|
Post by Sara on Nov 11, 2009 13:34:22 GMT -5
Another excellent article about spoilers: The Spoiler Problem.I still can't believe someone bitched that they were spoiled for the season finale of Mad Men when they clicked on an article titled " Mad Men Postmortem." I mean, really? 'Cause it seems like fairly basic logic to me--if you don't want to be spoiled for an episode, DON'T READ ARTICLES ABOUT IT THE NEXT DAY, especially when they tell you IN THE TITLE that the purpose of said article is to rehash said episode. Or am I completely missing something here? There's a woman old enough to know better- ten years older than I am!- arguing in that column that it's wrong to mention the Angela Lansbury twist from The Manchurian Candidate and calling such "spoilers" "boasting that you've finished the book" or words to that effect.Julia, I don't get the spoiler averse but I'm pretty sure that's not only BS but also nuts And as the article's author points out to her, just telling someone a twist involving Lansbury's character exists is arguably a spoiler itself--once you know that, it changes the way you watch as you try and figure out what the twist is. I know that if I'd been aware there was a huge twist coming in The Sixth Sense I'd have had a very different viewing experience than I did not knowing it. So even her example as to how to discuss something without spoiling it does, in fact, spoil it.
|
|
|
Post by Squeemonster on Nov 11, 2009 13:36:31 GMT -5
Welcome to Part 1078 of the Soulful Spike Society Main Thread! No S'cubie left behind! Never surrender! Attica! Attica! You crack me up hardcore, Monnie! Glad I could make you laugh. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Matthew on Nov 11, 2009 13:45:19 GMT -5
Another excellent article about spoilers: The Spoiler Problem.I still can't believe someone bitched that they were spoiled for the season finale of Mad Men when they clicked on an article titled " Mad Men Postmortem." I mean, really? 'Cause it seems like fairly basic logic to me--if you don't want to be spoiled for an episode, DON'T READ ARTICLES ABOUT IT THE NEXT DAY, especially when they tell you IN THE TITLE that the purpose of said article is to rehash said episode. Or am I completely missing something here? There's a woman old enough to know better- ten years older than I am!- arguing in that column that it's wrong to mention the Angela Lansbury twist from The Manchurian Candidate and calling such "spoilers" "boasting that you've finished the book" or words to that effect. Julia, I don't get the spoiler averse but I'm pretty sure that's not only BS but also nuts Only semi-germane to the discussion of spoilers as such, but I had that bit about Angela Landsbury "spoiled" for me a few years before I saw the movie, and it did not in one whit decrease the level of bowel-chilling terror I felt when I watched her ruthless, clinical cold performance in her verbose reveal. Some things it's not really possible to spoil. You know there's something really hinky and unsettling about the woman the first time you see her in the movie. And to bring it back around to the subject: complaining about something like that IS nuts. It's like bitching when someone talks about the duality/relationship between Don Quixote and Alonzo Quijano. Book's been out for four hundred years.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew on Nov 11, 2009 13:48:04 GMT -5
There's a woman old enough to know better- ten years older than I am!- arguing in that column that it's wrong to mention the Angela Lansbury twist from The Manchurian Candidate and calling such "spoilers" "boasting that you've finished the book" or words to that effect.Julia, I don't get the spoiler averse but I'm pretty sure that's not only BS but also nuts And as the article's author points out to her, just telling someone a twist involving Lansbury's character exists is arguably a spoiler itself--once you know that, it changes the way you watch as you try and figure out what the twist is. I know that if I'd been aware there was a huge twist coming in The Sixth Sense I'd have had a very different viewing experience than I did not knowing it. So even her example as to how to discuss something without spoiling it does, in fact, spoil it. Being one of eight North Americans who did get Sixth Sense's twist revealed to him ahead of time, it is indeed an entirely different movie. I watched it with a friend who does soto vocce commentary, and her criticisms of the characters' behavior and the actions they were taking meant that I got a little of the "surprised" experience too, and I had the gleeful fun of seeing the setup in all its intricate detail.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Nov 11, 2009 13:53:55 GMT -5
There's a woman old enough to know better- ten years older than I am!- arguing in that column that it's wrong to mention the Angela Lansbury twist from The Manchurian Candidate and calling such "spoilers" "boasting that you've finished the book" or words to that effect.Julia, I don't get the spoiler averse but I'm pretty sure that's not only BS but also nuts And as the article's author points out to her, just telling someone a twist involving Lansbury's character exists is arguably a spoiler itself--once you know that, it changes the way you watch as you try and figure out what the twist is. I know that if I'd been aware there was a huge twist coming in The Sixth Sense I'd have had a very different viewing experience than I did not knowing it. So even her example as to how to discuss something without spoiling it does, in fact, spoil it. Yeah, no kidding. I'm a bad person to be talking about this, because I hate surprises and am glad I was spoiled on The Sixth Sense because seeing it would have given me new nightmare material for a month. Julia, needing my own blankie.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew on Nov 11, 2009 13:55:25 GMT -5
And I remember a long time ago, reading a personal ad one time that said "My story is kind of like The Crying Game.... holler if you want to know more"
My thoughts were: "Really? You were a guerillia/terrorist who kidnapped a soldier of the country that occupied your own, developed a deep rapport with him, felt sympathy with him, allowed him to escape, only to see him run down by the forces the occupiers sent to rescue him, after which time you escaped, then fulfilled the promise you'd made to him to look up his girlfriend and let her know he was thinking of her when he died, only to get romantically entangled with her yourself, and then, just when you think you are actually putting your life back together, your old terrorist mates looked you up and dragged you back into the life?"
