# Do spoilers bother you?



## Morrus (Mar 19, 2014)

I know how _Breaking Bad_ ends, I know most of what's going to happen in S.H.I.E.L.D. when it restarts here in the UK in a week or so, and the same with _Walking Dead_. I just saw some concept art for the upcoming _Avengers_ movie which contains a major plot point, and I know which superheroes will be appearing in _Batman vs. Superman_.  I am familiar with the plots of upcoming _Arrow_ episodes, and I know what's coming in _The Big Bang Theory_.  I knew how _Battlestar Galactica_ ended long before I saw it.  I know the date of The Doctor's regenerations months in advance, and who he'll turn into.

Some of this info is promotional stuff (the movies stuff, mainly) and other stuff is simply because shows broadcast at different times in different countries.

Someone said a year or so back "For those who are concerned about spoilers - perhaps the internet is not the best place for you".  An odd suggestion that entire swathes of the planet not use modern communication and infrastructure.  

But anyway -- putting aside the practicalities involved, the ease of difficulty of avoiding spoilers, or any random complaints about the epic unfairness of it all, I was curious.  Do spoilers actually ruin stuff for you, do they make you more/less likely to watch something, do they make no difference to your enjoyment?  Would you rather watch each episode/movie with no prior knowledge, or do you enjoy knowing in advance?


----------



## Kramodlog (Mar 19, 2014)

Spoilers increase my enjoyment. I do not liek to rewatch films or TV shows, so by knowing what will happen, I can enjoy the foreshadowing or the contnuity problems. 

A study was made on this that says the same thing.


----------



## Umbran (Mar 19, 2014)

goldomark said:


> A study was made on this that says the same thing.




Well, what the study actually says is still not available.  What is that "hedonic rating"?

Plus, what it gives are averages - that implies that there's a spread - for some it increases enjoyment, for others it decreases enjoyment.  The chart in the article makes it seem like a pretty close thing.  You only increase enjoyment a smallish amount by spoiling it.

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.


----------



## Kramodlog (Mar 19, 2014)

> What is that "hedonic rating"?



Answers await!


----------



## Zombie_Babies (Mar 19, 2014)

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.


----------



## Homicidal_Squirrel (Mar 19, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> 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.



That's what happens when you get married.


----------



## EricNoah (Mar 19, 2014)

Sometimes I seek them out and I enjoy them. Sometimes I want to be surprised, and an accidental spoiler does indeed spoil it. 

Russ, do you have a thought about what is an appropriate amount of time before the general public should be talking about big surprises without warning?  I think most people know the big surprise of Empire Strikes Back, for example.  Would you say it's after something has come out on DVD or after its theatrical run (if we're talking about movies, for example)?


----------



## Morrus (Mar 19, 2014)

EricNoah said:


> Russ, do you have a thought about what is an appropriate amount of time before the general public should be talking about big surprises without warning?




Not really.  I think it varies so much.  I think putting it in a headline or subject requires the most care -- stuff people can't avoid even if they're being careful. The problem is, the delays vary massively.  A given foreign TV show (by which I guess I generally mean US shows, since I don't really watch non-English language stuff) might show here the next day, the next week, the next month, the next year.  And vice versa - stuff made in my country might show in yours the same day (as they seem to be doing with _Doctor Who_ these days) or up to years later (as you're getting with stuff like _Downton Abbey_).

Can I spost _Who_ spoilers when the episode ends?  Can I post_ Abbey_ spoilers now, depsite the fact that there's a year-old season you guys haven't seen yet?  Should I have posted _Avengers_ or_ Iron Man 3_ spoilers two weeks before the US theatrical debut? Do you want to know who the bad guy was in_ Broadchurch_? 

Additionally, we seem to get all the Marvel movies a couple of weeks earlier than the US; but half the Oscar nominated movies this year didn't reach our shores until Jan/Feb.

So I don't think it's possible to really put a rule on it.  Years later is obviously OK, but we're going to extremes there.

I do notice that some habitually spoilering folks get really angry when the reverse happens, which is odd.


----------



## tomBitonti (Mar 19, 2014)

My answer is "it depends".

