Drive, you guys. So good! OR WAS IT?! No, it was. But a woman in Michigan (the Florida of the North) is suing the film’s marketing company for false advertising. Sounds pretty airtight, your honor. From the HollywoodReporter:

Sarah Deming has filed a lawsuit against FilmDistrict claiming that the distributors, “promoted the film Drive as very similar to the Fast and Furious, or similar, series of movies.”

“Drive bore very little similarity to a chase, or race action film… having very little driving in the motion picture,” the suit continues. “Drive was a motion picture that substantially contained extreme gratuitous defamatory dehumanizing racism directed against members of the Jewish faith, and thereby promoted criminal violence against members of the Jewish faith.”

Deming is seeking a refund for her movie ticket, in addition to halting the production of “misleading movie trailers” in the future. The plaintiff intends to turn her individual case into a class action lawsuit, thereby allowing fellow movie-goers an opportunity to share in the settlement, reports Detroit’s WDIV-TV.

Wait a second, your honor. For one thing, this lawsuit doesn’t make any sense, because the Drive trailer was not at all like the Fast and Furious trailers. It was moody and artful and didn’t have a single g-string poking up over anyone’s low-rise jeans. I also love the weird detour the suit takes into the film’s possible anti-Semitism, even though that’s clearly not what the lawsuit is about and you couldn’t sue for that anyway but also she doesn’t actually seem to care at all about that and just wants the cost of her ticket back because something something Paul Walker?! Good lawsuit. Very justice. It’s weird that she didn’t demand that everyone in the class action (which probably includes MOST AMERICANS at this point) be awarded a satin jacket. You know, for HUMAN RIGHTS.

Comments (39)
  1. This woman is also suing the film makers of Bull Durham because she misread the title as Jeff Dunham. Disappointment!

  2. Aren’t self-loathing Michiganders just the saddest thing?

  3. “Miss Deming, you have absolutely no grounds for a lawsuit in this case. Officer, would you please Paul Walk-her out of the courtroom”-The Judge, if they know anything about making very funny puns.

  4. You should have heard her claim against the supposed “Never Ending Story”.

  5. I don’t get this. I DON’T GET THIS AT ALL. It’s like my friend who was disappointed in Snakes on a Plane (How? There were snakes, there was a plane, and the two were combined. IT DID EVERYTHING IT PROMISED TO DO), only about a good movie and making less sense, which is saying a lot, because I am 99% sure my friend was on psychotropics at the time.

  6. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: People who ask for their money back because they didn’t like a movie are the worst people.

    • I think asking money back from the theatre that played a movie you didn’t like is gauche and doesn’t hurt the people that deserve your ire. However, that said, I would like everyone involved with Benjamin Button to not only give everyone their money back, but they need to apologize for that pretentious garbled nonsense. And I rarely call anything ‘pretentious’. I stand by that.

    • I didn’t like your comment. I want my 5 seconds back.

  7. So she’s suing for… $15? Unless her lawyer is doing this pro bono (because it’s such a worthy case), I don’t really see what she expects to get out of it.

    A reality show, probably.

  8. i saw moneyball last night – very good! the ‘drive’ of baseball movies! – and there was a trailer for the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. and although I am one of maybe three people on the planet who did not read it, i was SO PISSED to see that the trailer not only gave away key details, but pretty much laid out the entire plot of the movie!

    maybe they got an early warning from Miss Deming in the form of an angry letter – last generation’s law suits.

  9. I’ll keep this short, because it is not totally on topic and you all likely don’t care, but my great aunts– very proper, very traditional, come from ‘old money’, religious, all that good stuff–anyways, back when Monty Python’s “The Holy Grail” came out..or was it “Life of Brian”? Anyways, they went to see it, knowing nothing about the movie other than what they assumed from the title. Needless to say, they were displeased and walked out of the theater 15 minutes into it. Maybe I should add ‘clueless’ to that list of character traits…ya, I should add clueless.

    • Had to be Life of Brian. The original production company dropped it after reading the script, so George Harrison (yes the Beatles’ George Harrison) mortgaged his house and formed a production company to finish the film. Movie history lesson of the day.

    • I could have been Holy Grail. My very not-conservative parents went to see it on a date and walked out when it got excessively violent (my guess is when the knight gets his arms and legs chopped off). They always steered me against violence as a whole, which is probably why I haven’t seen Drive. From some of the scenes I’ve read about, I don’t know if I’d like it AT ALL. But I love Elizabeth and I love the Godfather, so responsible violence or historically accurate violence with consequences gets a pass — which I is why I’m planning on renting this from Qwikster.

      Wait… what? SOMEBODY GET ME A LAWYER.

  10. This is actually even more bizarre when you consider that there’s also a lawyer involved, who is presumably not crazy, and is presumably working on a contingency basis.

    I don’t specialize in movie trailer-related personal injury law, but my professional opinion is that everyone involved is Fake and Great Lakes.

  11. “I’m with this lawsuit. Jewish drivers are liars!”

  12. I really need to see this movie. I haven’t gotten a chance yet! And then when I read that it’s directed by the same guy who did “Pusher” and “Bronson”??? I REALLY need to see this.

  13. Am I alone in thinking that pretty much all movie trailers are misleading? Like I remember seeing the trailer for 40 Year Old Virgin and being like “Ew no thanks” because it looked so dumb and unfunny, but then it was so funny! I should sue for the cost of my ticket to that, then also the second time I saw it in the theater, and then also the DVD I bought for it because they did not do that movie justice in the trailer and I would’ve liked to know ahead of time that it was actually going to be really funny!

  14. This makes even less sense when you actually watch the trailer– it condenses the movie’s entire plot in almost perfect chronological order.

  15. Gabe, you will be hearing from my lawyers regarding reimbursement for the damage caused by chewing my computer when I first stumbled onto this website.

    • I read the blurb for this blog and was expecting it to be a log of exclusively trampoline accidents. I was expecting maybe one post every 3-4 months on a new horrific, if hilarious, trampoline accident, instead of 8-10 thoughtful and hilarious posts a day about stuff that doesn’t even have anything to with trampolines.

  16. The weird thing is, I’m being sued by Charlie Kaufman. He feels that I enjoyed his movies so much, he should be getting more for them than just the eight euros I paid.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.