Didn't write her about that: a trans gal has enough to face with her chin up without dealing with criticism from half-assed movie critics. But by god, I thought it.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Nov 11, 2009 13:57:12 GMT -5
There's a woman old enough to know better- ten years older than I am!- arguing in that column that it's wrong to mention the Angela Lansbury twist from The Manchurian Candidate and calling such "spoilers" "boasting that you've finished the book" or words to that effect. Julia, I don't get the spoiler averse but I'm pretty sure that's not only BS but also nuts Only semi-germane to the discussion of spoilers as such, but I had that bit about Angela Landsbury "spoiled" for me a few years before I saw the movie, and it did not in one whit decrease the level of bowel-chilling terror I felt when I watched her ruthless, clinical cold performance in her verbose reveal. Some things it's not really possible to spoil. You know there's something really hinky and unsettling about the woman the first time you see her in the movie. And to bring it back around to the subject: complaining about something like that IS nuts. It's like bitching when someone talks about the duality/relationship between Don Quixote and Alejandro Quijano. Book's been out for four hundred years. Ditto Romeo and Juliet. I just watched The Manchurian Candidate in the past few months, and the way that story is structured, you know in advance just what happened. The horror comes from fearing that it's going to work. Julia, how can one have a culturally aware conversation without drawing on cultural touchstones?
|
|
|
Post by Sara on Nov 11, 2009 13:58:00 GMT -5
And as the article's author points out to her, just telling someone a twist involving Lansbury's character exists is arguably a spoiler itself--once you know that, it changes the way you watch as you try and figure out what the twist is. I know that if I'd been aware there was a huge twist coming in The Sixth Sense I'd have had a very different viewing experience than I did not knowing it. So even her example as to how to discuss something without spoiling it does, in fact, spoil it. Being one of eight North Americans who did get Sixth Sense's twist revealed to him ahead of time, it is indeed an entirely different movie. I watched it with a friend who does soto vocce commentary, and her criticisms of the characters' behavior and the actions they were taking meant that I got a little of the "surprised" experience too, and I had the gleeful fun of seeing the setup in all its intricate detail. I had a similar experience--I saw it in the theaters opening weekend, completely unspoiled (I was out of town and hadn't read a newspaper in days), and then watched it again with Greg when he saw it for the first time. The only thing I gave away to Greg beforehand was that nothing bad happened to the puppy.
|
|
|
Post by Matthew on Nov 11, 2009 14:05:03 GMT -5
Being one of eight North Americans who did get Sixth Sense's twist revealed to him ahead of time, it is indeed an entirely different movie. I watched it with a friend who does soto vocce commentary, and her criticisms of the characters' behavior and the actions they were taking meant that I got a little of the "surprised" experience too, and I had the gleeful fun of seeing the setup in all its intricate detail. I had a similar experience--I saw it in the theaters opening weekend, completely unspoiled (I was out of town and hadn't read a newspaper in days), and then watched it again with Greg when he saw it for the first time. The only thing I gave away to Greg beforehand was that nothing bad happened to the puppy. Actually, I don't think any of the newspapers actively "spoiled" Sixth Sense, in say, the way Martha Stewart spoiled (and she did, with malice aforethought) Fight Club. I read and looked up every review of Sixth Sense, and the furthest any of them went was to indicate that there was a surprise in store: some didn't even go that far. I remember it being the first time that my friends would actually change the subject from a movie they wanted to discuss if someone present hadn't seen it and wanted to. Poor Manoj Shyamalan! This is why I'm sorta glad Harper Lee didn't write anything after To Kill a Mockingbird. I still love his movies, but critics are so brutal to him..
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Nov 11, 2009 14:08:20 GMT -5
NCIS: odd episode--just seemed a bit random. Question: Were they trying to move forward on a Tony/Ziva relationship? I dunno. They've been teasing us all season, so basically, I watch without any particular expectations. I wondered about Tim and Abby, too!
