Advertisement

Movie Mom

Movie Mom

Are Spoilers Really That Bad?

posted by Nell Minow

I love this “Portlandia” skit about spoilers.

YouTube Preview Image

The whole issue of spoilers has become very complicated because of all the time-shifting and binge-watching in the way we consume media.  I don’t like spoilers and really work hard to keep them out of my reviews.  I used to try to read as much as possible about a movie before I saw it but I discovered that I enjoy them more if I know less.

But Esther Zuckerman argues in favor of spoilers on The Atlantic Wire.

Advertisement

Spoilers don’t actually ruin viewing experience, if the show is good I’m not the first person to argue this. Poniewozik himself did it last year. “[The spoiler] takes away the tantalizing sensation of realizing that, in just a few weeks or days or hours, you’ll know this thing that you do not now know,” he writes. “But it doesn’t take away the myriad surprises on the way to getting there, the thrills and pleasures of watching a story play out.” I actually find that if I know the big reveal, I can watch a show more carefully leading up to that moment. Since I watched the entirety of Buffy the Vampire Slayer on Netflix, long after it originally aired, I was primed to most of the big surprises. For instance, I knew that at beginning of season five the show would give Buffy a sister. Knowing that already meant I wasn’t angered by the choice, but more interested in figuring out how that major move was accomplished and why it weirdly worked. Chances are if a spoiler ruined the experience of watching or reading something for you, then it wasn’t worth watching or reading to begin with.

Advertisement

Spoilers can only make you more excited to see something With all due respect to Mad Men creator Matthew Weiner—the don, no pun intended, of spoiler-phobes—but his strict rules for critics actually aren’t doing him any favors. By forbidding critics to write about new characters or new relationships in any way, he kills the element of the tease. On the same note, it’s baffling to mewhy J.J. Abrams didn’t want to use the fact that his villain was in fact Khan as a way to draw people into the theater.  (Not that it really mattered; Star Trek Into Darkness still did big business.)

What do you think?

Previous Posts

MVP of the Week: Mamie Gummer
I am a big fan of Mamie Gummer, who has a recurring role on "The Good Wife" as opposing counsel Nancy Crozier and who played medical professionals in two television series, "Emily Owens, M.D." and "Off the Map." This week, she appears in two ...

posted 3:41:35pm Aug. 04, 2015 | read full post »

Trailer: Meet the Crew of "The Martian"
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVD_EE2ugzI[/youtube] ...

posted 3:29:35pm Aug. 04, 2015 | read full post »

Slate's Compilation of Movie Scenes With Teenagers Climbing Through Bedroom Windows
Slate has a very funny supercut inspired by a scene in "Paper Towns," where Cara Delevingne climbs through the window of her next door neighbor, played by Nat Wolff. Apparently every movie about teenagers features someone climbing through a window. ...

posted 8:00:50am Aug. 03, 2015 | read full post »

A "Star Wars" Superfan Breaks Down All the Changes and Tweaks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNbzSH84mj0 ...

posted 8:00:49am Aug. 03, 2015 | read full post »

The Oldest Living Movie Stars
The Film Experience has a put together a list of the 200 oldest movie stars, from age 82-105.  It includes two-time Oscar winner Olivia de Havilland ("Gone With the Wind"), John Wayne c0-star Maureen O'Hara, and century-old Norman Lloyd, who ...

posted 8:00:53am Aug. 02, 2015 | read full post »

Advertisement


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.