JJ Abrams and Secrecy... anyone else tired of it?

[Pavonis]

What constitutes a "spoiler" nowadays? When I was younger, spoilers were plot points, twists, and climaxes. Now, it seems, the official advertising of the film is considered spoiler material by some. I just don't understand the attitude. But, I'm one who reads the last page of a book first.

If I learn the twists and climaxes of a film before seeing it, I feel the same surprise when I learn them as I would when I see the film. Then I'm able to appreciate the story on another level without being distracted by twists and climaxes.

[KalEl]

Robert D. Robot wrote:

---

If you want to know all about the movie before your see it to decide if you WANT to see it, I would suggest the novel idea of waiting until the movie has been out for a few weeks, listen to the reviews and then decide. The movie will still be 'fresh' even a week or two later.

The strategy J.J.'s team has is working excellent for them. Look at all the discussion that is going on about possibilities. I, too, wonder about the folks that want to know all about a movie before it premieres. Someone did spoil me about Vader's reveal to Luke AND the 'surprise' scene in "The Crying Game", which would have been a more fun surprise as experienced while in the moment in the theater.

It really would be pretty easy to avoid so many spoilers (& potential spoilers) by just staying out of this forum, but I confess that I enjoy the ongoing serious discussions, humorous theories, and even a controlled amount of griping about Trek here as much as I do actually watching the Trek movies, so I am in here again, pulling at the wrapping paper just a bit....

I never said I want to know everything about the movie, I just don't want to be dicked around over villains or characters, it's ridiculous and gives nothing away. Abrahms dicked us around over a no name character, for what, his own enjoyment. These people get a kick out of fucking with us, they don't give a shit about the fanbase.

[BeatleJWOL]

If people would stop asking so many questions before a movie comes out, then Abrams and company would have nothing to be secretive about, now would they?

Clearly the problem is with people who just have to know everything about a movie before they watch it.

[King Daniel]

I enjoy all the secrecy, speculation and the trolls (Conan, anyone?). But I do wish they wouldn't blatantly lie to misdirect - like saying Alice Eve is "new to canon" then it turns out she's Carol Marcus. Bleh.

[Ovation]

Pavonis wrote:

---

But, I'm one who reads the last page of a book.

Now this is something I find inconceivable for any fiction I might read. (I sometimes do this for history and other non-fiction texts I'm considering for my students, but that is qualitatively different)

Do you skip to the end of a movie before watching the whole thing for the first time? Do you record sports matches and check the final result before watching?

I WANT the experience of the twists and surprises at first viewing. The creators went to some considerable effort to construct such moments as an integral part of the story. They deserve a chance to see if their efforts were effective. After that, if the whole thing was enjoyable, I will revisit it and appreciate additional aspects of it.

You want the spoilers, that's fine. But don't be (this is a general point, not about you in particular) the one who revels in spoiling such twists for others (I knew someone like that back in grad school--extremely irritating).

[Ovation]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote:

---

I enjoy all the secrecy, speculation and the trolls (Conan, anyone?). But I do wish they wouldn't blatantly lie to misdirect - like saying Alice Eve is "new to canon" then it turns out she's Carol Marcus. Bleh.

Maybe she's Carroll Markus. Not canon.

[SalvorHardin]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote:

---

But I do wish they wouldn't blatantly lie to misdirect - like saying Alice Eve is "new to canon" then it turns out she's Carol Marcus. Bleh.

Umm...

TrekMovie.com: OK let’s start with Alice Eve. Canon or new?

Roberto Orci: Canon

http://trekmovie.com/2012/07/14/excl...st-production/

[King Daniel]

Dammit, my brain is a sieve.

[Pavonis]

Ovation wrote:

---

Do you skip to the end of a movie before watching the whole thing for the first time? Do you record sports matches and check the final result before watching?

Well, I don't have any movies in my personal collection that I haven't seen before, so I don't need to skip to the end. But, I suppose that in effect I do the same for movies. For first time viewing, I usually dig up spoilers or wait until the film is out and then read the plot synopsis on Wikipedia before seeing it.

Let me point out, though, that when I read the last page of a book first, the scene and/or dialogue have no context. At most, I learn that a character or two will still be alive at the end of the story. It doesn't tell me how the plot unfolded, or what the characters went through to arrive at the end. It's not quite the same as spoiling myself for movies and television shows.

I WANT the experience of the twists and surprises at first viewing. The creators went to some considerable effort to construct such moments as an integral part of the story. They deserve a chance to see if their efforts were effective. After that, if the whole thing was enjoyable, I will revisit it and appreciate additional aspects of it.

I just figure that a good story will be good no matter how much you know about it going in. You enjoy the plot twists, but I find them distracting. When I know they're coming, I don't get distracted by them. By "distracted", I mean that I'm only half paying attention to the story as it is unfolding and the other half of me is trying to predict what the next plot twist will be. If I know the whole story, then I can enjoy each moment of it. If I don't, I just find myself trying to anticipate each moment.

