Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price (2005) User Reviews

Brave New Films pushes our buttons

[dlfagan · 7/10 · 18 November 2005]

I had a generally low opinion of WalMart before, and Brave New Films' documentary only made them seem worse, but I still have questions. WM is well known for persistent, and often illegal, anti-union activity, which is reported in this film. WM is also known for beating down prices, which is not reported. I didn't know that WM has high turnover, or that many stores are purposefully under-staffed.

The sad stories of the losing competitors do not sway me. Mom and Pop operations of all kinds have been giving way to big box operations for many decades. Olive Garden killed my favorite local Italian restaurant, Lowe's is killing my favorite local hardware store and a planned Home Depot will finish the job. That is just competition in the developed world.

What annoyed me were the subsidies and tax breaks that WalMart manages to get from localities. In one case a WM is shown skipping across the town line, abandoning the subsidized big box stores, just before their sales taxes kick in. But more annoying was a lack of perspective: How many big chains and franchises get subsidies? If many do, that would be the logical counter-argument, so I'd like to have gotten the information.

I was also annoyed that WM employees were on public assistance of some kind, but again: How common is this in retail? Do KMart employees get a lot of public assistance? Or not? Apparently there is a lot of crime in WM parking lots. Is there less crime in Walgreen lots, or more? Brave New Films doesn't say. WM sells products from Chinese sweatshops. Hey, even I know they aren't the only ones. WalMart's habit of stockpiling lawn products in the parking lot often leads to toxic runoff, but they aren't the only ones that do that, either.

I still think that WalMart is a very bad employer, and now I know how much of a drain they are on the local economy, but I think Brave New Films failed to demonstrate whether WalMart is all that much worse than the other businesses on the strip, or simply the biggest of a bad lot. Either way, that would be good to know.

"Store Wars" redux: A corporate cancer that feeds on America

[roland-104 · 8/10 · 22 November 2005]

Robert Greenwald, a hard-hitting political activist documentary filmmaker ("Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism," "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War"), comes out swinging in this incisive exploration of the retail marketing behemoth.

This film is the perfect sequel to Micha X. Peled's documentary, "Store Wars: When Wal-Mart Comes to Town," shown on PBS in 2001. That film focused on a single community, Ashland, Virginia, showing the strategies Wal-Mart used to buy its way in, essentially bribing the town council, strapped for cash for urgently needed civic projects, and the extensive though in the end ineffectual efforts of townspeople to stop the building of a W-M superstore in their town. Two of the worst blights caused by Wal-Mart, unfair labor practices and the killing off of long established small businesses that had been the backbone of the community, are highlighted.

Greenwald picks up where "Store Wars" left off, looking at other worrisome aspects of the Wal-Mart movement through a broader, nationwide lens. We learn that because staff wages and benefits are so pitifully meager, thousands upon thousands of Wal-Mart employees in numerous states qualify for and regularly receive benefits from public assistance programs, even as they work. What's worse, Wal-Mart capitalizes on this phenomenon in the most cynical possible manner. As a matter of company policy, stores offer detailed advice to employees on how to access government benefits! We taxpayers are shouldering the financial burden Wal-Mart shirks: like employees, we too are unwitting pawns in a master corporate strategy.

Meanwhile, we see proof that Wal-Mart - after exacting multi-year tax concessions as part of sweetheart deals some communities make to attract stores (the opposite of the situation that was described in Ashland, Virginia) - will actually relocate a store to land barely outside the town boundaries just before tax breaks are scheduled to end, leaving a useless hulking shell of a building and zero local tax obligations behind them forever.

We learn about Wal-Mart's approach to unionization efforts. There is a specialized managerial swat team based at W-M headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas. When news arrives that significant union organizing activity has begun at a particular store, the following day the union-busters are dispatched in a company Lear jet. The local store manager is reassigned and one of the team takes over. The others work to identify union activists and arrange for their swift dismissal. We also get more evidence, in case anybody needs it, about unfair labor practices. W-M defines full time employment as 28 hours/week, and often forces employees to work "off the clock" to get tasks achieved without providing any overtime pay.

We also learn about the cavalier stance W-M has on crime. Millions are spent on in-store video monitoring to prevent theft of goods. But it's a different story out in the vast and often poorly lit Wal-Mart parking lots. Here, nationwide, huge numbers of assaults, robberies, rapes and other crimes take place. Guess how much W-M spends for parking lot surveillance? You're right: nada, even when pushed and after agreeing to pay for regular patrols of lots, which make a huge positive difference, W-M often drags its feet in implementing reforms.

