McLibel

2005 "The Postman and Gardener Who Took on McDonald's, and Won."
7.1| 1h25m| en| More Info
Released: 20 May 2005 Released
Producted By:
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://spannerfilms.net/mclibel
Synopsis

McLibel is a documentary film directed by Franny Armstrong for Spanner Films about the McLibel case. The film was first completed, as a 52 minute television version, in 1997, after the conclusion of the original McLibel trial. It was then re-edited to 85 minute feature length in 2005, after the McLibel defendants took their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Cast

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

Reviews

Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...
Cooktopi The acting in this movie is really good.
Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...
Homogeek McLibel could have been an underdog story, but film makers had a different agenda. Morgan Spurlock (Supers Size Me) and Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 911) know how to make a documentary entertaining and still get their point across. You may disagree with the filmmakers but it is all-consuming watching the filmmaker unfold the argument in front of you. A more descriptive title would have been 'Greenpeace vs. McDonalds'. Franny Armstrong and the London Greenpeace folks shot for the publicity and controversy. McLibel (read Greenpeace) makes some valid points: • in the UK when you go to trail you get legal representation unless if it is a libel case then you are on your own. Since large corporations have so much in resources ($$$) everyone will just apology rather than face an expensive court battle. • McDonalds and other large corporations use their power and money to affect our buying habits through our children. • Many corporations underpay their worker. However there is no counter-point. The movie spent 83 minutes explaining and fighting what is wrong with society but as far as a solution: 2 minutes to say approximately:'mega corporations are evil. We believe individuals should be making their own decisions on what products and services should be made available.' I see this as a radical stand and I am not sure how Greenpeace actually envisions this utopia. Are they suggesting that everyone should grow their own vegetables like one of the protagonist? Should society be sourcing commercial goods locally? Should we constrain advertising so we eliminate the 'push' market and end up with a 'pull' economy? All of these are a radical change in society. Sorry Greenpeace, there are things I dislike about our society but a socialist reform is not the answer. (6 people found this review helpful.)
roystonv That's the point. They won - despite the odds. And when that is no longer the basis for an interesting film then we might as well all give up. Whether you agree with their politics or not, the stand they took, the obstacles they faced and the dirty tricks pulled by Maccas make this the perfect subject for a documentary. What bugs me most about the people who are on here criticizing this movie is the line that these "do-gooders" are profiting from this movie's release. Unlike people like you, making money is not the only motivation in this world and if you saw this film, you'd realise it is way down the list of priorities for these two people. Sometimes just getting the message out is the most important part. But I guess that wouldn't even occur to some people.
Theo Robertson ... More of a quest featuring a camcorder and people with an axe to grind Dave Morris and Helen Steel hit the headlines circa 1990 when after taking part in a leaflet campaign outside a London branch of McDonalds they found themselves on being sued for libel and this tells their story over several years of their quest to find " justice " Now if this was an objective documentary I would have perhaps found admirable things about it but it's not objective at all or even subjective - It's polemical opinion featuring two people with an axe to grind against a corporate company that's fashionable to bash and seems more interested in having people the average Joe have never heard of stating nonsense . Take Eric Schlosser ( Someone who's written a book on McDonalds hence it makes him some sort of expert ) who tells us that " McDonalds is deliberately designed to control workers and offer them as little creativity and intuitive as possible " ! Forgive me for pointing this out but if someone is paid to flip burgers and clean tables then why should they be encouraged to have a creative side ? If it's creativity they wanted maybe the could have joined the Lee Strasburg Acting School or have gone to University to study literature ? If you work in a cafe you have to do the exact same kind of work except for some reason this doesn't bring out the anger in Schlosser . Apparently according to him it's only McDonald workers who have pulled the short straw in life since they're not allowed union membership ( Again many companies of whatever industry do not allow union membership ) and have to do boring tedious work . Wow I thought people only worked for the money And this is typical of the arguments put forward by Schlosser , Morris and Steel - They're not wide reaching arguments at all . Yeah I agree that a high fat /high sugar junk food diet that McDonald sells isn't too healthy but is it actually cancer causing ? - This was the claim that almost certainly caused McDonalds to sue the pair - and for some reason no one in McLIBEL makes the point that McDonalds isn't the only fast food chain selling this type of junk food , several other similar fast food chains sell more or less the same stuff . Did they protest outside these fast food chains ? Perhaps the most cogent point is that no one is actually forced to eat at McDonalds and this fact is conspicuous by its absence .I guess the whole concept behind McLIBEL is that the audience will cheer that Morris and Steel eventually won the case against a corporate giant but only if you agree with the duo's politics . We're asked to empathise with the self righteous Morris and Steel but my own feeling is that haven't done anything heroic and are in fact just self seeking publicists . At least SUPERSIZE ME was entertaining despite the flaws . There's little entertainment to be found in McLIBEL
bob the moo A long time ago there was a company that made lots of money by selling bits of meat between two bits of bread. Many people were employed to put the meat between the bread and many animals were killed to be the meat. A friendly clown persuaded children to love the company. Some decades passed and all was well. The company became very, very rich. Richer even than many countries. And then some people wrote in their newspapers than eating lots of the meat and bread could make people ill. Other people said on television that too many trees had been cut down and that the workers were unhappy. This made the company very angry. The company looked around the world and saw that in England there was a special law that could stop people saying things the company didn't like. And make them say sorry.It is with the above text (delivered in a Star Wars fashion) that this film starts with – pretty much immediately helping you work out if your politics and sense of humour are in the right place to be part of the target audience for this documentary. The story of the film is famous now; basically in the early 1990's McDonalds took libel cases against many people who had spoken out against them – papers, television channels, pressure groups, generally media groups and the like. Drawing retractions from the majority of them, McD's was very happy with the UK system and set about going after other targets. David Morris and Helen Steel were volunteering with Greenpeace as part of their belief in environmental activism, part of which was handing out a pamphlet "what's wrong with McDonalds" outside the outlets and telling the "truth" about the company. When they got served with a libel writ from the company, some of their group apologised and retracted but Helen and David said no and started to defend themselves against a team of very expensive lawyers retained by McD's. The film documents their case and then the action that they took in the European Court of Justice years later.Having been made over the whole ten year period (rather than looking back) the film is gripping and really involves you in the story. The case is boiled down to the essence and it is made surprisingly fluid and exciting as a result. The dramatisation of the courtroom scenes feels a bit cheap but still works – although it doesn't help that Morris, despite being natural and himself across the rest of the film, comes across as wooden and "acting" in these bits. The bias in the presentation is there of course and if you disagree with them then this isn't the film for you. However, I saw them both as rather pretentious hippy sorts but yet I was still able to get behind them, learn the lessons and be inspired by them. And really "inspiration" is the film's main strength because their story is amazing and it totally flies in the face of those who say "what difference does it make if I etc etc"; I still think that individuals are limited in day to day life but when the chips are down, if you can stand your ground it is possible to make a difference.Alongside this, the target audience will love the anti-Corporation thing. I'm not a protester or anti-Capitalist but it is satisfying to watch McD be taken down a peg – even more so now that we have spent the last year or so watch them start to lose ground, lose profits and many of the McLibel accusations be backed up over and over by many sources, to the point that most viewers will totally agree with the "lies" that Morris and Steel were telling. Ideal viewing alongside the equally important (but a lot less serious) Super Size Me, this is a great documentary that makes up for the low budget feel by being gripping, entertaining and inspiring.