Do spoilers bother you?

[Tom Strickland]

For me, personally, it depends upon the work, and the spoiler. For many things people call spoilers, I admit it doesn't make a difference. But, I can think of very few times when a spoiler would make my experience better, and I can think of rather more where a spoiler would substantially reduce my enjoyment. As far as I can tell, the net effect is apt to be negative. So, I tend to avoid them on anything I already intend to see or read.

For things that I don't really intend to see, spoilers are a generally a non-issue.

There is a caveat to all this. I find that most of the time, if a good book is made into a movie, I probably prefer to read the book first. I would not, for example, want to watch Game of Thrones before reading the books involved. I think I prefer running into the twists and turns of the plot in the written form is more fun for me than seeing them first on screen.

Well said. I hold those same opinions.

 

[Janx]

Spoilers don't bother me at all. I mean, you're gonna find out anyway, right? I guess I just don't need that sense of wonder or whatever anymore. Just don't care.

The problem is when it destroys the whole setup for the revelation that the author intended.

Who wants to read a murder mystery with a good assemblage of clues if the somebody blabs the answer

I mean, who would have guessed Darth Vader was Luke's father?

 

[billd91]

I mean, who would have guessed Darth Vader was Luke's father?

Nobody. But then, most spoilers don't involve revelations so momentous. Rocket Raccoon firing away with a machine gun isn't so much a stretch.

It really depends a lot on the nature of the work. I daresay that nearly everyone who has read any Captain America or Avengers in the last decade (or played the video game Marvel: Ultimate Alliance) is going to know who will appear in Captain America: Winter Soldier. Knowing who had a hand in murdering Ratchett on the Orient Express may be a bit different but then that's a mystery story and mystery readers tend to like trying to figure it out on their own.

 

[tomBitonti]

Why increasingly so? Why didn't you need spoilers to gauge the character of the movie and of the story in the 70s, 80s or 90s? And why do you need spoilers, specifically, to do that?

Quite possibly because I've become older and pickier.

Quite possibly, because the degree of gratuitous violence is more than before.

I would much prefer to have a reviewer that I could rely one to tell, rather than pick over the details ahead of time (and thus spoil things).

Thx!

TomB

 

[Zombie_Babies]

That's what happens when you get married.

Nah, it's just what happens when you're an apathetic ass.

The problem is when it destroys the whole setup for the revelation that the author intended.

Who wants to read a murder mystery with a good assemblage of clues if the somebody blabs the answer

I mean, who would have guessed Darth Vader was Luke's father?

Not really. The words are still there, the journey is still there - I mean, nothing really changes. In fact, it can add to your enjoyment because you can actively look for the clues the author put in place. You can get inside not only the story but also its construction. I dunno, to me the words aren't changed just because I know a few of 'em in advance. It's all still there to be enjoyed.

Does it suck to see a movie that was based off of a book you read or to read a book that inspired a movie you saw? I don't think so. Part of the enjoyment is looking for the differences. The main stuff would be 'spoiled' but who cares?

Oh, one more thing: Sturm dies. Muahahahaaa!

 

[Janx]

Nah, it's just what happens when you're an apathetic ass.



Not really. The words are still there, the journey is still there - I mean, nothing really changes. In fact, it can add to your enjoyment because you can actively look for the clues the author put in place. You can get inside not only the story but also its construction. I dunno, to me the words aren't changed just because I know a few of 'em in advance. It's all still there to be enjoyed.

Does it suck to see a movie that was based off of a book you read or to read a book that inspired a movie you saw? I don't think so. Part of the enjoyment is looking for the differences. The main stuff would be 'spoiled' but who cares?

Oh, one more thing: Sturm dies. Muahahahaaa!

Let's clarify this:

Your statement is true FOR YOU.

I'm a smart guy. I like to figure things out. if you blab the answer to the mystery, you have robbed me of my entertainment.

So for me, spoilers damage the product because I want to see if I can figure it out before the author gives it a way.

 

[Umbran]

Not really. The words are still there, the journey is still there - I mean, nothing really changes.

I disagree. Some thing does change - you. More specifically, your knowledge of the journey changes. That extra information can greatly reduce dramatic tension for the reader. If you know your favorite character survives some will find passages with them at risk lose their anticipation and savor. Similarly, if you know a particular character is doomed to die, a reader may not invest much caring into the character.

Your *expectations* change. And how one responds to a situation, the personal experience on the journey, be it in real life or in a book, can depend very strongly on your expectations.

To make a gaming analogy - many folks find that knowing the GM will not allow their player characters to die rather ruins the game for them. The effect can be similar with media.

And, as in gaming - maybe you personally care, and maybe you don't.

In fact, it can add to your enjoyment because you can actively look for the clues the author put in place.

True. And, that matters if you're into that sort of thing. But, you similarly lose the experience of putting the clues you do see together as they are doled out, and to the folks who are into that sort of thing, that matters.

Does it suck to see a movie that was based off of a book you read or to read a book that inspired a movie you saw?

Depends on the case. For a straight up mystery... it'd need to include some outright stellar acting to get me to bother seeing the movie after having read the book.

 

[Tom Strickland]

Two things I thought about while following this thread further:

1. In the literature course in high school, one foreign student that also happened to hold the highest power-gamer rating in our lunchtime D&D group confided one time that he always first read the last page of any assigned novels: Beowulf, The Once and Future King, Crime and Punishment, etc. The rest of us asked why, and in the absence of any compelling appeal, shrugged and continued to read from the beginning. Obviously I tried reading the last pages of some unread sci-fi/fantasy novels at the library but was personally unimpressed by the approach and desisted thereafter.

2. Sometimes I wonder when reading the comments where the writers fall along some [ Preview <---> Spoiler ] continuum. I like watching movie trailers--considering them to be "previews"--and have not really found them to ruin a movie-watching experience. The official ones likely have formulas to follow to avoid the majority of controversy. In contrast, written info on forums can definitely reveal explicit plot points and I do appreciate when there are warnings and hidden text devices used.

 

[Hand of Evil]

It just does not matter to me.

 

[Viking Bastard]

A good twist spoiled can ruin a movie, while a bad twist spoiled can save a movie. More often than not, it will make no difference.

More than anything, it depends on what I want from the story. I seek out spoilers for Arrow and Doctor Who but I actively avoid them for Person of Interest. Much of my enjoyment of Person of Interest comes from where are they going with this?, while I enjoy the other two for different reasons, where the anticipation for what I know to be coming and seeing how it's executed gives me bigger goosebumps than that thrill of discovery.