jfever
Journeyman Douchebag
FEVAH!!!!
Posts: 218
|
Post by jfever on Oct 10, 2012 8:43:47 GMT -8
On the subject of Spoilers. There is a statute of limitations it's a simple mathematical equation (Release Date x Popularity) + DVD release - Book Release x Go Fuck yourself = how long I have to wait before I can speak my mind Also I think this is Important, any story that is only good/enjoyable based on one aspect/twist that can be easily spoiled is a bad story. Here's an example "The Game" by David Fincher it's twists and turns and you can't quite be sure until the end who is behind it. Then once you find out either that was what you thought or you were surprised. Now trying watching it again. Ugh. All the suspense and mystery is gone. The character are kind of bleh and not much happens. You could say well it's that way for mysteries and suspense. I would point to the BBC Sherlock show, or an old Mystery Green For Danger. In both of these there are twists and turns but the story is not hinged on them there is more to story. Characters with paths you enjoy watching. If it is a good story you can't spoil it. When I was a film student I watched tons of movies, now I can see every trick in the book. I knew who was going to die in the Avengers movie based on certain script cues and character uses. I still enjoyed it. I didn't need to be surprised. I think what I'm about to say is going to parallel the "we just don't have the same definition of minmaxing" thing. . . . Spoilers are not a reference to spoiling the quality of a movie. It spoils the plot twists and/or surprises. Spoiling something doesn't make a movie crap. What it does do is spoil the experience that someone will have when reading/seeing something for the first time. Ya know, like the one YOU had when you first read/saw it. A movie will be a good movie because it's a good movie, not because of the amazing twist. I have never heard anyone say, nor have I said myself "Wow! That movie was shit until the surprise at the end. Then it became awesome!" The closest I ever came to saying something like that was about the movie Martyrs, but that is another story. . . . "(Release Date x Popularity) + DVD release - Book Release x Go Fuck yourself = how long I have to wait before I can speak my mind" Also, there is a LARGE misconception that in order to properly talk about anything that has plot points or surprises in the plot, you HAVE to be talk about them out loud. THIS IS NOT TRUE. I have sat in the room with my wife and our roommate while they talk about all the Song of Ice and Fire books. I am not a good reader and I don't enjoy doing it, so I wait for the show to come out. My wife and roommate had full conversations pertaining to Song of Ice and Fire where they understood completely what each other was talking about, and managed to not spoil anything for me. There is a reason there isn't a statute of limitations on spoilers, because it is a the most giant grey area ever. Like Stu said in the show, Battlestar had just come out on Netflix, even though the show had been out for years. There was a whole group of people that were just being introduced to the show. Another example is CADave's mentality about book series. He doesn't read them until they are all out. So, if he doesn't start reading the Song of Ice and Fire books because he wants to wait for many years, what gives anyone the right to kill the surprises and plot twists in store for him? There are to many different situations and circumstances to have a definitive way of knowing when it's okay to spoil something. Ultimately, the feeling that someone should be able to speak about spoilers all the time in front of people who they know haven't seen/read the thing to be spoiled, spawns from a sense of entitlement and elitism. "I read/saw this thing, and you are less of a person for not having seen/read it. Therefore, it doesn't matter what you think or say, I am better than you and can talk about whatever I want whenever I want." I know it can be frustrating to not be able to talk about something because it will spoil something for someone else. But, I guarantee you, your life will be exactly the same whether you speak about the spoilers or not. The only thing that will change is the other person's enjoyment of this awesome story. Who are you to shit on that?