The trailer for *Guardians of the Galaxy* mostly is OK.  There is nice background information which tells me what the movie will be about, and which doesn't really tell the plot.

However, "mostly OK" is not "entirely OK".  The scene with 



Spoiler



Rocket Racoon shooting with abandon on Groot


 is an apex scene, and should not be put into a trailer.  Also, knowing the plot in as much detail as has been provided is too much for me.  On the other hand, the bio's and character previews were quite nice.

I do wonder if those same scenes will be present to the same degree in the movie.  Seems like a waste of screen time if the scenes are duplicated entirely.

Aside from plot reveals, I find spoilers to be increasingly necessary so that I can gauge the character of the movie and of the story: Is the story one which I want lodged in my brain, or is it sludge which I'll need to carefully scrape away when the movie is over?  I find this particularly a problem in terms of gratuitous scenes of violence and/or cruelty, and to a degree, nudity or sexuality.  Is the story one where the writers / author make unconvincing or heavy handed shifts in which the authors take advantage of their role in defining the narrative for effect, but at the cost of making an ugly shaped story.

Thx!

TomB


----------



## Morrus (Mar 19, 2014)

tomBitonti said:


> Aside from plot reveals, I find spoilers to be increasingly necessary so that I can gauge the character of the movie and of the story:




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?


----------



## Tom Strickland (Mar 19, 2014)

Umbran said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Janx said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Morrus said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Homicidal_Squirrel said:


> That's what happens when you get married.




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



Janx said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


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




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 (Mar 20, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> 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 (Mar 20, 2014)

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 (Mar 20, 2014)

It just does not matter to me.


----------



## Viking Bastard (Mar 20, 2014)

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.


----------



## Elf Witch (Mar 21, 2014)

I don't care one way or another. But I do care about the absolute whining that accompanies a spoiler. Especially when the movie or TV show has been out more than a year. I had some moron get upset over my saying that Stargate SG1 starts out episodic then later goes into more overall reaching mega plots. This was five years after the show was off the air. If spoilers upset you and makes it impossible to enjoy the the movie or TV show then maybe you should more of an effort to seeing things in a timely fashion. 

Times have changed with the internet it is almost impossible to keep a secret.


----------



## Morrus (Mar 21, 2014)

Elf Witch said:


> If spoilers upset you and makes it impossible to enjoy the the movie or TV show then maybe you should more of an effort to seeing things in a timely fashion.




Even if that means breaking the law?  Sometimes you don't get a choice when you can see it.


----------



## Elf Witch (Mar 21, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Even if that means breaking the law?  Sometimes you don't get a choice when you can see it.




That is hard in the old days of Dr Who we saw the shows years after they were shown in the UK. We already knew when Tom Baker was going to regenerate and who he was going to regenerate into. If you were a casual fan and didn't read magazines or got to cons you might not get spoiled. But what are you going to do but try your best to avoid articles or any conversation of a show. I knew what was going to happen on Downton Abbey and Sherlock because they showed in the UK before they showed here. 

I am not advocating deliberately spoiling it for someone. I got spoiled on what characters don't live through Thor the Dark World. And this was while it was out only two days. 

But it is annoying when a show has been out and if you wanted to you had access to it but you made the choice not to watch it and then get bent when someone spoils something. 

The person who was complaining about Stargate was an American who had access to cable and actually owned the DVDs he just had to gotten around to them.


----------



## Tom Strickland (Mar 21, 2014)

Elf Witch said:


> But I do care about the absolute whining that accompanies a spoiler.




"But I do care about the absolute whining that accompanies [being asked not to provide] a spoiler."


----------



## Elf Witch (Mar 21, 2014)

Tom Strickland said:


> "But I do care about the absolute whining that accompanies [being asked not to provide] a spoiler."




I have never seen anyone behave that way in my real life. Most of the people I know when asked not to say anything  stop talking about it or leave the room with the person they were talking to so they can finish the conversation without spoiling it for someone else. 

The internet is another matter because there are people who love nothing more than to cause drama.

But I have also seen people come onto a thread talking about last night episode of a show and then get angry when they read spoilers.


----------



## billd91 (Mar 21, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Even if that means breaking the law?  Sometimes you don't get a choice when you can see it.




