dont like commercials before a movie... sue

**Tommy Boomfiger** · 02-20-2003, 12:43 AM

Pre-movie ads rip off theatergoers, suits claim

February 19, 2003

BY DAVE NEWBART STAFF REPORTER

How much is three to four minutes of your time worth--especially when you're waiting for the latest "Lord of the Rings" movie to start?

That question was posed in two lawsuits filed Tuesday against movie theaters that claim in their ads they'll show movies at a certain time, but, instead, show on-screen commercials at the advertised time, delaying the movie's start.

Theaters are committing consumer fraud when they claim in advertising that a movie starts at a certain time but it really starts a few minutes later because of the ads, said Mark Weinberg, a Chicago attorney who filed the two suits.

"They deceive you into thinking a movie starts on time in order to create a captive audience,'' Weinberg said. "People are actually paying good money to watch commercials.''

The lawsuits were filed in Cook County Circuit Court. One is against the Downers Grove company Classic Cinemas and the other against New York-based Loews Cineplex Entertainment, which also operates theaters here. The suits argue that the practice of showing the ads constitutes fraud, false advertising and breach of contract.

One of the suits was filed by Miriam Fisch, 36, of Evanston, who teaches English and film in Lincolnshire and is Weinberg's former girlfriend. On Feb. 8, she went to see "The Quiet American'' at Loews' Pipers Alley theater in Chicago. She said she sat through commercials for Coca-Cola, Cingular Wireless, Fandango and one for the NAACP, which delayed the beginning of the movie by four minutes past its advertised starting time.

Greg Scott, 35, a DePaul University sociology professor from Oak Park, sued Classic Cinemas after he went to see "The Pianist'' Jan. 26 at the Lake Theater in the west suburb. He said he had to sit through three commercials before the movie started.

Both suits ask for damages of no more than $75 per person. More important, the attorneys who filed them say, is that their clients want the commercials dropped--or they want ads to state the time a movie actually begins, not just when the commercials begin to roll.

"We just want the practice to stop, or we want the company to give notice,'' Weinberg said.

The suits don't take issue with movie previews. That's because moviegoers have come to expect those trailers "as a time-honored part of the moviegoing experience,'' Weinberg said.

Chris Johnson, vice president of Tivoli Enterprises, which operates Classic Cinemas, said the "concept [behind the suit] is ridiculous.''

He said his company had been showing no more than three minutes of commercials at some of its 12 theaters for about four years. But the advertised start time for a movie is for the entire presentation, not for the movie itself, he said.

An official with Loews declined to comment.

lets all get together and solve the "commecialization of america" by suing!

i would like to see those gone, but what is likely to happen that any theater which stops the commercials will raise ticket prices to keep thier profits up.

**seqiro** · 02-20-2003, 01:01 AM

Heh I just saw this article in my newsfeed program.

I'm not fond of the fact that I pay money and still have to be subjected to commercials, but I wouldn't say that it constitutes fraud.

If they win, can I sue Disney because they put ads at the beginning of some of their DVDs?

**mojo** · 02-20-2003, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by Tommy Boomfiger
lets all get together and solve the "commecialization of america" by suing!

i would like to see those gone, but what is likely to happen that any theater which stops the commercials will raise ticket prices to keep thier profits up.

actually they seem more concerned that the movie starts when it says it starts and not a few minutes later. the commercials can stay

**NuTs62** · 02-20-2003, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by seqiro

If they win, can I sue Disney because they put ads at the beginning of some of their DVDs?

On DVD's, you can skip through those. In theatres, you'll have to wait the few minutes. The ads on DVDs I would say are similar to the movie previews in theatres.

**avlena** · 02-20-2003, 01:37 AM

they should be happy that they only see 3 lousy commercials!! at some of the theatres around here, the movie doesn't start until 20 min after the advertised time... and u sit through a bunch TV commercials, and then a few commercials from the movie theatre, and then finally the previews... it drives me nuts.

**Tommy Boomfiger** · 02-20-2003, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by mojo
actually they seem more concerned that the movie starts when it says it starts and not a few minutes later. the commercials can stay

yeah, either they want it gone or they want it advertised that the movie will start later. what might just end up happening is that in movie schedule listings there will be a tiny disclaimer saying that all movies will start xx number of minutes after due to "special notices" or something like that.

