What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Okay . . . let's try this again.

Moderators: Shirley, Sabo, brian, rass, DaveInSeattle

Post Reply
User avatar
brian
The Dude
Posts: 27870
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Downtown Las Vegas

What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by brian »

I'm thinking probably about a year. If you haven't gotten around to watching a show or a movie for like a year, then too fuckin' bad I says.

(However this goes up to something like 5 or maybe 10 years for some kind of mind-blowing plot twist at an end of a movie or show.)
Bandwagon fan of the 2023 STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS!
User avatar
govmentchedda
The Dude
Posts: 12753
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:36 pm

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by govmentchedda »

"TV" shows on demand would seem to have a longer statue of limitations, in my opinion. I'm likely never going to watch HoC past the few first episodes that I saw, and I knew that
[+] spoiler
Mara dies
, but I would argue that binge watch shows statute should be longer than a cable show.
Until everything is less insane, I'm mixing weed with wine.
User avatar
A_B
The Dude
Posts: 23430
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:36 am
Location: Getting them boards like a wolf in the chicken pen.

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by A_B »

I think a year after it hits DVD/on demand is pretty reasonable. If you guys don't know that Newhart was all a dream by now, god bless your soul.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
User avatar
Johnny Carwash
The Dude
Posts: 5955
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:57 am
Location: Land of 10,000 Sununus

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by Johnny Carwash »

I think it depends on 1) the target audience and 2) the cultural ubiquity of the movie/show in question. Like, if someone has any passing interest in Star Wars, there's no excuse for them to complain about spoilers if they haven't seen the newest movie within a month or two.

One-off movies whose plots hinge on a major twist, however, should have permanent spoiler warnings. I somehow managed to see Citizen Kane without knowing the identity of Rosebud beforehand. Similarly with Reservoir Dogs and the identity of the "mole."
Fanniebug wrote: P.S. rass! Dont write me again, dude! You're in ignore list!
User avatar
Steve of phpBB
The Dude
Posts: 8508
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:44 am
Location: Feeling gravity's pull

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by Steve of phpBB »

I think a year is more than fair.

My comment about Howard's spoiler about House of Cards was just a joke.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
User avatar
Nonlinear FC
The Dude
Posts: 10869
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 2:09 pm

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by Nonlinear FC »

I think you guys are moving toward a place I can agree on...

Movies - Blockbuster movies with a ton of hype, I think you get about a week to ten days leeway. Folks shouldn't be throwing up major plot twists just because they had the free time on opening weekend.

That said, 2 to 3 weeks after Star Wars came out, I don't have a lot of sympathy if something is spoiled for you. If you were such a superfan that you are livid over spoiler... There's an obvious disconnect there.

TV - Here's where I think things have gotten REALLY tricky. Let's look at a show like Game of Thrones. A Star Wars-esque fan base and it's going to be ALL OVER your news feeds and sometimes even whatever TV/radio casual news segment. On something like that, again, you are really putting yourself in a dangerous place by not just watching it Sunday night, old school style.

What prompted the thread was a situation like House of Cards. There are a shitload of those types of intense, closely followed... But Netflix binge watchable so people are watching them at all sorts of times that have nothing to do with when they are "aired." They aren't even really aired, but dropped en masse.

I don't think I have a fully formed take on that piece yet.
You can lead a horse to fish, but you can't fish out a horse.
howard
Karl Hungus
Posts: 9467
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:00 pm

Re: What's a reasonable statute of limitations on spoilers?

Post by howard »

Steve of phpBB wrote:My comment about Howard's spoiler about House of Cards was just a joke.
I knew that. Nonetheless this is a worthy discussion.

My video joke was not in an official House of Cards thread, which someone wishing to remain unspoiled could easily avoid reading. It was dropped in a random conversation having nothing to do with TV shows. I would not have placed a clip from last week's Better Call Saul in a non-topical thread. But a shot of Danny Trejo's head on a tortoise, yeah that was three or four years ago.
Who knows? Maybe, you were kidnapped, tied up, taken away and held for ransom.

Those days are gone forever
Over a long time ago
Oh yeah…
Post Reply