Classmates Sue Over 'Dazed and Confused'
 

:spock: I had no idea these were real guys

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nfused_lawsuit

Using their real names was moronic...

God, I love that movie.

"That's what I love about these high school girls, man. I get older, they stay the same age."

complete BS: These guys are probably going around "Hey, you know, I'm that guy in D & C. No, not the actor, the real guy. You see..." I'm guessing less than one percent of the population would make the connection at all, despite it being a great, cult classic...

What a fantastic movie.

What a bad move using their real names.

Damn, so they waited 11 years to file a lawsuit?

They just want some money.

Bullshit lawsuits ain't my specialty, but I would think that some sort of statute of limitations would have run on this. Perhaps not.

In any event, I hope they lose. What assclowns. :shake:

They said this in the article: "The suit was filed in New Mexico because it has a longer statute of limitations than other states for claims of defamation and false light, attorneys said"

I still find it hard to believe the SOL didnt run even in New Mexico, and thats a really long ass time from when the movie was made. Odd...

What a load of crap.

One of my favorite movies, btw.

Damn, me too, didn't they make a movie about a " chubby " kid who got picked on some years ago??? LOL :shake:

Agreed. Lawsuit nation. :shake:

Hopefully New Mexico will throw them out on their tails. Knowing our legal system, though - they'll probably all become millionares.

Has it really been that long since D&C was released?

1994-95ish

1993.

1993.

The timing of this is almost as reeruned as NWA being successfully sued last month for using a two-second Funkadelic sample in a song made back in 1990.

"He'd be alot cooler if he did"

If they win they'll probably spend the money on drugs, alcohol and teenaged girls.

Let's see, you're embarrassed by the local exposure- so much so- that even after 11 years, you feel it warrants NATIONAL exposure which only results in further depth of the wounds?

BS!

You're after the money. Fuggin asshats.

What really ticks me off- is that Dazed & Confused is a classic film...IMHO- one of the best. It certainly has its' share of great one-liners.

ROFL

Every time I hear that line, I just crack up...you get a rep!

It probably started out with one guy who noticed his name in the movie and he said, "Ya know, once I find the two other 'real' guys from this movie, we can file a lawsuit"....what a jackass.

I very much doubt that....

I'm sure that sometime during the developmental stages of the script or when the rights to the screenplay was purchased by a movie studio- Richard approached his old high school chums and stated he'd been writing a movie about their high school days.

Response from one of the guys: "It'd be cool if you did."

I bet you anything, these guys knew before the movie ever hit the theaters and that they were going to be immortalized on the screen...I'm sure they must have thought it was the kewlest thing then.

And, I'm sure Richard got them to sign a waiver of some sort to release their true names. No writer in this world would ever attempt to use another's real identity without coming up a psuedo moniker in order to save face.

Geez, you throw in some of Cosmic's stellar supposition, and the case really goes to shit!

Why I bet they signed a blood oath with the future director when they were kids to "never ever sue. . . especially never ever in New Mexico."

Seems just as probable that Linklater hated these guys in HS and meant to caricature them in the movie, then forgot to change their names to something fictional.

I thought that kid who played Mitch Kramer did an horrendous job of acting.

Hes the kid in the middle.

Yea, I'm sure that's what happened. :shake:

He wasn't that bad of an actor...

Wow, those guys were pretty cool in the movie. I guess it truly was fictional.

What makes you sure you have any idea WHAT happened? I'm just talking likelihoods here.

You say no director would make a movie without getting a release for the names used. OTOH, that holds as much truth as 'nobody' would sue if they had signed a release.

The case is stupid enough on the facts, why the need to suppose all this other crap?

I must've done too many drugs. I see two kids in the middle.

WTF is your gig, Baby Lee?

I am doing nothing but merely pointing out the hypothetical in that I find it rather disturbing Richard Linklater would develop a script with factual names in the characters without at first consulting with the real people in the first place.

Writers who leave the true identity of an autobiograhpical story without the consent of the character in writing- is asking for a lot of trouble. Defamation is a serious business, and all writers, agents, directors, and producers know that....

I think the "guys" feel like they are a reason behind the success of the film, and feel like they deserve a piece of that pie....so, after all these years, they finally think they might have something. Richard makes a movie about them and goes on to be a big timer in Hollywood, while the rest of them are stuck in small town Texas selling cars and fixing computers.

I'm just saying- writers know better than to publish something of an autobiographical nature without the consent of the characters in question.

If Richard Linklater failed to get their consent before selling the script to a producer- then he's one dumbazz screenwriter....I doubt that he is.

You guys will treat me a lot better once I get that money.

I'm not trying to start a fight, but the very things you think "well he certainly wouldn't do that" is what leads to these sorts of lawsuits.

I mean, you conjure this scenario where the guys now suing told him "it'd be cool" if he used their likeness and names, and signed a waiver releasing to Rick their names.

But "surely that's how it must've happened" is not evidence.


I'd analogize it to Nejah Davenport laying cable in that girl's closet, and me coming on here an saying "well he'd have to be stupid to do that. The girl probably told him it was OK, that it was a toilet that just looked a lot like a closet."

Apparently, you do not understand the word- hypothetical.

Let me help you out here: hy-po-theth-i-cal. adj
1. assumed by hypothesis. 2. presumed to exist.

I hypothesize that Linklater wouldn't be dumb enough to use real names of real people in a real film without their prior consent...That's all I'm saying....if he did, I think we'd both agree he's a dumbazz.

I don't think it's anymore than just common sense to draw the conclusion Cosmic is drawing. The guy that wrote the story afterall is a professional. This is a frivalous lawsuit and it's a shame some can't recognize that.

If all you are doing is hypothesizing, why go to the trouble of rolling your eyes at my speculation?
Where did I say this wasn't frivalous [sp]? My point is, this already frivolous. Cosmic's additional speculation is unnecessary and stated with undue certainty. Show me a release and I'll agree. But to say "this is a smart guy, he probably has a release" when there is no evidence that is the case, and rolling your eyes when someone posits the possibility that there is no release is stupid.

What about, as I hypothesized earlier the posit that the girl in whose closet Davenport took his poo gave him permission? I mean, Davenport's a smart guy. Certainly he wouldn't poo somehwere without permission.

I mean, it's just a hypothesis.

I guess my central point is, hypotheses are fine, so long as you realize a hypothesis where you START your search for evidence in support. It's not evidence in itself, no matter how reasonable you think the hypothesis is.

I haven't seen a jettio post since this became public knowlege....

Heck, I'm seeing six...




.....gonna go take another spoonful of cough syrup....