes Morgan is talking to a man about the movie and there on the table was Ban deodorant. It stuck out because obviously no one would just have deodorant outside on his or her table.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that stuck out was when Morgan told Pom that they would be the only beverages to be shown in the movie. After this was said, every other beverage was blurred out and the Pom was so noticeable in a lot of scenes especially because it was the sponsor of the movie as well.
Also, when Morgan met with Pom and pitched his commercial he was going to do with them it seemed to me that they picked the funny one out of the commercials he pitched. This was somewhat interesting to me just because it was almost somewhat inappropriate and that is what they chose. Although, if you think about the commercials you see every day online or on T.V. the ones that will stick out to you more will most likely be the funny commercials. This is one reason people watch the Super Bowl, because they come out with the new funny beer commercials. I am sure though because they chose that commercial they will get a higher rate of business because the funny commercial will be more noticeable.
The premise of the film "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" was to gather as many sponsorships as they can to fund a movie. This is an attempt by Morgan Spurlock to show the ridiculousness and control that corporations have, even in the film industry. Throughout the video Morgan is constantly being rejected y larger companies who think that he is to much of a liability. Eventually he has breakthroughs and gathers various sponsors from a gas station, deodorant, and POM juice. Once he gets the sponsorships and develops contracts, you can see how companies manipulate the script or add things just so there product can have air time. This is done even when it is awkward or doesn't fit.
ReplyDeleteMorgan showed this forced advertising throughout the movie. One scene that stuck out was when he was on the bench talking to Brian Steinberg. I forget what credentials Brian had but he was talking to Morgan about how ridiculous plugs in movies are, and how the plugs are so obvious and almost offend the viewer. Meanwhile, Morgan is sitting there letting Brian talk about the offensiveness of obvious product placement while he chugs POM pomegranate juice. The way he was drinking it also was exaggerated in order to make the viewer aware of what is going on. Despite how adamant Brian was against obvious product placement, it seemed as though he had no idea Morgan was plugging POM right in front of him.
I think the rhetorical analysis this scene would fall under would be logos. I think logos applies to this scene for a couple reasons. First, the way Morgan set the scene up was somewhat analogous. He set it up so the man would talk about how bad and offensive obvious product placement is, yet he sat by as Morgan obviously drank POM. I think that he was using that to create a rational argument about how even though some can be anti-product placement, it happens all around us. It happens so often and so frequently that we usually have no idea we are being targeted through advertisement.
The scene from “The Greatest Movie Ever Sold” that stuck out to me the most was when Morgan Spurlock began making cold calls to brands to ask them about sponsoring his documentary. The reason this scene stood out to me as being impactful is because it shows just how hard it is for independent moviemakers and other small film companies to get funding and co-promotion from mainstream brands. Also, when they sped up the shots and placed more than one picture of him making a call on the screen, it enhanced the effect even more. The purpose of the film is to show the viewer the process of securing sponsors and co-branding in the movie industry. This scene aids that purpose by showing the difficulty Morgan had securing his first couple of sponsors and exposing the issue of why it is so much harder for small companies to gain sponsors than a major motion picture company.
ReplyDeleteThere is ethos present in this scene simply because Mr. Spurlock is a credible filmmaker. He has an obvious knowledge of the topic and has done intriguing and controversial documentaries in the past, which makes me want to watch this film from start to end just to see how he chose to portray the industry and how he made the film. There is pathos in this scene when the mini-pictures of him making cold calls are all on the screen at once at a quick speed. Seeing all these different calls being made and the realizing he still had no sponsors for his movie made me feel exhausted and sorry for him because he got his hopes up and was let down by so many different companies. I can't remember the exact words, but there is also pathos in the short lines that he says during this scene because they are intended to enhance the emotional response you get from the fast-paced scene. There is logos present in the scene because of the way the different pictures were arranged on the screen for the sped up part. At some points there was a few rows with a few pictures and at others there were many rows with many pictures in each. Finally, I think the fact that it was filmed in what looks like his office while he makes calls adds to the scene because it gives it a more professional and serious vibe. Normally, he is a very humorous person, which is why it was so impactful seeing him struggle to secure the sponsors and begin to feel the frustration of not getting any help.