**Tommy Boomfiger** · 02-20-2003, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by NuTs62

On DVD's, you can skip through those. In theatres, you'll have to wait the few minutes. The ads on DVDs I would say are similar to the movie previews in theatres.

not all dvd's let you do that, some actually disable most of the controls so you cant skip to another chapter or fast forward. i have seen one dvd like that and it pissed the hell out of me.

**whitak24** · 02-20-2003, 07:49 AM

commercials in theaters piss me off. it's like "is paying $8 for a freaking ticket not enough to guarantee being able to come in and see the movie without having to sit through an ad for mountain dew?"

i wish they would just roll the commercials, previews, etc back to before the scheduled start time. that way if you're at the theater early you have something to kill time watching, but if you show up when the show is supposed to start, you know you'll actually see the movie.

**Hiro** · 02-20-2003, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by Tommy Boomfiger
i would like to see those gone, but what is likely to happen that any theater which stops the commercials will raise ticket prices to keep thier profits up.

f**k that...as if they aren't making enough money as is. $8.75 per ticket up in Santa Clarita. Not to mention $4.00 for a SMALL bucket of f**king popcorn!

$3.50 for the SMALL candy. Not making money my ass!

**Merlin** · 02-20-2003, 09:07 AM

The suits don't take issue with movie previews. That's because moviegoers have come to expect those trailers "as a time-honored part of the moviegoing experience,'' Weinberg said.

Watching movie trailers or previews is a time honored tradition. Ads for Coca Cola is not. I always enjoy the movie trailers and do want them to stay. As for the commercials I really could do without them. But in the end I'm really just killing time waiting for the feature to begin so I don't REALLY care. I would prefer more previews. Hell, most of them are better than the movies they are advertising anyway.

Also, the one thing that seems silly here is that I always show up a few minutes early to secure a good seat. So I would still be stuck watching the ads even if the movie started "on time". Do any of you expect to walk into a show at the start time and expect to get a good seat for any movie that has been out for less than a month?

Anhd another thing...Does any reasonable person anywhere think a 8:00pm movie actually starts at 8:00? It starts at 8:15, everybody knows that! I think they use the same clock as the airlines. Just plan accordingly.

To me these folks doing the suing really seem like busybodies who have too much free time on their hands.

**Merlin** · 02-20-2003, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Corsec

f**k that...as if they aren't making enough money as is. $8.75 per ticket up in Santa Clarita. Not to mention $4.00 for a SMALL bucket of f**king popcorn!

$3.50 for the SMALL candy. Not making money my ass!

Movie concessions, as a rule of thumb, carry about an 85% margin. No oo bad, not too bad at all.

**mcs328** · 02-20-2003, 09:20 AM

Don't I see enough ads as a slideshow/powerpoint presentation anyway while I sit there? Now I get more commercials before the movie.

I don't like commercials either but at least make an ad that I can't see on TV.

**eSDee** · 02-20-2003, 09:24 AM

The television ads piss me off. Keep the movie previews but get rid of the damn tv ads!

**johnnymk** · 02-20-2003, 10:32 AM

If movies were a buck or two, I wouldn't complain. I think the suit is a great idea.

**Burzhui** · 02-20-2003, 10:37 AM

Originally posted by Corsec

f**k that...as if they aren't making enough money as is. $8.75 per ticket up in Santa Clarita. Not to mention $4.00 for a SMALL bucket of f**king popcorn!

$3.50 for the SMALL candy. Not making money my ass!

try 9.50 and 11 dollars per ticket

**welfareloser** · 02-20-2003, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by Tommy Boomfiger
not all dvd's let you do that, some actually disable most of the controls so you cant skip to another chapter or fast forward. i have seen one dvd like that and it pissed the hell out of me.

disney is the WORST about that, too. another reason to hate the evil empire.

i do get very annoyed at some theaters that like to start their movies 15-20 minutes late - i think they do it to make you restlessly go buy more concessions. and the commercials don't really annoy me much... but the slideshows they show before those are AWFUL. the coca-cola quiz! add the number of naked gun movies to the number of american pie movies! did you get it right? YAY!!!! did you know that reese witherspoon named her production company "type a"? FASCINATING!!!!

i have lost so many iq points from that crap... i'd rather watch a slideshow of mangy cats puking.