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Nov 11, 2009 14:10:04 GMT -5
Actors playing those parts in Mad Men and Gilmore Girls respectively. Julia, played suspect brothers on Castle this week. Oh, I see. I didn't/don't watch either show. My bad. I went out again; the art and framing store was not open at 10 (as per the sign) so I went to TJs, then detoured back. It was open and she had the velvet/flocked/suede (names vary) paper I need in several likely-looking colors, including the basic black I've been questing after. So that's the end of that quest, and I can redo the vintage dresser tray again. Maybe tomorrow when I can spread junk out all over the kitchen table without being interrupted. My teeth hurt.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Nov 11, 2009 14:10:07 GMT -5
Some day, I'd like a job that doesn't make me hate holidays so much. MONNIE! Your avatar! What is happening in that avatar? I am going to guess that . . . Cas is giving Dean a . . . pendant of some kind?
|
|
|
Post by Sara on Nov 11, 2009 14:10:45 GMT -5
Only semi-germane to the discussion of spoilers as such, but I had that bit about Angela Landsbury "spoiled" for me a few years before I saw the movie, and it did not in one whit decrease the level of bowel-chilling terror I felt when I watched her ruthless, clinical cold performance in her verbose reveal. Some things it's not really possible to spoil. You know there's something really hinky and unsettling about the woman the first time you see her in the movie. And to bring it back around to the subject: complaining about something like that IS nuts. It's like bitching when someone talks about the duality/relationship between Don Quixote and Alejandro Quijano. Book's been out for four hundred years. Ditto Romeo and Juliet. I just watched The Manchurian Candidate in the past few months, and the way that story is structured, you know in advance just what happened. The horror comes from fearing that it's going to work. Julia, how can one have a culturally aware conversation without drawing on cultural touchstones?Precisely. Besides, how many people went and saw Titanic even though every one of them (presumably) already knew full well that the damn thing sinks? And, to follow up on something Matthew said, it can definitely be just as enriching an experience watching a movie with an unexpected twist even when you already know said twist--once you know what happened, you can watch and admire the craftsmanship involved in the balancing act of setting up the big reveal while still obscuring the truth. Not to mention making sure your misleads and fakeouts will hold up during that second viewing and not have the viewer crying "foul" afterward.
|
|
|
Post by Sara on Nov 11, 2009 14:17:55 GMT -5
I had a similar experience--I saw it in the theaters opening weekend, completely unspoiled (I was out of town and hadn't read a newspaper in days), and then watched it again with Greg when he saw it for the first time. The only thing I gave away to Greg beforehand was that nothing bad happened to the puppy. Actually, I don't think any of the newspapers actively "spoiled" Sixth Sense, in say, the way Martha Stewart spoiled (and she did, with malice aforethought) Fight Club. I read and looked up every review of Sixth Sense, and the furthest any of them went was to indicate that there was a surprise in store: some didn't even go that far. I remember it being the first time that my friends would actually change the subject from a movie they wanted to discuss if someone present hadn't seen it and wanted to. Poor Manoj Shyamalan! This is why I'm sorta glad Harper Lee didn't write anything after To Kill a Mockingbird. I still love his movies, but critics are so brutal to him.. Yeah, when I went back and read reviews afterward I was impressed at how every reviewer I checked had kept the secret a secret. One or two, though, did mention there was a surprise involved--and I was very glad I didn't even know that much. That's what I meant. I'm not saying I would have figured out the twist if I knew there was one. However, not even knowing that much made for, in my mind, a... purer viewing experience, for lack of a better word. Like I'd seen and processed it exactly as the filmmaker had wanted me to. Does that make any sense?
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Nov 11, 2009 14:20:24 GMT -5
Ditto Romeo and Juliet. I just watched The Manchurian Candidate in the past few months, and the way that story is structured, you know in advance just what happened. The horror comes from fearing that it's going to work. Julia, how can one have a culturally aware conversation without drawing on cultural touchstones?Precisely. Besides, how many people went and saw Titanic even though every one of them (presumably) already knew full well that the damn thing sinks? And, to follow up on something Matthew said, it can definitely be just as enriching an experience watching a movie with an unexpected twist even when you already know said twist--once you know what happened, you can watch and admire the craftsmanship involved in the balancing act of setting up the big reveal while still obscuring the truth. Not to mention making sure your misleads and fakeouts will hold up during that second viewing and not have the viewer crying "foul" afterward. and the same applies to a good episode of a TV show. This is why I generally read a new book by a favorite author twice in short order - the first time quickly while I worry about the characters and try not to peek at the ending, the second time slowly to better appreciate the author's writing skills, now that I know everybody's okay, or not, as the case may be.
|
|