logo Sign In

Spoilers don't spoil anything

Author
Time

I haven't read the original paper, but from the way it's described, it's a poor one.

Yes, the anticipation of a twist or shocking tragedy at the end, can theoretically be as exciting as being blown away while clueless.
However, it so, so incredibly depends on the details and quality of how it's done.

I remember watching a 24 episode, of the last of the 1st season. I had read a spoiler that Jack was about to bring a "preparated" mobile to President Palmer without knowing it. So there I sat, with my nose at the screen, screaming "don't give him the phone, oh no, you've bought Hopper's lie, no, don't!" all the time... was it poisoned? Was Palmer gonna die?

Alright, there we come to the deciding moment... it's revealed that there's a bomb inside, Jack notices it, throws it away, resolved.
Had I not known it in advance, I probably would've just shrugged my shoulders!
But the excitement was all due to the spoiler, not the episode.

Not to make a sweeping statement about it (24 had lots and lots of strong moments), but many scenes or plot lines in it were boring and dragging, and the only thing that saved it was the constant tension of what was going to happen next, and the regular mind-blowing twists.
On the other hand, sometimes those twists seemed to almost justify the weaker parts that came before, because it may have been boring, but this is what they had planned for you!!

So, do you enjoy it more without the spoilers, because the tension and twists keep you at your toes? Or... do you accept the boring parts more readily because you know what's in store and can't await how it's gonna all turn into shit?
Do we really wanna see Kim make out with that stupid street boy? But... IT'S A GIANT CONSPIRACY BY TERRORISTS THAT WILL ONLY BE FULLY REVEALED IN 9 EPISODES... BRILLIANCE, BETTER PAY ATTENTION TO EACH WORD!!

And there already, we have a massive ambiguity.



I watched the 6th sense the other day, already knowing the twist - it was cool, but like watching it a second time.
I enjoyed the little deceptive details here and there, but I would've done so on second viewing, and feel like having missed the mind-blowing twist at the end.

I quite enjoyed "Identity" in the same way at the second viewing, but was BLOWN AWAY by the twist the first time around.

I knew the LOST spoiler ahead, but blended it out while watching Season 6, because it seemed so much like actual flash-sideways, the fact that it was going to resolve into afterlife seemed non-existent.
So it's probably all the same, I was in for a disappointment and wasn't negatively shocked by it. On the other hand, maybe I would've been a tide more intrigued and excited without knowing it... then again, preparing myself for an even bigger disappointment.


Shutter Island? I knew about the spoiler, but it was so brilliant (to me), and was prepared so convincingly, I was blown away by it even when I watched it!

It all depends on various factors like this.
How well prepared is the twist? Or how artificial, and deceptive the preparation?
Do the parts before the spoiler hold up on their own? Or do you need the twist to come to a terribly needed rescue?

At the end of the day, both the anticipation and the surprise can have positive effects, but it all depends on those factors, and the QUALITY of how it's executed.


A study that doesn't take any of that into account and attempts to make a sweeping statement based on a few students reading a few books? Do not want.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

twooffour said:


A study that doesn't take any of that into account and attempts to make a sweeping statement based on a few students reading a few books? Do not want.

A long-winded reply that starts out by admitting the poster didn't even read the (relatively short) original article?  Do not want.

 

But anyway, I think it depends on two things:  the film/show, and the viewer. 

I think if the movie/tv show is good of it's own merits, than no, a spoiler wouldn't ruin the viewing.  However, that doesn't mean I want it spoiled. 

Shutter Island is a good example.  I loved that movie the first time I saw it in the theaters, but I have to admit that the whole time I was watching it I was thinking, "what's really going on here?".  However, once it came out on DVD and I got to watch it already knowing the end, I enjoyed it even more because I was paying attention to the actual merits of the film.  It was like watching it for the first time again - a mark of a good movie in my book is rewatchability.

Someone spoiled Fight Club for me when I was younger, but I really enjoyed the movie regardless - maybe even more so than I would have had I not been spoiled.  But that's the thing isn't it?  I think the reason people (myself, at least) are so spoiler obsessed is because of the finality of it all.  Maybe a spoiler will ruin a whole movie for you, and maybe it won't, but you'll never know until you're actually spoiled -- and then it's too late.

As for the viewer, here's a part of the article that I don't really agree with:

"We like it best when the suspense is contained by the formulaic, when we never have to really worry about the death of the protagonist or the lovers in a romantic comedy."

I think this speaks to the majority of moviegoers or television viewers who just want to sit down and enjoy some explosions or a love story or a few jokes without using their brain too much, but I don't necessarily include myself in that group.  I like my entertainment to challenge my brain, not make it numb, but I realize I'm in the minority. 

Also, I don't think a twist in a movie has ever made me feel "embarrassed by [my] gullibility", nor do I ever think it will.

So maybe this is true for a lot of people, like my Aunt Mary, who always watches the end of a movie and then watches the whole thing because she hates being surprised.  But I don't think I'd ever ask her opinion on what to watch.


Author
Time

RedFive said:

So maybe this is true for a lot of people, like my Aunt Mary, who always watches the end of a movie and then watches the whole thing because she hates being surprised.

For real?

Author
Time

Wow, she must have been really happy when DVD came out. Imagine taking the time to FF to the end of a VHS, then having to wait for it to rewind.

Author
Time

A long-winded reply that starts out by admitting the poster didn't even read the (relatively short) original article?  Do not want.


The ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER, not the article, you CLOWN.

And it was only long-winded because I actually cared to make arguments and provide examples, rather than just saying "it sux".
I guess that makes a post worse, though....


And yes, the article makes some sweeping statements that are simply not true. A lot of people actually like their cinema and TV suspenseful and tense, not knowing what's gonna happen next. Glad you picked up on it.


Author
Time
 (Edited)

CP3S said:

Wow, she must have been really happy when DVD came out. Imagine taking the time to FF to the end of a VHS, then having to wait for it to rewind.

For real, Frink.  And yes, pre-DVD she would fast-forward and then rewind tapes.  When she watched Fellowship of the Ring she called me and tried to get me to tell her how the trilogy ended!


Author
Time

Eh, fuck it. Just ignore him, and he'll go away.....


Mhm, yea. Just don't blatantly misread my posts and call them stupid because of that, then maybe you won't get derisive responses like above.

Real awesome move there, pal - fuck up and then blame it on me. What a pompous, hypocritical attitude.
"Just ignore it, then I can convince myself that I didn't make a mistake"... good luck.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

RedFive said:


Eh, fuck it. Just ignore him, and he'll go away.....

That seems to be the best move, but I don't think he'll go away.

I swear if everyone here ignored him, he'd just start arguing with himself.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

RedFive said:


Eh, fuck it. Just ignore him, and he'll go away.....

That seems to be the best move, but I don't think he'll go away.

I swear if everyone here ignored him, he'd just start arguing with himself.

And there go the biases and double standards again... you're pathetic.

Author
Time

twooffour said:

TV's Frink said:

RedFive said:


Eh, fuck it. Just ignore him, and he'll go away.....

That seems to be the best move, but I don't think he'll go away.

I swear if everyone here ignored him, he'd just start arguing with himself.

 

Author
Time

The gif is funny. You posting it as your only defense is fucking pathetic. (And will become even more so, the more gifs you post. Do as you wish :p)

Author
Time

RedFive said:

I like this thread, let's not let him derail it, please!  Just ignore him...

You disingenuous pillock.

Me: "I didn't read the original paper, just relying on the article (meaning: sorry if the paper got it better)."
You: "OMG U DIDNT READ THE ARTICLE YET POST YOUR LONGWIDED BULLCRAP, YOU TROL OLO!"
Me: "I read the article, you dyslexic oaf."

...

You: "Oh this troll again, if we just ignore him he'll stop derailing the thread, it's not like this was entirely my fault..."


Not being able to admit a mistake when it's so obvious to see for everyone, is a rather sad personality trait, and a clear sign of a vulnerable, defensive ego.
If that's what you want to display, please do go on - I'm not gonna help you two derail this thread any further ;)

Author
Time

RedFive said:

I like this thread, let's not let him derail it, please! 

Just ignore him, all he wants it attention anyway...

Done.

Author
Time

RE the topic, I like movies with twists.  And although I enjoy the journey as well as the twist, I find it more satisfying when the twist isn't spoiled beforehand.

I remember hearing the truth about Blair Witch right before seeing it, and having wished afterwards I didn't know it wasn't real going in.