This film, like other Greenwald films, is skillfully crafted. He shows us a lot of talking heads, but not the usual suspects, i.e., the experts. Instead the heads are those of small business owners, their spouses, families and employees. And former Wal-Mart employees, including some who had held key managerial positions for nearly 20 years, real former insiders. We meet these people on their own turf. The wife of one businessman talks to us in her kitchen, ironing clothes all the while. It is a highly viewer-friendly approach to interviews.

We also get statistics, usually in small, digestible batches, but sometimes in large amounts presented too rapidly to fully take in. A problem with a number of the interviewees' assertions and other material presented as factual is the lack of corroboration or presentation of other viewpoints. But this is in the nature and tradition of propagandistic documentaries. Such films rarely tell "THE" truth; rather, they tell "A" truth, a particular slant on important matters, what filmmaker Werner Herzog has called "ecstatic truth," or essential truth.

Greenwald has taken a grass-roots approach to distributing this film. Rather than seek out conventional big screens, he arranged for an Internet approach to recruitment of individuals and groups to host DVD screenings in a huge variety of settings, all in the same week. Churches, NGOs, university campus venues, some theaters, you name it. My wife and I saw the film at a private home in our area along with 10 other people, all arranged via the film's website.

As long as consumers think only of their own bottom line – buying everything they want at the absolute lowest price every time, never connecting the dots between low price, lousy service, substandard employment conditions, financial drains on the public sector, and the loss of fondly recalled small businesses - Wal-Mart will continue to eat away at our culture, parasitically suck away on our national nutrient resources, all the while building up its corporate treasures into a war chest to combat any and all challenges to its destructive excesses. There's no end in sight. My rating: 7.5/10 (low B+). (Seen on 11/18/05). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites.

While, it's not a perfect documentary. For what's it worth, it was very informative, even if the film was a bit biased against telling the good things about Walmart

[ironhorse_iv · 7/10 · 11 May 2017]

Almost everyone in the United States has to a certain extent, shop at Walmart, once in their life. So, many of them, heard of the many jokes and complains about the retail company retail-company, that owner Sam Walton have founded, and turn into a multibillion corporation. However, not a lot of people is unaware of full extent of the negative effects of its business practices on populations around the world. This documentary's job is to expose that. Without spoiling the movie, too much, I have to say, while, I can understand, where director Robert Greenwald & his Brave New Films crew was trying to say with this film. I felt that the documentary's arguments wasn't really told, well. There is not one main narrator in this film, but rather countless amount of people interviewed, whom lives were affect from the presence of the corporate giant. Because of this, I felt that, the movie jump around, way too much. One minute, they would be, talking about how Walmart has a negative effect on mom and pop stores and small communities. Only to cut into how Walmart overworks & underpays its workers to the point, that many employees couldn't afford their own health insurance, causing many of the employees to seek government programs, like Medicaid instead. Only to further jump, how Wal-Mart hiring undocumented workers for their cleanup crews, paying them well below minimum wage, only to stop talking, about undocumented workers, and then back to employees, again, talking about Wal-Mart's anti-union practices, and its poor record on worker's rights in the United States. Then, back to the negative effects on local economy, follow up on a story about sweatshop workers, and then back to talking about Walmart, with this time, talking about crime. Where is the pattern, here? The informative felt a little too spread out & all over the place. They also missing some, like the allegations of predatory pricing and supplier issues. Anyways, I guess, the actual video clips of Walmart's commercials, combine with then-CEO's H. Lee Scott exalting the virtues of the company in employee meetings and speeches were supposed to be, the structure. However, it felt, more unarranged & confusing, then orderly. It doesn't help that the film's lousy quick editing, makes all of it, look so choppy. It's also sad, that the pacing is a bit off, because the film doesn't always immediate rip it apart through its style in branching into a particular perspective to back up the rebuttal. Instead, it goes on with some stories for a little too long. The International story about the sweatshops felt like, a different movie, because of that. Another bad thing about this movie is how much, they repeat themselves. You get a lot of repetitive rhetoric on how bad, Walmart is, for the employees, but never, any of the good things. In truth, Walmart isn't as evil as this film, makes it out to be. Honestly, if the movie did some fact checking, they would realize that Walmart does do charities, despite Sam Walton's claim that the company will never be a charity business. For example, in 2005, Walmart donated US$20 million in cash and merchandise for Hurricane Katrina relief. Today, Walmart's charitable donations approach US$1 billion each year. They also help pay for any environmental or criminal damages to any victim that came to their store. Added to that, the company was praised for expanding its anti-discrimination policy protecting gay and lesbian employees, as well, as minorities. Walmart also plays employees, a lot more, than the federal minimum wage at the time & continue to do that, even today. They also give bonuses to every full and part-time hourly worker, who works for their company. While, it's still low, it's better off, than other retail businesses like Mom & Pop stores. Also, while, it's true, that WalMart does have strong anti-union imperative within the company history. It did announced that it would allow workers at all of its Chinese factories to become members of trade unions, and that the company would work with the state-sanctioned All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) in helping workers' rights. So, it's possible that a US version of this, is on the way: despite claims that prices would skyrocket, if it did. About the Walmart's high understaff and turnover rate as evidence of an unhappy workforce, the truth is that, there are several other factors that lead up to that, besides outing anybody who wants to set up a union. Most of it, comes from the fact that American consumers habits are always shifting. More and more consumers are using online commerce, due to time and location. Then, there is the logistics issues, the supply and demand of the area, and population. Any of these factors, can cause the reductions in sales. Due to this, many retailers, including Walmart, reduce staff, or replace jobs with self-servicing machines. There is also the fact, that most Americans knows that blue collar jobs like retail is every so changing, that they just want to work, part-time for a quick buck, until they can gain the skills, through education for a more administrative setting job or for the elderly, have enough money to retired. About the claims that Walmart destroy small towns. In truth, any technology advances can hurt a town. Good examples are the development of the highway, railroads, and shopping malls. Call me, harsh, but small towns just have to adapt to the ever-changing market. If you need somebody to blame. Don't blame WalMart, blame the system in which, they triumph in. Wal-Mart's growth is the natural end result of capitalism, and demonizing Wal-Mart is unfair, when other successful businesses, does the same. Overall: It's hard for an objective viewer like myself to ignore the obvious. Walmart is a catch-22 situation. It's has good things and bad things about it. In all fairness, I just felt the documentary should reflect that, more.

