Comments on: What's a Spoiler Now? http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/ A blog about television by TIME’s TV critic James Poniewozik. Wed, 09 Dec 2009 03:42:04 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Chaddogg http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18043 Chaddogg Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:56:18 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18043 @mcmagnus -- both valid theories, although I'm still not convinced on the Sayid's bad Rousseau experience turning them off to exploring the perimeter of the island theory. I know a raft took a long time (clearly, especially when Walt burns one down), but a quick canoe just for purposes of travelling when the beach wasn't around? And I would think a communications expert like Sayid would have the bravado to think that he could improve/boost the signal, and get it to work (where Rousseau could not). But I do appreciate the devil's advocate. . Here's an interesting thought/scene (it's amazing the theories that come to you re-watching the early seasons -- James, you should think about Lost Discussion Group just each handling issues from each season, 1-4, up to the current one): Sawyer witnessing his father's suicide. With all the time warps/etc. involved in the show, and considering we only see papa Sawyer's boots....any thoughts that kid Sawyer saw daddy Sawyer kill himself (in a weird, time-warp sense that he HAD to do so to save everyone, and put kid Sawyer on the path that would lead to everything else in the show)???? . By the way, if you're looking for amazing Lost season 1 scenes, let me recommend Kate-Sawyer playing "I Never" in the episode "Outlaws." Some amazing stuff there, particularly the climax, where Sawyer says "I never killed a man," they both pause, each drinks shakily, and Sawyer says "Well, I guess we have something in common" in a VERY knowing way. . I CANNOT WAIT for Lost to get back!!! @mcmagnus -- both valid theories, although I'm still not convinced on the Sayid's bad Rousseau experience turning them off to exploring the perimeter of the island theory. I know a raft took a long time (clearly, especially when Walt burns one down), but a quick canoe just for purposes of travelling when the beach wasn't around? And I would think a communications expert like Sayid would have the bravado to think that he could improve/boost the signal, and get it to work (where Rousseau could not). But I do appreciate the devil's advocate.
.
Here's an interesting thought/scene (it's amazing the theories that come to you re-watching the early seasons -- James, you should think about Lost Discussion Group just each handling issues from each season, 1-4, up to the current one): Sawyer witnessing his father's suicide. With all the time warps/etc. involved in the show, and considering we only see papa Sawyer's boots....any thoughts that kid Sawyer saw daddy Sawyer kill himself (in a weird, time-warp sense that he HAD to do so to save everyone, and put kid Sawyer on the path that would lead to everything else in the show)????
.
By the way, if you're looking for amazing Lost season 1 scenes, let me recommend Kate-Sawyer playing "I Never" in the episode "Outlaws." Some amazing stuff there, particularly the climax, where Sawyer says "I never killed a man," they both pause, each drinks shakily, and Sawyer says "Well, I guess we have something in common" in a VERY knowing way.
.
I CANNOT WAIT for Lost to get back!!!

]]> By: mcmagnus http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18037 mcmagnus Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:29:12 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18037 @Chaddogg: Playing devil's advocate here, as these aren't concrete answers, but: They didn't really have a canoe, and it took a lot of manpower to build just the raft. Sayid did go around the perimeter of the island to explore, but he had a bad experience with Rousseau. Finding out what happened to her, knowing she's been using the radio tower for 16 yrs without success, may have made him feel that particular avenue was futile. Best I can do. Also, I you want to waste more time reliving Lost, I recommend going here: http://blogs.chron.com/tubular/archives/2007/06/the_celestial_p.html The blogger started after season 3, and theres a lot of really interesting ideas. @Chaddogg:

Playing devil's advocate here, as these aren't concrete answers, but:
They didn't really have a canoe, and it took a lot of manpower to build just the raft. Sayid did go around the perimeter of the island to explore, but he had a bad experience with Rousseau. Finding out what happened to her, knowing she's been using the radio tower for 16 yrs without success, may have made him feel that particular avenue was futile.
Best I can do.

Also, I you want to waste more time reliving Lost, I recommend going here:
http://blogs.chron.com/tubular/archives/2007/06/the_celestial_p.html
The blogger started after season 3, and theres a lot of really interesting ideas.

]]> By: Chaddogg http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18032 Chaddogg Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:36:25 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18032 @shara -- you want to know what I don't exactly get now, looking back? How quickly Sayid gave up the whole "locate the source of Rousseau's repeating message" thing. . This has more to do with island geography (exactly how big is the island, anyway?) than anything else, but after Locke hits Sayid on the head and breaks the transceiver, why did Sayid just give up on locating the radio tower (that we eventually found at the end of Season 3)? I mean, wasn't locating that tower a pretty critical thing in terms of calling for help (even if they didn't know the signal was being jammed by the underwater station)? . Of course, I also still wonder why no one ever tried to walk around/canoe around the entire island to determine its size....but that's neither here nor there. @shara -- you want to know what I don't exactly get now, looking back? How quickly Sayid gave up the whole "locate the source of Rousseau's repeating message" thing.
.
This has more to do with island geography (exactly how big is the island, anyway?) than anything else, but after Locke hits Sayid on the head and breaks the transceiver, why did Sayid just give up on locating the radio tower (that we eventually found at the end of Season 3)? I mean, wasn't locating that tower a pretty critical thing in terms of calling for help (even if they didn't know the signal was being jammed by the underwater station)?
.
Of course, I also still wonder why no one ever tried to walk around/canoe around the entire island to determine its size....but that's neither here nor there.

]]> By: shara says http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18031 shara says Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:04:47 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18031 @Chaddog - I recently did the same thing, marathoned the earlier seasons to prepare for the show's return. I highly recommend said activity to any lost fans - watching it all at one shot did help me re-appreciate the excellent, gradual storytelling, as well as provide me with an excellent review of the story thus far - there were tons of little details that I had missed, not knowing their future context. . I was extremely impressed, in hindsight, with many things - re-watching the character development of both Charlie and Sawyer was, for me, the most satisfying. @Chaddog - I recently did the same thing, marathoned the earlier seasons to prepare for the show's return. I highly recommend said activity to any lost fans - watching it all at one shot did help me re-appreciate the excellent, gradual storytelling, as well as provide me with an excellent review of the story thus far - there were tons of little details that I had missed, not knowing their future context.
.
I was extremely impressed, in hindsight, with many things - re-watching the character development of both Charlie and Sawyer was, for me, the most satisfying.

]]> By: Chaddogg http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18025 Chaddogg Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:52:52 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18025 As a longtime Tuned-Inlander, I think we strike the right chord (or, more accurately, James sets a positive tone) here regarding spoilers -- he won't give away what's coming up on the show (and neither do any commentators), but he will post a recap and thoughts on the show the next day (hidden by the "jump") so that all of us can comment and theorize away our productive hours at work. . That being said, I foresee a sharp plunge in my work product on January 22nd....a very, VERY sharp plunge. . For those of you who are interested, by the way, I'm rewatching all the seasons of Lost, hopefully finishing up in time for Season 5's debut on January 21st. I'm currently on Season 1 -- there is certainly a LOT I forgot about this show, including A) how much of a jerk Jin was initially to Sun, B) how kinda creepy the whole Shannon-Boone relationship was, C) how much the show initially was about the Jack-Kate flirtation/her retreating in secrets, and D) how the show really was, for a very long time in its first season especially, JUST ABOUT survival. Watching the old episodes makes me appreciate, even more strongly, what the writers did in parcelling out the show, episode by episode, and allowing the mystery to build. . I'm also struck now by a very prescient Charlie line: "If I had to trust one person to get us off of this island, it'd be John Locke." Very interesting... As a longtime Tuned-Inlander, I think we strike the right chord (or, more accurately, James sets a positive tone) here regarding spoilers -- he won't give away what's coming up on the show (and neither do any commentators), but he will post a recap and thoughts on the show the next day (hidden by the "jump") so that all of us can comment and theorize away our productive hours at work.
.
That being said, I foresee a sharp plunge in my work product on January 22nd....a very, VERY sharp plunge.
.
For those of you who are interested, by the way, I'm rewatching all the seasons of Lost, hopefully finishing up in time for Season 5's debut on January 21st. I'm currently on Season 1 -- there is certainly a LOT I forgot about this show, including A) how much of a jerk Jin was initially to Sun, B) how kinda creepy the whole Shannon-Boone relationship was, C) how much the show initially was about the Jack-Kate flirtation/her retreating in secrets, and D) how the show really was, for a very long time in its first season especially, JUST ABOUT survival. Watching the old episodes makes me appreciate, even more strongly, what the writers did in parcelling out the show, episode by episode, and allowing the mystery to build.
.
I'm also struck now by a very prescient Charlie line: "If I had to trust one person to get us off of this island, it'd be John Locke." Very interesting...

