If it's crap ... We'll tell you
Allan posted a status
I R SMART posted a status
Christian posted a statusIf you peruse the new release wall of your local videostore, assuming of course that it hasn't already closed it doors for good, you may notice a peculiar DVD cover. It is for a rather basic direct-to-video horror film called 'Camp Hell' and just as you are about to turn up your nose and walk by, you notice the familiar visage of one Jesse Eisenberg ('The Social Network,' 'Zombieland'). Eisenberg is given top billing on this cover, his name even featured above the title, so one would assume he is the star, right? Wrong. Apparently Eisenberg's part is little more than a cameo, which he only did as a favor to friends producing/directing the film; though he was paid to appear. The actor is now suing the companies behind the release of this 2010 horror film: Lionsgate and Grindstone Entertainment. He is alleging that his "right of publicity was misappropriated" and that the filmmakers used his image for financial gain. Apparently this lawsuit is designed to protect Eisneberg's fans from being lied to and, I guess, having to sit through 'Camp Hell' under false pretenses. He is also asking for $3 million in damages. The film's budget was just under that mark.
I'm having a hard time believing that the entire impetus of this lawsuit wasn't someone at Eisenberg's publicist's office striving to ensure the success of his next run at an Oscar. I doubt Eisenberg himself cares about protecting fans from false advertising or that even cares whether anyone buys this movie. This is PR and respectability damage control and Eisenberg is likely just along for the ride. It just seems unlikely that he'd agree to be in a friend's movie, get paid for it, and then turn around and file a lawsuit against that movie that could potentially bankrupt it just because they gave his character too much attention and tried to sell a few more copies off his popularity. Also, he's in the movie, does he really have a case here? Did he really think they were going to use Andrew McCarthy as their big selling point? This sort of flimflam marketing is by no means a new invention. For many years exploitation and otherwise low-budget films have been marketed on things that are either less prominent than their packaging would have you believe or, in some cases, is not in the film at all. The poster for 'Battle Beyond the Stars' features characters who aren't in the film and the below poster for 1988's 'Robo Vampire' professes that Robocop himself is in the film...which he is definitely not. Hey Jesse, Robocop didn't sue, just saying.
Source: THR
Comment
Comment by Grimmjow666 on December 5, 2011 at 5:53pm this sounds like a typical celebrity "give me more money" scheme...i mean, ya its a legitimate claim to sue for your name and image being use wrongfully (especially if its for more monetary gain for themselves), but its the way he goes about describing the reasons, that it "fools" fans into thinking he stars in it...i mean, is anyone really a fan of any celebrity to the point they'd be "betrayed" by thinking they're in something they're are hardly in...well maybe, but i highly doubt anyone feels that strongly of Jesse Eisenberg of all people
Comment by Devane Boyd on December 5, 2011 at 6:12am @Everwen MIla Kunis is an Oscar nominated actress though so it doesn't make sense that they wouldn't put her on the cover
maybe he wasn't that good in "social network" he may be dick in real life too.
Comment by The Profit on December 2, 2011 at 5:31pm @MaroBot
He should have known that his friends were going to cash in on his popularity. Jesse should be flattered to have his face posted on a movie that HE volunteered to be apart of. There's no such thing as bad publicity. There's plenty of A-grade actors who've appeared in shitty movies. I think he's being a whiney bitch about it.
Besides, why do we come to this website? To have The Spill Crew tell us if it's crap or not. Don't feel pity for sheep who won't take a minute out of their time to do the research.
I've watched part of this movie, and Mila Kunis is in it too, as a main character actually, why didn't they put her on the cover? Or did they think that an Oscar nominated actor woud bring more respectability to their crappy movie? That's like saying Halle Berry brought more respectability to "Catwoman".
Uhmm...if youre a fan of some actor or actress i dont see what's "dumb" about wanting to see a movie that he/she is a star, and this poster makes you believe that Jesse IS a star of this movie. Those dipshits made a poster for their bullshit little movie from Eisenberg's mugshot and he's an asshole for sueing them ?
Comment by John Lemus on December 2, 2011 at 7:41am I think his role as a douche bag asshole is getting to his head because he has become a real douche bag asshole
Comment by The Profit on December 1, 2011 at 10:46pm Eisenprick should have thought about this before he decided to be in the movie. If his "fans" are dumb enough to buy/rent a movie just because his face is on the cover then they'll get what they deserve. What a selfish, greedy bastard.
@Josh Maxwell: But Jesse Eisenburg's not a singer trying to pose as an actor. Similar thing happened with The Fast and The Furious. One of the names mentioned in the trailer was Ja Rule and he was only in the movie for 5 minutes.
Comment by The Chaz on December 1, 2011 at 7:25pm If it was indeed Eisenberg who filed the lawsuit and not his publicists making a PR move, I doubt he made the decision to file for three-million because he wants the money. I find it to be no coincidence that three-million is nearly equivalent to the budget for the film itself. His goal is to convince them to remove his name and face from the cover of the box art, and what better way to persuade such a move than to remove any chance of, not only gaining a profit, but even making any of their money back?
If that be the case; well played, Eisenberg.
© 2013 Created by The Spill Crew.
You need to be a member of The Spill Movie Community to add comments!
Join The Spill Movie Community