You've found Father McKenzie. But are you really looking for Eleanor Rigby?

Thursday, May 19, 2005

How to spoil the spoiler

There is nothing like a good spoiler. The one you angst over, wring hands, look furtively either way, and then suddenly decide you will expose yourself to it (or let it expose itself to you!).

Film advertisers constantly walk a fine line between revealing enough about a movie to get an audience intrigued, and revealing so much that the plot is blown (especially those that say "there's a twist at the end! watch out for it!).

Case in point: TIME Australia's coverage of Star Wars Episode III:Revenge of the Sith. Chock full of spoilers.Not that there's anything wrong with that.

What I object to is the incompetent way the poor plebs have this info shoved in their faces - in particular, this poor pleb's face. I could have had a "total media ban" (like the wasted effort forEpisode I) and never opened the magazine. But I wantedto know a little more, and expected to be able to handle the spoiler action. Was I disappointed.

Not only were the key opening secrets of the movie revealed in gory detail up front, but the worst kept "secret" of them all was parenthetically enclosed with comments warning readers to avoid this sections as it contained "spoilers".

After having suffered through the first, real, spoilers I thought looking away would be too much to bear, so I snuck a peak at what TIME magazine decreed was an actually "spoiler".

Here it is (look away now, gentle reader, if you don't want to be disappointed!)

(drumroll please)

Palpatine is Darth Sidious.

A six year old could figure this out by watching Episode I alone!. Why this is considered "spoiler material" I'll never know. What kind of idiotic judgement reveals key parts of the film, yet hypes the most obvious as an incredible revelation?

Dufuses and non-fans, that's who.

TIME magazine, you have spoiled my fun.

No comments: