Just wanted to make sure you’d all read Ken Tucker’s essay on why, as a critic, he thinks it’s within his rights to reveal crucial plot points: "Whether I’m writing a review or reading one, I don’t want anyheld-back information to prevent that review from being the mostinteresting, thought-provoking one possible," he says. "If that means a movie critic reveals a crucial plot point in order tolay out an argument for a film’s greatness or its hideousness, so be it. As a TV critic, I am going to tell you who got killed on, say, lastnight’s 24, because an event like that immediately becomes part of thepop culture conversation — you bouncing your opinion off mine, critic andreader relishing the opportunity to speculate together on what thismeans for a show we care about."
I think we can all agree on that, right? A critic has a job to do, and the reader can choose whether to read the review, just look at the letter grade, or live in a bubble. What I find more interesting/debate-worthy is what Ken says at the end of his essay: "I admit that if someone tells me who won The Amazing Racebefore I’veseen it, I may gnash my teeth a little. But chances are, it will make mewant to see how those people scored their victories and how theproducers edited the game even more.Knowing the way something turns out shouldn’t ruin anyone’s pleasure."
Knowing the way something turns out shouldn’t ruin anyone’s pleasure. What do you think? For me, it depends. I can see enjoying The Bachelor just as much if I already knew which woman he picked, because it’d be fun to study their chemistry and the way the show was edited. But then I think of something like the Angel Season 4 episode "Awakening." Someone told me about the twist before I finally caught it in repeats (five years after it originally aired), and while my pleasure wasn’t anywhere near "ruined," it was definitely altered. I still appreciated the show’s ability to hurt so good, but my emotions weren’t the roller coaster they should have been. They were more like a Tilt-A-Whirl.
Comments (1-30) of 95 Add your comment
Shouldn’t ruin anyone’s pleasure, huh? Tell that to the folks who heard beforehand about the twists in “The Crying Game” or “The Sixth Sense.” If a the oopmh of a movie (or book or TV show) hinges on a single plot twist, critics shouldn’t ruin it by giving out spoilers upfront. This is exactly why I’m not reading any reviews of SATC right now – because I haven’t seen it yet and want to be at least somewhat surprised.
I enjoy spoilers because I’m impatient. They usually don’t stop me from viewing the movie/TV show though. I’m that way with books too. In order to make myself stop reading and go to bed, I skim the last chapter. Then I can take my time finishing the book.
I can’t agree– in a lot of entertainment, part of the enjoyment is derived from the tension built up by the viewer (reader/listener/whatever) not knowing what is going to happen next, and the way the creator(s) exploit that tension. And yes, I think this applies to low culture as well as high– to use his example there would be no thrill at the end of each episode of “The Amazing Race” if I knew who was going before they even began the heavily-edited rush to the finish line, and I’m still mad at my dad for telling me who did it in “The Maltese Falcon” the day before I went to see it.
(cont. above)
(cont. from below)
Also, I think Mr. Tucker is confusing reviewing and Criticism. If you were, say, writing an article on the Batman movies as a reflection of society’s changing attitudes on justice and vigilantism, then yes, you absolutely have the right to use any material from the plots that you find relevant. But if you’re writing a review of the new movie to help people decided if they want to see it, then I think, if nothing else, it is a show of respect to the filmmakers to let them decide how much the audience should know, and when. (The only exception I would put on this would be if something was grossly misleading or had some major cop-out, in a way that detracted from the enjoyment of the work, i.e. “It was all a dream!”)
If a spoiler MUST be revealed, (I think it should be avoided if possible), then a clear indication that a spoiler is forthcoming should be noted. EW’s been good about it and I will skip a few paragraphs in an article. But not in the headline and not without warning. Another analogy: taping a sporting event to watch it, then finding out the score first from someone. You will not give it the same attention you would live or not knowing what happened when you watch it.
…and how many times have you heard that the trailer of a movie gives too much away? Same difference.
Only problem, if you spoiler something the next day. It spoils those who taped something, and hasn’t seen it yet. Now if you’re talking about a plot twist in a movie that was released six years ago. Fine. Chances are everyone who has a vested interested has either not seen it by choice or has seen it. But if you tell me someone big died in a show the following day, and I was out that evening and have to watch the next day. You spoiled my enjoyment. So it’s a catch 22. Some shows fine. Reality shows sure. But not episodic television, unless it was weeks ago.