Then maybe people should be a little more judicious about what conversations they monitor. I don't have much sympathy for people whining about spoilers long after they've been out in the public discourse. Sooner or later, that spoiler becomes common knowledge and fodder for cultural literacy, not a surprise twist.


----------



## Umbran (Mar 21, 2014)

billd91 said:


> Then maybe people should be a little more judicious about what conversations they monitor. I don't have much sympathy for people whining about spoilers long after they've been out in the public discourse. Sooner or later, that spoiler becomes common knowledge and fodder for cultural literacy, not a surprise twist.




There are rules:

[video=youtube_share;v8IAhI-B6UU]http://youtu.be/v8IAhI-B6UU[/video]


----------



## Morrus (Mar 21, 2014)

billd91 said:


> Then maybe people should be a little more judicious about what conversations they monitor. I don't have much sympathy for people whining about spoilers long after they've been out in the public discourse. Sooner or later, that spoiler becomes common knowledge and fodder for cultural literacy, not a surprise twist.




We're not talking about "monitoring conversations" - that's a strawman. We're talking about unavoidable open spoilers.  And we're not exactly talking years afterwards; we're talking near(ish) broadcast or - in some cases - before broadcast.

But judging people on their inferior spoiler avoidance adherence methods is not really the question.  The question was much more simple than that -- do spoilers increase, decrease, or not affect you enjoyment of something?

Would you (or maybe did you?) be affected by knowing the end of _The Sixth Sense_?  Would it be more fun to *not* know when the Doctor is going to regenerate?  Would it be more fun to watch Batman vs. Superman and have a surprise "Holy crap!  It's Wonder Woman!"?

(They kept Capaldi's brief appearance in the Doctor Who 50th anniversary episode completely secret somehow; we saw it in the cinema, and there was an audible gasp of surprise and delight around the entire theatre when he appeared - that was something I'd not have felt had we known about it beforehand).


----------



## Umbran (Mar 21, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Would it be more fun to *not* know when the Doctor is going to regenerate?




This one's a particular bit, and it speaks to the point that what story you're talking about matters.

The folks making Doctor Who *know* the set is being watched.  They know the fans are trading information all over the place.  Keeping it secret isn't an option.  So, they write the stories to suit.  They don't write the story so that it being a surprise matters - they instead play with the inevitability of it, and use it to some advantage.  

I can think of another movie that plays with this -  



Spoiler



the 1998 Denzel Washington film, _Fallen_.


.


----------



## billd91 (Mar 21, 2014)

Morrus said:


> We're not talking about "monitoring conversations" - that's a strawman. We're talking about unavoidable open spoilers.  And we're not exactly talking years afterwards; we're talking near(ish) broadcast or - in some cases - before broadcast.
> 
> But judging people on their inferior spoiler avoidance adherence methods is not really the question.  The question was much more simple than that -- do spoilers increase, decrease, or not affect you enjoyment of something?




If you find that spoilers ruin what you're watching, maybe you should cultivate good spoiler avoidance techniques. Avoid threads where people are talking about the show. Avoid reading the entertainment magazines or news articles that cover the show. I'm not at all convinced a spoiler is unavoidable.


----------



## Morrus (Mar 21, 2014)

billd91 said:


> If you find that spoilers ruin what you're watching




Without wanting to sound like a broken record... _that's_ the question.  Do spoilers ruin what you're watching? You seem to be resistant to the question!


----------



## billd91 (Mar 22, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Without wanting to sound like a broken record... _that's_ the question.  Do spoilers ruin what you're watching? You seem to be resistant to the question!




You can check both the poll results and my first post in the thread. They don't affect me much. But in any event, I think the uproar they cause is overblown. I think the responsibility to avoid spoilers resides mainly on the person who doesn't like spoilers. I don't have a lot of sympathy when someone chides me for revealing the end of *Murder on the Orient Express* (something that actually happened - which I find weird considering the movie had been out 35 years at the time).


----------



## Morrus (Mar 22, 2014)

billd91 said:


> You can check both the poll results and my first post in the thread. They don't affect me much. But in any event, I think the uproar they cause is overblown. I think the responsibility to avoid spoilers resides mainly on the person who doesn't like spoilers.




