Monday, December 12, 2005

Spoiled Brat

I'm pretty used to being in the minority in various ways. I've been the only Black guy in class, the only kid who was allergic to milk, the only kid got a perfect score on the test, the only one who thinks certain things are rude, blah blah blah. The list goes on.

I must say, though, that I was pretty surprised, several months, ago to find that I was one of the few who thought it was bad form to spoil certain elements from not-yet-released or recently released movies, books, or tv shows. What a concept. To quote myself:

"I just listened to Terry Gross, I think, on NPR interviewing Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller, re: SIN CITY.

I got more upset than I probably should've over the fact that like so many times before, I stumble across ANOTHER interview (usually it's reviews) that's full of spoilers, but has zero spoiler warnings.

I do NOT believe it's impossible to discuss the material without revealing twist, turns, and surprises in the plot - particularly BIG ones. I don't want to spoil for anyone else and turn this thread into one big ball o' irony, but I thought of 3 things, off the top of my head, that were mentioned in this interview, but that SHOULD'VE been surprises.

The same thing happens when they have someone critique a movie and, sometimes, when someone discusses a comic book that JUST came out. What is so hard about either leaving out spoilers or offering spoiler warnings?!"

Spoiler warnings or the absence of spoilers. That's all I ask."

Plot and story twists and SURPRISES ought to REMAIN ... *surprises,* otherwise, their relevance in the film is reduced to NOTHING. That's what makes them surprises. If they don't surprise you, then they haven't done their job. And interviews and reviews are supposed to increase the potential enjoyment of these films, not neuter them."

There were a number of people who disagreed with me. That's cool. I can't say I like the result of that, but disagreement, in and of itself, isn't a bad thing. This, though, is another story:

"Quite frankly I hate warnings for things that are so obvious that those who need one should remove themselves from the gene-pool."


I don't want wanna know the butler did it or that the bad guy got away or that the innocently accused protagonist is gonna fry, no matter what. Apparently, that means humanity is better off without me.

I do NOT want to lump everyone who disagrees with me into the same category with this less-than-civil individual. There are plenty of people who have much more cordial methods of disagreeing. I'd just like to see more of the one thing that leads to callous spoiling of movies and needlessly suggesting the Lifeguard kick someone out of the gene-pool... common courtesy and consideration.

Now I'm starting to wonder who the REAL "Spoiled Brat" is, here.

Btw, if you're one of those people who doesn't care about spoilers, congrats. What I wonder, though, is if those who write about or openly discuss new/unreleased flicks ought to assume most folks are more like you or more like me.

Your thoughts?


Domenick Bartuccio said...

You are of no use to humanity. You requirement to have surprises actually surprise you makes you a waste of valuable human resources.

You should definitely stop breathing immediately.

I happen to thing spoiler warning are just polite.

West said...

Good to know. Thanks.