https://lawandcrime.com/entertainment/federal-judge-lets-movie-fans-sue-over-allegedly-misleading-trailer-featuring-ana-de-armas-who-hit-final-films-cutting-room-floor/

Wrong forum?

It has to do with politics, since Universal is arguing that the trailer is protected by the First Amendment.

For some reason, this clip came to me while reading the article

This is the trailer, and the scene mentioned in the lawsuit that wasn't in the movie is from 1:49 to 2:06

lethalninja said:

---

It has to do with politics, since Universal is arguing that the trailer is protected by the First Amendment.

---

I would think it was more of a false advertising claim.

That's what the plaintiffs are claiming, but Universal is the defendant.

A consumer protection attorney weighs in on the merits:



It's not just about a movie not being as good as the trailer. Ana de Armas was featured in the trailer but was cut from the film during the editing process. They left her in the trailer even after the movie had gone to streaming services. A couple of people bought the movie online on Amazon after seeing the trailer, thinking she was in it, and she wasn't.

If we could sue over misleading trailers we would all be millionaires via class action lawsuits.

c-jags said:

---

If we could sue over misleading trailers we would all be millionaires via class action lawsuits.

---

Yeah...

I saw the trailer and it looked really good. Then I watched the whole movie and it sucked.

I need $5million dollars for my pain and suffering...

It's $5 million total for all the parties involved in the lawsuit, not $5 million each.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/hannahmarder/movie-trailer-moments-that-werent-in-the-film


I've contacted my lawyers and we're about to get Rick James filthy rich. Here are 31 movies with scenes in the trailer that aren't in the feature length movie.

lethalninja said:

---

This is the trailer, and the scene mentioned in the lawsuit that wasn't in the movie is from 1:49 to 2:06

---

That movie looked so stupid, I wouldn't even watch it on an airplane.

As far as scenes in the trailer that weren't in the movie, this happens all the time.

If the plaintiff had ever been to a screening, they'd probably lose their mind.

When I saw the movie "Unaccompanied Minors" at a screening, it had a different ending than the theatrical release. I should have sued.

They specifically watched the movie because Ana de Armas was advertised to be in it: However, neither that particular scene, nor any other including de Armas, appeared in the final cut of the movie. The disappointed fans say the trailer constitutes false advertising and that they would not have chosen to view Yesterday if they had known de Armas would not appear onscreen.

It was a great movie, but then I came of age during the Beatles early years.

Doesn't that seem a little odd? You watch an entire movie just because there is one small scene in a trailer that shows an actress?

That doesn't track.

lethalninja said:

---

They specifically watched the movie because Ana de Armas was advertised to be in it: However, neither that particular scene, nor any other including de Armas, appeared in the final cut of the movie. The disappointed fans say the trailer constitutes false advertising and that they would not have chosen to view Yesterday if they had known de Armas would not appear onscreen.

---

I hope they didn't watch "Bullet Train" for the Ryan Reynolds scene(s).

Maybe they thought she was hot and reasonably believed that she would be in the movie, so they watched it because they thought she would be in it.

He was actually in the movie, though.

I had to look that name up. I remember her from Knock Knock. She had they most annoying laugh! I barely made it through that movie because of that Kamala-like cackle, as I recall.

I'm sure there are one or two people really upset about this (ie crazy nutjobs) and dozens, hundreds, thousands? Of other people who dont really give a **** but are willing to lie and hop on the train.

lethalninja said:

---

He was actually in the movie, though.

---

Uncredited on IMDB

Ana de Armas doesn't even rate an (Uncredited) entry on IMDB for Yesterday.

She was also in Knives Out.

So the lawyers get $4.95M and 10,000 (band wagon) plaintiffs get a $5 voucher towards a streaming movie of their choice.

Reynolds wasn't in the official trailer.

they aren't getting anything at this point.

to survive this early motion to dismiss, all the plaintiff had to plausibly allege was that significant part of target audience could be misled by thinking she was in the movie.

I understand and was joking, Counselor.

But, you know if the case survives by some miracle, that's how the settlement would look.

I had no idea people still paid for individual movies/shows without reading reviews from other consumers still. That's wild.

nortex97 said:

---

I had no idea people still paid for individual movies/shows without reading reviews from other consumers still. That's wild.

---

i had no idea people actually read reviews from strangers before deciding whether to watch a movie.

seriously, you read the reviews on amazon that people write?

BMX Bandit said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

I had no idea people still paid for individual movies/shows without reading reviews from other consumers still. That's wild.

---

i had no idea people actually read reviews from strangers before deciding whether to watch a movie.

seriously, you read the reviews on amazon that people write?

---

It's called a blind date.

Under this logic can the bot voters who thought they were getting a president biden and instead got a zombie also sue ?

BMX Bandit said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

I had no idea people still paid for individual movies/shows without reading reviews from other consumers still. That's wild.

---

i had no idea people actually read reviews from strangers before deciding whether to watch a movie.

seriously, you read the reviews on amazon that people write?

---

Absolutely (and rotten tomato's/even this site's insane entertainment forum, which is still informative somewhat).

Caveat/full disclosure; I have only been to star wars/top gun movies in the past decade I think, but when deciding to buy a movie to watch at home I always check out at least whether it is worth it to me to throw a few bucks at it. I subscribe to an embarrassing amount of crap at home so I don't tend to buy stuff separately.

To each his own though!