That this even got to a district judge, with the defendant saying, “Defendant consequently used Ms. De Armas’s fame, radiance and brilliance to promote the film by including her scenes in the movie trailers advertising Yesterday,” should now be termed the failing incel precedence.

Well, that would have been about 2008? I’m looking at “popular shows from 2008" and the only show I see that was any good was Fringe (and there was Trueblood). Not a lot of great content worth remembering, imo, although folks love to reminisce about reality tv :/

I had never heard of “Corman’s exploding helicopter” before today. Googling it, it sounds like it ought to more rightly be referred to as “Joe Dante’s exploding helicopter”.

I don’t think it really counts as false advertising in this case.  It’s likely that when the trailer was cut she was still intended to be in the movie.  It sounds like they didn’t remove her part until after test screenings.

Eh, just pay her to come in and shoot a little bit of footage to include in the trailers.

Sorry can’t hear you I’m busy trying to operate this toaster under water.

That reminds me of the time I was teaching assistant for an intro physics class, and the ultraviolet catastrophe came up. I of course thought of the Trotsky Icepick album of the same name, and I asked them if any of them had heard of Trotsky Icepick. My plan was to wait for someone to say, “Sure, who hasn’t?”, then…

Good thing these two weren’t around in the era of Corman’s exploding helicopter.

Yeah no one ditches Ana de Armas without good reason.  She’s a draw.

Movies cut scenes that appeared in trailers six months earlier all the time. I could see some sort of silly disclaimer now appearing in fine print along the lines of “not all actors or scenes will necessarily appear in the final cut of this film” in order to placate the babies and head off future lawsuits*, but in…

I remember him fondly from Stormy Monday which might be the first British Gangster movie I ever saw.

While it is not the worst example of false advertising out there, putting out trailers or movie posters to do shit like this is actually false advertising. Even if it is literally as old as movies. I remember Leprechaun redoing their poster to put Jennifer Aniston front and center once she had a big breakout with…

It’s not ideal, but what real harm has been done. Why would you waste everyone’s time suing someone over the cost of a movie ticket or rental?

AI Bros, generate me several iconic trailers from the passed 20 years with Ana De Armas inserted in them - Stat!

They cut the trailers before the movie is done with editing. The likelihood that this was intentional misdirection is nearly zero. Much more likely is that at some point after the trailer was out but before the movie was released, they decided that de Armas’ storyline didn’t help the movie, so they cut it out.

It’s a shame because my poor head is just buzzing with ideas. Guess they’ll just have to say in there. I doubt if Hollywood will be asking any of us for a re-do

Thanks. I haven’t seen it. Our town doesn’t get anything decent in the cinemas anymore. I checked out a review at Roger Ebert and was as disappointed as the reviewer was (although she didn’t pan it). I just didn’t understand what the point of all of this and it seems the movie didn’t play to its potential at all.…

Hopefully you already watch it and found out that’s not what happened. And Spoiler for 3 years old movie, he’s not the only one that knew Beatles exist also Coca Cola + Harry Potter.

And the greys ( never a good idea) seem to have disappeared completely.