Woman sues "Drive" distributor for not being enough like "Fast and the Furious"
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Exactly. She's not suing because she didn't like the movie; she's suing because the trailer led her to believe it would be a knockoff of The Fast and the Furious, and it turned out to be something else entirely. We have false advertising laws in this country, but for some reason they're never applied to movie trailers, even though they really should be. The guy who posted the Snow Dogs trailer gave a good example. Another one would be the Blade Runner trailer, which sold a thoughtful, glacially paced science fiction movie as an explosion a minute action flick. Something really needs to be done about this kind of thing, and I for one would love to see this case do it.Nouw said:Trailers have been misleading for a long time, about time someone sued
Actually, at it's core there is a valid arguement here. The stupid part is the allegations of racism, which fall under free speech if they are even present in the movie (I haven't seen it to comment on it), however trying to pass a product off as something else is illegal, with the practices of advertisers and the like coming under increasing amounts of fire in recent years. It's not surprising that those selling intellectual properties would be held similarly accountable, for leading people into thinking a movie is one thing, and giving them something else. It's no differant on a fundemental level than say selling someone chocolate candy, but actually putting sugar cubes with food coloring inside the product or whatever.
Given that movie makers have been caught using deceptive practices through the years to sell movies, cutting together differant scenes out of context to imply something that doesn't actually happen in the movie, or using footage that has wound up on the cutting room floor (a semi-famous example would be a scene featuring Mel Gibson and a dog from the movie "Payback" that was in the trailer but not in the movie) and so on.
You can say what you want about the brainless mass of movie goers, but there is a valid point that if your going to see a mindless car chase movie to put your brain into neutral, being handed a drama that doesn't fulfill that promise is an issue.
I think back to the movie "Fight Club". The movie has become something of a classic, but it was a case where the trailers for it were intentionally misleading. Those going to see a martial arts/cage fighting movie were given something else. In that case it paid off, but really I was kind of surprised they hadn't been successfully sued by someone especially seeing as I remember them flat out admitting that they set out to trick movie goers because they didn't think your average schlub would have given that movie a chance if they had known the actual premise of the film. As it is now, with the reveals out, there are those who refuse to watch it due to the "stupidity of a movie about a guy beating himself up" (which might not do justice to the entire film, but that very reaction is exactly why they did what they did).
Given that movie makers have been caught using deceptive practices through the years to sell movies, cutting together differant scenes out of context to imply something that doesn't actually happen in the movie, or using footage that has wound up on the cutting room floor (a semi-famous example would be a scene featuring Mel Gibson and a dog from the movie "Payback" that was in the trailer but not in the movie) and so on.
You can say what you want about the brainless mass of movie goers, but there is a valid point that if your going to see a mindless car chase movie to put your brain into neutral, being handed a drama that doesn't fulfill that promise is an issue.
I think back to the movie "Fight Club". The movie has become something of a classic, but it was a case where the trailers for it were intentionally misleading. Those going to see a martial arts/cage fighting movie were given something else. In that case it paid off, but really I was kind of surprised they hadn't been successfully sued by someone especially seeing as I remember them flat out admitting that they set out to trick movie goers because they didn't think your average schlub would have given that movie a chance if they had known the actual premise of the film. As it is now, with the reveals out, there are those who refuse to watch it due to the "stupidity of a movie about a guy beating himself up" (which might not do justice to the entire film, but that very reaction is exactly why they did what they did).
I've got a couple of misleading trailers, although these are re-edits done by a talented editor to make them look like completely different movies, but you can see how easy it is to market a movie as anything other than what it is.
OT: Hopefully it'll get thrown out before it even gets off of the ground.
OT: Hopefully it'll get thrown out before it even gets off of the ground.
The only way that picture would make sense is if there was an actual sharp knife hidden under the cardboard somewhere. Butterknives aren't sharp at all, and are only about as good at cutting things as the plastic knives you get at take out places and cafeterias. As you pointed out, a fork is a heck of a lot more deadly -- and a pen or a sharp pencil is a lot more deadly from that, so even if you are going to make an argument that the fork is deadly enough to make sure it's only sold to adults, you're going to have to start looking at quite a few other objects needed for daily life, objects that it would be ridiculous to restrict the sale of.Nurb said:It's fucking silverware. The fork is more deadly than a table knife.thelonewolf266 said:I can see how that would seem stupid to a citizen of a country that believes every one should be allowed and even encouraged to own deadly weapons for no other purpose than self defence because their scared in their own backyards due to the fact that there are so many deadly weapons in the hands of the stupid the insane the criminal and in short people that really have no reason to have them around and yes I did just turn this thread into another gun argument, I apologise for that because I'm just as bored of them as the next person but I can't help myself.Nurb said:Yea, it's stupid, but maybe if software had the same return policy like every other product you purchase, she could have returned an unsatisfactory item and not have to sue.
Oh please, stow the fucking nationalism. you think we're alone in stupid law practices?Cenequus said:
Oh and screw your nationalsm too.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4257966.stm
I'm not being nationalist at no point did I attempt to portray my country as better than yours or even as a good place to live I am well aware of how much violence goes on here and I still think that guns are a bad idea.In fact the level of violence that you pointed out is why products like that aren't sold to under eighteens because they can and have been used as offensive weapons.Nurb said:It's fucking silverware. The fork is more deadly than a table knife.thelonewolf266 said:I can see how that would seem stupid to a citizen of a country that believes every one should be allowed and even encouraged to own deadly weapons for no other purpose than self defence because their scared in their own backyards due to the fact that there are so many deadly weapons in the hands of the stupid the insane the criminal and in short people that really have no reason to have them around and yes I did just turn this thread into another gun argument, I apologise for that because I'm just as bored of them as the next person but I can't help myself.Nurb said:Yea, it's stupid, but maybe if software had the same return policy like every other product you purchase, she could have returned an unsatisfactory item and not have to sue.
