Ana De Armas Fans Clear Hurdle In Movie Trailer False Advertising Lawsuit (buzzfeednews.com)
Apparently, fans of a certain actress saw her featured prominently in a movie trailer but when they saw the film she had been cut totally out of the script. The studio tried to claim that it shouldn’t count as false advertising because a movie trailer is more of an artistic endeavor than it is straight advertising, but the judge ain’t buying it.
What do you think of this court case, and can you think of other trailers that played fast and loose (or even just lied outright) about the movie they represented?
Unless they can prove it was done intentionally to lure people into seeing it, I don’t see how they can win. But if it’s a jury trial, anything is possible.
That is part of their claim, actually. They put forth that the actress in question was a much bigger star at the time then the other two leads, and that she was left in the trailers to attract movie goers.
No problem. Just prove it in court. Unless someone admits it, or wrote/sent a message saying that, it will be hard to prove IMHO. If she was truly a lead actor, how could they cut her out?
I think, Get a life, people. Not every grievance in life needs to be litigated.
I have been to very very few movies in the theaters over the last couple decades in large part because I hate trailers. (As I am sure many of you already know, they are called trailers because they used to show them after the film was shown. I would have loved that because I would have been able to leave. They are no different than any other kind of advertising now)
Anyway, to my maybe ignorant understanding, it’s common to have scenes in trailers that don’t end up in the film. Trailers might be made before the film is done being edited and the producers many legitimately not have known that those edits were going to be made. It will be difficult to prove fraud unless there is clear cut documentation that the actor was put in the trailer with the intent to defraud.
I just read the article. The two plaintiffs rented the film on Amazon Prime for $3.99 because they saw her in the trailer I am guessing also on Amazon Prime and this is the basis of a $5 million class action. Hell naw. This is an abuse of the legal system.
This. I mean, if I run into a similar situation, then at most, I’m just going to be less trusting of what I see in movie trailers from now on. Now, mind you, my cynicism regarding the entertainment industry in general is already pretty high, so this extra distrust really isn’t going to move the needle very much.
That said, I don’t think the producers of the movie did themselves any favors here. If someone goes to see a movie because they’ve seen a favorite actor in the trailer, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to expect to see that actor in the movie.
ETA: Well, they did themselves a favor in the short run. But in the long run, maybe not so much.
I rule in favor of the plaintiff and award them $3.99
Each, or total? This is a class-action suit, so presumably the $5 million dollar figure comes from adding up a whole bunch of $3.99s.
Though over a million plaintiffs would be an awfully large class-action…
Total I assume. I also assume that if they are successful the lawyers will get a few hundred grand, the two original plaintiffs will get a few thousand each and then a bunch of $3.99s to a lot of others.
Stranger
To get the class certified they have to establish all class members felt cheated. Personally, I didn’t notice the trailer and film didn’t have the same actor, and I liked the movie. I doubt they can prove that there’s a huge class of viewers who care.
For our background, here is some expert opinion on class action suits for “incidental” false advertising in a non-showbiz context.
Does anyone want to sue Akaj for this remark? I’m sure it’s offensive to somebody somewhere…
It looks to me from the article like the judge was ruling on the general question of whether movie trailers could be the subject of false advertising suits.
This particular lawsuit seems ridiculous, but I’m having a harder time dismissing the notion that movie trailers are advertisements and, as such, could conceivably be false advertising.
I don’t see any question about whether a trailer is advertising. The reason they make it is to attract an audience for the movie. If there’s no movie, there’s no trailer.
Nitpick. IIRC Grindhouse featured a trailer for Machete, a movie that was never intended to be made. Public response was so positive, 2 Machete movies were made.
Sure. A fake trailer, but it was part of a larger project intended to simulate what the viewer might experience at a grindhouse theater.
lol, is Lionel Hutz the plaintiff’s attorney?
