Hacker News Reader

I disagree. Even without plot twists, a movie is often a process of discovery. You explore the character, narration, allusions, themes, and language in the order they're shown in the film. And Moon in particular is such a carefully paced movie. So while I agree that the plot spoilers may not matter much in this case, I think you'd have a much different and likely inferior experience watching Moon after reading this because of all the other stuff it reveals.

So what Biot said: go watch Moon and then come back and read this excellent blog post.

If you do consistently find things spoiled by foreknowledge, there is a simple solution - just avoid reading articles or discussions which mention the film before you see it (stop reading at the word Moon!), no need to call out spoilers because every meaningful discussion of this film will be a spoiler in some sense, and many people enjoy discussing films and books online after or before they see them. I'm not sure where this cult of no-spoilers has come from, but it damages public discussion - all content could be spoilers for someone so reviews become a cryptic set of hints instead of a full discussion with examples and no-one can speak frankly about stories without hearing 'spoilers'. The responsibility for avoiding exposure should fall on the person who doesn't want to know things, rather than on everyone else.

It's interesting, because I find more pleasure sometimes in rereading a book or watching a film again than the first time, specifically because of having a deeper understanding of it, the background to the characters, other films like it, and perhaps noticing things that were missed the first time round. Broader knowledge (from others or from previous experiences) actually helps further enjoyment in many cases, because it deepens your understanding when you are exposed. So I'd say go ahead and enjoy reading about things beforehand, you may well find it actually improves the experience - in some cases like James Joyce, or to a lesser extent Shakespeare, it becomes almost essential.

Like you, I often re-read books or re-watch DVDs. But I find the enjoyment that I gain from this is different the first reading/viewing, and I'd prefer to experience both. Spoilers would detract from this.

Different strokes. I find that spoilers make me more interested in how the story unfolds, personally. But yes, I understand that a lot of folks don't like them.

> It's interesting, because I find more pleasure sometimes in rereading a book or watching a film again than the first time [...] So I'd say go ahead and enjoy reading about things beforehand, you may well find it actually improves the experience

That's lovely for you. You are not me. You are basically doing this:

me: "I don't like artichokes."

you: "Oh, that can't be true! You must never have actually eaten artichokes! Surely you are laboring under a tragic and inexplicable delusion! Here, hold still while I stuff artichokes down your throat! You'll thank me later!"

Yes, thank you, I have had artichokes. I have never enjoyed a work of fiction more for having pivotal plot details spoiled, and I have often enjoyed it less. I am quite capable of evaluating my own reactions to things, thank you very much. You are not doing a public service by telling everybody to just be more like you.

This is exactly how I feel about people crying spoilers, because it ruins reviews or discussions of films and leads to people tip-toeing around discussions because they can't just discuss the details of the film without lots of hedging and caveats, and even then there's always someone who will say 'oh this ruins it for me, I need to see the film first before anyone discusses it on the internet you should have hidden your thoughts behind a spoiler warning or not written them at all'. I see this comment all the time on professional reviews of films, which are intended to discuss the film.

I wouldn't 'stuff artichokes down your throat' as you put it and didn't properly discuss the film here because of the spoiler warning, but I don't want to be policed by other people in what I can say about a film, which is exactly what talking about spoilers does - it shuts down discussion and damages the discussion of everyone else.

If you don't want to read about a film before you see it, don't do that then, but don't attempt to police the thoughts of everyone else.

It's clearly an emotive topic, and I'm sad now this has taken over the top of the discussion of this film and don't think any of these comments including the OP deserve to be anywhere near the top (they were not when this thread started), so will leave it there.

> but I don't want to be policed by other people in what I can say about a film, which is exactly what talking about spoilers does - it shuts down discussion and damages the discussion of everyone else.

Does it? The parent comment just warned people who haven't seen the film yet to watch it first. It didn't stop anyone from discussing the film, or suggest that the article should be spoiler-free.

I don't really understand. There are plenty of examples of work that discuss films without spoilers. Professional reviewers, especially, excel at this because they are explicitly aware of what parts of the movie will be fascinating to discover. And so your idea that everyone should cover their ears and run for the hills when they hear the word Moon would prevent them from finding out whether, say, they might want to watch it in the first place.

But regardless, you're missing the point. No one is complaining about the article containing spoilers or are trying to shut down the discussion; I think you must be reading too much connotation into the term "spoiler". What we're doing is providing the advice that people haven't seen the movie may wish to do so first, because it may be a lot more fun (I understand you may disagree, which is fine, but I stand by the advice). Your diatribe against "the cult of no-spoilers" is simply misplaced.

Classic HN comment. "The whole concept of spoilers is an anti-pattern"

Here's a radical concept: some people appreciate knowing when something contains spoilers, and now they know.

Your entire comment can be boiled down to "suspense is an unnecessary prop", and I couldn't disagree more.

What a weird, unnecessarily long and comprehensive response to a well-intentioned and relatively neutral advisory comment.

I managed to get my girls to watch Empire Strikes Back at just old enough to appreciate the films, and fortunately before they had heard that Vader was Luke's father. More than most spoilers, for some reason for this one it was really important to me that they experience the revelation in the film.

I remember watching Psycho with my first girlfriend. She had what you'd call a sheltered upbringing. (If readers have had one too, SPOILERS FOLLOW.)

Janet Leigh gets in the shower. "Is...is this the film with the shower scene?", says my girlfriend.

Janet Leigh is attacked. "But she can't be dead - she's the main character!"

As a film student, I was grateful to see the initial 1960 reaction played out in my living room.

> This is a great film, but I'm not sure why knowing more about the plot or the background to the design would ruin it for you? Do you also worry about spoilers for works of literature or films from the past?

Yes?