Can you sue the creators for deliberately misleading and lying?

I guess it's like any movie.... They are telling a story.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Are they allowed to do this?

Of course they are. "Found footage" is nothing new, and nowhere do they make any claims that the footage is real. The first bit found footage movie was "The Blair Witch", and if you'll remember, part of its success was a brilliant advertising campaign that gave the impression the footage was real. Other movies have played this game to a greater or lesser extent, but this movie is pretty up front that it's only a movie.

Other movies, like Fargo, simply claim to be true, knowing it's an outright lie.

Then, of course, there are all the horror stories that claim to be "based on true events", like The Amityville Horror, even though anyone with half a brain knows they aren't.

Of course, this just raises the question of why the heck they made the movie this way in the first place. I guess it was supposed to look like a documentary, but it looked nothing like a documentary. It's true that documentaries often mix real footage with reenactments, but they never ever reenact something they have footage of and show the two on split screen, because that's.... well.. a really stupid and pointless thing to do.

I think in the end, trying to make it look "real" was just an excuse for not writing a decent ending.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

With films, plays, and TV shows, it's common to take "creative liberties" and "dramatic license" (i.e. change facts, leave stuff out, etc.) to tell a better story and/or ensure the script will be filmed within the projected length (i.e. two hours, etc.)

"Fargo" begins with a title card saying it's based on a true story when it's not. In fact, some people went looking for the money.

In marketing a film, TV show, new song, or an entertainment personality, it's accepted that public relations executives will (within reason) use publicity stunts, inflate CVs, and plant stories in the regular and social media to create buzz. I remember part of the marketing for "The Blair Witch Project" and "Paranormal Activity" suggested they were or might be real.

For "The Fourth Kind," the studio went as far to create fake newspaper stories attributed to real newspapers in Alaska. The Alaska Press Club sued and reached a settlement if $20,000. See http://www.adn.com/features/article/fourth-kind-pays-telling-big-fib/2009/11/12/

In this case, the studio involved real businesses, without their permission, and damaged their reputations.

I don't think anyone who actually saw the film in a theater can sue. Buying a ticket for an entertainment or sporting event isn't signing a legal contract for emotional satisfaction. The film could stink, or your team could lose.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Even outside a "work of art" context, the general rule is no one is under any obligation to tell you the truth about anything. The law requiring truth and administering punishment for misleading is purely special circumstances like testifying in court or regulatory like food labels.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

Lying is not a crime, so no.

As far as i know this movie was not marketed as a documentary, therefore there was no misleading marketing.

------------------------------------------------
The spirit of abysmal despair

reply share

add reply

formatting help

i like how the first thought that comes into an american head is "how can i sue this and make sum cash money?"

reply share

add reply

formatting help