|
The assumption with spoilers is that the viewer "goes in fresh" and hence has an original experience from any subsequent viewings. The problem with this assumption is that (especially if you've seen a lot of media) a lot of things follow the same basic beats. You can use the monomyth as an example, but basically you have certain assumptions of the work based on the genre and the surrounding archetypes. The interest then shifts to "twists", which are supposedly unexpected turns of events that even a veteran wouldn't reasonably expect. The problem with twists is that they themselves either must make narrative sense, or are done in such a poor manner that they make the work kind of meaningless. For an example of the former, Ned Stark dying* in Season 1 of Game of Thrones was unexpected, but was a fairly common story beat (the wise old(er) man who dies and sets up conflict for younger characters - see Obi-Wan et all). For an example of the latter, take the video game Mass Effect 3. The revelation that the space weapon is secretly controlled by the bad guys' hive mind is certainly unexpected, but it really doesn't work well narratively. *I'm not spoiling this because it's about as well known culturally as most of Sean Bean's other characters dying.
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 14:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
contrapants posted:So, does it follow that not caring about spoilers is a sign that you are becoming jaded to media? Sure, things are still worth watching, but not like when you're, for example, a teenager? I wouldn't say jaded necessarily. It's a sign that you don't necessarily care about the plot of the movie, but that doesn't mean that you don't appreciate other aspects of the film. For a more invested viewer, this can be cinematography and the like. For a more casual viewer, it can be that rush of adrenaline you feel in an action scene. For example, a Transformers film is probably going to end with several robots fighting each other. The way to set that up is not necessarily important, so people don't care about Transformers spoilers even if they still paid (cumulatively) over $1 billion to go see it. Firstborn posted:Maybe it's a sign that you are less invested in that particular thing? You could spoil that new Pixar movie and I'll probably see it eventually, but I've been avoiding Jurassic World spoilers because I want to see it tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Spoilers only spoil the most superficial parts of a thing. To be honest I've felt more suspense when I've been 'spoiled' on something because when I recognise the spoiled scene I'm all "it's happening" and poo poo. Yeah, like the scene in Burn After Reading when Clooney finds Brad Pitt in the closet is surprising the first time, and then incredibly suspenseful the second time onwards.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Whining about casting choices is pretty dumb though, like what's happening in the Star Wars thread.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
precision posted:The only thing I don't understand is why some people are taking a moral stance on an issue that boils down to "what's so hard about typing [ spoiler ] and later [ / spoiler ]" It's not social courtesy if some idiot is whining about people openly discussing that The Player Character in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic is Darth Revan because that game came out over a decade ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
precision posted:I was just talking about threads that are discussing relatively recent and specific media in forums that at least pretend to be about legitimate discussion. if someone is getting spoiled in GBS or whatever that's their own fault. No, you ran in here and said "but have you considered that anyone who disagrees with me is a sociopath?"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:The only times spoilers matter is if they "spoil" something integral to what the director was intending, like in Psycho. Honestly the shower scene is a much more damning spoiler than the actual last minute reveal. With the latter you know Norman's a crazy dude, which makes the extended sequence of him cleaning up the crime scene all the better.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
BlindSite posted:Even small throwaway spoilers can ruin a movie or tv series. You can still enjoy it yeah, but why do it. Unless your goal is to ruin something for people which whatever, I get it your a sad neglected man child who is just looking for attention, but casually dropping spoilers in stuff un-related to the movie or show and then getting defensive about it is something I don't understand. Popular culture by definition is not going to be constrained to formal discussions about the topic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Saint Freak posted:Because threads serve many other purposes beyond discussion of the plot. Like someone might go into a video game thread to see if people recommend purchasing the game, or because they're looking for help troubleshooting how to run it, or if any of the DLC is worth purchasing, etc. Video game plots are the last thing anyone's worried about though. For movies it's either pre-release material, the plot, or themes/related media about the plot.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Saint Freak posted:Well yeah I just picked something, but it could be whatever. For TV shows for example you can find out guest stars or episode plots for the next season months before it even airs. There are people that are going to want to discuss that and people that don't and it takes all of no seconds to use a spoiler tag to make both sides happy. For pre-release material spoiler tags are perfectly fine (although there's a specific rule against using them for casting choices). What I'm talking about is having to spoil the ending of the first season of Mad Men (or even just the first season in general) when that came out 7 or 8 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:For example we could describe a painting and what it communicates, but there's a certain enjoyment to be had in talking around it, trying to drum up interest in looking at it and what it might contain. It's like an ad-campaign. Suddenly, you're not really appreciating art or performing reading, but part of the experience of having seen an image. No literacy required. This is similar to how SMG described video games. People don't derive enjoyment from playing them, they derive enjoyment from anticipating them. Anything that ruins that anticipation (eg, a bad review) ruins the game for them. In the same way, spoilers ruin the anticipation of the film, so people are disappointed with the final product.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
