RANT: The Cloverfield Monster is NOT A Spoiler

Spoiler

Yesterday, we posted the first photos of the Cloverfield Monster Toy, which is being produced by Hasbro. We received a few angry comments, yelling at us for “Spoiling” Cloverfield for them.

The whole concept of Spoilers has been something that has been on my mind for a few months now. Originally a Spoiler meant something from a film that gave away a twist or turning point in the story. Basically, anything that would ruin your experience watching the story on the big screen. I don’t know exactly when, but sometime in the last year the tide began to change online, and studio released production photos began to be considered “spoilers” even when they didn’t reveal something major about the story. A reader once complained to me that posting a photo of Indiana Jones standing in front of a jungle background was a spoiler which should be kept after the jump. I try not to “Spoil” stuff, but it has gotten ridiculous.

The Cloverfield Monster is NOT a Spoiler!

It’s a real testament to the marketing department at Paramount, that they somehow tricked the world into believing that the Cloverfield Monster is somehow a spoiler. It all started when director Matt Reeves threw in the now infamous last minute line “I saw it! It’s Alive! It’s Huge” while he was directing the film’s teaser trailer (the trailer was filmed before the movie). And sometime after the trailer hit attached to Transformers, the studio and Bad Robot decided to focus the marketing around the mystery and the fan’s craving to know - “What is it?”

But truth is - The Cloverfield Monster is not a spoiler. Seeing the monster does not ruin the movie for you. It doesn’t ruin the story what-so-ever. In fact, the marketing campaigns for most monster movies heavily involve the appearance of the monster(s). The only way the Cloverfield Monster would/could be a spoiler is if it was the result of a plot twist. Say for example, Rob’s father ate some brownies with some nuclear gamma acid and turned into the monster. So by seeing the creature, you would be able to see that the monster use to be Rob’s father. That would be a spoiler. Seeing Godzilla before a Godzilla movie is not a spoiler.

Besides, Paramount gave Hasbro the go-ahead to release the photos of the toy version of the monster. The photos were released on the official website, in plain view, without a spoiler warning. The film hit theaters almost a whole month ago. Paramount even began running television advertisements featuring a very good look at the Cloverfield Monster, just days after the film’s opening weekend. But then again, some people would claim that trailers and television spots are also “spoilers”.

I believe the studios are to blame for this recent change in reader reaction. Hollywood is so scared that spoilers will ruin their big Summer tentpole film, that they hide those productions in secrecy. But in result, they create this culture of fear among film fanatics. All of a sudden, a set photo of Zachary Quinto in costume as Spock somehow becomes a major spoiler. Even though all the marketing leading up to the film’s release will likely show Quinto in character. The audience somehow assigns these crazy associations to the word Spoiler, even though it is usually never the case.

I think we all need to calm down. A spoiler is me telling you what happens in the last ten minutes of a movie. A spoiler is not the picture of a toy version of the Cloverfield monster, released a month after the film’s release.

My position on this has remained the same throughout the years: A spoiler is something that will spoil your enjoyment of the story to a major degree (a plot twist, a character turn…etc). Anything officially released by the studio (production photos, a trailer, tv spots) is all fair game. We will continue hide spoilers after the jump, so that readers won’t accidentally run into them while scrolling through the page.

What do you guys think?

What constitutes a spoiler?

How long after the release of a movie does a spoiler become fair game as the topic of mainstream conversation? (ie How long after The Sixth Sense should you wait before publicly discussing the twist ending? Movies ad television shows spoof the ending all the time).

  • David
    I agree. There's no need to put a "spoiler" on this. People, it's your fault you didn't see this movie in the first place. It's been waiting there for over a month and also there were tv ads showing the monster's face. So as Peter said it's not a spoiler because there is no twist and it doesn't reveal anything "big" about the movie.

    Anyways Cloverfield was a good movie. People with no imagination nowadays just don't appreciate a film with it's unique style and realistic notions.
  • Jordan
    I hate spoilers, but I also know that they're pretty easily found online.

    As soon as a film has been out for say two weekends, I'd think it's fair game. Anyone REALLY interested in the movie should have seen it by that point. If you can't go on living for fear of being spoiled, take a cue from the Harry Potter fans. Lock yourself in a room and avoid all contact with life forms until you've finished the book / seen the movie.

