Can you guys explain spoilers to me?
I don't get how knowing the outcome of one scene would ruin the entire movie when you need te entire movie to know why that outcome even matters.
When the public stops caring about the story and only care for the end results it just seems like they are not looking for entertainment anymore, just titillation. sMh
>>64133997
Ruins the immersion, at least that's the case for me
>>64134102
What does that have to do with immersion?
>>64134169
So I can get a genuine reaction from whatever is happening on screen
>>64133997
I think it's a good way to spot a pleb basically. nobody with a genuine interest in film cares that much about events in the plot and generally don't watch the kinds of movies that have lame dramatic scenes like Han Solo dying that could be construed as spoilers
>makes it harder to get invested in a character/situation/whatever, especially if the viewer knows that bad things are going to go down
>robs major, climactic events of their emotional punch
>distracts the viewer by causing him to involuntarily try to figure out the chain of events leading to the spoiler in question, causing him to be less absorbed in the film
I think most people make too big a deal out of spoilers, and I think most movies don't suffer *too* badly from having major plot points spoiled, but it's still a pretty shitty thing. And there are some cases where one big spoiler can literally ruin the experience intended by the writer/director. You're not fucking MEANT to know that Bruce Willis was dead all along. Once you have that bit of information, it's like you're watching an entirely different movie. That ain't cool.
When someone says "X dies" you're expecting it every time you see that character. It's much better to not know what is going to happen next. It's storytelling 101.
It's equivalent to someone telling you the punchline to a joke before telling you the joke. Your reaction just won't be the same.
Movies that can be "spoiled" are made for teenagers anyways.
if you plebs can turn off your brain to enjoy your flicks then you can also pretend to not know the spoiler of TFA
>>64133997
While that's true in nearly every case, there was a recent rush of movies that feature TWISTS, and knowing those will ruin the whole thing. Because the "THING" is "OH SHIT DIDN'T SEE THAT CUMMING."
>>64134441
This is a sign of bad art. Something good at conveying an emotion relies on more than surprise.
I am 100% in the camp that art is never appreciated most the first time around. Of course there is a point of diminishing returns, but you simply can't get a full picture of a piece with all its connections until the second or third time approaching it.
The general public is always up in arms about spoilers because they are not interested in art, they are interested in shock and little more, and, in their books and their movies, that's about all there is.
>>64133997
young faggot die
>>64134547
Movies are not like jokes.
>>64134515
Both versions of Sixth Sense are interesting so I don't see the issue.
All interpretations of a Nolan movie are retarded.
OP is literally autistic.
>>64133997
>and only care for the end results it just seems like they are not looking for entertainment anymore
Huh?
Romeo and Juilet starts with the spoiling of the end, so does LOTR.
Spoilers have always meant nothing. And only ruin trh ebin twist xDXD
>>64133997
It's about the ride, not the destination.
Most people just want, as you say, their "fix" of surprise instead of watching a good film.
Most people dont like cinema, they just want entertainment.
That's why people care so much about spoilers, and why big companies like Disney work so hard to censor and protect their plots, because they know they will lose most of the audience if their tweests are known, because they also know they otherwise have shitty and unremarkable movies
Considering whenever Western public schools touch upon to Eastern, namely Japanese literature, they always emphasize "The storytelling is more about the journey than the end." Endings are indoctrinated into our youth as being of utmost importance, this plebeian stance thus transfers to film.
This is why people who care about spoilers are stupid faggots:
If knowing what happens ruins a movie, you'd never, ever rewatch a movie. In fact, the opposite is true: we only rewatch movies we love, and we know everything that is going to happen.
A spoiler doesn't necessarily ruin an experience, but it certainly changes it. A story goes from "I wonder what will happen next" to "I wonder how the dots will be connected in order to reach the destination"
For some people that change doesn't affect them, for some it does, either positively or negatively. I think the considerate thing to do is to avoid spoiling a movie (it's got SPOIL right in the word...) because you don't know what that individual prefers.
Regardless, spoilers are less about the person being spoiled and the person doing the spoiling. Unless accidental, people who spoil do it entirely out of malice or spite, and so I refuse to side with them.
>>64134492
>nobody with a genuine interest in film cares that much about events in the plot
muh cinematography is the true cancer. film is a narrative medium.
>>64136355
What is you do it so they can avoid a shitfest like TFA because you care for them?
>>64136496
>film is a narrative medium.
That would be a book, films are explicitly a visual medium.
>>64135998
It's not surprise, it's suspense you pleb
>>64135998
This, plebs think about movies the way they think about roller coaster rides. It's all about novelty for them. Like a soap opera.
>>64136575
Everything that tells a story is a narrative medium, retard.
>>64136579
So?
There's a lot of movies that you know how they will play out, yet people go watch them while refusing to be spoiled.
It's the very reason why we have frogposting threads.
You're looking for the spoiler moment to happen as the movie plays on. "The dog dies", you're watching/waiting for that to happen.
Also: SW:TFA is the latest in a testament to the elephant in the room: 'pirating' isn't the new, insidious plague of the movie times, it's spoiling films. There's almost no possible way to prevent movie spoilers nowadays, in this age of connectivity. From social media to forums to image sites to plain-old Google searches: you damn near cannot (soon WILL not) be able to avoid spoilers for films unless you see it opening night. And even then, still not fullproof, people spoil things from screenings.
I remember theaters getting The Dark Knight Returns shipped to them in two separate packages, to help prevent pirating it, IIRC. Think about it: how can film companies possibly hope to combat/prevent spoilers? They can't. Now YOU, the consumer, can try your best to go web black and stay offline as much as humanly possible until you see the film, but even that seems incredibly improbable.
Again, and SW:TFA is thew newest proof of this: the new cancer/threat of films from here on out (the huge blockbusters, mainly) is preventing spoilers.
>>64136697
>Everything that tells a story is a narrative medium, retard.
Except the fact that films are a visual experiance.
:^)
Only shitty movies are ruined by spoilers. Good movies get better with multiple viewings, where you already know the story.
>>64133997
its a shit movie and everything falls apart
I read the spoilers to TFA and I was like "Okay."
The movie was predictable to the extreme, and garbage.
If only spoilers saved me from going to watch it.
I didn't believeKylo Ren is Han Solo's son and kills Han Solobecause it was so utterly fucking stupid a plot.
So I was surprised when the movie revealed it anyways!
This is such a stupid fucking thread.
>>64136045
If both are interesting, then you're robbing someone of that first interesting experience since you can't get that one back. It's not that hard.
