| Jumpin said: Now do this for all products. If I drink a disgusting light beer and I don’t have parties springing up all around me, like in the advertisements, I want to be able to sue those corporate bastards. |
Huge difference between showing no-name commercial actors who don't know you exist showing up at fictional parties outside your house in Bud Light ads and showing famous A/B list actors in a movie trailer who aren't in the movie, though. One's a fictional depiction of beer parties for entertainment value, the other is straight-up lying to you, telling you this actor's in the movie when they're not.
Of course, Universal/Blumhouse were being shady as fuck basically telling us Halloween Ends was gonna be this big Laurie and Michael grand finale and, well, it wasn't. Michael's barely in the movie and we instead ended up following this Corey guy, but the judge's ruling unfortunately gives them enough wiggle room for that at least since he specifically mentioned interpretive art being protected under this new lawsuit.
Yeah, I know why they did it: they knew if we knew that it wasn't actually gonna be centered around "Laurie v. Michael: the final showdown, no bullshit this time, we swear", it would've caused a LOT of people to NOT part with their money. If they were being honest, they would've showed a lot more of Corey in the trailers because that's who the movie was actually about, but we didn't come to see that and they were well aware of that fact going in when making the trailers.
Though it appears a number of scenes in the trailer don't make it into the final movie. That, I can potentially sue them for if I see fit. This also seems very much like an actionable offense under the new lawsuit.
Last edited by KManX89 - on 09 January 2023