]]> By: rhys1882 http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18024 rhys1882 Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:07:31 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18024 For movies, sometimes I like to know the spoilers in advance. I feel like a movie should be good on its own, regardless of whether or not you know the ending. I feel like with TV shows, there's so much of a time investment its better to avoid the spoilers. I feel like the whole point with TV shows is the build up over many many episodes and to ruin it is to ruin months of watching. Whereas with a movie, at max you have like two or three hours, it intended for the entire experience to be rewarding, not just the climax. Hard to explain I guess. Glad you are taking a stand about spoilers. Don't let the whiners deter you. The problem is that people have no self control and will click on links if its about anything they are vaguely interested in without thinking whether they should and without really considering the risk of spoilers. A funny problem a couple of friends have had is getting spoilers by looking at merchandise for a show. One friend was watching the Wire, only into the second season, and was looking for merchandise and found a coffee mug for "RIP (MAJOR CHARACTER WHO DIED IN SEASON 3)." Similar thing happened with a friend looking for a Farscape Halloween costume on Ebay, the description of the item mentioned the character dying eventually. I think that's kind of a grey area. But personally, I recently avoided an interview with Jason Isaacs on a variety of topics because it indicated talk about Brotherhood and I haven't watched the third season (I am rewatching the first season with my GF and stand by my assessment that it is an amazing show). For movies, sometimes I like to know the spoilers in advance. I feel like a movie should be good on its own, regardless of whether or not you know the ending. I feel like with TV shows, there's so much of a time investment its better to avoid the spoilers. I feel like the whole point with TV shows is the build up over many many episodes and to ruin it is to ruin months of watching. Whereas with a movie, at max you have like two or three hours, it intended for the entire experience to be rewarding, not just the climax. Hard to explain I guess. Glad you are taking a stand about spoilers. Don't let the whiners deter you. The problem is that people have no self control and will click on links if its about anything they are vaguely interested in without thinking whether they should and without really considering the risk of spoilers. A funny problem a couple of friends have had is getting spoilers by looking at merchandise for a show. One friend was watching the Wire, only into the second season, and was looking for merchandise and found a coffee mug for "RIP (MAJOR CHARACTER WHO DIED IN SEASON 3)." Similar thing happened with a friend looking for a Farscape Halloween costume on Ebay, the description of the item mentioned the character dying eventually. I think that's kind of a grey area. But personally, I recently avoided an interview with Jason Isaacs on a variety of topics because it indicated talk about Brotherhood and I haven't watched the third season (I am rewatching the first season with my GF and stand by my assessment that it is an amazing show).

]]> By: jondelfin http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18023 jondelfin Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:26:53 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18023 "Begging the question—for me anyway—of what that person was doing reading a review of that episode if they hadn't watched it." I distinguish between "review" and "recap." A review, I hope, will tell me if the show in question is any good, without giving away so many details as to make watching the show unnecessary. An after-the-fact recap I expect to contain very specific information and analysis. And I religiously avoid reading *both* for shows I don't want to have spoiled. Which might be why, after a cursory viewing of a single television commercial while I was reaching for the DVR remote, I thought "Seven Pounds" was a caper movie. (I liked it anyway.) "Begging the question—for me anyway—of what that person was doing reading a review of that episode if they hadn't watched it."

I distinguish between "review" and "recap." A review, I hope, will tell me if the show in question is any good, without giving away so many details as to make watching the show unnecessary. An after-the-fact recap I expect to contain very specific information and analysis. And I religiously avoid reading *both* for shows I don't want to have spoiled. Which might be why, after a cursory viewing of a single television commercial while I was reaching for the DVR remote, I thought "Seven Pounds" was a caper movie. (I liked it anyway.)

]]> By: mcmagnus http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18020 mcmagnus Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:15:29 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18020 I don't like spoilers, and whether you personally believe in that or not, I think it should be respected. I also have some idealistic feelings about respecting the show-makers and watching what they have to present, instead of forming subconscious judgments about second-hand written descriptions that will unavoidably color the experience when you eventually watch the real thing...but those are my own personal feelings. I don't think anything you've done in terms of spoilers has been out-of-bounds, James. The only times I've get mad are when I visit EW's homepage or Kristen Dos Santos' site, and I see some big spoilery headline about Lost, which happens too frequently. I don't like spoilers, and whether you personally believe in that or not, I think it should be respected. I also have some idealistic feelings about respecting the show-makers and watching what they have to present, instead of forming subconscious judgments about second-hand written descriptions that will unavoidably color the experience when you eventually watch the real thing...but those are my own personal feelings. I don't think anything you've done in terms of spoilers has been out-of-bounds, James. The only times I've get mad are when I visit EW's homepage or Kristen Dos Santos' site, and I see some big spoilery headline about Lost, which happens too frequently.