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 10, 2012 9:37:05 GMT -8
I do not consider the book to have any relevance to a discussion about the movie. Theyre different works. That's your opinion but it's a shame that the sci fi/fantasy elective subject as part of the BA (English Literature Major) disagrees and considers both the context of the book and the movie together as one informs the other regardless of the believed or stated degrees of separation. Like any work of art . . . Once released to the public for consumption, perception and interpretation the creator looses ownership as it has become a shared object in a shared space with all observers participating with equal validity in attributing meaning. Otherwise F.A.T.A.L isn't a piece of rank gutter bilge spawned from the fevered adolescent dreams of a deeply disturbed individual(s) it is what the authors defend it as being because they are the final authorities on how it should be perceived and interpreted. In the latest Your Book is Why Daddy Drinks Podcast there is long debate about the relative merits, or lack of, of 50 Shades of Grey from 3 different readers . . . All viewpoints are considered equally valid in interpreting the underlying themes and subtext of 50 Shades - yet at no point is the author asked to contribute an opinion. I will defend PKD having an opinion precisely because it's actually an absence of opinion on the discussed theme, he claimed no authority he just wanted people to read and explore the possibilities in their own way and their own time - what is 'human' ? This question in itself is remarkable in its far sightedness when you consider the contemporary considerations of transhumanism, post humanism and the different expectations of the potential technological singularity predicted by some. Ridley Scott didn't invent this genre/philosophical enquiry nor did he precipitate it's consideration he produced a work of art (good or bad) and released it into the public domain for consumption and attribution of meaning, at that point his ownership stops . . . The fact that he constantly reedits it to evoke his desired response proves that the final analysis rests with the subjective experience of each individual member of the audience . . . No one is a passive observer, perception is a purposeful act of engagement . . .
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Oct 10, 2012 13:17:28 GMT -8
[quote author=jfever board=showannouncementsandfeedback thread=1192 post=9876 time=1349887427surprised. [/quote] I think what I'm about to say is going to parallel the "we just don't have the same definition of minmaxing" thing. . . . Spoilers are not a reference to spoiling the quality of a movie. It spoils the plot twists and/or surprises. Spoiling something doesn't make a movie crap. What it does do is spoil the experience that someone will have when reading/seeing something for the first time. Ya know, like the one YOU had when you first read/saw it. A movie will be a good movie because it's a good movie, not because of the amazing twist. I have never heard anyone say, nor have I said myself "Wow! That movie was shit until the surprise at the end. Then it became awesome!" The closest I ever came to saying something like that was about the movie Martyrs, but that is another story. . . . "(Release Date x Popularity) + DVD release - Book Release x Go Fuck yourself = how long I have to wait before I can speak my mind" Also, there is a LARGE misconception that in order to properly talk about anything that has plot points or surprises in the plot, you HAVE to be talk about them out loud. THIS IS NOT TRUE. I have sat in the room with my wife and our roommate while they talk about all the Song of Ice and Fire books. I am not a good reader and I don't enjoy doing it, so I wait for the show to come out. My wife and roommate had full conversations pertaining to Song of Ice and Fire where they understood completely what each other was talking about, and managed to not spoil anything for me. There is a reason there isn't a statute of limitations on spoilers, because it is a the most giant grey area ever. Like Stu said in the show, Battlestar had just come out on Netflix, even though the show had been out for years. There was a whole group of people that were just being introduced to the show. Another example is CADave's mentality about book series. He doesn't read them until they are all out. So, if he doesn't start reading the Song of Ice and Fire books because he wants to wait for many years, what gives anyone the right to kill the surprises and plot twists in store for him? There are to many different situations and circumstances to have a definitive way of knowing when it's okay to spoil something. Ultimately, the feeling that someone should be able to speak about spoilers all the time in front of people who they know haven't seen/read the thing to be spoiled, spawns from a sense of entitlement and elitism. "I read/saw this thing, and you are less of a person for not having seen/read it. Therefore, it doesn't matter what you think or say, I am better than you and can talk about whatever I want whenever I want." I know it can be frustrating to not be able to talk about something because it will spoil something for someone else. But, I guarantee you, your life will be exactly the same whether you speak about the spoilers or not. The only thing that will change is the other person's enjoyment of this awesome story. Who are you to shit on that?[/quote] I agree that in order to speak about a story, you do not have to regurgitate that story plot point by plot point. Enititlement and Elistism? Couldn't I just that people that expect everyone to censor themselves because "they" haven't experienced it yet is a sense feeling entitled and elite in the idea that others come second to them. I am not refering or defending the people that go out of their way to try and spoil or ruin things. i.e. the Harry Potter shirts with a character's death that came out the same day as the book. I disagree that the term spoiler doesn't refer to spoiling the movie. If learning a Twist or Surprise in a Movie SPOILS the movie, then it was not a good movie. I knew how The Great Escape Ended well before I saw it. It is a great film. My point is the Podcast can't just tip-toe around EVERYTHING because SOMEONE might not have seen it yet. It is not Elitism to want to talk about something I just experienced. I just experienced something I enjoyed it is only human that I then want to share that experience with others. If someone doesn't want to hear what I have to say the proper response isn't to tell me to shut up because you don't want to know or SPOILERS!, it is calmly excuse yourself from the conversation others might be having.
