3 ms·
Ugh- I thought that when it said spoilers ahead, it would be just the movie being reviewed in the article, which I don’t plan on seeing. Then there were spoiler
by jcpst 4y ago
Ugh- I thought that when it said spoilers ahead, it would be just the movie being reviewed in the article, which I don’t plan on seeing. Then there were spoilers for other movies (Get Out) that I intend to watch sometime.
- zach_garwood 4y agoGet Out was released 5 years ago. I think if you haven't seen it by now that's on you. Also, Darth Vader is Luke's father, Snape kills Dumbledore, and Bruce Willis is dead the whole movie.
- tleilaxu 4y agoFortunately Dobby lived to be a grandfather, right?
- jcpst 4y agoYep, got it, lesson learned. “Spoilers” can mean spoilers for anything. Back to my cave I go.
- savanaly 4y agoThat wasn't his point. His point was that spoilers for a movie that's 5+ years old don't need to be alerted. I agree, because it would make movie discussion somewhat exhausting if it were otherwise.
- throw0101c 4y ago> “Spoilers” can mean spoilers for anything. Honestly, if you're reading an article about movie X, then IMHO it is reasonable to assume that any spoiler warnings would be specific to movie X. If an article is going to spoil movies A, B, and C as well, then the spoiler warning text should make note of that.
- zach_garwood 4y agoI think that it's fair to be upset that a newly released movie was spoiled for you. I think it's silly to expect that nobody will ever talk about the details of a movie that hasn't been in theaters for half a decade.
- jcpst 4y agoI don’t think it upset me really- more so surprised. Still feels like it was just released recently, but I suppose time perception is funny that way. Interesting discussion on movie discussion etiquette though. I never really considered how much time is “long enough” to get into a movie’s plot details.
- carapace 4y agohttps://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/