Star Trek: The Undiscovered Slash. And a small rant on spoilers.

[bironic]

Whaaaa...?

Star Trek XI set for tentative release in 2008, with J.J. Abrams at the helm and focus to be on Kirk & Spock's "early days." Stories here and here.

* * *

Also, when the hell am I going to learn not to read posts with the warning, "mild spoilers"? I hate spoilers and avoid those things usually -- and you would think I'd know better after the FOX website fiasco -- but I am so trusting that people know what "mild" means and I tried one this morning. Now I know something I REALLY wish I didn't about the upcoming two-part House episode. F*ck, f*ck, f*ck.

That the article also had Hugh Laurie calling Robert Sean Leonard "Eyebrows" almost makes up for it.

* * *

OH. And this morning on the radio on the way to work, there was the usual "ad" for one of the weekend programs; they played the "Spi-der-MAN, Spi-der-man" theme, and then the host started in about how New York has been a crucial setting for comics, and he said as the one and only example, 'Who can forget when Spiderman's girlfriend DIED ON THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE?' So much for suspense in the upcoming movies. Thanks for nothing, comic-savvy host!

Got me wondering, though, about the expiration date for spoilers. On the House boards it seems to run at least several weeks to allow for the difference in air dates for Britons and such. In HP there's a grace period also of several weeks after the latest book comes out. At some point all becomes fair game. I guess you can't consider something a spoiler if it's for a comic that was published decades ago. But by the same token, if you know there are ginormous blockbuster Hollywood Spiderman movies coming out that have attracted an audience half of whom have never read the comics, wouldn't you think you might not want to mention something like that so offhand? He could have phrased it in an equally insider way by saying 'Who can forget that showdown with [name of girlfriend] and [villain] on the Brooklyn Bridge?' Aie.

Comments

[rj-anderson.livejournal.com]

I don't think MJ was the girlfriend in question (as far as I'm aware, she's still very much alive); I think that refers to Gwen Stacy, who was Petey's fiancee in the original run of comics, but who has never been shown in the movies. So... not so much a movie spoiler, I don't think. If it makes you feel any better. :)

[bironic.livejournal.com]

It helps a lot, actually; thank you. I still stand by my recommendation, though, that people be a bit more vague when making announcements like that in a public forum.

[chalcopyrite.livejournal.com]

Hey look! It's me, finally checking out your LJ and working backwards. I know this is considerably after the fact, but this caught my eye.

Like synaesthete7 sid, the girlfriend the guy was referring to was Gwen Stacy, not MJ. They already sort-of recreated the scene in the first movie, when MJ fell from the bridge, but Peter was able to save her. So it isn't a movie spoiler as such.

I'm with you on the spoiler thing, though. Admittedly, Gwen Stacy died in 1973, but . . . even people who read comics now may not know that -- a Marvel or Spider-man completist would, but a casual reader, I'm not sure. Though I guess she turned up recently in a confused-reality Marvel thing, so I guess people might know that.

But if this guy -- or whoever gave him the reference -- is a comic geek, then he just may not have thought that hey, some people may not know this. (I got a similar sort of reaction -- though not live on-air -- when I started a sentence with, "And the second Robin--" and got a, "Wait, what?!?" And I was like, "Dude, there's been *four* of 'em . . . um. Let's back up.") So yeah, using her name would have been less explicit -- but people might well not have known who he was talking about, Gwen Stacy being kind of like Batwoman.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what he said wasn't exactly news, or a spoiler, but he really could have phrased it better.

::vanishes back into lurkerdom::