To Spoil or Not to Spoil
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
I still don't get the 'Elsa is a lesbian' thing. I don't have a problem with it, but I still just don't see where the idea arose from in the first place. If it makes you happy to interpret that it that way, fine by me, but I don't follow the train of reasoning that led to that particular interpretation.
I think marketers are much more guilty of spoiling a movie than film critics. Say what you will about Abrams' Mystery Box; these days trailers and commercials give away much more.
I don't think it's so much 'Elsa is a lesbian' as 'Elsa's transformation is a metaphor for coming out'. Which apparently devastates the countryside?Falterfire said:
I never quite understood that either. There's a big difference between revealing EVERYTHING about a story and touching on important moments that define what makes a story good or bad. IS someone is looking for a review to tell them whether something is worth watching that is only 1 word? Yes or No? It seems most often people expect a long rant on why something sucks, but suddenly if it's good they don't want to hear anything at all (but still complain when there's nothing there?).MovieBob said:
At the end of the day though, reading a review and avoiding spoilers is exactly like saying, "Tell me all about this movie, but don't ACTUALLY tell me anything about this movie."
As a lifetime study and practitioner of movies, their construction, writing, acting, effects and everything involved. Working day in day out getting on getting stuff made and seeing the gritty, shitty side of the business involving temper tantrums on set and in the edit suite, backstabbings and the deconstruction of any glamour the movie business might hold. I find this statement to be particularly depressing and indicative of the attitude of a lot of movie critics. Worse when they act as if they are martyring their love and enjoyment on the altar of journalism. Boo I say, boo!Moviebob said:
Honestly i'm surprised that he feels this way, it's a bt sad. I'm pretty sure that a lot of reviewers are very capable of getting invested on an emotional level, just look at guys like Mark Kermode, who obviously loves being emotionally invested (atleast you can tell that it happens to him a lot if you follow his reviews) and i sure don't hope (Or think) that he's the only critic with that approach.Lono Shrugged said:
With that said, i think critics should talk about the movie, if that requires spoilers then spoil away, If people don't want to heat about the movies, they shouldn't read/watch reviews, they should stick with the overview at Rottentomatoes or Metacritic.
You know, Mark Kermode sprung to mind as a guy who is totally passionate about films. If you have ever read one of his books you will see a guy who has an inexhaustible love of film. Sometimes he rubs me up the wrong way, but his opinion always comes from a good place and if you listen to any of his reviews, he is pretty good on spoilers.MrBaskerville said:
I think that an unspoiled movie is a precious thing. You watch a movie and your expectations are subverted and you are surprised. You FEEL something. I love it when people get all pissy and protective about spoilers. It means that sense of wonder is not gone.
Why read the Game Of Thrones wiki and spoil all the plot points? To feel like you have one over on people? It has to be remembered that all the actors, effects and robot dinosaurs are there to serve the plot first and foremost. Saying that you DON'T watch a movie for the plot is like eating a delicious meal and then vomiting it up later. You don't get any nourishment that way. It's all sensation and forgettable crap then.
Here is a spoiler free 6 line review of Into Darkness. I could write for 2 pages on this, it's piss easy.
"Star Trek Into Darkness has a rocky script, with ham handed pacing, structure and senseless plot points, yet it's sense of momentum and strong supporting cast make it an easy watch. Fans of the original series will find themselves frustrated at the jarring callbacks to the original series. While new viewers may feel lost in the continuity. The enjoyment in this film is found somewhere in-between the turgid plot and the mostly enjoyable character performances of the crew. Overall, one gets the sense of a great adventure movie. Bogged down in too many ideas and not enough time or plot scope to fulfil them all. Standout performance really has to go to Benedict Cumberbatch for his charismatic portrayal of the enigmatic terrorist John Harrison. An enjoyable but flawed action/ adventure film. Worth a look."
