Judge dismisses Yesterday lawsuit claiming Universal used Ana De Armas to trick audiences into watching film
Proposed class action suit alleged that film studio had duped fans with a misleading trailer
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A US judge has dismissed a lawsuit accusing Universal Studios of tricking people into watching Yesterday using Ana De Armas.
The proposed class-action suit alleged that the film studio had duped fans by featuring the No Time to Die star in trailers for the 2019 film, despite the fact she does not appear in it.
Directed by Danny Boyle and written by Love Actually’s Richard Curtis, Yesterday starred Himesh Patel as a struggling musician who suddenly discovers that he is the only person who remembers the Beatles.
Using this knowledge, he finds huge success through performing their iconic songs. The film also stars Lily James, Joel Fry, Kate McKinnon, and Ed Sheeran.
De Armas was initially cast to appear in Yesterday as Patel’s love interest. Her scenes, however, were cut in the final version of the film.
Despite this, the trailer still prominently features the actor and Patel on the set of James Corden’s talk show.
As reported by The Hollywood Reporter, on Monday (27 August), US District Judge Stephen Wilson concluded that plaintiffs cannot pursue the proposed class action.
Wilson said that this was because the viewers did not rely on the alleged misrepresentations from the studio when making the decision to watch the movie.
In a lawsuit filed last year, Peter Michael Rosza and Conour Woulfe claimed that they had watched the trailer for Yesterday and were led to believe that de Armas played a substantial role in the film.
Watch Apple TV+ free for 7 days
New subscribers only. £8.99/mo. after free trial. Plan auto-renews until cancelled
Watch Apple TV+ free for 7 days
New subscribers only. £8.99/mo. after free trial. Plan auto-renews until cancelled
When they rented the romantic-comedy, however, the pair realised that the Oscar nominee does not show up in the movie at all.
Claiming false advertisement, unjust enrichment, and violation of unfair competition, the suit pointed to misrepresentations that the actor is listed as a cast member in search results.
“Unable to rely on fame of the actors playing Jack Malik or Ellie to maximise ticket and movie sales and rentals, Defendant consequently used Ms De Armas’s fame, radiance and brilliance to promote the film by including her scenes in the movie trailers advertising Yesterday,” the complaint stated.
The court, however, found that Woulfe, who rented the film a second time on Google Play believing that the Blonde star might appear in the director’s cut, “lacks standing” to bring the suit due to his “injury” being “self-inflicted”.
The judge found that Woulfe did not solely watch Yesterday because of suggestions from Universal that de Armas appears in the movie.
Wilson also said there was no reason to believe that the director’s cut version they purchased on Google Play “would be a different version of the movie” than the one they watched for the first time.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments