|
Post by johngreen on Sept 7, 2006 21:41:48 GMT -5
About the hoped-for video from Bree explaining this: Can't happen. as Terry pointed out, "Bree is a character. Characters, by definition, don't know that they're characters." The plot will continue, and it will continue to be ours to unravel. And characters don't know that they're characters, but actors know they're PLAYING characters. So I still want to know: Who's playing Bree? Who's playing Daniel? Do they shoot their own video? Are they happy about this or freaked out? And why aren't they trying to get agents? -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 7, 2006 20:48:56 GMT -5
I'm going to be the 11,000th to chime in on this: 1. I'm not disappointed. Im happy. We're all one step closer to understanding who is behind this. We pushed them toward giving us answers, and eventually they started to give us answers. There are still a lot of open questions (we don't know who they are, or where it's filmed, or what's going to happen to Bree. We don't even know whether or not they did this to try to get attention with a big studio or if they did it because they wanted to. We don't know who Bree is or who Daniel is or who Cassie is. There are plenty of questions left to figure out). I realize that there's inevitable disappointment that accompanies success, but let's be clear about it: We've gotten part of what we all wanted, or at least claimed to want, which is we now know some things we didn't know yesterday, which I think is the goal. Also, I think the notion that we should be paid for our fandom is a fantastic one! -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 16:34:52 GMT -5
Lee,
No one has nailed down connections that are irrefutably strong, and people with strong ties to Thelemic communities (including Tempestarii) have repeatedly posted saying that this doesn't look like anything they're familiar with. That said, there is also a pretty broad and diverse set of practices in these religious organizations, which tend to be small and not terribly hierarchical.
Personally, and this is just one guy's opinion, it looks like they're borrowing elements from a sort of generalizaed occultism, which is why a lot of the details don't match up to our expectations.
But the answer to your question is, "Not to my satisfaction, and if you can come up with some concrete relationship to a known religious community, I'll be grateful."
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 6, 2006 9:09:22 GMT -5
That's great stuff, Passer. And this is a guy who has been posting on the board forever and is well-respected, right? I'll say this: If she IS close to being outed, then Flemming's post "It's not about the girl; it's about the game," leads me to conclude that he IS involved, and that he's trying to keep the game alive after the naming of Bree and Daniel. -John Green www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 7, 2006 16:32:39 GMT -5
If she named the high school she went to, we could all prove her existence within about half an hour by calling the school and former classmates. Of course, I'd understand why Bree wouldn't want her former classmates getting calls from lg15 fans. But she's still not real.
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 18:04:59 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure the mod didn't delete it; he merged it into another thread. Webcuts would fit in terms of content. There are no movie releases (at least listed on IMDB) that are on October 12th. There are a couple horror movies coming out on October 13th (which is, after all, Friday the 13th), but neither seems to me in any way even vaguely connected to Bree or Cassie or Daniel or Thelema or Crowley. Virginia reported on the introduce yourself thread that she got an admission (albeit what she terms a dubious one) today from a video game designer, but the research that was done on the old board didn't point to any video games coming out that day. There are too many book releases to really rule that out, I think, but as an author, I would say it's unlikely to be a big-name publisher if it is a promo for a book release. Nothing against publishers, but they don't tend to think quite this far outside the box when it comes to promoting books. It could be an author on his/her own, but I personally think it's unlikely (just because the next chapter of the story, to my mind, doesn't lend itself to text). EDIT: Oh, and also, no movie releases on IMDB for December 10th. (I agree it's possible that they're using the non-American dating system, but the fact of Crowley's birthday makes that unlikely, imo.) FURTHER EDIT: Thanks for the heads-up, Terryfic. Will modify from now on. -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 9:08:15 GMT -5
Terry,
Do you know at approximately what point Bree stopped answering her emails? Was it around the Boy Problems video?
