Thoughts on the “Drive” trailer lawsuit
HollywoodNews.com: As sometimes happens, I commented on someone else’s blog (in this case, David Poland’s The Hot Blog) and what was supposed to be a random bit or two turned into a mini-essay. So for those so inclined, here is my ‘official essay on the Drive lawsuit’. Oh, here is the actual complaint for those who want details that I don’t feel like repeating. And try not to laugh when attorney Martin H. Leaf calls Nikki Finke a “respected film critic and “Hollywood insider”. Anyway, I do have some reviews up later this week, so apologies for the somewhat second-hand content. Enjoy.
It’s no secret I kinda hated Drive (review 01 and 02), but I did not even watch the trailer before seeing it, so one cannot conclude that the low (and highly unscientific) Cinemascore grade is directly related to the marketing (IE – majority opinion aside for the moment, it could just be that it’s not a good movie). I didn’t watch the trailer before seeing the movie (I had correctly heard that it was spoiler-filled), but if I had and thought the movie looked good based on the trailer, would I have a cause of action? Most trailers technically make the movie ‘look good’. If the studios have a bad movie, is merely advertising that film in a way that makes it look good a case for fraud?
If a trailer successfully makes a bad movie seem like a good one (like the second action-packed trailer to the 1998 Avengers, for example), is there cause of action? The Box received an ‘F’ from Cinemascore over opening weekend. Does that mean that anyone who bought a ticket on the basis that the trailer made the movie look good now has a cause of action? Is there a cause of action if a trailer contains a number of scenes that aren’t in the final cut of the film? That’s false advertising, right?
To read more go to MENDELSON’S MEMOS
Photo by ilmDistrict and Bold Films and OddLot Entertainment
Follow Hollywood News on Twitter for up-to-date news information.