| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 12/12/2006 : 12:01:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
I must say that I agree 100% with Downtown on this issue. In some sense, all reviews are spoilers. Certainly websites such as RogerEbert.com give more spoilers than us. Often times the advertising campaign of movies give as much or more away than we do in our reviews. Consider the ad campaign for The Truman Show. Did anyone walk into that movie without knowing it was a tv show? The revelation is supposed to be a big surprise and doesn't come to the audience until more than half way through the film. How about the trailer for Cast Away which shows what happens when Tom Hanks gets off the island when we were not supposed to walk in knowing that he survived the ordeal.
A case can be made that for certain movies on FWFR, Benj aught to have a spoiler warning at the top of the page, but I'd be very disturbed if there was a "spoiler censorship toggle" that someone could activate for it especially because the twists in movies like The Sixth Sense, The Crying Game, The Prestige, etc. are so much a part of those films. I recommend that fwfr'ers do what I've been doing since my first week on FWFR: do not read reviews for movies you intend on seeing. On the other hand, it is the responsibility of each fourumite to give a "Spoiler Warning" before discussing a spoiler in the fourum.
I take your point, but there is a distinct difference between giving away aspects of the plot and spoilers of the Sixth Sense type. The Truman Show one is something one discovers as soon as the film starts, so that does not really count at all. The Cast Away one is technically a spoiler, but it is so obvious that such a film would not just be about his living alone until he dies that it is at a very low level. (The Sixth Sense 'twist' also happens to be obvious, but that's a different matter.) Yes, a level would have to be decided on, as I mentioned, and there would be cases to weigh up, but that's only the same as weighing up any other decision here.
But yes, a basic version of this would be to have a spoiler warning at the top of, or before, certain film pages. However, this would not help when viewing people's pages, unless they had a similar warning, which I doubt you mean they would. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 12/12/2006 12:14:02 |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 12/12/2006 : 12:12:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
I agree with DT and GHC on this matter. It is a review site after all and as a matter of course I expect there to be spoilers on a large number of pages. In general I don't read reviews of films I have yet to see in the cinema. If it's an old film I take my chances; I'm more than likely not going to remember it if it does spoil the film, or chances are I already know it's got spoiler moments or a twist somewhere in it anyway.
I just don't think blocking out spoiler reviews would be approved by many contributers. We obviously want our reviews seen and voted on and the option would mean most visitors would keep it applied all the time "just in case".
The point is that this would not involve a large number of pages (relatively speaking), or a large proportion of reviews on those pages. You seem to take Downtown's view that we have got some kind of mystical right to get visitors' votes. My point of view is that I am glad for people to read my reviews and it is a privilege if they care to vote for any. Accordingly, they can choose to not read any that they wish, on any basis that they wish. |
|
|
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 12/12/2006 : 14:29:20
|
| I don't believe in any mystical right to votes. However, I do believe I have a right to have my reviews seen if they've been accepted by the editors. Frankly, I'm quite opposed to the "Voted only/Unvoted only" option, too, a feature I hadn't even really noticed until the other day. A review is either acceptable for publication or it isn't, which means it's either something to be seen or it isn't...there shouldn't be any grey area where we can decide as individuals what we do and don't want to see. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 02/13/2007 : 22:13:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
I don't believe in any mystical right to votes. However, I do believe I have a right to have my reviews seen if they've been accepted by the editors. Frankly, I'm quite opposed to the "Voted only/Unvoted only" option, too, a feature I hadn't even really noticed until the other day. A review is either acceptable for publication or it isn't, which means it's either something to be seen or it isn't...there shouldn't be any grey area where we can decide as individuals what we do and don't want to see.
O.K., fair enough - your position is certainly consistent. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Spoilers
