# Spoilers, How Old Is Too Old **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 28, 2009, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228 "2009-11-28T11:19:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/21 "2009-11-28T19:35:35Z")
Putting things in a spoiler box is easy enough that the rule of thumb should be to use it whenever discussing any such plot point. As I’ve said before, around once a year, someone starts a thread titled “I finally got around to seeing Citizen Kane.” So there is no expiration date on spoilers. Otherwise, with RealityChuck’s six-month rule for example, that would only make sense if everyone who reads here watched every movie or TV show on a synchronized schedule. The way so many people watch things on DVD, well after their run, makes that rule selfish and inconsiderate. Some things will always require spoilers: Citizen Kane, as I mentioned, Battlestar Galactica, etc. It’s only polite and requires minimal effort. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/22 "2009-11-28T19:55:06Z")
> [@lissener](#): > > Some things will always require spoilers: Citizen Kane, as I mentioned, Battlestar Galactica, etc. It’s only polite and requires minimal effort. Fuck that. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/23 "2009-11-28T20:10:32Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I think that was the point. Here was Kane, a powerful man who could buy the whole world, and what was this Rosebud? A secret lover, a hidden city, a passcode for a bank account? Minds were racing everywhere thinking it was to be a huge revelation. > > But he was simply thinking about his lost youth. > > And that seems cheesy by today’s standards because so many other films have played off of that concept. Some critics have argued that it’s a bit subtler than that. I can’t cite this, but we studied _Citizen Kane_ extensively in the American Film course I had in college, and one of the essays we read pointed out that it may be significant that Kane’s personal symbol of his lost youth was an _object_. He didn’t say “Mother” on his death bed, he named his old favorite toy. Throughout the movie we see Kane destroying his relationships with other people. In his last years he’s living largely in isolation and focuses on building his collection of art and other valuable objects. His final word may suggest that he never really “got it”, that even in his last moments he didn’t recognize that he was unhappy because he’d cut himself off from others and not because he didn’t have a particular thing in his possession. Then again, the end of the movie discourages the audience from attributing too much significance to Kane’s last word. “It wouldn’t have explained anything. I don’t think any word can explain a man’s life. No, I guess Rosebud is just a piece in a jigsaw puzzle. A missing piece.” ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/24 "2009-11-28T20:27:19Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > And ultimately, if a spoiler ruins a film for you, then it probably wasn’t all that good a film in the first place. Someone spoiled **The Crying Game** for me before I saw it; it didn’t matter. I haven’t seen **The Sixth Sense** , but I know the twist. I’d like to see it sometime. I guess you are not particularly interested in suspense. Nothing wrong with that, but why spoil things for people who are? ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/25 "2009-11-28T20:58:12Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > And ultimately, if a spoiler ruins a film for you, then it probably wasn’t all that good a film in the first place. I agree that a spoiler shouldn’t completely… spoil… a film. If a film relies that extensively on a single gimmick, I’d just as soon not see it. But I also enjoy surprises, and I envy anyone who can watch Psycho without knowing beforehand that Marion dies early in the film and Norman’s mother was dead all along.I can watch it and appreciate the cinematography, the performances, the writing, the music, and other sundry elements, but I can never have the experience of enjoying all that _plus_ the thrill of not knowing what will happen next, which means I’ve never experienced it as the creators intended. Do you see what I did there? I used a spoiler box on plot information that 999 out of 1,000 readers will already know. It cost me minimal time and effort and doesn’t inconvenience those 999 one whit, but it gives the other 1 the option of reading it with no more effort than a point-and-click, or remaining unspoiled. I really don’t see the downside. I wonder if those people who don’t see anything wrong with spoilers would see anything wrong with telling somebody that a surprise party was being planned in their honor, or revealing the contents of a Christmas package on the 23rd. I mean, if the party or the gift is any good, what difference does it make? ## One last analogy, I promise: A good movie isn’t ruined by a cell phone going off in the middle of it. It’s still damned annoying and something that can be prevented with minimal effort and a dash of common courtesy. \*Ironically, I put the spoiler in a quote box, so fixing it took a little more time and effort than I anticipated, but not too much. ---
