Viewers can sue over deceptive movie trailers?

[James]

Interesting lawsuit allowed to go forward: https://variety.com/2022/film/news/ana- ... 235467419/

"Movie studios can be sued under false advertising laws if they release deceptive movie trailers, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday."

[Daniel]

Kangaroo Jack dodged a bullet.

[EricJ]

And Snow Dogs mutters a silent prayer...

[Dacey]

This is an absolutely STUPID ruling, and is going to lead to a bunch of even dumber lawsuits in the future. Especially since the case in question was over a deleted scene!

[Ben]

Oh cheesus.

On the minus side, this is certainly dumb. Many trailers are cut concurrently with the editing of the feature itself and so has access and uses the same footage, often baking in alternate takes ("part time!") and footage or indeed characters that end up on the cutting room floor (or, er, now just in a deleted folder!) because of future refinements to the picture, including the need to react to test screenings, trim for timing, or just emotional beats that done work, for example.

On the plus side, this may inspire studios to create proper teaser trailers, like we got with that awesome Jurassic one (I love that teaser and can recite it perfectly, often running it from the LD since it never made it to any other disc and have been looking for it online for years, so an inadvertent thanks for that link too!) and like how Pixar often did or does. No one confused those *teasers* for final trailers or got upset when things in them did not happen in the movies.

Thirdly, an easy way for studios to protect themselves: below the This Film Is Not Yet Rated disclaimer, just add a "teaser for illustrative purposes only, may contain imagery not in the final motion picture" or somesuch. It may be small, but as long as it’s there it’s there.

Lastly, who rents a movie to try and catch some supporting actor? Maybe it was a friend? Maybe she could have said "I’m not actually in it now". Maybe she could have warned them that Yesterday is an absolutely abysmal waste of time stupid movie that’s about as stupid as them renting it in the first place when it turns up on TV for free nowadays anyway…

Dumb, dumb, dumb…this does not help my viewpoint on the general human race, but at least supports it…

[Farerb]

Great. Now we can sue Disney for releasing this misleading Frozen II trailer:

[Ben]

Why, what’s misleading about that? That it made it look like it might be a good movie?

Also, do we start attacking movie posters now? I actually *was* disappointed that the key art one sheet for Inception depicted a scene that totally wasn’t the way it was in the film. And I’m serious: the way the image sold it suggested a much bigger event that just came and went without any additional cast members in attendance. Ruined the film for me, ruined my life…

[gaastra]

From what they were saying on movie news it's not a deleted scene or hulk in wakanda in infinity war trailer type stuff, but they promised an actress is in the movie and she wasn't, and they never took her out of the trailer and still uses it to sell the film. False advertising.

So, you can't sue snow dogs for saying it's a talking dog movie and isn't but if they say let's say Bruce Willis is in it and he isn't they can. That's what i got.

[droosan]

..but if one of the key grips on the crew happens to be named "Bruce Willis" then they're OK.

[EricJ]

Also, do we start attacking movie posters now?

My generation still wants to sue Escape From New York, because the Statue of Liberty's head wasn't in the street.

(And then, there's "Warriors of the Wind"... )

[Ben]

..but if one of the key grips on the crew happens to be named "Bruce Willis" then they're OK.

Yes, as long as he’s *in* the movie (most likely just his arm from lurking on the edge of frame during a break in one shot. But that would cut it.)

[James]

Can it be the deepfake version of Bruce Willis' arm?

[Ben]

I think that shot got the elbow…

[gaastra]

Also, some now think a warning "may not be in the final film" will be added to the trailers to avoid lawsuits in the future like they do game trailers.

By the way i want a deepfake of bruce in snowdogs now.

Also, from the story--

The limiting principle that Defendant seeks is the reasonable consumer test which "requires a probability that a significant portion of the general consuming public or of targeted consumers, acting reasonably in the circumstances, could be misled." Kasky, 27 Cal. 4th at 951. The Court's holding is limited to representations as to whether an actress or scene is in the movie, and nothing else.

[droosan]

BruceWillisInSnowDogs.jpg (72.8 KiB) Viewed 12699 times