Does an appearance in the 1997 Disney flop "Flubber" make a classic T-bird worth more?
November 23, 2001 9:56 AM   Subscribe

Even if he did buy it because it was in Flubber, he should still receive it in the condition he was promised it would be in. Let's see if Disney's lawyers can talk themselves out of this one. (If Tony Rizzo says "according to the lawsuit" one more time, there's no telling what I'll do.)
posted by geoff. at 10:28 AM on November 23, 2001

In his dealings with the company, Hagerdon said Wednesday, officials emphasized that the car was valuable because it was used in the movie.

Never ever buy a movie prop you plan to actually use. Filming vehicles usually involves tearing out seats, mounting various crap, and eventually piecing it back together. Its a prop, not a car. Buyer beware.
posted by skallas at 11:38 AM on November 23, 2001

More importantly, wasn't TV'S WIL WHEATON in Flubber?
posted by Succa at 11:57 AM on November 23, 2001

« Older kick back and relax...   |   'Tell Them Nothing Till It's Ovber and Then Tell... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments