posted
So how long do you have to wait after a film or a book or even a television show comes out when you no longer have to worry about giving spoilers?
Back in the day, as soon as a movie was out of the theaters or a show was off the air you could start talking about it, because anyone who hasn't seen it will probably not see it. In our new YouTube and Netflix culture, suddenly movies and TV shows that would have been impossible to see years after their first runs are at our fingertips.
So I figure we should come out with an official time limit, after which you no longer have to worry about spoiling things for other people.
I suggest 1 year. Who's with me?
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:1 year is reasonable and make sure to ask if anyone has seen it already.
I think the point is that after a certain time, if someone hasn't seen something yet, they either don't care, or won't see it, so it doesn't matter whether you talk about spoilers in front of them. I'm not going to bite my tongue about Citizen Kane around someone. I'm also not going to go ruin a movie for someone by being a jerk. I'd definitely ask first. And where as with a newer movie i might refrain from talking about it in front of someone and move on to a different conversation, with something older like that, the person can choose to hear the conversation or not.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point is how long until you no longer have to ask.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
the thing is though, that certain things people haven't seen because they haven't known about it at the time. Like seeing Death Note, I only heard about it recently and had it been spoiled it would've ruined my experience of it.
IP: Logged |
posted
My opinion is that it's not society's job to ensure that you have an unspoiled movie experience. I think it's generally accepted that there's some sort of grace period of indeterminate length, and then after that it's nobody's job but your own to make sure a movie isn't spoiled for you. I'd say a year should be plenty of time.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I think a book's spoiler period should be longer. I think it's probably more common for people to read books years or even decades after publication than it is to see movies or tv shows that long after the fact.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
hey, if the subject of a conversation is a movie you want to see or a book you want to read, you can stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la la."
If you find that reading forum threads about movies you haven't seen tends to spoil them for you...
It's nice that people are trying to be nice about it (for up to some amount of time) though.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say that in a situation where if the thread is clearly about the book, show, movie, etc., and says so in the title, the assumption should that it will have spoilers about what has been publicly released.
If you don't want spoilers about the latest episode of Lost, don't open the Lost thread until you've seen it, even if the word "SPOILERS" isn't in the title.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I'd say that in a situation where if the thread is clearly about the book, show, movie, etc., and says so in the title, the assumption should that it will have spoilers about what has been publicly released.
If you don't want spoilers about the latest episode of Lost, don't open the Lost thread until you've seen it, even if the word "SPOILERS" isn't in the title.
I agree with this. The only exception is if someone specifies a thread is to be "Spoiler Free" in the title. Then the posters should respect it.
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