Yeah, so I gathered. You've made that very clear.  



> I don't have a lot of sympathy when someone chides me for revealing the end of *Murder on the Orient Express* (something that actually happened - which I find weird considering the movie had been out 35 years at the time).




I wouldn't have sympathy for someone chiding me about a 35-year old movie, either.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Mar 22, 2014)

spoiler alert I am going to talk about Agents of shield....



I don't mind very basic spoilers but things meant to be a mystery annoy me. I didn't mind when my friend told me that Victoria Hand would appear in a few shows... but got very upset when he told me about Sky getting shot.


----------



## Morrus (Mar 22, 2014)

GMforPowergamers said:


> spoiler alert I am going to talk about Agents of shield....
> 
> 
> 
> I don't mind very basic spoilers but things meant to be a mystery annoy me. I didn't mind when my friend told me that Victoria Hand would appear in a few shows... but got very upset when he told me about Sky getting shot.




Well, there's a prime example!  By the time I saw your spoiler alert, I could also see the spoiler.  The second half of the season hasn't started here yet*; but now I know Sky gets shot.

This doesn't upset me as much as it says it upset you - I'm not very invested in that show, though I do watch it. But I think it does show that it's not *that* easy to avoid spoilers unless you're going to just avoid the internet entirely - which isn't a practical solution.

*[edit - huh; apparently it sneakily started back here last week!]


----------



## MarkB (Mar 22, 2014)

I like to go into a show or movie as 'fresh' as possible. I'm currently avoiding Sky's trailers for Game of Thrones because I don't want to go into the new series with too many preconceptions, even though I've read the novels.

Back when the Doctor Who anniversary episode was in the offing, I seriously curtailed my forum reading and actively avoided press stories in order to keep spoilers to a minimum. I still knew the general gist, but was a lot happier for not knowing too many twists ahead of time.

I recall getting spoiled for the _Serenity_ movie just before it came out over here, by someone who didn't even think his comment was spoilerish.

[sblock=Don't read if you haven't seen the Serenity movie]He said that two major characters died, and that while one of the deaths came naturally out of the plot, the second was totally unexpected.[/sblock]

It completely changed the way I watched the movie the first time, both providing unintended tensions and deflating tensions that should have been there. I feel a definite sense of loss for the movie experience I would have had that first time, if not for that one comment.


----------



## Tom Strickland (Mar 22, 2014)

The time limit I consider irrelevant. In person among trusted friends, we always ask first if a person has seen a movie--even years in the past--before mentioning illustrative plot points as part of an enjoyable discussion. [Sometimes people would like to see something about which they never knew with fresh wonder for the first time.] Nevertheless, I have always accepted hearing plot points of unseen movies when asked. The key is the respect among people. [And "truth is stranger than fiction" so I have no great investment in any fictional plot anyway, but it is nice to be asked.]


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Mar 22, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Well, there's a prime example!  By the time I saw your spoiler alert, I could also see the spoiler.  The second half of the season hasn't started here yet*; but now I know Sky gets shot.
> 
> This doesn't upset me as much as it says it upset you - I'm not very invested in that show, though I do watch it. But I think it does show that it's not *that* easy to avoid spoilers unless you're going to just avoid the internet entirely - which isn't a practical solution.
> 
> *[edit - huh; apparently it sneakily started back here last week!]




I am invested in AoS, and was in star gate (the last time I threatened to stop talking to such friend) in this case I in demand AoS on Wednesday after work, because when it airs Tuesday night I am running a D&D game. At that game one of the players is a major SPoiler addict... he knows already the ending to Captian America the Winter SOldier and the end credit scene, and the end of Guardians of the Galaxy... No matter how many times I tell him I want to watch the movies first he still lets things slip... 

If something is ment to be a twist or a shock, or a conclusion or even major change, I don't want to know... I don't mind basic information though...

[sblock=winter soldier]I read comics so I know it is Bucky Barns... but that comic used things I doubt they will in the movie... so there is still a lot to be surprised about, but I don't want to know how it ends[/sblock]

One of the greatest suprises for me was the Man of Steel movie, and I would have hated the movie if the ended wasn't the way it was... so a spoiler could have lessened my fist pumping "Yea" moment when...