You want the spoilers, that's fine. But don't be (this is a general point, not about you in particular) the one who revels in spoiling such twists for others (I knew someone like that back in grad school--extremely irritating).

I understand. What I don't understand, and would like to, is why some people treat advertising and promotional material for the film like spoiler material. Honestly, it's as if they see knowledge of the existence of the film as the ultimate spoiler, to be avoided at all costs.

[The Wormhole]

SalvorHardin wrote:

---

Umm...

http://trekmovie.com/2012/07/14/excl...st-production/

When Alice Eve was originally cast, it was stated she was playing a character "new to canon." Read here.

Star Trek sequel producer/director JJ Abrams has chosen actress Alice Eve for an unnamed role in the film. The report states that the role is "believed to be new to the canon."

The secrecy is bad enough. Take a look at other movies over the past year, none of them are anywhere near as secret. This time last year, Ridley Scott himself was revealing key plot points and character backstories about Prometheus, which didn't hurt the movie at all.

However, this kind of dicking around is uncalled for. Okay, Cumberbatch's identity is all good fun, and we're going to look back on that and laugh. However, in this case "this character is new to canon." A few months later: "she is canon." And finally "She's Carol Marcus." What the hell does "new to canon" then? Either they are being fuckwitted assholes or complete idiots. And at this point, I'll gladly apply any term to Abrams and his cohorts.

[Chemahkuu]

Lighten up for once in your life, the level of hatred, the name calling, the obsessing over these movies. nice to know you've had so much time to waste on that the last four years.

[SalvorHardin]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

When Alice Eve was originally cast, it was stated she was playing a character "new to canon." Read here.
.

I gave you a direct comment from Orci.
You gave me ancient reports from "sources" and "insiders" back when Del Toro was still being talked about and Eve hadn't signed yet.

From your link

Paramount had no comment on the involvement of Eve, who doesn't yet have a deal in place

Sources say Eve's character is new to the "Star Trek" universe, unlike del Toro, would insiders believe will be playing someone familiar to Trekkies.

[Ovation]

The Wormhole wrote:

---

When Alice Eve was originally cast, it was stated she was playing a character "new to canon." Read here.

"believed to be new to canon" by whom? There is no unequivocal statement to that effect, just a supposition on the part of the person who wrote up that piece.

The secrecy is bad enough. Take a look at other movies over the past year, none of them are anywhere near as secret. This time last year, Ridley Scott himself was revealing key plot points and character backstories about Prometheus, which didn't hurt the movie at all.

Actually, I studiously avoided any of those spoilers as I did NOT want to know anything about it. Sadly, I was not able to catch it at the cinema (only just saw it yesterday), so it took some effort to avoid spoilers. Quite happy I put in the effort, though.

However, this kind of dicking around is uncalled for. Okay, Cumberbatch's identity is all good fun, and we're going to look back on that and laugh. However, in this case "this character is new to canon." A few months later: "she is canon." And finally "She's Carol Marcus." What the hell does "new to canon" then? Either they are being fuckwitted assholes or complete idiots. And at this point, I'll gladly apply any term to Abrams and his cohorts.

Again, try not to overreact to suppositions made by others rather than actual statements made by the filmmakers. It's better for your blood pressure.

[chardman]

Don't have a problem with the secrecy. A rather large number of big budget blockbusters have had much tighter security and secrecy.

Lucas used to give certain actors only the pages of the scripts (for ESB, ROTJ, and the prequels) that they were actually in, so that not even they knew what the overall story of the film they were shooting, and therefore couldn't let it slip in front of members of the press. Heck, David Prowse was such a notorious blabbermouth, and would later be overdubbed by James Earl Jones anyway, that George opted to give Prowse script pages with lines to speak that bore little resemblance to what would later be dubbed over him. Prowse didn't find out that Vader was Luke's father until "Empire" had it's premiere. Up til then, he'd been under the impression that the secret he shared with Like about his father's fate was that Obiwan had killed Anikin for allying with Vader.

And Lucas isn't the only one who limits actor's access to full scripts.

One of Seth Green's first big screen acting roles was in a Woody Allen film, and he claims that he didn't even realize that he was playing the younger version of Woody's character until after he wrapped shooting on the film.

And I believe it was Paul Reiser who didn't realize that his character of Burke was the bad guy in "Aliens", until his very last day of shooting, when Cameron gave him "new script pages". From what I hear, in the script that Reiser was originally given, his character was cut off from the group, and assumed dead until he unexpectedly resurfaced at the 11th hour, only to become the accidental hero of the piece.

Cameron also apparently pulled a lot of script-misdirection on the actors in "The Abyss", not only to keep the full tale away from the press, but to surprise his actors into reacting to scenes with genuine spontaneity.

The thing is, such secrecy has been pretty commonplace for 30-odd years now, and the trend is growing by leaps and bounds. So if it's something you're tired of... I guess it really sucks to be you.

[siskokid888]

Com'on, man, look at all the fun discussions going on on this board right now due to Abrams and company keeping things under wraps. And I agree with other posters that you have to be impressed at how he can keep things a mystery with all the constant internet snoopers around.