Oh, that was a spoiler.  Sorry. :p

Author
Time

In high school I had a teacher who would say that it does not matter if we know the ending of a story if the story is well-written. The enjoyment is in the story as a whole. Any story that is 'ruined' simply by knowing the ending obviously wasn't much of a story.

twooffour's argument doesn't hold water. The students in the study read a dozen different stories by a number of quality authors. And 11 of the stories were rated more enjoyable after knowing the twist. To say that the cleverness of the twist makes a difference misses the point. The students were rating the enjoyability of the books overall.

I think the cleverness of a twist might only be determinant when that's all the story has going for it, like the punchline of a joke. We may find that the more clever the twist, an individual might rate a story differently than a story with a less clever twist. For instance, "A Chess Problem" featured a greater gap in enjoyment than "Rhyme Never Pays". Maybe this has to do with the cleverness of the twist. But in the end, both stories were rated more enjoyable after knowing.

I, like RedFive, enjoy trying to figure out the mystery and being surprised. Maybe I would nonetheless rate a story/film more highly if I knew the ending. I think a number of the reasons in the article make sense.

Would Star Wars be more enjoyable if someone told the audience ahead of time that Leia was Luke's sister and Darth Vader was their father (the way many experience nowadays)? It is a qualitatively different experience from just seeing the evil guy in black stroll down the corridor and strangle a man. It doesn't necessarily make Vader less bad, but changes perceptions of many events.

Still at the end, I don't think people rate Star Wars more poorly for knowing these things. Maybe people would rate it more highly simply because even though they know the twists, they are more engaged to see exactly how it's sorted out. They are anticipating Vader's turn to good and taking enjoyment in knowing Leia is Luke's sister before they do (haha, you kissed your sister!). It's a different kind of enjoyment - and one I'd prefer on second viewing - but not "worse."

I suspect many people would say they would prefer not to know the twist ahead of time even though they enjoy the stories more after knowing. I'm totally comfortable having this cognitive dissonance.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

If you wanna engage in black-and-white painting and say that there are good stories where spoilers don't matter on the one hand, and bad stories that solely rely on a twist on the other hand, then please be my guest.

Truth is, however, lots of stuff people avoid spoilers of, is in many ways mediocre, and even good works can have strong and weak aspects.

A proper scientific study has to take all of that into account, although I guess you can still proceed from this one for further research.

If you want to deny the role of the surprise element in the enjoyment of fiction as well as story, you're free to do that, too.

Author
Time

twooffour said:

If you wanna engage in black-and-white painting and say that there are good stories where spoilers don't matter on the one hand, and bad stories that solely rely on a twist on the other hand, then please be my guest.

Truth is, however, lots of stuff people avoid spoilers of, is in many ways mediocre, and even good works can have strong and weak aspects.

A proper scientific study has to take all of that into account, although I guess you can still proceed from this one for further research.

If you want to deny the role of the surprise element in the enjoyment of fiction as well as story, you're free to do that, too.

I don't know that anyone is denying the surprise element in the enjoyment of fiction. What I'm saying is that the point is irrelevant. You were the one who raised the specter of different kind of stories that would undermine the study's results. I speculated how you might be touching on something (which means I am the one engaging in "black-and-white painting" - huh? sorry for trying to give your point any credence I guess).

A "proper scientific study" must take into account relevant factors to the question it asks. I conceded that taking into account the cleverness of the twist might show variance in enjoyability by individuals. Just as knowing whether the students had read such fiction before. Just as knowing how many had eaten breakfast and were more or less alert. Just as knowing, etc, etc, etc. Whatever multitude of possible factors were at play, 11 of 12 stories were rated more enjoyable after knowing the twist. I think you're thinking of a question the study wasn't asking.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

It's questions the study should've been asking if it wanted truly significant results.
12 selected stories with no examination of their specific content? Sorry.

I think the cleverness of a twist might only be determinant when that's all the story has going for it, like the punchline of a joke.


Well what do you base this sweeping statement on again?

How about the story has to offer a lot, but the twist adds even more to the enjoyment?
LOST had to offer a lot, and I'd like some study on that showing that people who already knew the flashsides were a con and a duck, enjoyed it just as much.
What if the story is so engaging, it allows you to suck in the twist with loving passion without scrutinizing its crude underpinnings? The quality of the twist would matter in a lesser story, but less so here.