[sblock=man of steel]superman is forced to kill zod. It is one thing I loved from the Man of Steel Mini back in 85 and 86, there are times you have no choice...[/sblock]

Batman begins also got a good surprise that in later watches changes the movie...

[sblock=Batman Begins]Ras being played by leam neason was not spoiled for me and watching the early training scense is very different now.[/sblock]

Dr who is impossible to not be spoiled on... I know the ending of shows that wont air for weeks sometimes.... I knew about captian jack becoming immortal before I got to the show that introed him... I would love for a surprise regen or compainion change mid season without the whole internet exploding weeks or months before...

I watched six sense in the theater with my best friend and

[sblock=if you are the last guy not to know the trick] half way through I asked him "Why is no one talking directly to bruce's character?" and just as I was asking we got the line "They don't even see each other." and he turned and asked me "Do you think he's a ghost too?"[/sblock]
I find it hard to imagine if that movie came out today and we went opening weekend we could have that same exchange (It wasn't opening weekend we saw it)


The TV show leverage is one my girlfriend has never seen, and it's hard watching ones I remember and not spoileing it for her... because the fun of the show is "What is the next twist?"


----------



## Elf Witch (Mar 23, 2014)

I realize sometimes I want to be spoiled. Recently watching a show a character was stabbed in the neck. Now this character is not a regular but a guest in the credits. I did not want to wait until next week so I went looking for the information of he lived or died.


----------



## delericho (Mar 24, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Do spoilers actually ruin stuff for you, do they make you more/less likely to watch something, do they make no difference to your enjoyment?




Sometimes. It depends on the spoiler and it depends on the show.

For the most part, I tend to avoid spoilers. If a thread indicates that it contains spoilers for a show I watch and for episodes I've not yet seen, I'll tend to avoid it. Likewise, I'm deliberately avoiding reading anything about casting or other details for the new Star Wars films (and will be avoiding reviews) until I've seen it - I want to see it as cold as possible.

The big thing I _don't_ like, is when a spoiler comes out of nowhere. There was an incident on here some years ago when someone dropped a big 24 spoiler into a tangentially-related thread in the 2-day gap between the US and UK screenings, which really wasn't cool.

And I would have thought that, since people know it _does_ bother others, common courtesy would suggest they react accordingly - use the sblock and spoiler tags to conceal the spoilers, or mark the thread itself to indicate that there are spoilers. That way, people who want spoilers can seek them out, people who want to avoid spoilers can do so - everyone wins.

(And yes, I agree that there should be a reasonable time-limit to this. Complaining about 24 during the screening gap is one thing; complaining about it now would be quite another.)


----------



## Zombie_Babies (Mar 24, 2014)

Janx said:


> Let's clarify this:
> 
> Your statement is true FOR YOU.
> 
> ...




So people that don't care to try and put every little clue together aren't as smart as you or something?  Umm ... ok.



Umbran said:


> 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.




How?  I don't think that most spoilers are presented nearly as well as the story in question reveals the events.  Earlier I said 'Sturm dies'.  Now tell me what that really says.  Not a lot, right?  How does he die?  When?  Where?  And even if I went on to explain the whole situation, would I do it as well as the author?  I don't think so.  There's plenty of meat still on the bone even after something is 'spoiled'.



> 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.




No you don't.  A spoiler isn't a word for word explanation of what happens - at least not in 99%+ of spoiler situations.  You don't know that on page 74 when the author wrote about her brother's penknife that it'll later be used to carve the pumpkin that scares the author's aunt into a blah blah.  The clues are still there for you to find on your own.  



> 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.




Interesting.  I think the different media is enough of an incentive in its own right in a lot of cases.  I mean, I read The Road but I didn't actually see it, yanno?  I 'saw' it but it's not quite the same.  Then again, that's not a mystery.


----------



## Janx (Mar 24, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> So people that don't care to try and put every little clue together aren't as smart as you or something?  Umm ... ok.




I didn't say that.  I stated 2 sentences.  One that I am smart and two, that I like to figure things out.

There are some dumb people who also like to figure things out, though by definition, they aren't likley to be successful.