|
|
|
Post by malifer on Oct 10, 2012 13:18:48 GMT -8
I do not consider the book to have any relevance to a discussion about the movie. Theyre different works. That's your opinion but it's a shame that the sci fi/fantasy elective subject as part of the BA (English Literature Major) disagrees and considers both the context of the book and the movie together as one informs the other regardless of the believed or stated degrees of separation. Like any work of art . . . Once released to the public for consumption, perception and interpretation the creator looses ownership as it has become a shared object in a shared space with all observers participating with equal validity in attributing meaning. Otherwise F.A.T.A.L isn't a piece of rank gutter bilge spawned from the fevered adolescent dreams of a deeply disturbed individual(s) it is what the authors defend it as being because they are the final authorities on how it should be perceived and interpreted. In the latest Your Book is Why Daddy Drinks Podcast there is long debate about the relative merits, or lack of, of 50 Shades of Grey from 3 different readers . . . All viewpoints are considered equally valid in interpreting the underlying themes and subtext of 50 Shades - yet at no point is the author asked to contribute an opinion. I will defend PKD having an opinion precisely because it's actually an absence of opinion on the discussed theme, he claimed no authority he just wanted people to read and explore the possibilities in their own way and their own time - what is 'human' ? This question in itself is remarkable in its far sightedness when you consider the contemporary considerations of transhumanism, post humanism and the different expectations of the potential technological singularity predicted by some. Ridley Scott didn't invent this genre/philosophical enquiry nor did he precipitate it's consideration he produced a work of art (good or bad) and released it into the public domain for consumption and attribution of meaning, at that point his ownership stops . . . The fact that he constantly reedits it to evoke his desired response proves that the final analysis rests with the subjective experience of each individual member of the audience . . . No one is a passive observer, perception is a purposeful act of engagement . . . Well said.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Oct 10, 2012 13:43:53 GMT -8
[quote author=jfever board=showannouncementsandfeedback thread=1192 post=9876 time=1349887427surprised. I think what I'm about to say is going to parallel the "we just don't have the same definition of minmaxing" thing. . . . Spoilers are not a reference to spoiling the quality of a movie. It spoils the plot twists and/or surprises. Spoiling something doesn't make a movie crap. What it does do is spoil the experience that someone will have when reading/seeing something for the first time. Ya know, like the one YOU had when you first read/saw it. A movie will be a good movie because it's a good movie, not because of the amazing twist. I have never heard anyone say, nor have I said myself "Wow! That movie was shit until the surprise at the end. Then it became awesome!" The closest I ever came to saying something like that was about the movie Martyrs, but that is another story. . . . "(Release Date x Popularity) + DVD release - Book Release x Go Fuck yourself = how long I have to wait before I can speak my mind" Also, there is a LARGE misconception that in order to properly talk about anything that has plot points or surprises in the plot, you HAVE to be talk about them out loud. THIS IS NOT TRUE. I have sat in the room with my wife and our roommate while they talk about all the Song of Ice and Fire books. I am not a good reader and I don't enjoy doing it, so I wait for the show to come out. My wife and roommate had full conversations pertaining to Song of Ice and Fire where they understood completely what each other was talking about, and managed to not spoil anything for me. There is a reason there isn't a statute of limitations on spoilers, because it is a the most giant grey area ever. Like Stu said in the show, Battlestar had just come out on Netflix, even though the show had been out for years. There was a whole group of people that were just being introduced to the show. Another example is CADave's mentality about book series. He doesn't read them until they are all out. So, if he doesn't start reading the Song of Ice and Fire books because he wants to wait for