Wal Mart Pays Disgustingly Compared to Costco

[SCronin123 · 18 November 2005]

There are some "viewer posts" on this site that are fake. Someone at WalMart's rapid response team is posing as a Wal Mart employee, and providing facts regarding how wonderful Wal Mart is.

One fact I know is that COST PLUS pays its employees a respectable wage, and WAL MART does not. In one study, WAL MART's SAM'S CLUB STORE was found to pay its employees A $11.52 per hour, while COSTCO paid its employees $15.97, 40% Less. (Source: Business Week Online April 12, 2004)

Note: I am NOT associated with any business, labor group, political party, association, or group of any kind. I'm just sick of WAL MART paying its employees disgusting wages, and then paying politicos big money to provide RAPID RESPONSE PUBLIC RELATIONS sound bites, attempting to defend the indefensible. They should start by not lying about who them are, when they post submissions on IMDb.

Worthwhile film, but a bit clunky...

[dzagar · 7/10 · 15 November 2005]

Another strong message by Robert Greenwald of "Outfoxed" fame. Similar to that doc, however, it is a quickly done, and somewhat less than fully polished film. Too shticky at times, it occasionally comes close to a parody of propaganda films, especially when dealing with the lives of Chinese workers. However, there are some moving portrayals of those affected by Walmart, including former employees, and some powerful testimonials by former management who feel betrayed by a company they gave their loyalty to.

I was most shocked by some facts about the Walton family, who are some of the richest people on the planet, and apparently some of the stingiest. You'd think they'd be more generous just for to get positive P.R., even if they couldn't care less about "the little people". For a more sober depiction of the Walmart phenomenon, I also recommend the Frontline documentary "Is Walmart Good for America".

By-the-Numbers Effort...

[ReelCheese · 6/10 · 8 September 2006]

There is a case to be made against Wal-Mart, but this cheaply made, by-the-numbers effort doesn't do it in a very interesting way. WAL-MART: THE HIGH COST OF LOW PRICE is not so much a documentary as it is unabsorbing propaganda. At least when Michael Moore presents something ridiculously slanted, he's entertaining about it.