There are some smart people who don't like to figure things out as well.

And of course, in the 4th quadrant, there are dumb people who don't like to figure things out.

Let's try not to segue off topic in mock offense over nothing or we'll be harkening back to the bad times.

In reality, my point was to address the desires of people who live in the "likes to figure things out" half off the graph.  I obviously didn't need to digress into the Smart people quadrant, but you also didn't need to drag it down as an insult either.


----------



## tomBitonti (Mar 24, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> How?  I don't think that most spoilers are presented nearly as well as the story in question reveals the events.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I'd consider that a significant spoiler.  Even missing context, knowing the outcome could have a large effect on the reader's experience of the story.

Now, once the outcome is known, going back and rereading with that known would be interesting.  The spoiler has a value to some readers.  But I wouldn't want to rob readers of their first time experience, based on not knowing the outcome.

True, at the beginning of the whole story, the outcome won't have much meaning.  The reader isn't yet invested in the story or the characters.  But, later on, as the story progresses and his storyline begins to gather weight, knowing the outcome is very important.  That is, throwing out 



Spoiler



Sturm dies


 to an audience that doesn't care is not a defense to spoiling the audience that does care.

Note: 



Spoiler



From a dramatic point of view, the outcome is predictable.  But, I'm thinking, the uncertainty, however slight, still adds to the experience.



Thx!

TomB


----------



## nerfherder (Mar 24, 2014)

Yes, spoilers bother me.  I take some responsibility to avoid them - e.g. by avoiding any threads with the name of the show/film/book in the title - and I also avoid giving away spoilers in the titles of threads.  I still remember being annoyed at the writer of the newsgroup thread entitled something like "Sixth Sense - did anyone else figure out that he was dead?".  IIRC, this was during or just after the opening weekend.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (Mar 25, 2014)

Janx said:


> I didn't say that.  I stated 2 sentences.  One that I am smart and two, that I like to figure things out.
> 
> There are some dumb people who also like to figure things out, though by definition, they aren't likley to be successful.
> 
> ...




I'm sorry but I have to question what value you saying 'I'm smart' added to the conversation.  As such I can't see a whole lot of good reasons to have said it.  As we've dealt with each other before, I'm willing to consider it a misunderstanding.  I just thought it an odd thing to say.



tomBitonti said:


> I'd consider that a significant spoiler.  Even missing context, knowing the outcome could have a large effect on the reader's experience of the story.
> 
> Now, once the outcome is known, going back and rereading with that known would be interesting.  The spoiler has a value to some readers.  But I wouldn't want to rob readers of their first time experience, based on not knowing the outcome.
> 
> ...




It's a difference in thought process.  When some hear 'Sturm dies' they get upset about missing out on the experience.  When I hear something like that I think 'how' and read on.  Meh, I guess it's all in how ya see things.  To me, he's gonna die regardless of when or how I find out so it doesn't matter.  Hell, he's already dead.  You're reading a history, so to speak, not a live account of events.  And, as I've said, the knowledge changes nothing about the book itself so I don't see an issue.

Oh, and in this case the Sturm spoiler shows another benefit of spoilers: If you're not terribly interested in the book or show or whatever but do have some minimal interest because a friend or whatever is interested, a spoiler like this can get you into the discussion without the need to pay the terrible price of reading something that's totally awful.  That's what it did for me.  I know he died, I know how and I can talk about it on some level but I never, ever had to actually suffer through the text.  Bonus.


----------



## jasper (Mar 26, 2014)

Anyone remember Arsenio Hall's spoiler of "War of Roses".... The jerk gave away the ending of the movie while interviewing the actor the week the movie was release.  That is bad spoiler.  Who is going to be the villain, cast, general plot I don't care. I like the college humor limits.


----------



## tomBitonti (Mar 26, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> It's a difference in thought process.  When some hear
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I guess its a difference between what impact a spoiler has on different people.

Several different questions:

*) Does the spoiler matter _to you_.
*) Might the spoiler matter _to anyone else_.
*) For folks as a whole, what is a good map of how much the spoiler matters?

That is, while a spoiler might not matter to a particular person, it might matter to a different particular person, perhaps a little, perhaps a lot.