The ad that I saw in the movie that kind of made me mad was the one where he held up his shoe and started pitching it to the lawyer. I get that he wears the shoes all of the time and he did do a good job building up the brand, but the timing was ridiculous. I understand that that was the whole point of that specific ad; it was meant to be random and obnoxious to play up the point of the movie. But I still think it was a bit overdone.
ReplyDeleteIt uses a great deal of logos because he walking all over the place in the film and he's wearing the shoes that he pitches so of course the audience is going to believe that the shoes are comfortable and wear well. The reason why I feel that the ad is a bit absurd is people are too busy giggling about the ad placement and how cheese-ball it is rather than actually paying attention to the brand or the product. I couldn't remember the brand of the shoe to save my life. I just remember him holding it up, saying something to up-sell it and then putting it back on.
For pathos, there really wasn't any talk about how comfortable the shoes were. Usually the actors use analogies to sort of draw the audience in and help them understand what the product will achieve if they buy it. For example, he could have walked all over Manhattan to these marketing firms and then at the end of his journey he says something like, “Thank goodness I wore my shoes from this brand today. My feet are so comfortable, I could do this all week.” This way the audience can relate walking all over God's green Earth and having achy feet; they will understand how comfortable he's suggesting they are.
As far as ethos, this is more of a jab at funny ad placement for the audience than ethos being applied to the actual product. It is demonstrating the convoluted process of advertising within a film and how obnoxious it can be; the audience feels that it is a bit restrictive. But there isn't any ethical dilemma brought up by the plug for the shoes. It's pretty straight forward; people have achy feet, wear these shoes.
This film, to me, covered a topic that is really prominent in modern society. More and more, we are seeing the use of product placement in movies, television, the internet, and even in our streets.Since this overuse of marketing is so routine and "normal" to us now, we either attempt to shut it out as much as possible, or allow it to consciously affect our decisions. Personally, I try to shut out these desperate cries from companies to buy their products, but there are times when it is admitedly difficult to not be affected by appealing advertising.
ReplyDeleteBecause we are all so familiar with these constant appeals for our attention, it is easy to forget just how much time and thought really goes into each of these advertisements. I was particularly drawn to the scene in this movie where Morgan meets with the executives of POM. The way that this company presented itself and protected its particular image reminded me of just how hard companies often work to portray themselves in a certain light and to get costumers to respect them for their distinct style.
For most of the companies that Morgan came in contact with throughout the movie, whether they ultimately agreed to do business with him or not, there was a certain skepticism radiating from the faces of the executives about whether or not Morgan would be able to portray their company in a positive light. This was perhaps due to both the nature of the film itself and Morgan's history of damaging the reputation of McDonald's in his film 'Super Size Me". Morgan has a particular "brand" of his own and if this was not in line with a company's particular style, he was quickly denied.
I found his meeting with the POM executives interesting because they seemed to be unique in the fact that they liked the transparency of the film, and felt that that was similar to what they try to represent themselves as:truthful, blunt, nothing to hide. This was a bold approach on their part because a lot of companies feared looking bad to the public for manipulating them with advertising. I personally find this outlook pretty offensive. Do companies really think their clients are stupid enough to not realize they are being brainwashed by advertising? How blind and completely out of touch with reality do they think we are?
I appreciated the way that POM recognized that it's viewers are smart enough to be aware of product placement in their lives. At the same time, POM was unwilling to compromise it's particular style of marketing itself in order to do one of Morgan's advertisements that didn't fit their image. I actually admired the way that this company seemed to have a real self-awareness and knew what they stood for, which was in stark contrast to companies like ban, who were not even able to describe what their product represented. If compnaies are going to shamelessly try to brainwash costumers with rediculous advertising, they should at least know what it is that they are advertising. They should also be willing to acknowledge that they are using advertising to affect the publics decisions, and not assume that their audience is unintelligent. I think this may have actually been a point that Morgan wanted to make with this film, and I think it was made successfully.