We've all been there: The slow, sad realization that that awesome scene in the trailer that convinced you to go and see a movie isn't actually in the movie itself. It's far from an uncommon occurrence, but a New Zealand man decided to take the matter to the next level when he realized that recent Tom Cruise actioner Jack Reacher was lacking one particular (but extremely brief) explosion promised by the trailer, complaining to the Advertising Standards Authority about the omission.

The result? Paramount Pictures, which made the movie, is offering to repay the cost of his ticket.

Calling the missing explosion "the defining part of the ad that made me really want to go see the movie ... aside from having Tom Cruise in it," the anonymous moviegoer – identified by the New Zealand ASA only as J. Congdon – took Paramount to task for removing "the defining part of the ad that made me really want to go see the movie."

The studio responded that the trailer was released before the movie was completed, adding that "despite our best intentions, it is always possible that certain scenes appearing in an advertisement or trailer may not appear in the final version of a film."

To avoid any potential bad publicity, Paramount independently offered Congdon his money back, leading to the ASA dropping the case. But the precedent set by this offer is a dangerous one. Does this mean, for example, I can now complain to Disney because The Muppets didn't feature Danny Trejo?

Realistically, however, most people – aside from J. Congdon – don't expect trailers to have absolute fidelity to their parent movies. And, really, would you rather have a trailer that was completely faithful to the footage in a movie or something as wonderful as this?