Returning to the original question, that leads to different interpretations of the question (since "you" is ambiguous):

Do spoilers matter?
Do spoilers matter (to you)?

Thx!

TomB

Edit: There is a looseness to the poll question.  When "spoilers" is stated, does it mean, "does the fact that spoilers exist bother you?"  The poll question seems to be getting at finer questions, which is, "to what degree do spoilers bother you", and "how often do you find you enjoyment impacted, or significantly impacted, by a spoiler".


----------



## Morrus (Mar 31, 2014)

Well, I now know exactly how last night's (in America) _Walking Dead _ends.  And I was being really careful not to. 

In other news, _The Walking Dead_ season 4 begins tonight at 9pm in the UK.  Awesome!  I can't wait to find out what happens!

I really should just start torrenting this stuff. That said, I'd still be at least a day late, so it wouldn't have helped in this case.

Didn't bother with SHIELD after I was told upthread (in a thread _about _spoilers) about Sky getting shot.  Just kinda lost interest.  So yeah, in answer to my own question - I guess spoilers make me less interested in watching something if I know exactly what's going to take place.


----------



## billd91 (Mar 31, 2014)

Morrus said:


> Didn't bother with SHIELD after I was told upthread (in a thread _about _spoilers) about Sky getting shot.  Just kinda lost interest.  So yeah, in answer to my own question - I guess spoilers make me less interested in watching something if I know exactly what's going to take place.




But do you know *exactly* what's going to take place? Do you know who shot Sky? Do you know what happened on the train? Do you know what Mei did that surprised Coulson? 

Do you ever watching things more than once? Are you less interested in watching them the second, third, or fourth time because you know exactly what happens?


----------



## Morrus (Mar 31, 2014)

billd91 said:


> Do you ever watching things more than once? Are you less interested in watching them the second, third, or fourth time because you know exactly what happens?




It depends what it is.  On a show like Walking Dead or Breaking Bad or something, no, I'll never go back to them. A movie like Ghostbusters I watch for entirely different reasons, but immortal classics aren't the norm.


----------



## Lwaxy (Apr 1, 2014)

Spoilers determine whether I watch something at all. 

For example, I watched seasons 1-3 of Dexter without seeing any spoilers, because I binge watched it. The story already got whacky so I read up the spoilers of the other seasons and decided I don't need to waste my time with it any more. I don't need impossible plot twists, stupid relationship issues and dumbly excused character deaths. 

So I'm really glad for spoilers. It stops me from wasting time on stuff others think is great but is definitely not for me.


----------



## Jhaelen (Apr 2, 2014)

Well, just think about 'The Sixth Sense'. Watching that movie after having read a spoiler is a complete waste of time. Without the surprise factor it simply doesn't work. It's a movie you cannot watch twice. It's just an extreme example of a general principle, though: Enjoyment is definitely lessened if evrything has already been spoilt. There's reason it's called 'spoiling', after all!

Recently I had the strangest sense of deja vu when watching the latest season of Game of Thrones: Up until the penultimate episode I couldn't shake the feeling I had already seen everything before. The reason of course being that I had read the novels. While I like the show, I cannot really get excited about it because it's just rehashing something I've already read.


----------



## Lwaxy (Apr 2, 2014)

The show is utterly confusing to me, so I stopped watching it - I had to read detailed descriptions of each episode to get what was happening in the sometimes fast changing scenes, at least in the second season. I have had several people tell me they would have gotten as confused had they not read the books.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (Apr 3, 2014)

Jhaelen said:


> Well, just think about 'The Sixth Sense'. Watching that movie after having read a spoiler is a complete waste of time. Without the surprise factor it simply doesn't work. It's a movie you cannot watch twice. It's just an extreme example of a general principle, though: Enjoyment is definitely lessened if evrything has already been spoilt. There's reason it's called 'spoiling', after all!




Umm ... no.  That's how _you _feel about it.  Many, many, many others do not.



> Recently I had the strangest sense of deja vu when watching the latest season of Game of Thrones: Up until the penultimate episode I couldn't shake the feeling I had already seen everything before. The reason of course being that I had read the novels. While I like the show, I cannot really get excited about it because it's just rehashing something I've already read.




