Movies Federal court allows "false advertising" lawsuit over "deceptive" movie trailers

[Remarkableriots]

Ana de Armas Fans’ Lawsuit Puts Studios at Risk Over Deceptive Trailers

VARIETY.COM

---

A judge allowed two Ana de Armas fans to sue Universal for false advertising, after she was cut out of "Yesterday."

 

[stepee]

lol

[Remarkableriots]

I was a huge fan of Highlander and remember watching Endgame at the theater. I was upset that parts of the trailer weren't in the movie. So where do I file this lawsuit for 22 years of pain and agony? 

[silentbob]

27 minutes ago, Remarkableriots said:

I was a huge fan of Highlander and remember watching Endgame at the theater. I was upset that parts of the trailer weren't in the movie. So where do I file this lawsuit for 22 years of pain and agony? 

now would that be over the missing trailer parts

 

OR

 

because it was a giant piece of shit movie. (I’m in this category and I saw it for free thanks to work)

[Remarkableriots]

26 minutes ago, silentbob said:

now would that be over the missing trailer parts

 

OR

 

because it was a giant piece of shit movie. (I’m in this category and I saw it for free thanks to work)

I enjoyed parts of it, just seeing Duncan and Connor MacLeod together on the big screen. The sequel was even worse, and that was a giant piece of crap movie.

[unogueen]

objective future looking good so far

[TwinIon]

I'm trying to imagine at what point I might actually consider a trailer false advertising, especially if you put them in any context. Would a trailer for a musical that doesn't indicate that it's a musical count? How about a trailer that is a vignette from the film, but gives no real sense of the film itself? I don't think those would qualify, especially since all sorts of other advertising for those films would give you more info about them. Plenty of teaser trailers have basically no information at all, but that's hardly false advertising.

 

I suppose if you advertised an entirely different film, but that seems like it would be more of a mistake than anything else.

 

Certainly including an actress that was cut doesn't qualify, and I can't imagine this case goes far.

[Remarkableriots]

18 minutes ago, TwinIon said:

I'm trying to imagine at what point I might actually consider a trailer false advertising, especially if you put them in any context. Would a trailer for a musical that doesn't indicate that it's a musical count? How about a trailer that is a vignette from the film, but gives no real sense of the film itself? I don't think those would qualify, especially since all sorts of other advertising for those films would give you more info about them. Plenty of teaser trailers have basically no information at all, but that's hardly false advertising.

 

I suppose if you advertised an entirely different film, but that seems like it would be more of a mistake than anything else.

 

Certainly including an actress that was cut doesn't qualify, and I can't imagine this case goes far.

If the stuff happening in the trailer is cut from the released movie, imo, that is false advertising.

[TheLeon]

I would understand this more if it was something like All the Money in the World, which was initially advertised as a Kevin Spacey movie. 

 

And this is the shit I never understand about lawsuits:

Quote

The plaintiffs, Conor Woulfe of Maryland and Peter Michael Rosza of San Diego County, Calif., each paid $3.99 to rent “Yesterday” on Amazon Prime. They are seeking at least $5 million as representatives of a class of movie customers.

WTF is that? How do you land on that number? Where would that money go? If I paid $10 to see the Ana de Armas film "Yesterday" in theaters, could I get in on this? (I forget how much I paid, but I did see it in the theater)

[TwinIon]

35 minutes ago, Remarkableriots said:

If the stuff happening in the trailer is cut from the released movie, imo, that is false advertising.

If anything is cut from the movie? Trailers are usually made before the movie is finished, it doesn't seem like you can hold them to that. Products are routinely announced with features that don't make the final version, but no one is going to sue them for false advertising.

 

Hell, turns out you can put together a pretty representative trailer for Rogue One only using deleted scenes.

 

I'd argue that's a very reasonable advertisement for the film, even if none of the footage was seen in cinemas.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Let's see how video game developers/publishers are reacting to this development:

 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

1 hour ago, Remarkableriots said:

If the stuff happening in the trailer is cut from the released movie, imo, that is false advertising.

 

There is absolutely zero chance that will be the legal standard that will be applied, nor should it be.

 

The legal standard would be if the trailer "materially" misrepresents the content of the released film with a deliberate intent to deceive and that certainly is a higher standard than a few scenes that are in the trailer but not the released film.

[Guest]

False advertising statutes don’t, and really couldn’t, apply to things like editorial decisions between a trailer and a feature film releases. The core of successful truth in advertising claims is intent to deceive, and choosing not to include a shot or scene that makes it into a trailer is unlikely to be done with such intent.

[stepee]

Can I sue Mel Brooks for never making history of the world pt2?

[Jason]

25 minutes ago, stepee said:

Can I sue Mel Brooks for never making history of the world pt2?

 

no because that's happening

 

‘History of the World Part II’ Variety Series Ordered at Hulu, Mel Brooks to Write and Executive Produce (EXCLUSIVE)

VARIETY.COM

---

"History of the World, Part I" is finally getting a Part II, with Hulu ordering a variety series followup to the classic Mel Brooks film

 

[Spork3245]

1 hour ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

There is absolutely zero chance that will be the legal standard that will be applied, nor should it be.

 

The legal standard would be if the trailer "materially" misrepresents the content of the released film with a deliberate intent to deceive and that certainly is a higher standard than a few scenes that are in the trailer but not the released film.

