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

Trailer: Samuel L. Jackson is the President in "Big Game"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKThy0cipVA ...

posted 8:00:34am Apr. 25, 2015 | read full post »

Trailer: Song from the Forest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekirhw2MMwQ I was delighted to see that there is a documentary about Louis Sarno, whose work I have admired since I saw the wonderful film Oka! directed by Lavinia ...

posted 8:00:43am Apr. 24, 2015 | read full post »

The Age of Adaline
Be careful what you wish for.  You think it would be great to stay 29 forever?  Adaline (Blake Lively) finds out that it is not great to become unstuck from time, to watch everyone you love grow old and die, to hurt those you care about ...

posted 5:59:10pm Apr. 23, 2015 | read full post »

The Water Diviner
Before it detours into not one, not two, but at least three preposterous Hollywood twists, "The Water Diviner" is an absorbing drama about ...

posted 5:58:54pm Apr. 23, 2015 | read full post »

Critics Write About Our First Encounters with Star Wars
The latest Criticwire survey asks for our first encounters with "Star Wars." I had a lot of fun writing about mine: A long, long time ...

posted 9:22:38am Apr. 23, 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.