MovieChat Forums > The Greatest Movie Ever Sold (2011) Discussion > Apple product placement?

Apple product placement?

posted 13 years ago by hunk-1
4 replies | jump to latest

OK, I realize the irony in discussing product placement in a movie that talks about product placement that was funded by product placement.
So please keep any witty responses to yourselves.

What I want to ask is if you think that Apple gave even a single dollar for the funding of the movie.
The reason I'm asking is because Apple is mentioned when Morgan gets his results from his "Brand Personality" test,and the logo is seen in a close up.
Also when he is talking to Mane & Tail the shot begins with him rotating the laptop so we can see the screen, and not the logo. But it could have easily started from when the screen was already rotated since he hadn't placed the call yet.

I just think that that was one of the many times that he tried to use product placement without drawing attention to it.
Sort of a game with the audience if you know what I mean.After watching the movie and hearing about product placement can you watch it again and spot the ones we didn't tell you?

[–] BigRich 13 years ago

No, I wouldn't think they paid anything, just as much as McDonald's didn't pay anything but you seen the M logo in Time Square and the Ronald McDonald caricature several times in Morgan's home, or that there was a Shell logo on his nude poster (and several references to the 7-11 stores as well).

There's a certain point where products end up getting free advertising, like when the POM CEO talked about Minute Maid (and then later when Morgan did the POM commercial featuring Minute Maid). IMHO, Minute Maid got more air time and exposure than Apple.

I myself wondered if it was a violation on one of those advertising contracts when he got into the Cadillac Escalade towards the end of the movie, as he wasn't supposed to be in any vehicle but a Mini (but maybe they got around this because of he wasn't driving the Cadillac).

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

[–] hunk-1 13 years ago

Well, regarding the Minute Maid juice, I don't think it got any good publicity because if you recognize it from the movie you probably remember that it was 98% percent NOT pomegranate juice,therefore not buying it.

As for McDonald's it would be impossible to convey the feeling of being over-advertised in Times Square if every company that didn't pay had it's logo blurred out.It would have been literally just a blur.
And I honestly can't recall Ronald in Morgan's home.

What was a violation by Spurlong was that he read out loud the reply from Volkswagen and then later on said "I'm glad I'm not driving one of those *beep* Volkswagen cars" when the company said it wanted nothing to do with the movie.

Finally regarding the poster.A movie's budget is not just what it takes to shoot it,but is also the marketing cost.Think Kevin Smith's Clerks for instance.It cost a lot more to market it that it did to shoot it.
So if Shell has actually seen a cut of the film, and thinks it's a good investment to get it's logo on Morgan's chest then why wouldn't they?The point Morgan was trying to make is that a movie is constantly sold,even after it has been shot.
So I doubt the companies that ended up in the poster didn't pay anything.

And to get back on the Apple thing, I just found it weird that the shot of the computer started like that.it was like Morgan going "I don't get money from Apple,so I better hide their logo" when it was clearly seen.And it only drew attention to it.

[–] michaeljburnside 12 years ago

The Ronald Macdonald characiture was nothing to do with maccas though that was his mascot from supersize me

There are things that go bump in the night and we are the ones that bump back

[–] j24r 13 years ago

I think it would have been funny Spurlock had blurred out the Apple logo and any other logos of non-sponsors that were highly visible in the final cut.