**Author:** ![TWDuke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e495f1/32.png) [@TWDuke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TWDuke)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/26 "2009-11-28T21:17:46Z")
> [@MsWhatsit](#): > > Why put something in a spoiler box when you have given absolutely no indication of what work it is spoiling? The only person who is going to click a spoiler box like that is someone who doesn’t care about seeing a spoiler anyway. Sometimes (although not in the example cited) there is a good reason for it. I swear I recently saw an exchange something like this: > [@A](#): > > **The Tragic Life of Aloysius B. Cardamon** has the best twist ending ever! Who would have suspected Aloysius’ hamster! > [@B](#): > > Actually, it’s a ripoff of **The Tragic Death of Xerxes Y. Zebedee** , where Xerxes’ gerbil is the killer. > [@c](#): > > **B** , you should have specified what movie you were discussing! I just clicked on the box and now **The Shocking Death of Xerxes Y. Zebedee** is spoiled for me! ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/27 "2009-11-28T21:20:21Z")
Ah, yes, I will gladly concede that in a situation like that, it makes sense not to name the movie outside the spoiler box. In general, though, I think it is not very logical. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/28 "2009-11-28T22:20:42Z")
Regarding Kane and Rosebud, there are those who refute the theory discussed so far in this thread. The alternate theory is that… “Rosebud” was William Randolf Hearst’s pet name for the genitalia of his mistress. I find this theory much more satisfying than… a freakin’ sled… and a decent explanation of WRH’s animosity toward the flick when it was released. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/29 "2009-11-28T22:50:31Z")
> [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](#): > > Regarding Kane and Rosebud, there are those who refute the theory discussed so far in this thread. The alternate theory is that… > > “Rosebud” was William Randolf Hearst’s pet name for the genitalia of his mistress. Even if true (the evidence is shaky), this is a theory about the real-life inspiration for “Rosebud”. It tells us nothing about the significance of Rosebud within the context of the film because the end of the movie makes it clear that Rosebud was in fact Kane’s sled. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/30 "2009-11-28T22:55:11Z")
Not necessarily, **Lamia**. Just because the sled had Rosebud written on it, doesn’t mean that’s what he was thinking as he exited the mortal coil. I know when \*my \*time comes, I’m going to be thinking more about the women I’ve ridden than the sleds. ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/31 "2009-11-28T23:39:24Z")
[QUOTE=Erdosain] What annoys me is when people casually drop spoilers into an unrelated thread about a different show/movie. There is no fair warning there, and I think it’s bad form unless the thing being spoiled is several years old. They often still put it in spoiler tags, but it doesn’t help if I think the spoiler is about thread topic, not something completely unrelated. [/QUOTE] Agreed. **The Sixth Sense** was spoiled for me about four weeks after its release by an EW article that had nothing to do with the movie.:mad: What’s also irritating are those smug film critics who arrogantly think they’re doing you a favor by blurting out the plot twist or ending in their review. One local critic earned my undying enmity by giving away the ending to **Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade** in his review. I realize that it’s been 20 years and that wasn’t even the best Indiana Jones movie but that still galls me, dammit!.:mad::mad: > [@Zoinks](#): > > Cool, thanks. I remember reading the Cracked article about [classic movie plots that make no sense](http://www.cracked.com/article_16625_p2.html) and laughing when they ask: > > what kind of weirdo names his sled anyway? Does he miss his childhood desk chair too? [NITPICK] Kane didn’t name his sled. “Rosebud” is obviously either the name of the company that made the sled or the name of that particular sled model. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2009, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/32 "2009-11-28T23:59:01Z")
> [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](#): > > Not necessarily, **Lamia**. Just because the sled had Rosebud written on it, doesn’t mean that’s what he was thinking as he exited the mortal coil. Yes, it does. You are entitled to dislike the ending of _Citizen Kane_ if you find it silly or unsatisfying, but Rosebud’s identity is not left open to interpretation. Welles didn’t have to reveal the answer to this mystery in the film, but he did. Regardless of what intimate nicknames Hearst may or may not have had for Marion Davies, within the context of the movie Rosebud was quite clearly the name of the sled that Kane left behind as a boy. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/33 "2009-11-29T00:11:38Z")
Oh, I agree with you, within the context of the movie. But I like to look beyond that. You know, trying not to be superficial… 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/34 "2009-11-29T03:34:38Z")