I'd say it's not just about the plot and the twists, it's just as much about the journey, I remember rewatching American History X last year, i know what happens in the end, but that didn't stop me from being 100% invested in the movie, at some point i even caught myself thinking that "Maybe things would turn out for the better this time". I also know a lot of what is going to happen in season 3-4 of Game Of Thrones but it's still very engaging and exciting to see how everything unfolds and watching the characters interact and evolve. I believe that twists and turns can be just as exciting even when you know they are coming, if they are well executed and if the movie manages to engage you emotionally. But if it can be avoided that's probably preferable, there are just some events in certain movies that are important if you are going to discuss the story in an interesting way and i think Kermode and Ebert comes off as the ideal examples of how to do this.Lono Shrugged said:
Though it can also hold a certain charm to be kept in the dark, which is why i persobally avoid some reviews. There's no point in me reading about movies by directors that i follow, cause i'm going to watch their latest movie no matter what.
I don't think people come to the Escapist for one-word criticism; people like Yahtzee and Bob make a big deal about how they aren't here to produce yes/no evaluations, but to actually talk about something. That said, there are plenty of ways to talk about something without spoilers. LonoShrugged gives a good example of this with Star Trek: Into Darkness, by talking about what the movie is without revealing what the movie is about.TiberiusEsuriens said:
I'm one of those who is bothered when MovieBob starts his review with "This review contains spoilers." I know that he's good enough at his job that he can talk a bit about something without spoiling it. I don't mind if he does the mid-video "spoilers from here on out", but having the whole thing be a spoiler smacks of doing exactly what he says critics don't do: focusing on the plot rather than every other aspect of the movie. It's not expecting him to keep totally silent if I think the movie might be good, or not saying anything about the movie; it's asking a critic if they can talk about a movie without revealing the important moments.
I personally try to be cautious of spoilers but I know myself I don't think they have quite the impact that people think they do. I live in a small town and we have a one screen movie theater meaning that I rarely get to see things the week they come out, usually it's weeks or even months later. but with netflix and hulu I can watch TV whenever i please. When the new captain america movie came out I held out watching agent's of shield for as long as I could but reached the point where it was going to expire from my hulu que. 2 months later when we finally got to see winter soldier I had seen the finally of agents and knew two of the biggest spoilers of the movie. I still enjoyed the heck out of it and didn't really feel like I had lost anything.
I also had one of the first big twists of Attack on titan spoiled for me and it didn't ruin my enjoyment of it one bit.
I think good twists are in a way spoiler proof. oh yeah it is best to experience them cold but if knowing the twist spoils something than there would be no point in rewatching them. I've rewatched Attack on titian all the way through and i can't tell you how many times I've rewatched Sixth sense or the usual suspects, movies built around that one big twist. I know i'm late to the game but i just started watching Game of thrones and when I finished season one if i hadn't had season 2 right there I might have gone ahead and rewatched season 1 right away. if something is good spoilers take less from it than people think. If somethings bad than I shouldn't be watching it anyways so spoilers don't matter.
If everything is a spoiler, nothing is a spoiler.
I also had one of the first big twists of Attack on titan spoiled for me and it didn't ruin my enjoyment of it one bit.
I think good twists are in a way spoiler proof. oh yeah it is best to experience them cold but if knowing the twist spoils something than there would be no point in rewatching them. I've rewatched Attack on titian all the way through and i can't tell you how many times I've rewatched Sixth sense or the usual suspects, movies built around that one big twist. I know i'm late to the game but i just started watching Game of thrones and when I finished season one if i hadn't had season 2 right there I might have gone ahead and rewatched season 1 right away. if something is good spoilers take less from it than people think. If somethings bad than I shouldn't be watching it anyways so spoilers don't matter.
If everything is a spoiler, nothing is a spoiler.