Part of the greatness of a thought provoking show or movie is being surprised by what happens. I love when excellent writing keeps me intrigued. When I accidentally found out about the 4 cylons on BSG, it was definitely not as fun to go back and watch the episode when they were revealed.
I agree with daisyj: It’s one thing to write a review/analysis of a film that came out a while ago, or even a tv show that aired the night before – but it’s another thing to spoil a movie before it’s even been released. That really irritates me, and EW in particular is notorious for writing spoilerific reviews of movies before they are released. It’s for this reason that I will only look at the quick one sentence blurbs on RottenTomatoes when I want to look at movie reviews. Please, critics: I just want to know whether or not you thought it was good – please don’t spoil huge plot points for me, especially if it’s a new movie that I might not have seen yet, because that always ruins it for me.
When did it become every critic’s right to decide to spoil a movie or tv show? In the last 2 weeks, I’ve seen every plot point for the SATC movie given away, and that’s before the movie had even been in general release. How is that at all acceptable? Is it just critics/reviewers enjoying that they get to see it before everyone else? Because I have to point out something that I consider very pertinent: a review isn’t just one big synopsis of the movie; it’s intended to be a critique of how the elements of a movie contribute to the whole product and it’s quality. And what I’d really like to say is: Ken Tucker, shut your big fat trap. I’ll be avoiding your reviews from now on.
For many TV shows, I search out spoilers, reading SpoilerFix and columns like Ausiello’s and Watch with Kristin, but I know that many others don’t want to know, so I keep that knowledge to myself in conversations with friends. Spoilers shouldn’t be in magazine articles; spoilers should be hard to find and require choice. I avoid many movie reviews if I don’t want to be spoiled (I still haven’t read EW’s review of SATC cause I haven’t seen it yet) cause I know its hard to avoid sharing plot points in a review. I think magazine’s like EW need to be careful and give “spoiler alerts” to warn readers more often. I personally enjoy the insider knowledge, but I also like to choose which shows and movies I remain unspoiled for. Its ironic that this discussion is happening now on EW, since you just hired the king of spoilers, Michael Ausiello.
I couldn’t agree more with Ken Tucker on this point if I tried. I know how classic movies and how Shakespeare’s plays are going to end – that doesn’t affect my enjoyment one whit. I honestly have to roll my eyes when people act like finding out that somebody on a tv show is going to die, kiss, or stab someone else in the back is the end of the world. It’s not just about what happens, it’s how it happens. The element of surprise is not necessary for my enjoyment, it never has been. I can get wrapped up in an elegantly plotted twist just as thoroughly if I know it’s coming, perhaps I can even appreciate it more when I’ve been spoiled.
Living in New Zealand, we always get shows after they air overseas, and in the case of The Amazing Race, almost always after they finish airing. I accidentally heard that BJ and Tyler won TAR9, and when I came to watch the show, I quickly realised that I hated those two. Words cannot describe how much I deplored every moment they were on screen. And watching them, knowing they would win, and seeing them come last TWICE at non-elimination points was torture.
The first example that comes to mind is Lost’s Season 3 finale – if I had known the twist beforehand, that the scenes taking place off the island were a flashforward, and not a flashback, I would have been intensely disappointed. Watching an episode ‘fresh’, not knowing anything about it gives you the opportunity to watch the episode twice, with different views each time. Once without being spoiled, and once knowing exactly what happens, looking for things you missed when you didn’t know what was happening. Spoiling an episode beforehand takes that first experience a way, and taints watching the show.
While I appreciate wanting to remain unspoiled (having done so for all four seasons of LOST), I think it’s ridiculous to expect critics to write non-spoilery reviews. As the anonymous commenter below me noted, reviews should be “a critique of how the elements of a movie contribute to the whole product and it’s quality”. Sorry, but that includes plot twists, character deaths, unexpected hook-ups and anything and everything else one could consider spoil-worthy. It bothers me when people complain about critics spoiling the outcome of film and TV – if you really don’t want to be spoiled, don’t read reviews. It’s not hard.
Anon, what’s your beef with Ken Tucker? He wrote that article while writing the TV Watches for 24 last season because too many people complained that he gave away info from the next episode previews. Although I can agree that you should avoid spoilerific details for opening movies or DVD releases – after a nice chunk of time, it shouldn’t be a big deal – in TV Watches, it should be fair game. Single episode evaluations should be written with the intent that we already watched the episode.