Still, this (presumably) low-budget effort does have its moments, from the emotional closure of a family hardware store to the insight from former employees of the big "W". But it's hurt by its lack of rebuttal to the many good things say about Wal-Mart. If the anti-Wal-Mart arguments are so strong, why not bring in a dissenting voice and try to prove why he's wrong? Lefty director Robert Greenwald apparently saw no reason to bother because when you're right, you're right. By the way, this film is unlikely to change your opinion of the retail behemoth.

Must See, Important Message

[susan-225 · 10/10 · 18 November 2005]

I saw this tonight in a screening at our local community college with the producer present. It was a huge, standing room only crowd, and it was clearly a hit with the viewers. Producer Robert Greenwald uses an interesting device of running a rah-rah speech of WalMart's CEO at a company meeting, with the CEO bragging about all of WalMart's great policies towards employees, the environment, customers, etc., alternated with clips of dozens of ordinary people testifying to quite the opposite. The stories of small town businesspeople having to close their family stores were especially poignant, as well as the interviews with exploited overseas workers in Walmart's sweatshops. Even one of the company's plant inspectors said he just cried when he went back to his hotel after his first inspection.

Full of astounding facts about the true costs of WalMart, the over two billion dollars it has cost US taxpayers in subsidies, welfare programs for underpaid employees, etc. It became very clear that, whether or not you shop there, it's costing you money, money that's going right into the pockets of the Walton family. It's costing all of us our way of life.

Quite an eyeopener. I, for one, plan to never patronize WalMart again.

more activism than documentary, but still worth a watch...

[slurm23 · 7/10 · 12 March 2006]

as i really liked greenwalds first documentary "outfoxed" i had high hopes for this one as well. to put it bluntly - the movie is overedited, overly sentimental and some 20 minutes too long. overedited as in too many cuts and fact-bits suggesting a more dynamic development than there is to expect (lets face it - walmart has been doing this kind of business for quite some time now).. overly sentimental as in too many people crying and a somewhat misleading selection of probably the worst possible experiences with walmart out there. about 20 minutes too long as in mentioning the poor working conditions in large parts of the world, without elaborating enough on it – that is a whole different movie and deserves to be told separately...

all things considered the movie contains way too much activism and too little documentary. the subject is most interesting and the movie has its merits also, but in my opinion it should be enough to plainly state the facts and let them speak for themselves. in that department "outfoxed" did a better job by far. still this movie is well worth a watch! it does manage to illustrate some of the issues caused by the business practices of walmart and the ramifications for ordinary people. just keep in mind that the presentation could and probably should be more objective in order to avoid partisan film-making – even more so since greenwald would have a solid case even without resorting to such techniques.

for those who aren't afraid to look

[jasonbednarz · 9/10 · 20 November 2005]

if you have concerns about the corporate structure and its inherently psychopathic nature (profit at any cost), this movie should pretty well confirm your suspicions and make us all realize that if this system plays itself out to its logical end, it is not going to be a pretty picture....unless, of course, your name is Walton and you have your own personal underground nuclear shelter/compound. Either the corporate world will beat us all into submission or the next great revolution will take place against it... it will of course be up to us all to decide which. A nice compliment to this movie would be the Corporation, which really delves further into the issues of the nature of corporations and how they have become the exact opposite of what they were intended to do in the first place, which was to serve the PUBLIC good.

A little less than compelling

[Hodne428 · 7/10 · 21 December 2008]

This was not a bad documentary by any means. Excellent points about subversive business practices were brought up and explored. The problem I had, of which others seem to agree, is that it focused so much on walmart and walmart only. True they are a little more well known than most for these sorts of subversive business practices as I have said, but they are clearly not the only company doing them. This makes the film come off as a little overly bias and, in my opinion, takes away from its credibility. Perhaps the documentary would've been better off not focusing so much on walmart and looking at the bigger picture. At times it simply seems like they're grasping at straws.

Overall, however, a solid documentary worth your time if not your money.

Important Subject, Ham-Handed Presentation

[phantoboy · 4/10 · 16 July 2006]

I'm a liberal, anti-big-bully-business bleeding heart. Nobody dislikes Wal-Mart, and the amoral, vicious corporate attitude of which they certainly are the apotheosis, more than I. So I was more than a bit disappointed to discover that this film wasn't made for me and my well educated friends, nor does it invite its perhaps less well versed viewers to think fully and carefully about the issues from the ground up. It is a hammy, manipulative, awkward screed, that takes an important issue and shoves it through the left-wing version of a right- wing low brow attack ad.