> [@Ximenean](#): > > I guess you are not particularly interested in suspense. Nothing wrong with that, but why spoil things for people who are? What suspense in **The Crying Game**? That’s just a plot twist. And knowing the plot does not ruin the suspense. Suspense depends on the audience knowing what’s going on – usually when the characters do not. Let me tell you a story. Back in the early 70s, I happened to have some time to kill and picked up a book about Alfred Hitchcock. The book had a shot-by-shot breakdown of the crop dusting scene in **North by Northwest** , which I hadn’t seen. I figured I wouldn’t be seeing it any time soon, so I read the article, looking at each shot and reading the commentary. A half hour later, I returned home and turned on the TV. You guessed – it was **North by Northwest**. And it was the crop dusting scene. Despite not an hour before, I had read an analysis of every shot in the scene and knew exactly what was going to happen, I was still on the edge of my seat. That’s suspense. Now, mystery is another matter. But even then, I enjoyed **The Murder of Roger Ackroyd** a lot, even though I knew who the killer was before I picked it up. ---
**Author:** ![shijinn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@shijinn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shijinn)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/35 "2009-11-29T03:57:52Z")
nevertheless, i agree that spoilers have no expiration dates if you’re considerate. if it wasn’t an issue it wouldn’t be. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/36 "2009-11-29T04:21:26Z")
I am pretty cautious about spoiler usage. Years ago I mentioned, in passing, the winner of the World Series of Poker that year. This was months after the event and at the time, although I had little interest in poker, I knew all about it. He was the first nobody winner who got in through a $39 online satellite and the story was all over the regular media. The idea that anyone interested in poker would not know he won was like expecting a football fan to not know, in August, that the Steelers beat the Cardinals. However some poster jumped in to abuse me because the WSOP had not yet been shown on US TV and he had somehow kept from learning who won. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/37 "2009-11-29T05:01:13Z")
> [@don\_t\_ask](#): > > However some poster jumped in to abuse me because the WSOP had not yet been shown on US TV and he had somehow kept from learning who won. I move that all sporting/gaming events be exempt from spoiler rules. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2009, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228/38 "2009-11-29T13:10:25Z")
> [@Tanbarkie](#): > > A similar example is that of “Saving Private Ryan.” If we as the audience know that the old man at the beginning _is_ the titular private, then the rest of the movie loses a whole lot of tension, because we know the damned kid survives. I won’t dispute that, as a framing device, “Old Man Ryan” is clumsier (not to mention pumped full of Spielbergian sentimentality) than “Rosebud,” but you can’t deny that saving the reveal until the end served an important narrative purpose, even if it wasn’t very well executed. Honestly, I found (the stuff you talk about in the spoiler box) completely irrelevant to what I took from that movie, and if I were spoiled I don’t think it would have even registered to me as being spoiled. It just wouldn’t have occured to me that the big surprise was meaningful. (As is, it’s just kinda stupid and cloying.) > [@](#): > > In other words, plot surprises are one of many elements of good movie-making. Their contribution to overall quality varies from film to film (as noted above, a historical film suffers less from being spoiled than, say, an M. Night. [Shyamalan] film - say, 10% reduction in enjoyment vs 75%), but it is almost always _something._ I disgaree completely. I think the spoilers / twists are the absolute least entertaining part of M. Night’s films. His films have fantastic tone or mood or setting or however you want to say it, but the plot and dialogue range from bad to terrible. Having one of his films spoiled is saying you watch his movies for the plot. That’s like watching the original Adam West Batman for the gritty reality. (I love M. Night movies.) > [@TWDuke](#): > > I wonder if those people who don’t see anything wrong with spoilers would see anything wrong with telling somebody that a surprise party was being planned in their honor, or revealing the contents of a Christmas package on the 23rd. I mean, if the party or the gift is any good, what difference does it make? I don’t much care about spoilers, though occasionally I try to avoid spoilers about a specific project. But I wouldn’t care _at all_ about having a surprise party spoiled or knowing beforehand what a Christmas present was. > [@](#): > > One last analogy, I promise: A good movie isn’t ruined by a cell phone going off in the middle of it. It’s still damned annoying and something that can be prevented with minimal effort and a dash of common courtesy. This is tough to refute. I would say a cell phone going off or obnoxious teens talking over the picture would detract from the experience, and you could easily counter than foreknowledge detracts from the experience the director intended. I think they’re two different experiences, though. One is the ability to physically perceive the film. (This is why I virtually never go to the theater.) The other is, to my mind, a disruption of the suspension of disbelief. My propensity for suspension of disbelief knows no bounds, so I am all but immune to spoilers. But if loud surroundings make the movie hard to hear…GAH!!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/spoilers-how-old-is-too-old/519228.md?page=1)