The Time Dissolver posted:They portray not wanting a story spoiled as dumbing one's self down in search of cheap thrills (see posts in this thread such as "'I hate spoilers' means 'I hate knowing things'", "film is not some new elaborate jack-in-the-box"). They claim to have discerned the border between emotion and intellect and that is a delusion. By the same token, isn't trying to maintain a border between society and pop culture a delusion?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Corek posted:See, this is why I hate JJ Abrams' mystery box publicity for Star Wars so much. It is entirely predicated on not being "the enemy", by neither being a spoiler or being George Lucas (see the promo hyperemphasis on real sets! real props!). Not being "the enemy" is a Disney thing, I think. Age of Ultron seems like it had several scenes inserted specifically to say "we're not like that gritty Man of Steel, honest! Now watch Hulk tear up a city."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
The Time Dissolver posted:Why have goons been harping on this so hard lately? What is with these bouts of faddish wisdom that go around? Spectacle doesn't go away as you age, it's just different things that push the awe buttons. The specific spectacle does go away as you age, much like the specific movie's twist is known to you forever more even if a similar movie isn't.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
Clipperton posted:"I watch spaceship movies like an ADULT but you watch spaceship movies like a CHILD" has been going on for a while though. Because constantly talking about how grown-up you are is definitely something real adults do No one has been saying that doing this or that makes you grown up. It's a difference between an in-depth reading and a surface level reading, and while the latter is what lots of kids participate in, it's also where lots of adults spend their time. If people are childish, it's because they're trying (and failing) to recapture that magic they had as a child. It's not because they don't engage with the material.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Clipperton posted:I recapture that magic every day dude. I still cry at the end of Watership Down, every time. You'll have to tell me about the spaceships in Watership Down.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:I can see that, but if you're gonna post something that you realize people might consider a spoiler, why not just slap a spoiler tag on it even though it's not really one? You get to be as specific as you want and nobody's experience or expectations are ruined. For one, because spoilers aren't a binary thing. Someone might care about, say "Darth Vader is Luke's father" but not "The movie opens up on an ice planet". If you make trivial things spoilers, you're ironically making it more likely to make people spoiled.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:
That's really the point - there's two questions being asked: Is an unspoiled an environment a factor that allows unique experiences (the answer: yes, although it's not the only one*), and if it is, then how much should we accommodate that environment? For the question of accommodation, you have to consider space and time. For space, you're asking which areas should be spoiler friendly or not. The typical case here is having a "spoiler" area where people can freely discuss things, and the default is to not be spoiled (there are exceptions though, like the Game of Thrones thread in TVIV). For time, the question is "how long should we attempt to preserve a property's unspoiled environment?" At one end, there are people who want to yell out "Snape Kills Dumbledore"; we can see this is bad. At the other, you have people who are mad at casually revealing the plot twist of Knights of the Old Republic, despite that game being 12 years old. It's fair to say there should be a reasonable accommodation for both, but neither should really be too comprehensive. Having a dedicated "Star Wars spoiler thread" after the movie has been out for a while makes no sense (which is why it was closed), and having to tag spoilers about (eg) Spiderman 3 nearly a decade on makes no sense either. *For example, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind gives a much different experience immediately after a breakup. A breakup is non-unique (usually) but is still fairly rare.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:Funny anecdote edit: I had the plot point of Star Wars VII spoiled for me, but when I told my friend before seeing the film, "I heard a spoiler for TFA," he told me he heard a spoiler that turned out to be fake (he had already seen it at that point). So when the scene in question arrived I wasn't really sure what to expect. His comment somewhat negated the spoiler because he tricked me into thinking it might be fake, which it ultimately wasn't. That leads to an interesting situation - say you've gotten spoiled about three elements of the movie, however two of them are fake. Is that not a unique viewing experience? Should we try to post fake spoilers everywhere so people will be surprised when they're not actually in the movie?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Darko posted:You're still affecting their viewing of the movie by weighting it with distracting anticipation. Yes, but it's a unique one that's not reproducible again. Just as unique as "going in blind". The assumption seems to be that the intent of the film's creator(s) is more important than other's.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 19:08
|
|