**johnnymk** · 02-20-2003, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by welfareloser

i'd rather watch a slideshow of mangy cats puking.

I have that video. I'll sell it to you for two dollars (NO ADVERTISEMENTS, too }

**cheapie** · 02-20-2003, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by Merlin

Watching movie trailers or previews is a time honored tradition. Ads for Coca Cola is not. I always enjoy the movie trailers and do want them to stay. As for the commercials I really could do without them. But in the end I'm really just killing time waiting for the feature to begin so I don't REALLY care. I would prefer more previews. Hell, most of them are better than the movies they are advertising anyway.

Also, the one thing that seems silly here is that I always show up a few minutes early to secure a good seat. So I would still be stuck watching the ads even if the movie started "on time". Do any of you expect to walk into a show at the start time and expect to get a good seat for any movie that has been out for less than a month?

Anhd another thing...Does any reasonable person anywhere think a 8:00pm movie actually starts at 8:00? It starts at 8:15, everybody knows that! I think they use the same clock as the airlines. Just plan accordingly.

To me these folks doing the suing really seem like busybodies who have too much free time on their hands.

hmmm....i think i'm going to have to slightly disagree. if you'll notice, they litigants are only asking for $75. we all realize that movies start late because of previews, but we do not accept that we have to delay the rest of our evening to watch commercials which are showing during the time which we paid to watch a movie. this is different than tv commercials to me. if a tv commercial comes on when i'm watching something, i can change the channel, go eat or pee, or turn it off. in the theater, i'm stuck. i can't reasonably get up and do something different like go watch Rachelle, Rachelle. if they want to show commercials a few minutes before the scheduled start time, it's their prerogative. heck, if they want to show "a slideshow of mangy cats puking", no problem. however, when it on my time, it's previews or the movie baby!

i guess i like the spirit of the lawsuit because i am so sick of giving up my free time to deal with marketers. it's my precious free time so f&ck off!

**mojo** · 02-20-2003, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by johnnymk
If movies were a buck or two, I wouldn't complain.

if movies were a buck or two, i'd have to check the nearest newspaper to see what year it was

**faither** · 02-20-2003, 12:38 PM

IT WAS 4 F'ING MINUTES. Tell the lawyer's ex-girlfriend and DePaul buddy to get over themselves. Furthermore, these are the types of lawsuits that are representative of what bogs down the courts. The lawyers should be slapped or beaten (literally) and fined.

Compensating the paintiffs no more than $75 works out to a whopping $1,125 per hour for their time. There is no teacher or professor making that kind of money.

I'm surprised the lawyer's not looking for class-action status.

Look, before the kids were born the DW and I went to the movies all the time and while there are surely more ads and previews than ever before, who gives a crap if the movie starts five minutes later than advertised. If this delay stresses you so or puts such a cramp in your plans, go do something else.

Twenty or thirty minutes, though, on the other hand is another thing. That's plain wrong...but not worthy of bringing suit. Protest with your disposable income -- go spend it somewhere else.

**cheapie** · 02-20-2003, 12:41 PM

it's 4 minutes, today. if this isn't stopped, who knows how much it will be in a year or so. of course, i'm playing the devil's advocate.

**Merlin** · 02-20-2003, 01:10 PM

Again, if it bothers you then simply show up five minutes later for the movie.

**whitak24** · 02-20-2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Merlin
Again, if it bothers you then simply show up five minutes later for the movie.

right, but the problem is that there is not a consistent commercial length prior to movies. you don't know if there's going to be 2 minutes or 5 minutes or 10 minutes. if there was a universal standard (ie crap for the first 15 minutes, then the feature), one could plan for it.

of course, none of this affects me that much, as a.) i rarely see movies in the theatre and b.) i'm always late, so if i get there by the end of the credits i'm doing well

it's just the principle that pisses me off -- when i'm PAYING to go somewhere, i shouldn't have to watch commercials.