The pacing is clumsy. The editing is herky-jerky, the real-life victims are presented in a mawkish, stereotyped fashion, the music is jarring, syrupy, preachy, melodramatic and frequently too loud to hear the simultaneous dialogue. The fragments of conversation with interviewees are sometimes hard to decipher - expressed in sentence fragments and mumbling disconnection. The statistics are too often presented without adequate context, without appropriate reference points for comparison. An isolated total dollar amount or employment number is not revealing without some reference data, and that is most often missing here.

All I can think is that the producers want to appeal to the right-leaning, flag waving, rural America crowd by pushing all the buttons that the new GOP does, to get their atavistic outrage going and impel them "into the streets" - instead of appealing to the sober intelligence they actually can display when given a fair chance and a dignified explanation of the facts. It is, ultimately, a shallow and condescending film.

With our allies imitating the worst tactics of our adversaries, what are we to say? Well, for one, see the "Frontline" documentary. Then "hit the streets."

trust me

[bogiehead1 · 9/10 · 5 November 2007]

Trust me, I work there; they have---if you can believe it---gotten WORSE for the workers. They recently (within the last 2 months) changed our dress code---no hats (not so bad), everybody has to wear a blue clone shirt (a little bit worse), no more vests (so we have find other ways to carry the tools required for our job), and, just a couple days ago, no radios on the floor, which have been allowed ever since I started working there over 2 years ago. Also, within the last 2 months (this is the worst), they have decided we need to be to be timed on how long long it takes the stockers to work their freight. I mean, c'mon already, this is WAL_MART---not Ford Motor Company!!! If you want me to do piece work, then pay me piece work rate, not less than $10 an hour. Yup, Wal*Mart's lowering prices, alright---lowering the price they pay their employees (oops, sorry---ASSOCIATES).

A typical look at big corporate greed.

[blanbrn · 7/10 · 21 November 2011]

Sure Wal-Mart is everywhere especially it has populated small town America from coast to coast and just about everyone has fell in love with everyday low prices always low prices. Yet as this documentary proves it comes at a price! As Robert Greenwald exposes and shows the dirty side of a big corporate outfit that's dirty and they will do anything to make a profit. Yet still Wal-Mart claims to be champions of the community and fighters for the little people, but as you see example by example and step by step in this film low prices come at a high cost.

Most telling is how low that Wal-Mart pays it's employees, as many can't even afford health insurance and disturbing is seeing how Wal-Mart only allows so many hours during a work week, and they will run short to finish jobs even making workers do overtime yet still the company will turn in false time to make a profit. It clearly does not live up to it's commercials Wal-Mart is not a great place to work.

The biggest problem with Sam Walton's empire is how that when his stores move into little town U.S. they put out your local mom and dad stores that have tradition. As Wal-Mart offering everything at a lower price puts out the community special stores. Also of a note is how the building of new Wal-Marts destroy valuable and precious land of historical towns. And Wal-Mart doesn't seem to be worried about security as evidenced by it's history of crime on store property as the security cameras actually watch inside on the store employees who are trying to organize unions! That's another big negative with Wal-Mart they are so anti union and seeing the shocking footage of how their toys are made in China wakes a person up and it showcases that Wal-Mart is a business of corporate greed and dirty money they will expose a worker for profit. Yet as the film closes out their is hope many bigger towns are fighting to ban Wal-Marts from coming to their towns, by voting against the building of them at the ballot box. So I guess democracy still works. Overall this is a pretty eye opening film about Wal-Mart it will make you think before shopping with them again as low prices come at a high cost for most involved.

Some interesting segments, but mostly a very one-sided hit piece

[lori-143 · 3/10 · 4 February 2006]

I was eager to see this documentary, especially since I've liked other of Robert Greenwald's films, and I was terribly disappointed with its poor quality and one-sidedness. This movie can hardly be called a documentary, because it's so blatantly biased. I do not like Wal-Mart and haven't shopped there for years, but I believe its story can be told without resorting to such obvious manipulation. I agree that Wal-Mart has hurt many of the communities where its superstores have been built, and most of the film's segments reflect this. Although some of these segments were truly eye-opening, many of its points merely repeated the same assertions in what felt like a heavy-handed way. Also, the film draws a number of spurious conclusions. For example, would the money spent to subsidize new Wal-Mart stores in some communities have been earmarked for education in the absence of Wal-Mart? The film presents no real evidence that it would. Along with its polemical content, muddy sound quality during some segments and poor organization overall added to my opinion that this is one of the worst documentaries I've ever seen.

