Tron 3

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/joseph-ko ... -tron-film
...


Evil Dead sequels may tie old and new together

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/evil-dead ... s-together

Peter Jackson Gives You A Peek At THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION...

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61744
...


PERCY JACKSON: SEA OF MONSTERS Trailer

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61748

From Peter to Percy... Never caught the original.
...


PINEAPPLE EXPRESS 2 Trailer

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61749
...


Paramount Sets Up For A 3rd G.I. JOE

That's all there is to that really.

Jack Reacher refund

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/apr ... ew-zealand

Good, that sort of [LIFTED]'s been going on for decades now

They should have a better idea of what is in the film rather than leaving it till the last minute. The trailers should be accurate represenations of the film. If a big scene is cut then the studio should be banned from advertising for a year. You could blame the one director but since the film will be gone by the time the complaint is in court the only punishment that would hardly deter them.

What a [LIFTED] ludicrous claim to bring to court.

Yeah, but he won.

And that is all that matters. Overall my sympathy is with the plaintiff and the studio were in the wrong. Though if you see some of the cases brought this actually looks remarkably sane.

The award for most spurious use of the judicial system goes to … that guy.
Okay, yes, technically the claim was legit, but seriously …
That guy should be banned from ever going to see a film at the cinema (any cinema) again.

Mark

This really should have been dealt with by the Advertising regulators. If they were not up to the job then what alternative do you have? I can think of more spurious cases like many iPhone class action suits. Sometimes companies simply look at being sued as an occupational hazard.

Absolutely.



Why? There have been many trailers which contain things which don't happen in the film.
Are we going to see someone sue The Expendables 2 producers because what's his face from The Inbetweeners didn't actually appear in the film?

This whole thing at once makes me angry yet filled with inertia.

It does not bother me personally but for some people it does. I cannot remember the trailer anyway, so would never know if a scene is missing to start with.

I'm still considering legal options after I once had to use Lynx deoderant and yet didn't have to flee from a mob of sexually aroused women.

DreamWorks Is Taking On The Church Sex Abuse Cover-Up

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61775

'I preferred Life of Brian.'

He didn't go to court, he complained to the ASA which is only fair. Why should the film companies be allowed to advertise something which isn't actually featured in the product they are advertising? If you tried that with any other product the ASA would be down on you like a ton of bricks.

Legal, Decent, Honest, Truthful as the old ASA advert used to go. The trailer wasn't and so the company lost and the system worked.