Oh please, stow the fucking nationalism. you think we're alone in stupid law practices?Cenequus said:
Oh and screw your nationalsm too.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4257966.stm
They do.Abandon4093 said:
In fact it carries a 25,000 dollar fine.
more about it here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frivolous_litigation]
The thing is, can you even remember when was the last time you heard about somebody who failed a get rich quick scheme?
Similarly, you never hear about somebody being fined for wasting the courts time and money, because that be boring.
See my post above. Unless it's really different in the UK from how it is in the US (and judging by the picture, it's not), sharp knives are sold separately from silverware sets. That thing may have a few butterknives in it, but those are uniformly dull, meant only to spread stuff like butter, peanut butter, and jelly. A good sharp pencil would make a much more deadly weapon than anything in that package.thelonewolf266 said:I'm not being nationalist at no point did I attempt to portray my country as better than yours or even as a good place to live I am well aware of how much violence cause on here and I still think that guns are a bad idea and that's why products like that aren't sold to under eighteens because they can and have been used as offensive weapons.Nurb said:It's fucking silverware. The fork is more deadly than a table knife.thelonewolf266 said:I can see how that would seem stupid to a citizen of a country that believes every one should be allowed and even encouraged to own deadly weapons for no other purpose than self defence because their scared in their own backyards due to the fact that there are so many deadly weapons in the hands of the stupid the insane the criminal and in short people that really have no reason to have them around and yes I did just turn this thread into another gun argument, I apologise for that because I'm just as bored of them as the next person but I can't help myself.Nurb said:Yea, it's stupid, but maybe if software had the same return policy like every other product you purchase, she could have returned an unsatisfactory item and not have to sue.
Oh please, stow the fucking nationalism. you think we're alone in stupid law practices?Cenequus said:
Oh and screw your nationalsm too.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4257966.stm
That's just due to the legislation it won't have been put in place for that particular set but for other items like sharp butchers knives and the like but due to the legislation being just a blanket measure so not being on a case by case basis that set is covered by it to so the manufactures legally have to put that on the box and shops aren't allowed to sell it.I hope that made sense not sure if I explained it very well.
Well, I do agree she's stupid, but not for the lawsuit. Drive is a shitass of a movie BECAUSE IT HAS RYAN GOSLING IN IT.
A man with the emotional scope of a teacup in a movie mostly about talking (i.e, emotion) should send up red flags across the board. But no, some people need to have it proven to them in the most brutal way possible...there, lady, that's over an hour of your life you wasted watching Ryan Gosling cross his arms and refuse to act. After several movies like this, if you didn't know it would suck simply because he's in it, it's your fault. I hope you're ashamed of yourself, I'm already ashamed for you.
But I can't really blame her too much, I guess...I mean I allowed myself to be exposed to Michael Cera fully THREE times before I finally decided to boycott the Lord of Hipsters until he learned to express an emotion besides "stammering teenaged permavirgin".
But you know what...at least Cera can produce AN emotion. Maybe it's just the one, but God bless him, that's one more than Ryan Gosling has ever shown!
A man with the emotional scope of a teacup in a movie mostly about talking (i.e, emotion) should send up red flags across the board. But no, some people need to have it proven to them in the most brutal way possible...there, lady, that's over an hour of your life you wasted watching Ryan Gosling cross his arms and refuse to act. After several movies like this, if you didn't know it would suck simply because he's in it, it's your fault. I hope you're ashamed of yourself, I'm already ashamed for you.
But I can't really blame her too much, I guess...I mean I allowed myself to be exposed to Michael Cera fully THREE times before I finally decided to boycott the Lord of Hipsters until he learned to express an emotion besides "stammering teenaged permavirgin".
But you know what...at least Cera can produce AN emotion. Maybe it's just the one, but God bless him, that's one more than Ryan Gosling has ever shown!
As fatuous as this case may be - and utterly moronic - I cant help but sympathise. Due mainly to the apalling state of movie trailers these days. Yes, I know movies these days suck (they used to be my primary form of entertainment, now they barely scrape top five) but movie trailers are even worse. I cant tell you how many times I've seen a trailer that appears to be nothing more that a five minute edit of the entire film. Including the frigging ending!
What happened to trailers being there to build up excitement and get you hyped up for a film? What happened to not showing anything in the trailer from the final quarter of the film? Jesus, its like distributors are so insecure about their product (and lets be honest, considering the 'quality' of most films these days, they have every right to be) they feel compelled to show all the money shots.
We dont want to see money shots in the trailers guys! If you put them in the trailers, then theres no frigging point in seeing the film!
/rant
What happened to trailers being there to build up excitement and get you hyped up for a film? What happened to not showing anything in the trailer from the final quarter of the film? Jesus, its like distributors are so insecure about their product (and lets be honest, considering the 'quality' of most films these days, they have every right to be) they feel compelled to show all the money shots.
We dont want to see money shots in the trailers guys! If you put them in the trailers, then theres no frigging point in seeing the film!
/rant
...
What.
Seriously... what?
WHAT!?
How-wha-whe- HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN!?
This is just stupid beyond beleif... beyond recognition...
Jesus Christ i hope she is thrown out of court immediately.
What.
Seriously... what?
WHAT!?
How-wha-whe- HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN!?
This is just stupid beyond beleif... beyond recognition...
Jesus Christ i hope she is thrown out of court immediately.
Wow, really? No words can describe how stupid she is.
Did you actually read what was in your link? Never mind the fact it is over 6 year's old but it is about a study based from 1991 to 2000, so whatever point you were trying to make, it is pretty invalid.Nurb said:
