Spoilers and What You Need to Know

Eugene

Spoiler-mania baffles me.

In this era of the Internet, the spoiler warning is ubiquitous, and I know people who are absolutely fanatical about avoiding spoilers of all kind. I'm afraid I don't understand the mania.

Perhaps it's because I'm from the pre-Internet era. In the days when TV shows weren't available upon a click, we (as fans) were desperate for any information we could about shows we hadn't seen, or had perhaps seen but forgotten. I loved Starlog magazine's episode guides because that was all I could ever hope to get. I completely read and studied every book and plot synopsis for every episode of Blakes 7 long before I ever saw Blakes 7, and I loved and looked forward to Blakes 7 because of it. There are some significant spoilered plot points in the series of Blakes 7 but in no way did my advance knowledge diminish Blakes 7 for me. Yes, perhaps I would have been shocked (and stunned) in the final scene of the series, but it didn't lessen the impact emotionally.

Fusion Patrol, to me, is like those old magazine articles and episode guides in Starlog. We hope to both discuss shows you may love (or hate) but also to whet your curiosity about shows that you may have never seen. Perhaps even answer the question: Should I bother to watch this show?

What I'm getting at is this: We do know there are spoilers inherent in what we're doing, but we are (generally) talking about shows that are 30+ years old. The freshness date on the potential spoilers has long since passed. We hope then that, even if there are programs we review that you haven't seen (or perhaps cannot even find) that you can still listen in to the podcast.

When people discuss Shakespeare's work on the internet, do they post spoiler warnings? (Not that I am comparing Man From Atlantis to Shakespeare... although, there is that one episode, the Naked Montague, that might warrant comparison.)

Let us know your feelings on this.

Simon

The Moff on spoilers. In fairness this is not about a 30+ year old show. I have my own thoughts to add in due course... :-)

Eugene

I heard his rant earlier today and, in this instance, I rather agree with him, but we are talking about something brand new, something that has been under a major cloud of secrecy and then, it was the DW/BBC team that held the screening that resulted in the spoilage.

Some blame has to ride with DW/BBC for not vetting their audience, not making them agree to confidentiality and/or not prosecuting the hell out of the person who violated that.

His rant is unjustified blaming "fans" when he's specifically referring to one unethical person.

However, when it comes to spoilers I general, I still hold that it is contrary to human nature. People like stories, people like to talk about things they like, and when that comes to stories, many times the things we like are "spoilers"

It's hard to talk about many programs without giving away somethingthat someone, somewhere might consider a spoiler, and I think those people take it to a ridiculous extreme, plugging their ears and shouting "lalalalala" as loud as they can.

(Synchronicity! I am sitting in a hot dog restaurant, and four businessmen about 3 tables away are talking about something and one of them says, "...and then this spaceman walks out of the water and shoots the Doctor dead!". Talk about timing!)

In any case, I think people need to adopt a sense of proportion. Of course, if you were talking to someone about the movie The Sixth Sense, despite being ancient, you'd not tell them the twist ending - that would truly ruin the entire movie - which had nothing else to recommend it except the ending. On then other hand, I know people who'd be upset if you told them that Indiana Jones fights Nazis and discovers the Ark of the Covenant in Raiders of the Lost Ark. That movie isn't about the reveal, it's about the ride.

Even that's not absolute. Should we all refrain from mentioned "rosebud" because there's always someone new being born that hasn't seen Citizen Kane?

Simon

Hey! I honestly haven't seen Citizen Kane. (And it's a real pain avoiding spoilers, people are always "rosebud"ing and I don't know why).

I've got some sympathy with you, though. As I say, I'll add my thoughts when I've got a little more time to organise them coherently!

Simon

Haven't read this, for fear I get spoiled about something: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/aug/20/do-spoilers-ruin-films-books?mobile-redirect=false

Eugene

I heard about this the other day on some podcast, although for the life of me I can't remember which one - Maybe Skeptics Guide to the Universe.

There are so many ways that programs and stories are "spoiled" and, for the most part, I agree with these findings. I usually enjoy a book better the second time through. A good mystery story is still a good mystery, even though I know whodunnit. Sometimes it allows me to appreciate the craft of the writer, placing the clues and setting things up carefully.

There are times, like, the classic Twilight Zone episodes "To Serve Man" and "I Shot an Arrow into the Air" where the story really pivots on the reveal at the end - in those cases, even I would be discreet in not telling someone the ending. (Even still, I still enjoy those stories and I've know the endings for 40 years.)

The vast majority of stories just don't matter, because the ending is the logical conclusion to the progression of events. You're not being surprised by it, you're being lead to it.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Tagged