 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 years is certainly a good deal of time, but to say the nous is upon somebody else is nonsense; this assumes the person chose not to see the movie for all this time and isn't somebody who's just discovered it for what ever reason (like age).
For me, what I do is if it's something popular or famous, I mean use spoiler code (if the board I'm posting at has it) and if it is not, I just post it.
Example:
Monkeys always look ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
The use of spoilers came about through the internet but there’s far too much concern about not wanting to give away plot elements which makes it difficult to write any sort of serious critical analysis of a film. For me, spoilers should only be applied for a major climactic twist or surprise in the plot but people use them for the most routine story elements.
I’ve recently been browsing through some popular UK film magazines from the 1930s to 1950s and it’s clear that filmgoers in the past were not at all bothered about knowing essential plot elements. It’s interesting to see how routine it was to provide the complete substance of a film in the form of a detailed précis or to sometimes present the complete story in a series of stills from the film.
I’ve always been very relaxed about knowing plot elements which may be because when I was a child in the 1950s it was routine for us as a family to walk into the cinema in the middle of the film (the phrase “This is where we came in” was commonly heard then!). Obviously it wasn’t an ideal way to see a film but I can’t say it ever ruined my enjoyment and it often provided an interesting exercise in trying to figure out what had happened earlier to get to a particular point in the film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The comments I read placing the onus on the viewer who has not seen the film seem to assume it is in the power of those who have not seen the film to know in advance that there is some sort of surprise in the film.
They don't, especially in films that are not whodunits, or others that rely on those devices typically (if you haven't seen THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE you don't know what it is, do you?)
That's why I believe it is upon those of us who have it in our power, to be considerate and discreet. I'm glad to read there are others above who agree with me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Apr 4, 2015 - 11:18 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Josh
(Member)
|
The comments I read placing the onus on the viewer who has not seen the film seem to assume it is in the power of those who have not seen the film to know in advance that there is some sort of surprise in the film.
They don't, especially in films that are not whodunits, or others that rely on those devices typically (if you haven't seen THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE you don't know what it is, do you?)
That's why I believe it is upon those of us who have it in our power, to be considerate and discreet. I'm glad to read there are others above who agree with me.
Well put. Just because a film is umpteen years old doesn't mean that everyone should be expected to have seen it, regardless of its popularity. Christ, tens if not hundreds of thousands of films have been produced since the advent of the medium. None of us has seen even a significant fraction of them. I especially do not expect to read spoilers in a thread on the film score discussion side of the board, which one should reasonably be able to presume to be limited to discussions of the music itself without revealing specific plot points. If a twist or revelation were to be divulged in such a thread, I would fully expect it to be cloaked in spoiler tags or at the very least prefaced by a warning, simply as a matter of common courtesy.
Hypothetically speaking, say I'm at a used CD shop and see a copy of James Newton Howard's score for The Sixth Sense on the shelf, a film which I hadn't seen, so I use my phone to search the internet for some comments from other film score fans to help me decide if I might want to buy it, and I stumble onto a thread on the film score discussion forum of the FSM board. Would I expect to be at risk of the plot twist at the end of the movie being revealed in the course of the discussion? No way. Would I be surprised and disappointed if it were? You bet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Apr 5, 2015 - 3:08 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
MusicMad
(Member)
|
Hypothetically speaking, say I'm at a used CD shop and see a copy of James Newton Howard's score for The Sixth Sense on the shelf, a film which I hadn't seen.....
And, hypothetically, you may even read the track listing when looking at the CD. And you may even read the title of track 11...
There are spoilers everywhere Josh...
My thoughts, too. Without looking, I can name three John Barry OST track titles [The] Death of ... on three different scores. Perhaps they belong to an age when people weren't expected to look at/buy soundtracks until they had seen the film ... 
There is, of course, courtesy in not revealing plot-lines, etc. but to expect nothing to be discussed about a film even years after its release is unrealistic. As others have said, if someone hasn't seen the film after it's been available on DVD and perhaps after TV broadcasts then it's likely there's no desire to watch it ... so why prevent others, who have and wish to discuss it in a dedicated thread, from doing so?
Perhaps you should not read the novel on which a film is based in case it gives the story away. Make sure you close your ears and eyes when the next attractions - future release adverts come on before the big feature you're about to watch - it's amazing how much of the story can be revealed. And certainly avoid all reviews in the newspapers, etc.
There's no easy answer to this and Mr. Jack above sums it up as well as can be.
Mitch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