I think we have a case with Brutal Legend then

[stepee]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

 

no because that's happening

 

‘History of the World Part II’ Variety Series Ordered at Hulu, Mel Brooks to Write and Executive Produce (EXCLUSIVE)

VARIETY.COM

---

"History of the World, Part I" is finally getting a Part II, with Hulu ordering a variety series followup to the classic Mel Brooks film

 

 

well then, I certainly have a case for when actors that appear in that 1981 trailer aren’t in this!

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

28 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

I think we have a case with Brutal Legend then

 

I don't think that I'll ever truly forgive Tim Schaffer for that particular "bait n' switch"!

[stepee]

8 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

I don't think that I'll ever truly forgive Tim Schaffer for that particular "bait n' switch"!

 

What was the bait n switch? That it was part rts?

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Just now, stepee said:

 

What was the bait n switch? That it was part rts?

 

That's it!

[stepee]

I didn’t remember that being a bait and switch, I must not have paid attention to the early hype. I sure was disappointed whenever it was I saw Tim’s new game was a RTS though! 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Just now, stepee said:

I didn’t remember that being a bait and switch, I must not have paid attention to the early hype. I sure was disappointed whenever it was I saw Tim’s new game was a RTS though! 

 

ALL of the marketing emphasized the rock n' roll hack n' slash aspect of the game and ABSOLUTELY DID NOT REMOTELY REFERENCE the RTS part!

[stepee]

Just now, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

ALL of the marketing emphasized the rock n' roll hack n' slash aspect of the game and ABSOLUTELY DID NOT REMOTELY REFERENCE the RTS part!

 

Damn, maybe I just forgot, though I can’t think of anything more disappointing to me than expecting a hack n slash and getting a RTS, my goodness! 
 

I love me a good hack and slash and RTS is my least favorite genre. I don’t think there is one I like as Rabbids counts as TBS right?

 

That is such a crazy idea to do that as a bait and switch because I imagine it’s not just me and that there is not like the largest overlap between fans of those genres.

[MarSolo]

I mean, can I sue Marvel Studios for not including THIS scene in Infinity War:

[Spork3245]

8 hours ago, stepee said:

I didn’t remember that being a bait and switch, I must not have paid attention to the early hype. I sure was disappointed whenever it was I saw Tim’s new game was a RTS though! 

The publisher admitted to hiding that it was an RTS after the first 3rd or so of the game as they thought it would hurt sales.

[Keyser_Soze]

8 hours ago, stepee said:

I didn’t remember that being a bait and switch, I must not have paid attention to the early hype. I sure was disappointed whenever it was I saw Tim’s new game was a RTS though! 

 

On top of what everyone else said they even released a demo for the game and it seemed like a normal game. When everyone got it they were like "it's an RTS!"

In fact Jeff Gerstmann touched on this briefly a couple weeks ago when someone wrote in saying the Midnight Sons was in a similar spot not indicating it was a card game on the game pages. (The timestamp embed should jump right to the point where he says this)

 

 

[Bloodporne]

15 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Let's see how video game developers/publishers are reacting to this development:

 

[5timechamp]

On 12/22/2022 at 4:37 PM, stepee said:

Can I sue Mel Brooks for never making history of the world pt2?

 

Spaceballs 2 perhaps

[SuperSpreader]

I'm all for this. 

[skillzdadirecta]

This so so fucking stupid. As others have said, editorial decisions happen between the release of the trailer and the release of the film often times driven by audience feedback and test screenings. There IS a murky area when some trailers will attempt to make film seem more action packed than it actually is or emphasize comedic elements in a film that isn't really a comedy, but thats a far cry from deceptive advertising.

[SuperSpreader]

I'm all for anything that hurts marketing execs. They're the slugs of the earth. Probably the most full of shit people I've ever met. 

[Greatoneshere]

It's come up before too, here's one example from 11 years ago:

 

Woman sues to stop Drive getting away with a 'misleading' trailer | Movies | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Michigan resident files suit against distributor of Ryan Gosling thriller, claiming the film had 'very little driving' and is 'antisemitic'

 

[Reputator]

On 12/22/2022 at 11:51 PM, MarSolo said:

I mean, can I sue Marvel Studios for not including THIS scene in Infinity War:

 

Actually... maybe! I know that and some other footage was created that was TECHNICALLY meant to be deliberately deceptive. Albeit so we wouldn't have spoilers.

[unogueen]

I wanna see the idiot who brings spoiler culture to high court.

[SuperSpreader]

2 hours ago, Reputator said:

 

Actually... maybe! I know that and some other footage was created that was TECHNICALLY meant to be deliberately deceptive. Albeit so we wouldn't have spoilers.

 

I think that's different, there are plenty of shots of heroes running, meanwhile the other movie example doesn't have the actress that was marketed as being in it at all. 

 

An example would be an official trailer for a new avengers movie and a shot of wolverine, but then he isn't in the movie at all. No wolverine would be misleading marketing instead of "different shot of heroes in action."

 

Those same heroes are depicted doing the same thing throughout the film. In fact, the film is sorta about that shot. It's all about heroes running at the screen. 

 

I also agree that a commercial/trailer shouldn't have the same protections as a film itself.