THANOS IS IN GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY, THE INTERNET IS A SNAKE EATING ITS OWN TAIL
- Thread starter richiek
- Start date
- Status
Spring-Loaded
Member
Who is saying this? Where are you reading this??
You're right that people can't know. Which is why people are suggesting more general consideration wouldn't hurt anyone.
How do you dictate what people enjoy about watching/reading GoT? You (or non-psychic people) can't know one way or the other. It's irrelevant. Some people only take in media to evaluate it and don't care about spoilers, and manage to enjoy stuff they're spoiled on. Some do care about character deaths, and so forth.
You can know that some people don't like spoilers in general and then speak/post accordingly. If you're using some formula to figure out what constitutes as a spoiler for people of specific personalities/nationalities/ages, then isn't that more work than just generally being more careful with spoilers?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
He probably forgot already.
lololol
That was last night and I did drop it. The thread has become purely about spoiler talk since then and I'm allowed to contribute.
So then are you guys talking purely about casting announcements now, admitting that not all promo material should be fair game?
How is knowing about a character in a movie, which has been known for months, the same as discussing the future narrative in a tv show? It's not even remotely the same.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
So are you saying that promo material isn't fair game if it isn't simply a casting announcement?
Spring-Loaded
Member
Hannibal season 2 episode opener has already been brought up. There was pre-release footage of that scene which is a spoiler no matter how you slice it, even with the way it's handled in the show. It's a bigger spoiler than Thanos' inclusion, but it's fair game for a thread title going by your logic.
Intheflorsh
Banned
Well that's dumb. He already had a cameo in TDK, it's not a huge suprise he would be in TDKR.
Besides, that example's irrelevant since his appearance wasn't advertised or announced beforehand.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
It's what happens when this conversation reaches the below point:
"Why did you spoil this?"
"It's not a spoiler."
"How is it not a spoiler?"
"Reason a, b, c, and d"
"Yeah, but I didn't know that."
So basically, once you get to THAT phase, what we're talking about is asking for people to redefine "spoiler" to include "Things that are public knowledge and have been promoted on the part of the filmmakers before the release of the film* that a specific user might or might not have heard of because they can't read or hear everything."
You see why this makes things really frustrating for people who have been cautious and considerate not to spoil things for people, only to be told that by posting a non-spoiler, they HAVE spoiled someone.
Only they didn't - because knowing that Thanos is in Guardians of the Galaxy isn't a "Spoiler."
This is why Duckroll blew up at the beginning of the thread. It has nothing to do with forcing people to be okay with spoilers, or telling people they don't need to be cautious of spoilers. It's about people who have made a conscious decision to go above and beyond in their attempts to "purify" trying to hold other people responsible for that decision.
*that part, by the way, is one of the key distinctions - you don't see Weiss & Benioff spoiling the books, so stuff in the books is NOT fair game for people watching the show, especially when you know they haven't read the books. Now if Weiss & Benioff & HBO had put out a press release stating someone had been cast, or something was coming up, and described that something in detail, THEN we'd have some sort of parity in the examples.
Cornballer's posts about the TV thread policies was a good one, if you haven't read that.
I know, right? It's almost like a snake eating its own tail.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Here's another example, since now we've got saying it's okay because it was just a casting announcement that was publically spoken about at Comic Con.
Recently at SXSW, the Spierig brothers talked about how [PREDESTINATION spoilers - don't read unless you've read Heinlen's original short story]
. That's just based on talking about her being cast as her character at a public film event with lots of press. Is that fair game for a thread title?
Recently at SXSW, the Spierig brothers talked about how [PREDESTINATION spoilers - don't read unless you've read Heinlen's original short story]
Sarah Snook took to playing the same character that ends up as Ethan Hawke.
CharminUltra
Member
I thought it was the end
but no my friends this is when
we get to do it all again!
do it all again!
Until the thread is locked
we get another go to show them
we can do it all again!
Escape Goat
Member
Shush! Don't spoil it for them.
I'm not wasting anymore time discussing this with you, because it's fairly obvious you're just here to stir reactions. Even after you've been exposed for feigning outrage and you continue to push the issue that that majority of the board has ruled you're simply wrong.
The Silver
Member
and im asking you where is the point where "general consideration" goes too far to the point it impacts discussion?
Leaving Thanos out of the title of this thread and just saying "marvel character" directly impacts the type of people that would enter the thread. Hell I wouldn't have come into the thread if it was titled a different way.
