True, the studios have played a major role in this hysteria, but I feel it has had less to do with being overly cautious about production details, and more to do with dumbed-down ad campaigns that choose to focus on one, easily spoiled detail or character rather than hype the film as a whole. At first glance, Cloverfield might seem to be a film of this type, considering that the look of the creature was shrouded in mystery prior to the film’s release. It wasn’t just the monster, however–it was the WHOLE movie that was mysterious. For this reason, a glimpse, heck, a whole gander at the beast would not be enough to spoil the film. I will agree that seeing the creature on the screen for the first time is an exciting moment and one that I do not wish to be taken away from potential viewers, but I feel that “spoiling” the monster’s look beforehand is much more in the viewer’s power than he or she believes. As far as I know, Paramount has been relatively delicate in showing pictures of the monster, and I do not see pictures of this new action figure splashed on billboards yet. Audiences tend to spoil movies for themselves, and I don’t think a toy, released well after the film it is based on, should be made to take the blame.

like I previously said, i come here for movie news (spoilers or not), not book spoilers. just because a movie will be made for it, doesn’t mean all bets are off. in all seriousness, people weren’t posting the ending of fight club in of blogs before the movie came out just because the novel had been released beforehand.

i don’t really give a shit about reading the HP books, i’d rather see the films. that’s a fair comment as I see it.

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.

But in your defense, people who don’t want inside scoops like that shouldn’t be reading a site like this.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

http://www.threadless.com/product/844/Spoilt