More Fuel for the Fire

Yes, I’ve apparently got too much time on my hands. But — despite my earlier disavowal of continuing interest — I’m finding myself compelled to follow the lonelygirl15 trail.

The latest developments:
  • The producers have decided to cater to their core audience by putting Bree in a bathing suit — though at least they had the good sense to keep the video appropriate to the character, rather than making it into pure titillation.

  • Bree has added a hint of interactivity in her latest video, mentioning at least a couple of commenters by name (though again, I suspect planted messages — if those messages even exist, which I haven’t bothered to check).

  • The Wikipedia page has finally — and grudgingly — been restored. I still suspect that someone at Wikipedia has a stake in this thing; Wikipedia editor and YouTube director Brian Schott, perhaps?

  • Suspicions are being aired that this may be the beginning of a new Alternate Reality Game, with the likes of Who Is Benjamin Stove? creator Brian Clark, Beast author Sean Stewart (with I Love Bees co-creator Jordan Weisman), Blair Witch studio Haxan Films, and documentary filmmaker Brian Flemming being tossed around as potential puppetmasters.

  • The picture of Aleister Crowley wasn’t always that picture; it was apparently swapped out sometime before its closeup. Current speculation has it that the original was Baphomet, though I can’t make it out clearly enough to be certain (or even hazard a guess).

  • In that same video — dated June 23 — I noticed that Bree dubs Daniel “the Danielbeast” as a part of her naturalist schtick. Daniel ends up using that as his user name, but the implication, of course, is that the moniker didn’t exist before Bree’s video. Anyone know how to check not when a user’s first video is uploaded, but when the account was created? A “member since” tag or something? I’m curious as to whether the dates line up...

  • At least one blogger is starting to question not the veracity of the videos themselves, but the curious nature of its popularity in the first place. Let’s be honest, the content of these videos is nothing extraordinary — was there some gaming of the system to generate this “popularity”?
Sure, this may be just silliness, but I’m having fun with it. Especially since it doesn’t take up nearly the amount of time of something like The Beast. That much time I do not have.

Technorati tags: , , ,


At 2:52 PM, Moxie Mom said...

I don't know what to think about…this. I have only watched a few of the early videos and I am not sure I can take it anymore.
Sure, she is cute. But GOD is she annoying. I realize I am not in the group this is targeted to, so there's that.

I have to agree with your wonderings about the editing, the lighting, parents allowing a boy in her room with the door closed…but very religious. Fishy.

The one video where she investigates what her Dad and Daniel talked about was completely staged. IMO

At 3:15 PM, Moxie Mom said...

OK, I just watched a few more. This girl reminds me of my 13 year old niece in a way.
The way she talks, how she gestures. It's weird.
And the responses from Daniel. It's totally like a show from the W.B. over the internet.

But why?

At 3:28 PM, Moxie Mom said...

OK, maybe I'm a bit obsessed right now. But imagine Keri Russell (Felicity) and Jason Biggs (American Pie).
Slap them on the internet and you have Bree and Daniel.

At 10:08 AM, Bill Coughlan said...

Oh, the story is crap. Melodramatic tripe. The only thing keeping even that target audience engaged is the novelty of the (faked) reality angle.

I was originally fascinated with the story behind the story, but now I realize it's all just a big joke being played at the expense of the particularly gullible. And that's something I can really enjoy.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home