Now for all anyone knows the character could be someone inconsequential like Thanos or it could be Thor showing up in the movie and hardly anyone would enter the thread so as to not take any risk.
People came to the conclusion that because Thanos was an already known character, was just a casting announcement, and the fact that Marvel reported it themselves on on news headlines around the internet that it shouldn't be considered a spoiler to anyone and thus a safe thing to post. You can not expect every single person on GAF to come to the same conclusion of "consideration" and magically know that that you think its a spoiler.
Spring-Loaded
Member
This is something being put into a thread title. It's not within an official thread with set rules for this stuff and there are examples of other media putting out pre-release content that contain what are objectively spoilers. If all it takes for something to not be a spoilers, episode previews, pre-release interiews with footage (stuff like the Hannibal opener) and even book adaptations fall into that category.
I read your post, but I need to ask this first off: is leaving something out of a thread title hurting discussion? People who want to know who's revealed only have to click on the thread and then discussion continues on without a hitch. Is that legitimately too much trouble?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I'm trying to have a discussion. What's wrong with my question? How is it stirring reactions? I'm trying to establish where you draw the line and curious to see your answer to my question.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Bobby, while you're being level-headed and contributing toward the discussion (which I appreciate very much), can I hear your take on what I posted above:
And maybe your take on the Hannibal Season 2 promos for the opener.
And maybe your take on the Hannibal Season 2 promos for the opener.
The Silver
Member
if you did read the rest of the post (2nd and 3rd sentence) you would know the answer to that question. Now everyone is living in fear and it destroys a lot of potential discussion due to things being so vague you don't want to enter the thread at all.
Intheflorsh
Banned
No because that reveals a significant plot point and not just who is appearing in the movie.
The Predestination Q&A was designed for people who have just seen the movie to ask questions, not to announce things to the public. That's a very different scenario than the SDCC event.
I'm not sure you're getting this.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Shit. I thought my Seven thread was bad....how did this happen over a fucking screencap of Thanos? Some of you are fucking nuts. I still love you all, tho.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Excuse me, I meant to ask "how [is it huring discussion]?" What is so detrimental to discussion by such a warning, especially in this case if, for many people, it's not a spoiler? If there wasn't a huge influx of people coming in here who said they were spoiled, that would've been much less detrimental to discussion than a spoiler warning. "Pics of GotG villain revealed" or whatever.
The Silver
Member
Look at your example of a title.
The villain in GOTG is Ronan, now you have a bunch of people going in to see Ronan and then they get hit with Thanos and start bitching again.
People made the judgment call that because of the circumstances in which Thanos was revealed that he was a safe thing to post, once again you will never ever get everyone here to come to the same conclusion of your :general consideration".
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
Now this evil is... rising. Besada... you have to come back.
I've watched all the trailers and some of the clips and I didn't know Thanos was in this. I don't read about movies I plan to see because a lot of times they give too much away. I have a feeling that if everyone was supposed to know that Thanos was a part of this he'd be in the trailers. Yeah the information was out there, but I feel like it was out there for people who wanted to know and would still be a reveal for people watching the movie without knowing everything about it first. Whether or not this was a "spoiler", plenty of people were spoiled. At the very least it could have been handled better.
Steve Youngblood
Member
It can hurt discussion. It's not asinine that many people exist that don't want to miss out on the experience of a fresh first viewing (or reading, or listening, etc.) of something. That's why the very premise of spoiler warnings and tags exist, and what we enforce their usage when appropriate. I don't think we are sending mixed signals here. This thread isn't supposed to serve as an indication that it's now open season to ruin others' enjoyment of a piece of entertainment.
But -- thought it may me difficult to perfectly delineate when something is and isn't a spoiler for every imaginable scenario -- we need to agree that a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Basically, we have to be reasonable. And being reasonable can't be defined as "revealing any unknown information about a work to someone."
Given that, what I mean in regards to your question is that vagueness about the topic may keep otherwise interested parties away. People that may have otherwise been interested -- knowing Thanos is in the movie already as it's not a big secret -- might be scared of being spoiled. Does that risk outweigh upsetting those that didn't know and didn't want to know about this? Maybe. Maybe not.
Right now, the feeling among the staff is that there was no need to conceal this information.
Prepare to be ignored or not even regarded as he jumps to yet another strawman argument.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Yes, but you'll find that many in this thread are trying to communicate that who is appearing in the movie can spoil part of a film's plot when their character is revealed. That's the point I'm making. To some people (not me) it obviously is significant.