    As for a pic of a toy being a spoiler, thats just silly. There were decent glimpses of the monster in the teasers, if I recall. People weren't going in expecting puppies and kitties, they were expecting a monster.
  • Captain Awesome
    The "299 Die" in that graphic is hilarious.
  • Vader182
    While I don't think its a spoiler one of the best parts of Cloverfield for me was seeing the monster for the first time. I do not think it was wrong of you to post that though. (aside of the fact it doesn't really look that much like what the monster actually looks like)
  • Jay
    I loathe spoilers.

    I think that it takes so much from a movie if something of massive importance is revealed to me before hand and I go into the film angry about it.

    I think that it's ridiculous for anyone to think that seeing the monster is a Cloverfield spoiler -- it's not at all.

    I also think that blowing out a big part of the Harry Potter series before the movies that may hold it are released is about as repulsive a spoiler as you can swing and I'm pretty pissed about it, to be perfectly honest.

    As for the rest of the movies on there, people should have seen them by now, but sometimes people don't see a movie right off the bat; sometimes it takes a while to get to, and if I hadn't seen any other ones of those films either, I would be equally pissed. Hell, I didn't even see Citizen Kane until last year!

    As a fan of this site who KNOWS what it's like to be a movie geek, I would have thought you had more respect for those people. I don't know if you were just being ironic in spoiling 15 or so other movies in your article about whether the damn monster spoils Cloverfield, but you succeeded admirably.

    That's my rant. Maybe I'm the only one who still thinks it's a totally inconsiderate concept and that it breaks one of the biggest unwritten rules of movie fans.

    I'd like to see more head usage in the future, kids.

    Thanks.
  • Jeff
    I'm sorry for thinking that seeing the monster was a spoiler, I thought that the revealing of it in the film would be a big point in the story. But apparently I'm wrong. I'm sorry for creating such a fuss. I will of course continue to read this blog, you do a wonderful job.
  • Eric M.
    The truth is, the physical appearance of the monster is really not that critical to the story and, thus, might be construed as being a non-spoiler. By not seeing the film in theaters and early on, you open yourself up to receiving those small but rewarding surprises in the film spoiled for you. It wasn't Slash-Film's fault and it was easy to overlook the fact that an image like that might offend some people who hadn't yet watched the movie.

    It would be like if the new Indiana Jones featured some sort of throwback to one of the older films... an easter egg that had nothing to do with the actual plot of the movie. If someone posted that online two weeks after the movie came out and I saw it before I got to see the actual film, I'd be disappointed I didn't get to go into the theater and, for example, discover that short-round makes a re-appearance, but I wouldn't blame the person who posted it because after all, he hadn't really spoiled anything crucial to the enjoyment of the movie's plot and it's an easy oversight.
  • jeff, don't worry bout it, you weren't the only one. Besides, i think the topic of what and what is not a spoiler was long over due. Thanks for reading! :)
  • I must agree with you on this.
    It's been a whole month (for you guys, the movie premierd here in Sweden about 1½ week ago) but i'm with you on this.
    Even though i must say that seeing the monster in the movie before you've seen it online is a richer experience but not necceserily a spoiler.

    Thanks for a great blog!
  • I agree. Seeing the monster is not so much a spoiler. BUT: It has definitely added to the experience (at least for me) to see it for the first time on screen. It was just so cool to see it in full action.
    If you won't get spoiled just avoid everything around you and get to the film/book/TV-Show you want to see.
  • mike
    They reveal the monster in the film's last 10 minutes, so i think it's a spoiler
  • John
    I've known the endings to the Crying Game, the Sixth Sense, There Will Be Blood and countless others. And those are big twists. Then I watched 'em all. Did I enjoy them any less? Probably not.

    If the effect of a movie is so dependent on one spoiler, then it's not worth your time anyway.
  • A large part of Cloverfield's concept is that neither the characters or the audience know what is attacking the city, so yes, I think the monster should be considered a spoiler.

    With that said, if a movie has been out for a few weeks it should be up to those who still haven't seen the movie to stay away from spoilers.
  • nick
    Sorry, but much of the suspense in the movie comes from the audience guessing "what the hell is it?" whilst craning their necks to get a peek at whatever it is that is tearing up the city. The film is about the mystery of it all. The pay off is at the end when you see it for the first time.