]]> By: Diane http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18019 Diane Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:06:59 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18019 @murdoc829 Hee! Sorry. Not. Yeah, I don't search for info on shows I might want to watch in the future, but I read this and other tv blogs, TV Tattle, etc and it's impossible not to catch certain things. But whatever - it rarely spoils that much, as you say. It seems to me the ONLY solution if you don't want to be spoiled at all is to avoid TV sites. Because what's the alternative, train everyone on the Internet to conform to your personal spoiler policy? Good luck. And as these comments attest, there's a wide range of opinion on what's a spoiler and how long people should wait to reveal them. @murdoc829 Hee! Sorry. Not. Yeah, I don't search for info on shows I might want to watch in the future, but I read this and other tv blogs, TV Tattle, etc and it's impossible not to catch certain things. But whatever - it rarely spoils that much, as you say.

It seems to me the ONLY solution if you don't want to be spoiled at all is to avoid TV sites. Because what's the alternative, train everyone on the Internet to conform to your personal spoiler policy? Good luck. And as these comments attest, there's a wide range of opinion on what's a spoiler and how long people should wait to reveal them.

]]> By: shara says http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2009/01/05/whats-a-spoiler-now/comment-page-1/#comment-18018 shara says Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:48:00 +0000 http://timetunedin.wordpress.com/?p=2621#comment-18018 I don't have a problem with spoilers. I watch a lot of shows online, rather than as they air, which means that there is usually discussion about what I've missed, and I'll read it anyway. Actually, if I miss a show, I usually go straight and read the reviews and recaps, which doesn't ruin the unseen show, just gives me something to look forward to. Occasionally I try to stay in the dark about particular cliffhangers, but its not that big of a deal. That said, I don't even know what really constitutes a "spoiler". I don't consider casting info or anything like that a spoiler, that should be fair game. For example, (OFFICE SPOILER ALERT), I don't think that it is a spoiler to say that the actor who plays Ryan is leaving the show. That gives away that something will probably have to happen with his character, but it doesn't give away anything about how the show will handle his leaving or his absence. Its news, not a spoiler. A spoiler would be if someone posted "Ryan to Leave The Office in Hail of Gunfire" or "Ryan to Get Fired Again after Burning Down Dunder Mifflin", not "the actor who plays Ryan is leaving the show". But I know others disagree. Giving away main plot elements is really all that deserves any protection. My bottom line opinion is that if people don't want info/discussion on TV shows, they shouldn't go look at a TV blog until they're ready, although I like the "spoilers after the jump" approach best, because it suits everyone and is a reasonable accomodation/compromise. I don't have a problem with spoilers. I watch a lot of shows online, rather than as they air, which means that there is usually discussion about what I've missed, and I'll read it anyway. Actually, if I miss a show, I usually go straight and read the reviews and recaps, which doesn't ruin the unseen show, just gives me something to look forward to. Occasionally I try to stay in the dark about particular cliffhangers, but its not that big of a deal.

That said, I don't even know what really constitutes a "spoiler". I don't consider casting info or anything like that a spoiler, that should be fair game. For example, (OFFICE SPOILER ALERT), I don't think that it is a spoiler to say that the actor who plays Ryan is leaving the show. That gives away that something will probably have to happen with his character, but it doesn't give away anything about how the show will handle his leaving or his absence. Its news, not a spoiler. A spoiler would be if someone posted "Ryan to Leave The Office in Hail of Gunfire" or "Ryan to Get Fired Again after Burning Down Dunder Mifflin", not "the actor who plays Ryan is leaving the show". But I know others disagree. Giving away main plot elements is really all that deserves any protection.

My bottom line opinion is that if people don't want info/discussion on TV shows, they shouldn't go look at a TV blog until they're ready, although I like the "spoilers after the jump" approach best, because it suits everyone and is a reasonable accomodation/compromise.

]]>