Then, of course, the are two components of the enjoyment, aren't there - before the twist, and after (or during). The surprise during the twist is what usually sticks in the memory the most.
So you'd have to ask the participants how they were feeling before the surprise, and how impressed they were with the WTF moment in the aftermath.

Author
Time

1984 the movie spoiled 1984 the novel for me, so much so that I'm never going to read it because I already know how it's going to unfold.

Of course, I hated 1984, so that may have something to do with it ...

Author
Time

I think another factor that should be considered in research like this: the second viewing.

If a movie is good, the story is good, etc., a second viewing will always be worthwhile whether you've been told the spoiler, or have actually seen everything that's to come.
The question should be, in what way does the first viewing with spoilers, differ from a second viewing after seeing it without spoilers?

Sure, in a second viewing, attention will be paid to the elements and aspects you've already seen, rather than an abstract concept you've been told about (or even a scene shown from the ending) consciously anticipated.
It's a major difference.
Then, you can be told different things in advance, from the final twist, to the entire synopsis.

Still, again, when I was viewing the 6th Sense, I couldn't shake off the feeling that I'm kinda viewing it a second time.
I already knew what it was coming to, and what the little deceptive elements were there to do, and I feel I'd been watching it about the same way had it been a second viewing.


So that's another important factor ;)

Then, with Lost or Shutter Island, I knew the twists, but hadn't read the synopsis of either, AND, the way the illusion was staged was more convincing without the "dead-giveaways" like the wife not responding to Bruce Willis, so... there was a cognitive dissonance involved there. "I know this is how it's gonna turn out, but I can't imagine how, this is just not where it's going... not it must be flash-sideways, the spoilers must've been wrong".

And there yet another example how knowing the spoiler can have different impacts on enjoyment depending on structure and implementation :)

Author
Time

RedFive said:

I feel bad for you, that's a great book. 

I'm yet an ignoramus on this, but all I know from it is the rat scene, and I couldn't stop to wonder... what? After that build-up? "It's the worst thing"... and they're gonna bring in a rat because they know you're afraid of them?


Okay... but I'm sure it's very significant in capturing totalitarianism, so I guess that doesn't matter :)

Author
Time

twooffour said:

It's questions the study should've been asking if it wanted truly significant results.

That is too funny. The study didn't study what you wanted it to study, so the results are not "truly significant."

12 selected stories with no examination of their specific content? Sorry.

No need to apologize! The point is that 11/12 stories were rated more highly after knowing the twist. That is pretty significant. Are you saying at least 11 of the stories had twists of low quality? Or that at least 11 of the stories were of a markedly different character than stories in general? There were a variety of stories by different authors.

I think the cleverness of a twist might only be determinant when that's all the story has going for it, like the punchline of a joke.

Well what do you base this sweeping statement on again?

If you noticed how I started my sentence ("I think"), it is clearly a supposition.

 


How about the story has to offer a lot, but the twist adds even more to the enjoyment?
LOST had to offer a lot, and I'd like some study on that showing that people who already knew the flashsides were a con and a duck, enjoyed it just as much.
What if the story is so engaging, it allows you to suck in the twist with loving passion without scrutinizing its crude underpinnings? The quality of the twist would matter in a lesser story, but less so here.

Sometimes research rebuts our personal feelings. As I said, I prefer to not know the twists. But maybe, just maybe, I would rate a story more enjoyable knowing the twist ahead of time, nonetheless. Even recognizing this, I still maintain I wouldn't want to know the twists. I greatly enjoy Lost. If I had known that the flashsides were a ruse, I can't say that I would have rated it less highly. I think you're trying too hard to supplant research with personal feelings and anecdotes. There well may be an error in the research, but you haven't identified it.

Then, of course, the are two components of the enjoyment, aren't there - before the twist, and after (or during). The surprise during the twist is what usually sticks in the memory the most.
So you'd have to ask the participants how they were feeling before the surprise, and how impressed they were with the WTF moment in the aftermath.

So you want to ask if the twist in isolation was more enjoyable knowing or not knowing - not whether the work as a whole was enjoyable. And this is the problem with your whole, "argument." I would think it obvious that a twist is more enjoyable not knowing it. But that wasn't the question. The question was whether the story as a whole is less enjoyable for knowing the twist. It is a significant question, even if it's not the more myopic question you would ask.

The blue elephant in the room.