    Therefore, I'd consider any image/scan/fan-art or other representation of the monster to be a SPOILER! Since it could potentially SPOIL a viewer's experience of the movie.
  • xb00t
    *** MOVIE SPOILERS ***

    Seeing the monster IS a spoiler. There is reason why you didnt get to see it until right at the end of the movie and it didnt apear in any of the viral marketing. It was something I protected myself from because I wanted to be suprised when I saw it for the first time. Its a kind of a reward when you get to see it at the end of the movie and you know you managed to avoid all spoilers previously. I read /film every single day (sometimes twice :D) and I appreciate what you do but think of a spoiler this way - if its a secret in the movie, it has to be a secret for who havent seen the movie yet --> spoiler. :) For this same reason you show us The Incredible Hulk but you hid the Crystal Skull.
  • JC
    I think it is a spoiler but Cloverfield has been out long enough. If you haven't seen it yet then you don't really care, you are just complaining for the sake of complaining.
  • Pete
    it seems like people like to find ANYTHING to bitch about now a days. if you havent seen cloverfield by now, then why are you surprised about finding out about the monster??

    i could see if it were a week after the movie was released....but if you care enough to "not be spoiled", then you should have seen it already. give me a break. even if it WAS considered a spoiler, its already a month after the movie has been released. its like tivo-ing the super bowl and then waiting a month to watch it....and then get pissed when you see the score on the front page of the paper the next day.
  • I noticed in the picture above this article, it shows Frank, the six-foot tall bunny in Donnie Darko. Next to Frank, it reads: Donnie Dies. I have to disagree. Donnie does NOT die in Donnie Darko, I have seen the movie and he doesn't die.
  • Beating a dead horse here, but I agree. I absolutely hate spoilers, but you're right. Plot points given out in a synopsis are not spoilers.
  • eric
    special effects are not spoilers.
  • Jerry Butler
    I agree with Peter.

    Besides, like I said in the other thread, in the film itself we never get to see the monster as clearly as those toy pics. The shape of the monster has zero to do with anything in the movie.
  • nick
    lol, first thing i thought when i saw the monster, having not seen the movie I quickly thought of a monster from SPAWN series lol.
  • Manny
    Thank you for ruining Star Wars for me...
    Seriously though, if people didn't want the movie to be ruined for them, they could of easily watched it opening weekend. I saw it at midnight because I knew that the next morning it would be impossible to be on the 'internets' and not have the movie spoiled. Keep up the good job.
  • Peter -- I think that you post WAY too many spoilers on your site. In fact, if every publication used such reckless abandon in their reporting the world would break out into a post-Apocalyptic state of chaos. The only time that I ever come to this site is when I would like to have movies ruined for me and have my childhood crushed. Oh, and I also enjoy having my soul sucked from my being, which is what your posting of the Cloverfield monster did for me. Thanks man. Thanks.
  • Captain Awesome
    By the way, Gwen Paltrow's head is in the box!
  • Kode
    I agree 100% with you Peter.

    and by the way, that pic is awesome did you get it?
  • Kode
    where-
  • PAT
    I don't think it's a spoiler... don't these people watch TV? THEY NOW CLEARLY SOW THE MONSTER IN THE TRAILERS ON TV. With something like the Cloverfield monster if you don't want to know what it looks like before you see it you need to see it when it first comes out because eventually it's going to be shown everywhere... it's been a month already. A spoiler would be something like if what I said happened at the end.

    Like if someone said that Harry Potter killed Lord Voldemort at the end of book 7 within a few weeks of the books release...

    Or in the Simpsons when Homer walks out of the movies after a date with Marge in a flash back and says "Wow who would have guessed that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father!" in front of the line of people waiting to go in and see the movie next.... THOSE are spoilers. There is also a time limit on spoilers too... I know people who haven't seen Star Wars... do you think they're going to get mad at FOX for revealing that info in an episode of the simpsons?
  • PAT
    by the way, Soylent Green isn't made of People. Soylent Cola is made of people lol
  • Jeff
    I wasn't going to reply anymore, but I just want it to be clear I wasn't complaining for the sake of complaining. I honestly have interest in the film and have had no time due to school starting back up along with work. I was just a little disappointed to see the monster prior to the film, spoiler or not. But maybe it is my fault for not finding the time. This has been a nice debate.
  • PAT
    wait, I forgot about the movie too... I was only thinking of Futurama when I said that lol
  • I really really want to see the version of Cloverfield where radioactive brownies turn Rob's father into the monster. That sounds way better.
  • @Charlie Jane Anders:
    Don't count on it to be the "final" version though. I hear they going to release (at least) sixty different versions, to accommodate for all the people who were disappointed and liked their own monster design better... ;-)
  • Kode: it's actually the design on a now retired t-shirt that was produced by threadless:

