I'm still hearing his voice on new trailers, so I don't know what you guys are talking about. He obviously recorded a ton of them before he died.
Woman sues over 'misleading' trailer for "Drive"
- Thread starter the G-man
- Start date
Indeed, but then people today are, as a rule, morons.
Next thing you know, somebody will sue over the fact that they see a white man and a black man making eye contact .
That's racist after all.......
Man Who Threw Hot Dog At Tiger Woods Was "Inspired By The Movie Drive" To Do Something "Epic"
Oh cool. I submitted a screenshot of that article to whitewhine.com and they used it:
http://whitewhine.com/post/11533183238/open-and-shut-case
http://whitewhine.com/post/11533183238/open-and-shut-case
I'd never heard of the website White Whine before you posted it but it's already one of my favorite sites. 
Since trailers are made weeks before the finished film is in the can, they may contain footage that doesn’t wind up in the final cut. Not a deliberately deceptive practice, just the nature of the movie business.
Awesome, isn't it? I posted a list of some of my favorite entries from that site in this other thread.I'd never heard of the website White Whine before you posted it but it's already one of my favorite sites.
Some Star Trek trailers (e.g. the First Contact and Insurrection teasers) used footage from other Star Trek productions - effects sequences, clips from action scenes, etc. That wasn't a matter of cutting, but a misleading inclusion (I would guess that it wasn't purposeful so much as they simply didn't think about it).
There are also wonderful teasers that are more thematic than literal, like the 2009 Star Trek's teaser.
Instead of being misleading or not thinking about it, wasn't that more a case of not having post-production effects ready when the teaser trailer was being made, so they used TV footage to fill out the action? I don't think they were trying to imply that Voyager was in First Contact, for instance, it's just that they had recent Voyager footage where the FX held up well enough to be in a movie trailer, so they used that (in addition to shots of fighting the Borg from DS9 Emissary, I believe).
Those were "teaser trailers" for TNG, meant to do just that. Teaser trailers pretty rarely will have scenes from the actual movie in them, especially when done early enough.
Thank you for repackaging what I just said and giving it back to me as if it wasn't knowledge I already possessed.
She put a hot cup of coffee between her legs and proceeded to drive. That's not where hot coffee belongs. If she didn't have a cup holder, she shouldn't have bought hot coffee or at least held it in ONE hand.
Coffee so hot that you get third degree burns?
Hell, some Star Trek movies have re-used footage. Witness the Bird of Prey explosion in Star Trek VI and the Bird of Prey explosion in Star Trek: Generations.
No, that's not what happened at all. Read the link I just posted.
a) She was not the driver.
b) The car, driven by her grandson, pulled forward slightly and came to a stop so she could open the lid to add sugar to the coffee.
When she opened the lid it spilled on her and caused third-degree burns on her lap.
Third.
Degree.
Burns.
Not "ouch that hurts" be annoyed for a day first degree burns.
Not "OW THAT HURTS!" go to the hospital and get some special cream and a wrap second degree burns.
But "OH MY GOD MY FLESH AND MUSCLE TISSUE IS COOKING, JESUS CHRIST!!!!!" go to the hospital and have skin grafts and debridement surgeries over the course of several days third-degree burns.
Instantly.
The coffee was held by McDonalds at 190*! Not what it was brewed at, not a fluke, but as a matter of policy McDonalds held their coffee at a temperature of 190*. If the woman had simply tried to just drink her coffee she would have severely scalded her palette.
Coffee served at home is usually served at 140*, at that temperature the burns would've been less severe and she would have had time to dry off or react to the burn before getting too injured.
McDonald's knew their coffee was too hot and the danger it posed if customers spilled it on themselves and it had been recommended to them by experts to not hold it at such a high temperature and they did it anyway believing most people don't drink their coffee right away but rather wait until they get to their destination to do so, even after their own conducted survey showed otherwise.
The woman also only sued for her medical bills but the court awarded her the much larger punitive damages because it saw that McDonald's was behaving recklessly by serving people a liquid just shy of boiling.
So, yeah, call me stupid but I don't think it was her fault for being served a drink 50 degrees over a safe handling temperature, spilling it on herself, and then suffering third-degree burns over 6% of her body requiring skin grafts and a week-long stay in the hospital. Well, okay, it was "partly" he fault for spilling the coffee which is why the court split the damages between her and McDonald's 20%/80% respectively. But then the court gave her the punitive ("Don't let this happen again!") damages, which she was not asking for. Originally she tried to get McDonald's to only settle for $20,000 outside of court but McDonald's refused.
The final award given to her by the court was $160,000 in damages, $2.7m in punitive damages (again, given to her by the court and not something she was asking for), McDonald's appealed and the punitive damages were later reduced to $480k, upon further appeal McDonald's and the victim went into secret arbitration and reached and unknown settlement.
So, yeah, how about you learn some facts before so easily dismissing the woman for spilling coffee on herself which caused severe burns, M'Kay?
McDonald's Hot Coffee Facts
She wasn't even the one driving. She was a passenger in her grandson's car and he stopped his car so she could add cream and sugar in her coffee. Because she put the cup between her legs she was found to be 20% responsible for her injuries and that was taken into account when a payout figure was determined by the court. McDonalds was considered to be 80% responsible because they served their coffee at a temperature that was far too hot.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hprByjGNgn8&feature=player_embedded[/yt]
Can we just agree that the coffee case was more complicated than it first appears and get back to discussing movie trailers?
And, yeah, I remember those Highlander Endgame trailers. There were entire special effects sequences in the ads that appeared nowhere in the movie.
And, yeah, I remember those Highlander Endgame trailers. There were entire special effects sequences in the ads that appeared nowhere in the movie.
That's true. I'm certain McDonald's considered third-degree burns to be acceptable if they were only on ONE hand.