With that said, I think everyone has their own perspective on how spoilers can potentially ruin the experience. In some ways it does, and I do get pissed when that happens on something I love. In fact, two people spoiled Battle Royale’s ending for me before I finished either the manga or novel. It also would’ve ruined the HOLY CRAP! factor from Lost’s season 3 finale. Still, in both cases, even when knowledgeable of the conclusion, they’re still amazing pieces of work.
I read Mr. Tucker’s remarks in the magaazine, and my reaction was, “What an egotistical and adolescent perception he has of his “rights” as a reviewer.” Critics far more talented and acclaimed than he have managed to review films brilliantly without giving away the surprising plot points. If any film critic I read had spilled the beans on “The Sixth Sense”’s plot twist before I saw the movie, I’d have hunted him or her down. TV recaps are a completely different matter. I never look at them until I’ve seen the show. What I learned from Mr. Tucker’s article was to avoid reading his critiques from now on.
Laurie, I couldn’t agree with you more. I can’t think of any occassion where a “spoiler” ruined something for me- most of the time I don’t believe anything I hear about a show or movie before I watch it for myself anyway. And if I DO believe it, I like seeing HOW it happens. Sometimes that makes all the difference.
I don’t mind spoilers, if there is disclaimer. But what really chaps my a%& is when morons give away spoilers in the comment section of EW with no notice whatsoever. It put a damper on my enjoyment of the last season of the Wire because “”Spoiler Alert”", people had to write about Omar’s death. I spent more time wondering if the scenen I was watching was the one where he would die, as opposed to being able to just watch and enjoy things as they played out.
I am just not sure about all this. I get annoyed with the SPOILER ALERTS!
But at the same time, I know that certain things can really affect how I watch a show. There’s certain shows that I’m fine with reading about before watching (Greek, HIMYM, etc.) – in fact in those cases I kind of like to read about them before so I can realize some of the jokes. But I will not read about shows like Lost. I want that to be a secret.
Here’s my biggest example of spoiling affecting a show that I can think of right now (without spoiling it for anyone else, I guess) – I had heard about Mad Men and I just didn’t watch it. But when it started repeating, I started watching. I went back and happened to read something about the season finale. When I read about what happened to Peggy, I started noticing way more through the series than I know I would have noticed. I guess it was good how I got to notice how good the writers were at adding certain hints in, but it ruined the surprise for me.
I think spoilers can ruin the fun of tv shows & films, depending on what sort of spoilers they are or what kind of twists are involved. Anyone who spoils “Lost” for me will suffer my wrath. (Luckily, I was finally able to watch the finale tonight, spoiler-free.) I think if a critic insists on using spoilers they should at the very least, add a disclaimer to the start of their column.
I 100% disagree with Ken Tucker. Spoilers for anything, tv, movies, sports, even reality show winners, just plain sucks. Whether it’s a big twist or just plot details, I prefer to see everything for myself. Some people argue that what matters is ‘how’ something turns out- but that just takes me back to ‘who cares? I already know what happens!’
Everybody (everybody) loves a good surprise, even people who don’t mind spoilers. They say it doesn’t effect their viewings, and I’m sure it doesn’t. But I’m also pretty sure their viewings would be even better that exciting jolt of shock.
The Sixth Sense was spoiled for me so when I watched it, I didn’t really think it was all that great.
I can only imagine what it must have been like to see Darth Vader tell Luke he is his father for the first time on opening weekend.
Maybe if the movie/show/game is 20 years or older, but other than that, give me a spoiler alert, please. Or write 2 reviews, one with and one without your precious details
I think it’s nice that Ken Tucker likes to give out spoilers and defends that behavior. Wait, where does he get his paycheck? Oh, that’s right, from a magazine whose job it is to give spoilers. Seems a little biased, doesn’t it?
I also dont appreciate being told to “Grow up” because I disagree with him.
Here’s the deal with spoilers and something that even Ken Tucker cant get around. When he watches who got killed on last night’s 24 and knows the scoop, telling that information does not affect him at all. He knew it before and he knew it after the telling. However for littly Johnny Tivo, who has not yet seen the show, telling the information forever changes that episode for him. Tucker can say the change doesnt matter, but a change occurs nonetheless. Little Johnny can never go back an ‘unlearn’ what he was told. Of the two only little Johnny is changed. So it’s pretty self-absorbed for Tucker to say that spoilers dont matter when he’s not the one who is being affected.
