To Spoil ... or Not To Spoil Point:Counterpoint Toryn Farr versus Fox Published 4/5/02 There is no ignorance, there is knowledge -- right?

Toryn Farr - Spoiler Queen

Spoil me. Give it to me now. Life is short. Eat dessert first.

Which is better? 1) a single unspoiled first viewing of two hours and fifteen minutes of film or 2) three years of constant and almost daily enjoyment from teasers, trailers, website documentaries and pictures, the Star Wars Insider, spy reports, leaked storyboards, etc.?

As for me, I'll take the spoiler route every time. (I also like to read the last chapter of a book first, and as a child I sneaked open my Christmas presents early.) I don't think it diminishes my enjoyment in the least to know what's coming. In fact, in most cases I think foreknowledge increases enjoyment -- and anticipation. I knew the big twist of Sixth Sense before I saw it the first time, and guess what -- I didn't have to watch it a second time to derive all the little ah-hah thrills you get from knowing what's going to happen. I read The Fellowship of the Ring and The Sorceror's (aka Philosopher's) Stone before I saw those movies, and knowing details from the books did not ruin the experience for me. On the contrary, it allowed me to sit back, relax, and enjoy the spectacle.

I saw The Phantom Menace at least 40 times in theaters. I suppose I'll see Attack of the Clones just as many times, if I can get away with it. Each screening allowed me to discover something new. I can't imagine going into the theater knowing virtually nothing about the next film -- there's simply too much to take in. Better, if you ask me, to have at least some knowledge of what you're going to see. And you know what? No matter how many spy reports and screen grabs I see, no matter how many illicit storyboards, leaked photos, or stolen soundtracks I find, I have every confidence that the first viewing of the actual film will still knock my socks off.

Yes, there is a slight down side to being a spoiler addict. I was totally spoiled for The Phantom Menace, and I was disappointed the first time I saw it because of what had been left on the cutting room floor -- scenes I'd been anticipating, that I'd read about, that had been excised between the script and the screen. But that's such a minor concern. After the second viewing, it no longer bothered me.

I just think being "unspoiled" for a film is overrated. The first time I saw The Empire Strikes Back (despite knowing almost everything about it from reports in Starlog Magazine), I got to experience the shock of hearing, "No, Luke. I am your father," completely unspoiled. I also got to experience the shock of sitting there at the end of the movie and ranting, "That's IT?!?! I have to wait three years to find out what happens?!?!" I would have gladly traded away the privilege of the former if I could have been mentally prepared for the latter.

I guess it comes down to this: Attack of the Clones is going to give us 135 minutes of fresh revelations. Some people prefer to take those 135 minutes all in one huge lump. I prefer to nibble away at those 135 minutes a little bit at a time. To me, whatever ephemeral thrill there is to be found in a single, unspoiled viewing of the film is not worth sacrificing the tremendous amount of enjoyment I've derived from hunting down spoilers these past three years.

I briefly considered trying to go into the next film, Episode III, unspoiled. But the more I think about it, the sillier it seems. Why go to all that trouble to avoid being spoiled when it's so much fun to be "in the know"? What is to be gained by remaining ignorant? Nothing that I can see.

Fox the Unspoiled

Spoilers are indeed habit-forming, but here's my feeling (from the other side of the fence, natch):

I do not want spoilers. This applies not just to Star Wars films, but to other movies, plays, television, opera, literature -- hell, it applies to the symphony, if there's a musical device of such startling brilliance late in the fourth movement that your knees go weak and for a moment everything in the world is all right. I don't want to know about it ahead of time.

In my life, I have spent a great deal of time analyzing plays and books and things -- comes from having parents who are literature professors and a natural tendency to pick things apart. So my default setting is to go in knowing not only What's Going To Happen, but also What It All Means (acknowledging that there is often disagreement on this point). More often than not, obviously, I'm seeing or reading something I've seen or read before. I go -- to plays, especially, but also to movies in this era of literary adaptations -- less to see what they're doing than to see how they're doing it. And this is fine! It's great! I love it!

But when I get the chance to go in knowing the title and the setup but none of the actual fallout, I don't want to compromise that. Irony is one of my favorite things ever, and I don't want to ruin what the writer or director or actor has spent time and energy crafting so carefully. Romeo and Juliet (to take the world's most banal example) have to play the whole play as if they didn't know they were doomed. When I went to see Lord of the Rings, there was a great gasp of horror in the theater when Gandalf fell down the chasm with the balrog, and I was a little jealous of the people who were so stunned (not a lot, though, because I recall being similarly floored when I read that moment). I'm very jealous of those of you who saw The Empire Strikes Back in 1980 -- I grew up knowing Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father, just as I grew up knowing Ilsa was going to get on the plane instead of staying in Casablanca with Rick, and knowing Rosebud was [SPOILER REDACTED].

My favorite productions of Shakespeare's plays are ones that do unexpected things, rather than just presenting the same stuff again. Romeo takes the poison and then realizes Juliet isn't really dead, when it's too late for him. It's how I'll direct them, when I find myself directing Shakespeare plays. [g] Lady Macbeth is a human incarnation of the third witch, the one who hails Macbeth as "king hereafter." We see the ghost of Hamlet's father when Horatio and the guards see him, but not when Hamlet sees him, because Hamlet really is off his nut. Cordelia marries the King of France and then disguises herself as a boy so she can stay in her father's court as the Fool.

After I've seen or read or heard a thing for the first time, I have a whole lifetime in which to go in knowing all the cool details before the beginning. (Actually, another part of the fun for me is discovering the cool details. I don't want them handed to me on a skewer.) It's not like there's only one chance to see the movie and I have to pick whether I'm going to be spoiled or not. I can see the movie as many times as I can afford -- but I can only see it unspoiled a maximum of once. I'll hang on to that with both hands, thanks.

(Toryn Farr knew everything about Star Wars back in 1977 thanks to Starlog Magazine. She's been trying to keep her know-it-all reputation ever since. During the few minutes per day her kiddo is in school, Toryn attempts to run an internet design business and write fantasy fiction.)

Return to Index