In recent years, Hollywood has created a culture of including scenes in trailers that end up not appearing in the final version of the film, as a way of avoiding leaks and encouraging fans to create theories about the production.
Apparently, not everyone is happy with this marketing strategy and if it depends on a federal judge in the United States, the practice could end soon.
Those who are fans of Marvel Studios films will certainly remember the controversy surrounding the Avengers: Infinity War trailer, which featured scenes that never appeared in the final version of the film, in addition to some digitally edited moments to delete or insert characters that did not appear in the film. final version.
It’s not new that Marvel uses this tactic in its trailers, including altering the scene where Nick Fury’s corpse appears in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, or Spider-Man’s appearance at the airport battle in Captain America: Civil war.
While these tactics are used to preserve the movie’s big secrets and get viewers excited about what’s to come, many consumers believe that this is also a form of false advertising, as the studios are selling something that doesn’t live up to the movie. product delivered.
Stephen Wilson, a US federal judge, ruled this week that a movie studio can be sued for false advertising if it releases misleading trailers.
The decision was catalyzed by the 2019 film Yesterday. This musical adventure is premised on the protagonist played by Himesh Patel profiting from a world that has forgotten the classic band The Beatles. Trailers before the film’s release showed that Ana de Armas would play a role in the film. However, fans of the actress were disappointed to see that she does not appear in the film. This caused two De Armas fans to file a lawsuit in January, claiming they rented the film after seeing the trailer and discovering it was cut from the final product.
Universal Pictures wanted the lawsuit dropped, claiming the trailers were protected by the First Amendment. They further claim that the trailers were “artistic and expressive works” that should be considered a three-minute story rather than a straight commercial. However, Judge Wilson rejected this and found the movie trailers to be “commercial speech” subject to California’s false advertising and unfair competition laws.
Universal is right that trailers involve some creativity and editorial discretion, but that creativity doesn’t trump the commercial nature of a trailer. At its core, a trailer is an advertisement designed to sell a movie by providing consumers with a preview of the movie.
While Universal tried to argue using other examples with footage from trailers that didn’t make it into the final version of the film, the judge was firm in saying that the ruling only applies to “significant portions” of a trailer that don’t make it into the film. So things like the final scene of the Avengers: Infinity War trailer being cut from the movie wouldn’t count. Wilson also said he would only listen to “reasonable consumers”.
The Court’s decision is limited to representations about whether an actress or scene is in the film, and nothing else.
The two fans suing the suit seek $5 million in damages as representatives of a class of movie patrons. Because of the ruling, the case will now proceed to discovery and a motion for class certification.
If the decision spreads, we can’t forget the controversial Suicide Squad trailer, which featured several scenes of Jared Leto as the Joker, something that never appeared in the final version of the film.
Ever wondered if fashion catches on?