I have to say, I disagree with Ken Tucker. I once had a spoiler about the Usual Suspects, you know the whole point of watching the movie, ruined for me and while I was watching I kept thinking “I know how this ends, I know the big twist, why not turn it off now and go make a sandwich.” I prefer not to have spoilers but sometimes you can’t avoid them. For instance, I am watching BSG from the beginning, as I got into it late, but now I know who all the Cylons are before they are revealed in the shows I am watching (I am at the end of season 2). So don’t spoil if you can help it. hey I just realized that the name of spoilers says it all they spoil!
I have to agree with the person who just goes to Rotten Tomatoes prior to seeing a film. You can use their ratings to help decide whether to see the film or not without losing any of the “NO WAY!” factor once you see the film–which is frequently what keeps people enthralled in narrative in the first place. Homer knew it, Virgil knew it, Joss Whedon knows it. Great epics rely on those twists to keep people glued to their seats from episode to episode. (And, yes, I just compared Whedon to Homer and Virgil. Deal with it.) Critics, listen up: “with great power comes great responsibility.” Just because you’ve seen it and are paid to tell people your opinions doesn’t mean you should just throw it all out there. If you can’t find some way to explain your opinion without major spoilers, you aren’t a very good critic.
knowing what happens can ruin pleasure, and sometimes it can’t, if the story is sufficiently well-told…and if your personality type prefers the journey to the destination. i do disagree that it’s a critics right and need to provide spoilers – a good critic can encourage/discourage you to watch without blatantly identifying major plot points.
and then, there’s the total “what the crap???” spoilers, like the other day when i opened the newspaper and, under a caption of a BSG character whose identity was not revealed in season 3 (don’t have cable, haven’t seen 4!), was written, “so-and-so, Cylon…” how was that necessary? the article wasn’t even about BSG, it was about how the actor recovered from breaking his or her back.
I think anything that already aired is fair game – this is an entertainment site that talks about TV. It’s ridiculous to think that we shouldn’t be allowed to discuss something that happened right after it happened. If I missed an episode of Lost, I don’t come here until I’ve seen it. If it hasn’t aired yet, that’s another story. I used to read spoilers all the time until I discovered the end of Buffy season 5 before it happened and realized how much it ruined the episode for me. Now I generally stay away from major spoilers; tv watching is more fun that way for me.
Also I think that Jeff Probst had a really good point in the article. If you know something ,someone doesn’t, it gives you power, even if it’s over something as silly as a tv show. I was pretty mad when I came on EW last summer to read Dalton Ross’s blog about Emmys and somebody in the comments section spoiled the end of the Harry Potter book before it came out. That’s people deliberately trying to ruin the book.
For any form of entertainment that ramps up the dramatic tension with plot twists, hate hate HATE spoilers of any kind. I can’t even stand TV previews of the “Someone.Will.Be.Gone.Forever” sort. Yes, there can still be some pleasure derived by seeing what leads up to the twist, but I get the real charge from the jaw-dropping moments. When I know what’s coming it’s pretty deflating. I stopped reading movie reviews years ago. And it downright pisses me off when studios show the best parts of a film in the trailers. How about a little mystery in life? I may be curious-sometimes even tremendously curious-but I have learned over the years that it is a lot more fun to be surprised than to be “in the know”.
I use to love Nathan Lane. Until he divulged the ending of The Sixth Sense on Letterman before I had seen the movie. Now, I can’t help but see him as a killjoy, smug, know-it-all. Sure, tell me who’s America’s Next Top Model, but don’t tell me who Bruce Willis really is.
Reviews, in my opinion, should be basic impressions on a piece of art (whether it be film, TV, music, books etc) and not go into any great detail. Basic questions: did I (the critic) like it? Were the actors any good? How was the music? are all that should be answered.
Recaps, on the other hand, are more of a play by play of a TV show (usually) that is assumed to have been watched. More advanced questions can be asked: What happened? Who died? Small easter eggs the viewer may have missed.
Reviews and recaps are also used for 2 different purposes. The first is helpful in making ones mind up about experiencing the thing that was reviewed. The second is more of a discussion about what was already viewed.
Therefore, I think that critics should refrain from out and out spoilers in their reviews, and watchers should refrain from recaps until they have watched. If you read the recaps before watching, you have no right to complain about spoilers.
Simple really.