Frontline offers a much better Wal-Mart documentary, "Is Wal-Mart Good For America?" which presents the issues in a much better organized, less manipulative way.

Wally world

[wrlang · 6/10 · 22 July 2006]

This documentary shows us how the Walton's business practices affect American jobs and how too much power is a bad thing for some while a good thing for others. The important thing to know is that EVERY company's main goal is to generate wealth and massive companies like Wal-Mart have a huge impact on our lives and livelihoods. That workers will always be the most expensive part of any business, but forcing them into poverty will help no one. I'm sorry most of us did not take the buy American campaign as seriously as we should have. We have only ourselves to blame as it is now almost impossible to get an all American product. I know people who work for the Waltons and I can tell you that they do not treat their employees well. The Waltons do good things in the communities they service, but make no mistake; they do it as a revenue generating tactic. A truly American company pays workers a fair wage and doesn't complain about it because they know it's the right thing to do.

As a Wal-mart worker I am disappointed

[Bradleejay · 6/10 · 18 September 2006]

This movie is tailor made for bleeding hearts! Just check out the stories of a family business going under and the segment on overseas sweat shops. I am currently a Wal-mart worker and I was really excited to watch this DVD but my first thought after seeing it is "BLEEDING HEART OVERKILL".

It's clear objective is to smear Wal-mart's reputation and they beat that dead horse into a fine pulp.

The thing is that as a Wal-mart worker I was hoping that this would be a movie that could drive other workers off our couches and into the streets for employee rights and that would be quite a feat since we are always understaffed and therefore always tired.

There are some really good points made but they are lost like a needle in a haystack of unsubstantiated figures and questionable character interviews. C.E.O. Lee Scott is shown saying, "Yes, I can keep the prices low and raise the employee wages but I have an obligation to my share holders". Why don't we write to all the Wal-mart shareholders (of which I am one) and ask them if they would do something humane like convince Lee Scott that it's okay to raise the employee wages. Wal-mart can always find ways to trim other costs. It can be done and it should.

Don't Buy This DVD at Walmart

[gryffindor249 · 9/10 · 8 November 2005]

I wonder how this will play in the Red States, when they see the heartland raped and pillaged by The Walton family. When they see God-fearing, flag-waving patriotic Americans whose lives have been decimated by this Evil Empire in a Big Box. People might think that a documentary like this is the territory of the "Liberal Elite," but the liberals can live in their sophisticated cities where Walmart's presence cannot make quite as big a gaping hole in the local economy...but it is the rural, Bush-voting Red Staters that should be leading the rallying cry against this company. It is especially effective to see ministers preaching about how Walmart's values are not in line with the Christian faith.

Obviously, the creators had an opinion before they started this documentary, but the findings and facts are consistent with what the mainstream media reports about the way this company is run. The long arm of Walmart is dramatic enough without necessitating the filmmakers occasional lapses into melodrama, but the points are well-made and ignoring the facts presented in this film and continuing to support this Goliath in a blue smock could be our undoing-I hope this gets passed around from person-to-person faster than the Paris Hilton sex video and also hope we soon see a documentary on how Walmart collapsed like the Roman Empire.

What is Welfare?

[jeffspilger · 15 June 2006]

When most people think of welfare, they think of a 20-year-old single unemployed mother trying to get by on basically nothing, even after she goes to the government for help.

After viewing "Walmart - The High Cost of Low Price," I have a much different idea of welfare. How about those subsidies in the millions of dollars that municipalities give to the world's largest retailer so they can set up shop and put all the mom and pop stores on Main Street out of business. I guarantee that many more of your tax dollars are going to Wal-mart and other billion-dollar corporations, than to unemployed people.

The stories about Esry's grocery and the hardware store at the beginning of the movie being driven out by Walmart just made my blood boil. Esry's grocery, for example, paid their workers good wages and full benefits, and they had a Christmas party every year. Stores like this do much more for the local economy and quality of life in a small town than a Walmart ever could. Red Esry never got a dime from the government, but Walmart got 1.2 million dollars when they moved into town (I can't remember if that figure is correct). Walmart is going to pay their workers much less than Red Esry, and they won't be treated with respect and dignity. All of Walmart's profits just go back to a few rich snobs in Bentonville, not back to the local community.

One former Walmart employee interviewed in the movie, when talking about how Walmart encourages their employees seek government assistance says the best quote of the movie "You talk about using the system, look at how Walmart is using the system."