-John
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 18:12:03 GMT -5
I have two responses to this: 1. If Flemming doesn't believe God exists (and boy does he go to extravagant lengths to tell us that he doesn't), I'm not sure why he'd think that Satan exists, or even find Satan a very interesting character. 2. Clark has since denied knowing anything about who is responsible for lg15. If he and Flemming are such close collaborators, how can that be? Or is Clark lying, too? And if Clark is lying, where is our hint that his opinion can't be trusted either? -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 13:56:55 GMT -5
Right. Every time I think, "Why hasn't someone who attended high school with her or saw her in Starbucks last week come forward and said, 'I think this girl's name is such-and-such,'" I remember that even her most famous videos only have 800,000 views. (And a lot of those are people who watch the videos repeatedly, looking for clues.
That means there are 299,000,000 Americans who have never seen a picture of lonelygirl15.
-John
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 8:54:12 GMT -5
John Green is still playing. The only thing I'd add here about Goodfried is that his "no comment" to Virginia strikes me as a little weird. Actually, Goodfried generally strikes me as a little weird: 1. He not really a trademark lawyer. 2. He is not with a big firm. 3. He is not an entertainment lawyer _at all_. 4. He didn't deny anything, which I would think any 60-year-old lawyer would. If you asked, for instance, my 60-year-old uncle the lawyer if he was representing lg15, my uncle would say, "Who the hell is lg15 and why is the new york times calling me?" So I agree that he does know the creators of lg15, which lends A LOT of credence to the notion that they're a small cadre of young people who haven't been outed yet primarily because Bree and Daniel are not as famous as we think they are. Speaking of which, we should get that reporter from the LA Times to publish photographs of them in the LA Times. That would really increase our chances, no? -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 18:07:58 GMT -5
Well, it's not the job of the New York Times, certainly. but I bet we could talk the Post into it. -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 6, 2006 17:20:19 GMT -5
Two things: 1. Is it not possible that Flemming did this, but nothing before it? I think Flemming's denials were genuine, but then he got fascinated by the lg15 community, and by the idea of "community problem solving," and decided to make a game out of it. (It is possible that his denials weren't genuine, and he's been behind it the whole time, but it's better-scripted than most of this stuff. 2. Flemming insists on his blog, "It's not about the girl. It's about the game." But, to me anyway, it IS about the girl (or, rather, the game is not what-horror-movie-awaits, but rather who is behind this and why they're doing it. Whoever created this can be disappointed that we're not playing the game s/he wants us to play, but it's his/her own fault that the mystery of authorship is in this particular case infinitely more compelling than the mystery of Bree as a character. I think, in fact, that if we figured out the mystery of authorship, the game of the story's plot would become more interesting to us and a lot of us would hang around to try to figure it out. But until then, the story (for us, and for newspapers, and for everyone) will be who-is-she-really, not what's-going-to-happen-to-her-fakely. -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 6, 2006 8:30:53 GMT -5
Yes, the audio was emailed to VH from the address Cassiestruggles18@hushmail.com. (Get it? Bree's email is BreeSnuggles15. Bree snuggles while Cassie struggles.) Something I thought of last night: Cassie's email says "There is more than one girl." Initially I took that as some kind of vague horror-movie thing. But could it mean that there are other girls (on youtube or elsewhere) whose videos we are suposed to be connecting with lg15? Of course, I have no idea how we'd find those videos. -John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 6, 2006 0:41:58 GMT -5
I still hear: I'm scared / (no idea) / I can't see. (or can't see. Or, conceivably, Cassie. But I sure wouldn't pronounce Cassie that way.) I've got my friends at public radio on it; we'll see if they can put together a better version, but I doubt it will be that much better than Terry's. Question: Does anyone think the voice is the same as Bree's? I tend to think not. Also: Do we have any reason to believe this recording was made by anyone afilliated with lg15? To bed, John www.sparksflyup.com
|
|
|
Post by johngreen on Sept 5, 2006 23:43:42 GMT -5
I just listened to the reversed file, and to me at least it really does not sound like words, at least not Cassie's whispering. However, there's a chance that the background noise itself, when reversed, becomes words (I guess, although this seems unlikely), and my headphones aren't highpowered enough to pick it up. I will forward the attachment to anyone interested in hearing it backwards, but it really is much, much creepier when played forwards. -John www.sparksflyup.comp.s. I have emails in to friends at public radio, hoping they can use, you know, work equipment to get a high quality distillation of the whispers.
|
|