many years, what gives anyone the right to kill the surprises and plot twists in store for him? There are to many different situations and circumstances to have a definitive way of knowing when it's okay to spoil something. Ultimately, the feeling that someone should be able to speak about spoilers all the time in front of people who they know haven't seen/read the thing to be spoiled, spawns from a sense of entitlement and elitism. "I read/saw this thing, and you are less of a person for not having seen/read it. Therefore, it doesn't matter what you think or say, I am better than you and can talk about whatever I want whenever I want." I know it can be frustrating to not be able to talk about something because it will spoil something for someone else. But, I guarantee you, your life will be exactly the same whether you speak about the spoilers or not. The only thing that will change is the other person's enjoyment of this awesome story. Who are you to shit on that?[/quote] I agree that in order to speak about a story, you do not have to regurgitate that story plot point by plot point. Enititlement and Elistism? Couldn't I just that people that expect everyone to censor themselves because "they" haven't experienced it yet is a sense feeling entitled and elite in the idea that others come second to them. I am not refering or defending the people that go out of their way to try and spoil or ruin things. i.e. the Harry Potter shirts with a character's death that came out the same day as the book. I disagree that the term spoiler doesn't refer to spoiling the movie. If learning a Twist or Surprise in a Movie SPOILS the movie, then it was not a good movie. I knew how The Great Escape Ended well before I saw it. It is a great film. My point is the Podcast can't just tip-toe around EVERYTHING because SOMEONE might not have seen it yet. It is not Elitism to want to talk about something I just experienced. I just experienced something I enjoyed it is only human that I then want to share that experience with others. If someone doesn't want to hear what I have to say the proper response isn't to tell me to shut up because you don't want to know or SPOILERS!, it is calmly excuse yourself from the conversation others might be having.[/quote] Precisely . . . the world moves around us not for us, one cannot attend to everything as it happens . . . like queue at McDonalds some people just get there first. We are social beings and we like talking about stuff . . . this forum is one long discourse between several hundred people . . . what else would one talk about except what you've seen, heard, read and enjoyed.
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Oct 10, 2012 13:57:23 GMT -8
Whenever spoiler conversations happen, I'm reminded of "Sixth Sense." I saw this film days after it premiered in the theaters. I knew nothing about it at all.
I should preface this with the fact that I'm not an "active" movie watcher. I don't try to figure stuff out as it goes. I don't look for plot clues or hiccups. (I also don't look for boom mics, lights and other technical glitches). I just enjoy the experience the talented fuckers have put before me. Period.
So I was fucking FLOORED when I discovered the main character was (censored). I mean TOTALLY taken by surprise.
THAT was the experience the director and writers were hoping I'd have, right?
I've watched the film a couple times since, now looking for clues to the revelation that floored me the first time.
I think the film holds up even after the big reveal. And I don't think spoiling that would "ruin" the film. HOWEVER, I would never have had THAT EXPERIENCE the first time I saw it.
Knowing spoilers doesn't ruin movies, but it sure as hell can rob people of the experience.
The Battlestar Galactica thing was a minor offense with regards to spoilerage. If I'd said, "I can't believe that (censored), (censored) and (censored) are cylons!" that would be worth some rage.
|
|
|
Post by muntjack on Oct 10, 2012 18:15:11 GMT -8
Well said, jfever!
I hate spoilers, and I do my best to not spoil something that I know other people are going to read/watch. Thankfully I think most of my friends share the same sentiment about that, too, and we're good about not spoiling something. The experience and the emotion that you feel is much different if you have an idea what is going to happen. I think out of courtesy people should really preface something with a warning if they are going to discuss an important plot element.