If I ever meet Lee Scott, I'm going to shout at him, "HOW THE %#$@ DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT?"

Didn't really change my mind

[cricketbat · 6/10 · 4 January 2020]

I already thought Wal-Mart is evil. I still shop there sometimes. This film didn't really change my opinion one way or another. I felt it could have been shorter, though. They seemed to introduce an idea, beat it to death, and then kick it repeatedly after it died.

The word must be heard

[Devngel_653 · 10/10 · 7 June 2007]

A possible monopoly, an abuse in American corporate freedom, exploiting people everywhere from employees to tax payers. It really gets you thinking. Is it possible that Walmart is a reason of an increase in crime rates? to what extent should the government allow corporations like Wal-mart to act the way it is shown in this movie. I strongly recommend and urge people to take some time to watch this film. We cannot let mega corporations bankrupt small businesses or make them exploit employees; expecting them to work 16 hours a day no overtime or being threatened to get fired. The German lady was right in this film "if you fear the place you work there is something terribly wrong"

gives a good, cliff-notes analysis of the many facets of Wal-Mart

[Quinoa1984 · 7/10 · 19 April 2007]

Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, is a somewhat valiant attempt by Robert Greenwald to put into a coherent picture what it is that makes Wal-Mart such an overbearing presence as a conglomeration and ultimate capitalist (or maybe more likely fascist) entity. It goes something like this: the independent businesses that serve at the pleasure of small towns can't keep up with the competition that a HUGE Wal-Mart imposes and closes down; the same towns, in the subsidizing that goes on, end up losing out on what makes a town a town, and it even encroaches into education (schools shut down); the employees work for crap wages, get no real medical insurance or health-care, and there is discrimination as well as no real care for what the wages should be as opposed to cheating the workers of overtime pay; the international impact, workers in factories in China and Wal-Mart employees in Germany; and finally the impact of the consumer's safety *within* security camera sight in the parking lots. In shot, Greenwald's expose is meant to be a bitter, bi-partisan pill to swallow (albeit some conservatives, of course, will look at what Wal-Mart represents, as did the Republican National Convention which invited the CEO to speak) for anyone interested in what may be dangerous about something as immense a profit-machine as Wal-Mart.

Through all of this, Greenwald gets usually impassioned testimonies from past workers, small-town farmers and store owners that had to close up and look elsewhere for money, and even those who succeeded in stopping Wal-Mart coming into town. His stylistic tactics might be a little less gripping as the people he gets on camera; his editing taste is pretty simplistic as a documentary filmmaker, and unlike other documentaries he's made his taste in music choices are a little emotionally over-bearing or too manipulative for the moment meant to be caught. There is also something that is sort of lacking in the documentary which is a more incisive look at why the consumer gives Wal-Mart so much business. Is it truly the low prices? I think it's something a little more complex, and it is maybe wisely kept to a subtle level given how much Greeenwald gets in 97 minutes: there is a comfort factor, something almost meant to condition the consumer, with a Wal-Mart. Who needs to go to this place and that place and the other in a town to get everything done, when a Wal-Mart has everything needed, from groceries to auto work and hardware? It's a level of complacency that isn't always totally comforting, however, as those who've been victims of crimes in the parking lots would say (and just in 2005 alone), or those in other countries who work slave wages for said comforts at home.

Bottom-line, this Wal-Mart documentary doesn't present many things that most informed about what the corporation is all about won't already know (certain things, like the subsidizing and its full effects, or the environmental damage, are fresh and appropriately critical), but it does act as a meaningful portrait of the truths that the ads would never live up to, and if anything contradicts everything in a typical Wal-Mart ad. What it lacks in anything striking visually it compensates with its relatable human drama on the levels that should matter to Wal-Mart, but never will.

Documentary??

[nickbeirne · 4/10 · 6 August 2006]

I have my doubts as to whether this can truly be called a documentary; perhaps rant, tirade or propaganda would be a better description. Frankly Greenwald would make Goebbels appear even handed and unbiased; even Michael Moore makes a half hearted attempt to allow his targets the opportunity to answer the criticisms. This film makes no attempt to consider any point of view other than its own, and so entirely devalues the message. Which is something of a shame, because some of the points raised are important to us all, and certainly worth considering.

At times the message seems rambling, appearing to look everywhere for the smallest criticism, and running it long past the point of tedium. Wal Mart has (apparantly) 1.2 million employees; surely Greenwald could have found abuse more meaty than the unsubstantiated complaints of individual vague accusations of discrimination. Disgruntled employees are hardly surprising in a company of Wal-Mart's size, and airing their grievances in itself adds no weight to the argument. Much is made of the apparent preferential promotion of ethnic groups by offering us anecdotal evidence, but without offering any proof to back this up.