Again, it's a personal thing.  How many people watching that show do you think have read the books?  A handful?  I guarantee you that quite a few of the show's rabid followers read every single book _before _they watched the first show.  In fact, GoT is one of the best examples of spoilers having no impact or even a _positive _one as people watch the show _because _they read the books.

EDIT: Not to mention the many folks who read the books _after _seeing the show.  Srsly, this GoT stuff is like the posterboy for spoilers not mattering or having a positive effect.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 4, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> Again, it's a personal thing.  How many people watching that show do you think have read the books?  A handful?  I guarantee you that quite a few of the show's rabid followers read every single book _before _they watched the first show.  In fact, GoT is one of the best examples of spoilers having no impact or even a _positive _one as people watch the show _because _they read the books.
> 
> EDIT: Not to mention the many folks who read the books _after _seeing the show.  Srsly, this GoT stuff is like the posterboy for spoilers not mattering or having a positive effect.





That's not spoilers, it's more like repeat viewing. The Sixth Sense example aside, it's perfectly possible for a show to have major, shocking revelations and yet stand up to repeated viewings ("No, Luke. I am your father.")

Seeing a great reveal for the first time and experiencing the full shock and thrill of the startling revelation is one kind of enjoyment. Seeing that same reveal on a second viewing and noticing the minor foreshadowings, empathising with the poor, innocent characters who have no idea what's coming is another. And that second experience is enhanced by the memory of how you felt when seeing it the first time around.

Personally, even having read the books, I'm very spoiler-shy when watching Game of Thrones, because I very much don't want advance notice of _how_ scenes and characters from the novels have been translated for the series. I want to experience that for the first time as it appears on the screen within the episode.


----------



## Zombie_Babies (Apr 7, 2014)

MarkB said:


> That's not spoilers, it's more like repeat viewing. The Sixth Sense example aside, it's perfectly possible for a show to have major, shocking revelations and yet stand up to repeated viewings ("No, Luke. I am your father.")
> 
> Seeing a great reveal for the first time and experiencing the full shock and thrill of the startling revelation is one kind of enjoyment. Seeing that same reveal on a second viewing and noticing the minor foreshadowings, empathising with the poor, innocent characters who have no idea what's coming is another. And that second experience is enhanced by the memory of how you felt when seeing it the first time around.
> 
> Personally, even having read the books, I'm very spoiler-shy when watching Game of Thrones, because I very much don't want advance notice of _how_ scenes and characters from the novels have been translated for the series. I want to experience that for the first time as it appears on the screen within the episode.




Wut?  If you know something happens, how and when, that something has been 'spoiled'.  It's the same thing.  You can rationalize however you see fit, of course, but that doesn't make it any less than exactly the same.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 7, 2014)

Zombie_Babies said:


> Wut?  If you know something happens, how and when, that something has been 'spoiled'.  It's the same thing.  You can rationalize however you see fit, of course, but that doesn't make it any less than exactly the same.




A spoiler is a revelation out of context, that robs the revelation of its dramatic impact. If I've already read the book, then I haven't experienced the revelation out of context - I've experienced it in precisely the context the author originally intended, with all the dramatic tension that was written into it.

That may make no difference to you, but it makes a huge difference to me.


----------



## Dog Moon (Apr 13, 2014)

I don't like spoilers.  I hate them, in fact.

I don't want to know what happens.  Sometimes previews for the next week's television episode completely ruins the suspense of how it ended.  Like OMG how are they going to get out of it?  Oh, by the preview of next week it looks like this guy is back somehow and saved the day.

And then the next week the guy saves the people and all I can think is "Man, that would have been awesome if I hadn't seen it coming..."

So yeah, I hate spoilers.  Enough that I refuse to watch previews of the next week's stuff because too often previews have spoilers.

But if it doesn't ruin a plot twist or whatever, then it's not a spoiler and it doesn't bother me.


----------



## lehcym (Apr 22, 2014)

Spoilers can make me lose interest in a show. The problem is that I love watching whole seasons in a week end or two and it's hard sometime to dodge them as people put a spoiler tag for the last week show, not for the last year show.


----------