Of course, there are limitations to these things. I think we all know about Luke/Vader in Star Wars or anything that's been around for years, but I think good points have been made about the current state of media. With Netflix and Hulu, "older" shows and movies are becoming more available to a new, wider audience. And some people are just plain BUSY and can't get to something right away. I'm currently trying to work my way through Battlestar, Firefly, and some other shows, but given the fact that I have so LITTLE free time and so many DIFFERENT forms of entertainment to get through, I may not get through any of these shows even by the end of this year.
Thus, I think it's just nice to give a bit of warning up front. It's not difficult to do, and it's just plain considerate.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Oct 10, 2012 19:42:25 GMT -8
I had a question regarding the Chaosium/Cthulhu Cards discussion. If H.P.'s IP ( is now public domain how does Chaosium have any point of defense at all ? I understand that they might own the copyright for the system of CoC but they can't own a public domain source material correct ? My FLGS has seen a total EXPLOSION in Lovecraftian games and props (card games like Arkham Horror, Munchkin Cthulhu, Cthulhu dice, plush Cthulhu dolls, shirts, Shoggoth Toilet Paper (if that doesn't exist I call dibs)). Did Cthulhutech have to get the ok from Chaosium ? And I hope Stu's ban on Chaosium products isn't still in effect. Really ? Just because some douchey lawyer got their dander up you develop a scorched earth policy against a company which has created some pretty incredible products ? And talk about IP infringement, my new favorite shirt:
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Oct 10, 2012 20:57:12 GMT -8
I do have to admit feeling forced to tip toe around certain people in terms of pop culture references from what seems the PAST FORTY YEARS really makes me feel that people who want me to act like that are the elitist jerks with a sense of entitlement. They must get very dizzy with the rest of the universe revolving around them.
I had to laugh too, yeah, obnoxious guys from New Jersey - hey, wait a minute....
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Oct 11, 2012 6:41:42 GMT -8
Chaosium doesn't hold a copyright, but they've registered "Call of Cthulhu" as a trademark for roleplaying games and supplements. It is from that trademark that they felt entitled to go after the Call of Cthulhu cards kickstarter. Charlie Krank, president of Chaosium, contacted the kickstarter, saying they were violating their trademark and copying their artwork. Here's an excerpt: "On advice of my lawyer, a specialist in intellectual property rights, I have begun gathering additional information on your project. On closer inspection, infringement on our trademark is not the only problem. It appears that you have also copied our copyrighted artwork, and re-worked it for your project. An example is below, showing our original art, created in 1983, and your current effort."
The images that were included actually altered our original image to make it look more like his and seems to make the claim that his company owns the rights to any images that resemble the Elder Sign. The elder sign design Shane created is based on the version described by August Dereleth. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/Elder_sign_derleth.jpg is the example provided by Wikipedia, is ubiquitous, and used in tons of other media. If you're interested, you can read the entire update: www.kickstarter.com/projects/1460165270/cthulhu-playing-cards/posts/317074There's also an update where the issue gets resolved. Mr. Krank's behavior was bully-like at best. He gets no more of my money. Both Realms of Cthulhu and Trail of Cthulhu mention an agreement with Chaosium.
|
|
|
Post by shadrack on Oct 11, 2012 7:18:31 GMT -8
Realms of Cthulhu does specifically mention the Call of Cthulhu game (and has conversion rules). So that one does seem reasonable, I will be quiet about 'Trails of Cthulhu' because I haven't read it.
I have no issue with him defending his IP. I do have issue with the manner in which he went about it. It seems to me that this should have all been handled civilly, between the Kickstarters and Chaousium. Only if that was going poorly should Bicycle have been notified. It does appear to have been a strongarming tactic. I agree with Stu, Mr. Krank seems like a bully, or a kid who doesn't want to share his toys.
What he should've done: bring up the issue off-line and politely, give Chaousium's blessing to this project and promote it. Also commission another limited set to go out with 7th Ed CoC when it arrives (I believe it's in playtesting now). Get the Kickstarter guys to blast all the kickers about that when 7th ed is ready for pre-orders.