A considerable proportion of the movie is devoted to the environmental crime of one outlet storing its fertilizers uncovered in the car park, but this was never demonstrated to have been directly responsible for any environmental impact. So we are left wondering why this is cited as the worst offense of one of the world's largest corporations.

However some sections are handled far better than others. The statistics relating to children of workers on Medicaid speak for themselves, and the section about working conditions in China and Bangladesh is pretty shocking, and certainly would make me think twice about what I buy and where.

Ultimately though, reasoned debate this is not, demonisation it is. There is a deliberate failure to give Wal Mart the chance to put across their response. And all right thinking film goers should ask themselves "WHY?"

Who makes Wal-Mart strong

[vidarium · 8/10 · 27 November 2005]

This movie presents information available from other sources. Yet the way it's shown here is still compelling. The overall impact is powerful. The movie is worth watching. Most disturbing are the types and numbers of crimes committed in Wal-Mart shopping lots, aided by lack of security. Shoppers could be protected but that would cost money ...

There's a glaring omission. Wal-Mart gets its main strength from us, the consumers. That point is made eloquently in South Park's episode "Something Wall-Mart This Way Comes" (season 8, episode 9, Nov 2004). Another good critique is PBS's Frontline in "Is Wal-Mart Good For America?"

If we didn't shop there, there would be changes. We get what we pay for.

Rating: WWW (Well Worth Watching)

Good film, but may have a creditability issue

[frazerdavid · 7/10 · 10 May 2006]

At the end of the film, the list if cities that have denied Wal-Mart the ability to build scrolls by to in an indication that the war against Wal-Mart is being won. However, one of those cities listed is Martinez, CA. Seeing as how its about 15mins from my house, I'm pretty sure there is a Wal-Mart in Martinez. Perhaps this film can be given the benefit of the doubt, seeing as how one city I noticed not being listed was Danville/San Ramon, CA (Not sure in which city exactly Wal-Mart partitioned to build). That city did indeed deny Wal-Mart the right to build, and only then did Wal-Mart head to Martinez. At the very list, this information should have been correct.

Random complaints that could be towards any company ever started

[pavelow235 · 2/10 · 9 May 2006]

I'm sorry some people like to complain about low prices on pretty much every item (including price matching). Being on top probably bothers some, ie the old man who owned the hardware store. So what do they do, they complain. He didn't have a backup plan. Walmart more then likely had every item the hardware store carried, and then some. All at cheaper prices of course. In the process employing several hundred people of the area and creating heavy taxes for whatever jurisdiction it fell under. How do they do it, a little thing called mass production coupled with one of the best logistics systems in the world. They provided aid in Hurricane Katrina faster then FEMA. I like how the documentary glossed over all the good things Wal-Mart does. Next they the discussed the usual problems plaguing every company, internal complaints of pay, bias on account of race, gender, religion, etc for promotion consideration. Every company has these problems to an extend. Just recently Wal Mart send a personnel report to the media showing woman and minorities were in fact in correct proportions (in relation to the population) in management positions. They then discussed the squashing of union building that supposedly goes on. Unions are another argument. They then went into environmental infractions, that granted should of been taken care of that same day it was discovered but again every company performs some sort of EPA or OSHA violations every day. Wal-Mart's are glaring infractions because it happens to be the largest company in the world. They decided to take on foreign labor, and the appalling conditions workers live under. Every item you touch probably has foreign labor to manufacture all or part of it. Other countries have different labor laws, thats a political problem not a walmart problem. The stupidest argument against walmart was the crime in the parking lot. Yeah maybe they don't offer as good outside security as say a bank but they are trying to keep the price down. She could of just as likely been attacked in the local gas station or even as she was pulling into her driveway at home. Blame the criminal, the police department, the city, the state, the judicial system in general, but not walmart. Yet another lawsuit in this sue-happy country. Finally they closed with local communities blocking the building of Walmarts. Thats fine but they are blocking out jobs, tax money, and low prices. All so they can keep mom-and-pop stores on life support. It's not the 19th century any more the world is becoming more interconnected every day. I say let the efficient company in and make sure there's at least one competitor, Target. All and all a documentary that may contain a lot of facts but isolated incidences blown out of proportion.