There does seem to be a big shift in review styles. I don't even know what "Review" means anymore. Everyone is coming in expecting something different.Thunderous Cacophony said:
I'm sure there's a middle ground somewhere, but it is still pretty hard to find. I definitely don't like how every TV Show review lately is just a 5 page plot synopsis of an episode of Game of Thrones - I'm hear reading to see how my opinions match up with other peoples' thoughts. That said, it is pretty much impossible to discuss deep episode thoughts without directly pointing at a big event in one way or another since a lot of reviews now are about sharing reactions (it's hard to share a reaction without talking about what you're reacting to). With the increasing relevance of comics and books being transformed into epic shows and movies there isn't much room for speculation, either. Most thoughts that can be said have been said tens of years ago, leading reviews to now be more about plot differences, or characters that should have been there or others you'd like to see in the future.
At the end of the day I don't care at all about spoilers, (I personally assume that risk simply by clicking the link) I just want it to be something - anything - more than just a bland rehash of the movie.
I get where people are coming from with the 'Elsa is a lesbian'... thing, I think they're extremely wrong, since she comes off as far more asexual than anything, but I get it. Of course, since it's a Disney movie, I don't really pay attention to the characters' sexualities. They just don't factor in for me.Falterfire said:
There was also that big falderall about the blonde guy in the sauna who everyone assumed was Oaken's boyfriend with no damn proof. Everyone has that one family friend who the family calls 'Aunt/Uncle X', who aren't related... and that was my read of the character, a family friend. People were extremely eager to read non-hetero into every character in the movie.
As long as "spoliers" are flagged, then its fine. But then trailers are always spoiling movies for me when they show every thing. I remember the trailer for a movie where they showed the twist which was the phone calls the baby sitter was getting were from within the house.
Firstly, if a review is tagged as having spoilers (which you're generally pretty good about doing), then a person loses any right to be upset that you spoiled the movie for them. Actually, let me rephrase that, they can be as upset as they want to be, but they lose the right to complain about it and expect anyone to sympathize with them. Secondly, if someone genuinely wants to "know absolutely nothing" about a movie before going in, then why are they watching reviews in the first place? A review (generally) is there for when you're on the fence about something; if you're adamant about going in with absolutely no details, then it seems your mind is already made-up.
Basically, 'she doesn't have a boyfriend'. Or is not interested in boys during the movie's runtime. People are so used to female characters being like that, that Elsa comes off as strange. Therefore the only explanation for her behaviour (ie not being boy crazy like most female characters) is that she's a lesbian!Falterfire said:
Something like that, I don't know.
It'a less of a case of "Here's-the-message-under-the-story-the-writer-is-sending" and more of "Here's-the-message-I-think-the-writer-intended". Some people like to crowbar in their own meanings into stories, regardless of if or what the author's intended meaning really is.CelestDaer said:
I don't think people mind if Bob uses spoilers with appropriate warning. I think sometimes it bothers them if that is all there is to his review. Some people trust his opinion and simply want to know whether he thinks the movie is good enough to sink money into watching on the big screen.
With Maleficent as an example, he could start saying something like "I was not expecting this movie. Especially not from Disney. Jolie's performance is excellent, and the movie has a surprisingly dark and Gothic undertone. Go watch it!" and then go "Spoilers warning from here on..."
He has done it with some of his reviews, but lately he just tends to lead with "Spoilers!" at the beginning.
With Maleficent as an example, he could start saying something like "I was not expecting this movie. Especially not from Disney. Jolie's performance is excellent, and the movie has a surprisingly dark and Gothic undertone. Go watch it!" and then go "Spoilers warning from here on..."
He has done it with some of his reviews, but lately he just tends to lead with "Spoilers!" at the beginning.
Elsa has something innate about her that she is told she has to keep hidden. She fears that if people find out, including her relatives, she will be hated, and indeed when she is 'outed' this happens. She then comes to terms with her power being a part of her, and she is accepted by her family and society, and can be openly herself.Darth_Payn said:
Even if the writers didn't intend anything like that, it's a narrative many non-straight people can identify with, and it even gives her the happy ending where she is accepted, so it's easy to see why this would resonate with people.
We know nothing about Elsa's sexuality, though, since it's in no way touched upon in the movie.
I find that you have a good sense of what constitutes a spoiler and what doesn't. I also find that I generally agree more with your analyses of movies than most other critics. Just keep doing what you're doing.