    http://www.threadless.com/product/844/Spoilt
  • TheKillingJoke
    TO PETER...I COULDNT WORK THE POP3 THING WHEN TRYING TO EMAIL YOU SO HOPEFULLY YOU GET THIS>>>whats up man..my name is Matt and im a dedicated Slashfilm reader...im on your site atleast 10 times a day checkin the updates and reading about all that is Hollywood and the film industry...as a screenwriter and future producer i think ur site is the best for what it offers on the web...its great....i just wish there was more info on the dark knight coming from ur site...i know Heath Ledger has died and everyone is extremely saddened by the lose...i was extremely distraught and i didnt even know him personally...as a 23 year old guy i cried many a time watching his clips and the daniel day lewis speech from the SAG awards...but jeez i mean i would really suck a dick for some new news on the dark knight...i would take it in the ass for a pic of two face....so if there is anything that is even rumor maybe we could get a post on the movie...if u have ran into a script to show us and put a spoiler warning on it maybe...i dont know...u have done such a great job on blogging news from the movie....and i amongst others are eagerly awaiting something new....alright man thanks...keep it up...SLASHFILM IS THE GREATEST SITE ON THE WEB AS FAR AS IM CONCERNED!!!!!!!
    Matt Giorgio
  • Tyler Ethridge
    not a spoiler.....

    if you haven't seen the movie by now then you really didn't give a damn about it in the first place.

    quit bitching.
  • Spoiler for sure. But if you haven't seen the movie yet, and you don't want to be spoilered, stay off the goddamn internet.
  • Jeff
    I understand what you're trying to say. In the true definition of the word "spoiler", showing a character in a movie doesn't tell you anything plot-wise.

    BUT, thinking of what it means to spoil something for someone else, you did by showing a monster that - as you said - was kept secret from the public. Anyone who intends to see "Cloverfield" - myself included - was shown something that they wanted to see for the first time in the movie itself, and not from an internet picture.

    And telling me I should have seen the movie already if I'm that emotionally invested in it is not a valid point. Believe it or not, it just started showing here on Friday because our local theaters (Marcus-owned) did not come to a financial agreement to show it when it opened nationwide.
  • "The Sixth Sense" is a really good example. I was waiting for it to come to the dollar theater. THE DAY BEFORE I WENT, the day before I had been planning to see it all week, was the day someone made a comment.

    The amazing thing is, I knew, instinctively, that was the big twist. The fact that it was the big twist wasn't mentioned in the conversation I overheard, but I knew it was anyway.

    Amazingly, the first "monster spoiler" was the New Godzilla; I remember there were NO toys on the shelves, and NO pictures in the ads. However, THE DAY BEFORE THE PREMIERE, for which I had a pre-paid ticket a week in advance, I saw, of all things, the MAD Magazine parody.

    I couldn't stand that chin. Until I saw the movie, which made it all much better.
  • Knowing the twist ending didn't make Sixth Sense any less of a good movie for me... but it did make me feel like I was seeing the movie for the second time, the first time.
  • brian
    Showing the monster is somewhat of a spoiler I think. Just because it was so hidden in its marketing and was basically the first question everyone asked me after seeing the movie.

    But what is perhaps the worst is the fucking picture posted on the top of this thread. The first thing that jumped out at me was "Snape Kills Dumbledore". What is that shit? I dont want to know that.

    The others aren't so bad because they come from films that have already come out. And yeah, it's written in the book but this isn't a book blog. I dunno, I'm just really pissed about that cos I've been avoiding all HP spoilers. And just because I choose to see the films instead of reading the books doesn't mean shit like that can be spoiled. Unless of course that spoiler was a joke. But seeing as none of the other spoilers on the graphic aren't, then I'm not holding my breath.

    Really man, wtf?
  • Jon
    to brian:

    Jesus dude, that book came out years ago now. The statue of limitations on that one expired a long time ago. Read a book! They're all written, so there's no reason to wait any more.

    And don't read the other comments in this thread if you don't want the ending of the 7th ruined for you. Someone mentioned it.

    If you don't want anything spoiled, don't spend any time on the internet.
  • I mostly agree with you Peter, at this point, the monster is NOT a spoiler. The movie was released a month ago in the US, and has opened in many other countries as well. If you haven't see the monster by now, too bad - the whole world can't hold it's breath until Japan gets a chance to see it.