The post-screening Q+A involves a large number of press. There were more than a fair share of articles covering the Predestination conference, because the filmmakers and studios wanted press, positive word of mouth. My point is that you're suddenly having to be very specific about the context in which casting announcements can or can't constitute spoilers. And that's the point. People here that have a different barometer to you may not consitute the Predestination film press event in which it's openly talked about the casting of characters as spoilerful, but it would be courteous to you and me - who consider it to ruin the fun of discovery, to post a little spoiler warning in a thread title, rather than making it the wild west.
If you know who Thanos is, it's not a surprise he's in a cosmic marvel movie. If you have no idea who he is, you still have no idea who he is.
The Silver
Member
Why would Thanos be in trailers? Actually seeing him in the flesh is of course something Marvel wanted to surprise people with in the cinema.
What we are talking about is his existence which was advertised, "come see this movie and you'll finally get a look at Thanos".
TV advertisements are not the end all be all anymore, we are all on the damn internet here.
What we are talking about is his existence which was advertised, "come see this movie and you'll finally get a look at Thanos".
TV advertisements are not the end all be all anymore, we are all on the damn internet here.
To be honest I'm a little sad when I saw the thread title because I wanted to go into the movie surprised. I don't follow all casting announcements for GOTG and didn't want to be spoiled on this since the movie hasn't released here yet.
I just don't understand why the thread title is such a blatant spoiler because it assumes everyone is following GOTG casting news.
I just don't understand why the thread title is such a blatant spoiler because it assumes everyone is following GOTG casting news.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Yet there's been a whole thread's worth of bitching because of this. I don't know the number of villains in the movie, but — and I'm seriously asking since I don't know the details of the film — isn't there a way to specify which villain in the thread title without saying their name? "screen caps GotG villain [revealed at comic-con] surface" or something similar.
Again, I really don't see how putting the character name in the thread title is any safer for discussion if it leads to all this.
Has the response the thread received already been taken into account? If this is done for the sake of discussion, surely having 20 pages of discussion (of fluctuating degrees of "constructive") not about the actual thread subject is worth considering.
Of course there needs to be a line drawn. Apparently pre-release material can be objectively labeled spoilers in show threads where episode previews must be tagged. I haven't seen any explanation as to how that differs from this. If you're concerned with hurting discussion, I get how a spoiler warning would turn some people away. I don't get how that's worse than going the more likely spoiler route, especially if there's a way to specify/hint at what's being censored in the title.
SonofdonCD
Member
I don't think there should be any real hard rule for this type of thing. I think you have to look at each case individually, and determine whether it's thread-worthy.
You have to look at how this info was delivered (was it a rumor or officially announced?), how long ago it was discovered (after a few months it should be fair game), how many outlets disseminated the info, and whether the info itself is vital to the enjoyment of the project in the first watch/read/listen/play/etc. (or not).
I think in this particular case, this info was given out by Marvel themselves, months ago, every major (and minor) entertainment news outlet covered this that whole time, and knowledge of Thanos prior to seeing GOTG will not ruin the enjoyment of watching the entire movie (though it would be cool to go in fresh, sometimes the anticipation knowing beforehand can also be just as cool) makes it fair game in my eyes.
You have to look at how this info was delivered (was it a rumor or officially announced?), how long ago it was discovered (after a few months it should be fair game), how many outlets disseminated the info, and whether the info itself is vital to the enjoyment of the project in the first watch/read/listen/play/etc. (or not).
I think in this particular case, this info was given out by Marvel themselves, months ago, every major (and minor) entertainment news outlet covered this that whole time, and knowledge of Thanos prior to seeing GOTG will not ruin the enjoyment of watching the entire movie (though it would be cool to go in fresh, sometimes the anticipation knowing beforehand can also be just as cool) makes it fair game in my eyes.
Thanos was revealed at the end of The Avengers in 2012. Marvel announced Brolin had taken the part back in May. None of this is breaking news.
It's a bullshit thread title that shouldn't have been allowed. It spoils a surprise reveal, plain and simple.
I am a huge fan of the Marvel films and actively try to avoid spoilers and this was a crappy way to get this confirmation.
I get that some people think it's not a big deal because it is "known", but it's still shitty.
I am a huge fan of the Marvel films and actively try to avoid spoilers and this was a crappy way to get this confirmation.