Seems very short-sighted by Mr. Krank. (if that is his real name...)
|
|
|
Post by shadrack on Oct 11, 2012 7:31:59 GMT -8
Did Cthulhutech have to get the ok from Chaosium ? The Cthulhutech quick start rules have no mention of Chaosium. There is also no phrase "Call of Cthulhu" that my pdf reader could find. (I just downloaded the quick start - it's free!) I wonder of the 'Law of the Geek' podcast will discuss this one. They talk IP a lot.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Oct 11, 2012 8:09:41 GMT -8
Having seen that I'd have to agree with you that this was handled poorly. Blood sucking lawyers rarely seem to bring "human decency" into the money equation. Too bad really. I still cling to my old Sandy Petersen CoC books with all of their muddy mechanics. I haven't bought a chaosium product in 15 years. I hope that they might pay attention to the CoC fans who find the cards a great supplement to the Cthulhu-verse and rectify the way this was handled. But if he's already taken this stance because a lawyer got involved I'd say its doubtful.
|
|
|
Post by bloodsparrow on Oct 12, 2012 12:21:47 GMT -8
Stork telling Stu that he's gone too far in his statements about how much he dislikes Tolkien is fairly hilarious. *cough cough MCA cough cough*
On the subject of the Cthulhu cards... It looks like they use the Chaosium version of the Elder Sign. (the star with the circle and the flame I believe came about with the RPG) and then that more elaborate one (Sigil of the Gateway) of the lines in the circle with the "Elder Sign" in the center. Which would be their artwork, possibly even a logo... Or were those not included until after they made a deal with Chaosium? If so, yeah, total bunk.
If it's one thing I've learned listening to HP Podcraft, it's that there's always been ethically dodgy things going on with Lovecraft's work and things connected to it going all the way back, even when he was alive.
|
|
|
Post by henryhankovitch on Oct 12, 2012 16:02:36 GMT -8
www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/11/spoilers-study_n_924413.htmlI'm going to commit Internet heresy here: People who whine about spoilers need to grow the fuck up. Okay, there are a few properties-- Fight Club, The Sixth Sense, arguably The Usual Suspects--where knowing the outcome takes away a very specific part of the watching experience. These are works where the revelation of the plot twist casts the entirety of the work in a completely different light. The vast majority of details labeled as spoilers have nothing like this sort of importance. Where were you when you learned that Darth Vader was Luke's father? It most likely wasn't while you were sitting in a theater seat eating popcorn in 1980. According to spoiler logic, this means you have been robbed! You have not had the "pure" movie experience--you didn't learn this plot detail at the same place and the same time as all those people who did. Now let's say that the day before you see the movie, someone mentions to you Vader was Luke's father. Your reaction is likely to be "what? That's nuts. How the hell does that work? Hmmm..." But if you learn that detail while watching the movie, what is your reaction going to be? Something like "what? That's nuts. How the hell does that work? Hmmm..." It's effectively the same reaction, you're just having it at a different time and place. More importantly, knowing that fact in the abstract does not actually give you the experience of seeing that scene. The importance of that element of the film goes far beyond the plot detail in and of itself. It's not just about changing what we think we know about Luke, Obi-Wan, et al--it's about seeing Vader as he says it, seeing Luke's reaction, the fact that it's a capstone on a long-building scene of physical and emotional struggle. Spoiler whining is a trained response, like a kid who's learned to throw a tantrum every time he bumps his toe. The Internet has turned a minor part of everyday life--learning facts about media we are thinking about consuming--into some kind of horrible, emotionally-scarring experience that must be shouted down with extreme prejudice. The entire reason that trolls enjoy trolling with spoilers is because it's guaranteed to provoke some horrified outburst from an Internet manbaby. Grow the fuck up. (Or not. Sorry. Jeez. I'm just trying to, you know, make a point. Don't hurt me.)
|
|