Spoilers in reviews

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 3:50pm

I, like many people, enjoy reading the major reviews of a show before deciding whether to see it. Most of the time the reviewers do a great job of painting a picture without giving away too much of the plot, but lately I feel like a line has been crossed. (Or maybe it's always been crossed and I'm just now noticing.)

Specifically... I am seeing Meteor Shower tonight and just read the NYT review. Obviously I haven't seen the show, so it's possible that this is something that's addressed upfront and is a nonissue, but Jesse Green clearly gives away the "twist," which really took me aback. Similarly, I was reading the New York Mag/Vulture review of The Band's Visit, and the reviewer spoils a plot point that my gut says comes as a twist in the show.

What gives? Obviously a reviewer needs to be able to talk about the plot a little bit in order to give context to the review, but I absolutely don't think that major spoilers should be a part of it. I'm pretty miffed that I now know that point in The Band's Visit before I see it, when I would've much preferred to experience that reveal while immersed in the show.

Thoughts on this?

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 5:15pm

Critics should be given freedom to actually discuss the production, which involves pertinent plot points.

Neither Meteor Shower or Band's Visit hinge on an unforeseen or major, mindblowing "I am your father"-type twist or plot point (in fact, things that *do* rely on a major twist even bar critics from discussing those points!). If merely knowing plot points is enough to spoil an experience for you, then stay away from things that might discuss plot points. Like reviews.

"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 5:39pm

The NYMag review of The Band's Visit says this:

Click Here To Toggle Spoiler Content

She senses real connection in the band’s reserved conductor Tewfiq — the wonderful Tony Shalhoub, disappearing into a performance as heartbreaking in its secret shadows as it is amusing in its straight-laced foibles — but she’ll end up sleeping with the handsome trumpet-player Haled.

Without knowing the show - and I'd love to hear that that isn't actually a spoiler - that seems to give away a plot point that hasn't been mentioned in any other press, presumably because it comes as a surprise in the show. Absolutely reviews can and should discuss the general plot, and the fact that Dina and Tewfiq have a connection and chemistry is relevant - that's a general overview of what the show is about. I just don't believe that something like who she ends up sleeping with instead is at all crucial to the review (it says nothing about the production or Katrina Lenk's performance), and all it does is ruin that plot point for people who haven't seen it.

Plenty of people like to read reviews to decide whether to see something - that's sort of the point of reviews. Saying to stay away from them altogether is absurd.

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 5:45pm

I agree with Kad -- the best reviews aren't just "I liked this, I didn't like this", but rather the ones that are analysis of the art in question. It's hard to talk about what works and what doesn't work if you can't discuss any plot points or specific aspects. I tend to stay away from reviews if I know I am going to see a show, as it tends to color my expectations and change how I view it. Sometimes a great review can leave me feeling "eh" because my expectations are high -- as opposed to going in blind, and being able to think with a fresh mind.

Updated On: 1/10/18 at 05:45 PM

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 5:52pm

My thought on this is... instead of just guessing whether something in a review might cause a problem, why not see the two shows in question and see if what the reviewers discussed actually creates a real problem BEFORE starting a thread criticizing it.

Spoilers in reviews

Posted: 1/10/18 at 8:45pm

UncleCharlie said: "My thought on this is... instead of just guessing whether something in a review might cause a problem, why not see the two shows in question andsee if what the reviewers discussed actually creates a real problem BEFORE starting a thread criticizing it."

Ok, I have now seen Meteor Shower, so I guess I’m allowed to comment on it now? After seeing the show, I’m doubling down on my point.

(Meteor Shower spoilers:) This show has a Fight Club-esque twist, which you find out like five minutes before the play ends. I think it’s completely messed up that this was spoiled in the Times review. I’m actually pretty astonished that the people in this thread feel perfectly fine about that... I just can’t imagine the Times film critic writing a review of Fight Club on opening day and spoiling that Brad Pitt isn’t real. Would people be defending that as “analysis of the art in question”? I’m honestly asking.

And yes, I read the Meteor Shower review in large part to decide whether or not I wanted to see it. I feel a bit cheated that I didn’t get to experience the play as intended, which is going in without knowing how it ends. YMMV.

Edited to add that I’ve read plenty of reviews where the reviewer has said, “I won’t spoil it for you here...” Dear Evan Hansen comes to mind. You can certainly write a thoughtful artistic analysis of a production while maintaining the courtesy of letting audiences experience plot points on their own.

Updated On: 1/10/18 at 08:45 PM

← Back to Message Board

View all Videos

Tickets From $59

Tickets From $70

Tickets From $106

Tickets From $159