I get that some people think it's not a big deal because it is "known", but it's still shitty.
elrechazado
Banned
marvel spoiled the surprise reveal. Cry to their marketing dept. this freaking thread. Way to not read it.
It doesn't matter because not EVERYONE here follows GOTG news. A lot of people avoid threads about it so they can go into the movie fresh. This thread has in caplocks a spoiler.
Knowing someone has been cast does not mean people knew he would be in the movie. Most expected it but that doesn't mean they wanted to be spoiled. I wanted to go into the movie fresh and now I know a reveal.
Jack Scofield
Member
Not that I care about GOTG, but TV show threads have to have next week's promos spoiler-tagged, but this is okay?
The mods have doubled down, though, so there's no turning back and saving face for them.
The mods have doubled down, though, so there's no turning back and saving face for them.
The Silver
Member
um no, isn't that the point? to not reveal at all who you're talking about?
in regards to your other title, Thanos wasn't revealed at Comic-Con he was known for months. as you see it specifically says GOTG
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/30/josh-brolin-will-play-thanos-in-guardians-of-the-galaxy
and this exact thread was made before and it turned out fine, only now did people start coming out of the woodwork.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Does his inclusion in Avengers illustrate that he'll show up in GotG though? GotG isn't Avengers 2. Even with a "Brolin cast as Thanos," announcement, I would think, based on that, that he's going to be Thanos in Avengers 2.
I'm still not clear on how overall discussion is benefited by putting pre-release/preview material in a thread title in general. I can understand reasoning like in SonofdonCD's post above for Thanos in this one instance, but is this something that'll be a problem from now on? How up-to-date must everyone be on stuff like this?
SDCC: Marvel Confirms Josh Brolin To Be Playing THANOS In GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY And More Marvel even said he was, it's not a spoiler!!!!!!!
Just because you don't follow the news does not mean it does not exist.
MisterHero
Super Member
That a character is present in a movie is not a spoiler. They are either facts or not, and discussed thoroughly based on things like casting rumors.
I'd be a little annoyed if the secret cameos in X-Men DoFP were spoiled, but I already read the spoilers and read the rumors. The cameos were not officially announced until the movie credits.
What happens to the characters at the end is a spoiler. They are mostly likely from someone knowing the entire story either from script reading or watching the movie.
SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE is a spoiler.
Ultimately there needs to be some sort of proof. If it was in a press release, then it's not a spoiler.
I'd be a little annoyed if the secret cameos in X-Men DoFP were spoiled, but I already read the spoilers and read the rumors. The cameos were not officially announced until the movie credits.
What happens to the characters at the end is a spoiler. They are mostly likely from someone knowing the entire story either from script reading or watching the movie.
SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE is a spoiler.
Ultimately there needs to be some sort of proof. If it was in a press release, then it's not a spoiler.
how did this become a serious thread smh
InsaneZero
Member
Like mentioned long before, a spoiler warning is by definition a warning about information that people who have actually watched the movie would know. So if you put a spoiler warning for Thanos, a character that has been known for months to be in the film and was even announced in a press release, then that would scare away people who haven't watched the film while inviting actual spoiler discussion. And then you'd get another person who is also wary of spoilers but knows that Thanos is in the film making this exact thread anyway, because that person isn't going to be going into a spoiler thread.
Admiral Woofington
Member
I don't fucking know what is sarcasm in this thread. GAIS I NEED HELP. WHAT THE FUCK. HOW IS THIS A SPOILER.
elrechazado
Banned
Herp derp not everyone knows any hundred facts about the movie. You not knowing something isn't a spoiler. Stop being a narcissist.
Cut it out with passive aggressive crap.
We have threads for information on movies for a reason, it's to avoid spoiling people about stuff that happens within movies/tv shows/ etc.
I said that not everyone follows GOTG news and castings. That's why people don't click on certain threads to avoid these things.
If Thanos was playing an important role in the movie and was advertised in it throughout every trailer and commercial and promotional artwork, I can see how saying people overreacting is silly. But it's pretty evident a lot of people didn't know about the reveal and are not happy it was spoiled.
InsaneZero
Member
Basically, if something is announced as a press release and thus reported as actual, official NEWS then the complaints of spoilers go right out the window.
Like I edited into my other post, just because YOU don't know something that does not make it a spoiler. Not following the news does not make it go away, it's still out there.
Also by a lot of people, you mean like 15, because that's all I've seen get there panties in a twist over this.
Use spoiler tags bro, fuck now my life is ruined!!!!
- Status