    However, before the movie was released in the US, what the monster looked like WAS a spoiler. "What Is It?" is what the Average Joe wanted to know. The mystery was never about the story, it was about the monster.

    But I think there is an easy way to determine what should be considered spoiler or not - the source. If you are getting "studio released" footage of the monster, like the "monster revealed" footage on Yahoo, or in this case Hasbro Toy photos, there is no problem. Bootleg photos, leaked scripts, etc, are an other story.
  • Geoffrey
    While not technically a spoiler it does take some of the sheen off seeing the movie for the first time and seeing the monster for the first time. I was one of the people who complained in the original article because I followed the whole Cloverfield hype for quite some time and one of the main questions that people wanted to experience was what the monster looked like. It was guarded with upmost secrecy until it was released in cinemas and this is what generated some of the buzz even here at /Film there was a LOT of talk about what it would look like.

    I am disappointed now after seeing it right there on a blog I visit every day even for the sake of those who haven't seen the movie like myself it would've been simple common courtesy just to place the photos on the main body of the article and not on the front-page. Simple as that. Imagine how pissed off you would be if you inadvertently saw images of the monster before the movie came out?

    As for when is it acceptable to talk about spoilers? Its not a matter of length of time its about if the person/people you're talking to have seen the movie. Fullstop. You ask. You keep it quiet if they haven't seen it.
  • Jeff
    Dennis, I live in the United States. I just told you it opened here a couple days ago because of a financial disagreement between whoever and Marcus Theatres.

    Why is it a "too bad" situation? No one is making you discuss the monster publicly. There are plenty of outlets to discuss it without ruining it for people - regardless of where they're from.
  • NuVanDibe
    Tsk, the major point about Cloverfield is that they never showed us what the monster looked like until AFTER the movie came out. The most anticipated answer among everyone waiting for the movie was what the monster looked like (and btw the Hasbro toy is very different from the monster in the movie). Being able to watch the movie and see the monster for the first time on the big screen with all its theatrical scariness is a HUGE part of the mood for the entire movie. By posting pictures of the Cloverfield monster, you deprive people of that mood.

    To be fair, anyone who clicked the link, "Cloverfield Monster Toy Revealed," and didn't expect pictures of the Cloverfield monster probably deserved to have it spoiled for them. Also it's already feb 18th and by now lots of people have seen it and know what it looks like.

    Still, each movie has its own unique rules for what "spoils" it. Seeing Godzilla before a Godzilla movie is not a spoiler. However, because the movie Cloverfield was what it was, Seeing the Cloverfield monster before seeing Cloverfield does spoil it for some people.
  • Angus
    Yeah, I remember when I was sitting in the theater to watch Titanic and someone behind me said "the boat sinks." I was so mad I stormed out and still haven't seen it. Thanks for ruining the movie for me...
  • Geoffrey
    "To be fair, anyone who clicked the link, “Cloverfield Monster Toy Revealed,” and didn’t expect pictures of the Cloverfield monster probably deserved to have it spoiled for them."

    You didn't have to click into the article it was just there on the frontpage. This is my point all the submitter had to do was place it in a main article OFF the front page. Simple as.
  • The problem here is that the trailer never told us there WAS a "monster" -- maybe it was alien spaceships, or a giant mecha, or who-knows-what. Those wanting to go into the movie without knowing what the Big Bad Thing is were right to feel a bit cheated.

    But in your defense, people who don't want inside scoops like that shouldn't be reading a site like this.
  • Jim
    If it isn't in the first 10 minutes it is a major spoiler.

    Many trailers are spoilers and for that matter most marketing comes in the form of spoilers. Marketing people don't care about wrecking a movie so long as they get you to see it. So using the "if it is in the marketing its not a spoiler" argument is not valid. Sometimes it takes a spoiler to get interested in a movie. Sometimes they have you at hello and you don't want to know anything more until you're sitting in the seat.

    A spoiler is anything that limits the range of possibilities of what someone can expect from a film. Think mystery box. The more you tell me about what is in the box. The less I will be surprised about when I open it.

    If someone gets you a present and tells you what it was before you opened it. True it doesn't wreck the present. The present still does what the present does. But they wrecked the surprise. And some would say that the surprise is a vital component of the whole present experience. A lot of people feel the same way about movies.

    I'm sure it wouldn't hurt your site stats to put more things after the break. It would help a lot of people maintain the mystery box as well. Win/Win.
blog comments powered by Disqus