moriath
2007-01-17 06:07 am UTC (link)

I don't know what I think, but I friended the journal.

I also don't know what I think about Blood and Chocolate being a movie. 'Cause damn do I love the book...which is only used for its title and character names in the movie, it appears. I'm kinda irritated about that (and totally don't get why they think it couldn't have been faithfully adapted into a good movie).

I definitely like the concept, and doing this around a YA book-inspired movie seems like the way to go (as adult-turned-YA-author Scott Westerfeld says (paraphrased 'cause I'm too lazy to look it up), teenagers are more fun to write for because they'll Google you and tell you how awesome you are). I just don't know if it's going to go as *I* would like this time around.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

keri
2007-01-17 07:49 am UTC (link)

I think that if they were faithful to the book, there'd be loads and loads of sex, more than they'd want to put on screen. Maybe? Or at least a much darker theme? I haven't read it for a while, but in high school, it was one of my favorite novels for when I wanted something romance novelish, but with meat on it. (no pun intended?) I don't recall it exactly, but it felt like a very.... sensual book, where sensual is used to refer to the senses, not just sexy.

Bah. I'm all flubbered about it. I didn't realize until now that it was adapted from the book because I was afraid to find out. I'm going to have to ignore it, then!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

moriath
2007-01-17 04:28 pm UTC (link)

You know, I read it for basically the same reason in high school. When I re-read it not too long ago, it's still a very sensual book, but there's no sex graphically described. Heavy making out and knowing that the guy has a condom in his pocket (I remember being so confused the first time I read it because I had no idea what a "rubber" was, lol. I was so innocent!), but (I think) they could easily do it without getting too obscene.

Well, wait, there might have been werewolf!sex. After Vivian gets chosen as the alpha's mate (was queen her new term? Or am I making shit up?). But that could be done all artsy and stuff.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	ravenscanary 2007-01-17 07:24 am UTC (link)
	I think it's fascinating. I am only vaguely familiar with the book canon (I read a synopsis) and not at all with the film. But I think it's damned interesting marketing, and at least a unique way of approaching and courting online fandom. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	tangentialone 2007-01-17 07:53 am UTC (link)
	It is! Sort of. A creepy, dishonest version has definitely been done before, but this is a completely different flavor of thing, besides being more fandom-oriented. I hope it works out, because it's pretty cool. Complete with the character commenting on other blogs posing as a real person. D: (Reply to this)(Parent)

ealusaid
2007-01-17 08:34 am UTC (link)

I friended the journal, too, and went and looked at the trailer and was intrigued and will probably see the movie; I guess the marketing's working, because I usually wouldn't.

I like that they were upfront about it. I guess a lot of campaigns before didn't understand that fandom knows it's playing make-believe, and really doesn't mind being told "This is a story, these are the people who wrote it, but you can still get involved". We don't need the fiction of something being true.

Um... I've been into the litcrit again. Meep. Hopefully the meta of all that makes sense.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

tangentialone
2007-01-17 08:53 am UTC (link)

Oh, completely. Fandom's practically all about suspending disbelief enough to care, even though we know it's not real--especially in the context of rp.

And it's okay to admit that it's marketing. It's like those sample tables at grocery stores. You know it's the company doing it, and that they're doing it in hopes that you'll buy some of their stuff, but you don't see anyone going, "THEY ARE MARKETING AT US OH NOES D:".

Plus, lying about it, even by omission, would be bound to piss people off and alienate potential fans. I think if they did that, then most people who got involved and invested in it would feel betrayed when they found out. You know?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	b_jellybean 2007-01-17 12:46 pm UTC (link)
	OBLIGATORY LEMMING COMMENT- I'd read just about anything synecdochic wrote. (Reply to this)

	esclaramonde 2007-01-17 02:34 pm UTC (link)
	I really like the idea. It's upfront; it's not like they're pretending she's a real journal. I also like that they considered having a fanfic contest, because it makes me think the standards about fanfic are loosening. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	semirecluse 2007-01-17 04:23 pm UTC (link)
	You just know someone would have written Blood and Chocolate furry necro watersports chan or something and MGM would have freaked. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mindset 2007-01-17 04:53 pm UTC (link)
	I'm interested in the concept, but what makes me really wonder is what happened to the original vivian journal. A name like that, journal created in 2004 -- did they pay someone off? Did it happen to be a LJ staffer's reserved but unused journal? And, has there been any wank about it? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	moriath 2007-01-18 12:19 am UTC (link)
	Actually the user info says it was created in 2000, and the posting calendar on the page has links to a bunch of days after the "intro" post that all say "No entries were made today." It's curious indeed. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mindset 2007-01-18 01:05 am UTC (link)
	Nah, those are just locked posts. Probably for future plot points. But yes, 2000, sorry. For reference, this was vivian's profile back in November, and this is what her journal looked like. A few people friending her, but no actual friends. I wonder what sort of information you'd get if you emailed toothfairy_punk@pinkmail.net? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	moriath 2007-01-18 02:49 am UTC (link)
	Is it bad that I really want to post a comment in the ooc post that asks about the "real" Vivian. Forget porn. The internet is for conspiracies. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	tangentialone 2007-01-18 05:06 am UTC (link)
	Hm. Maybe they're just borrowing the journal temporarily and those are her old entries? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	tangentialone 2007-01-18 05:09 am UTC (link)
	...Oh, wait, after the intro post. Durr. Yeah, probably future plot points. :P (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ladyrogue 2007-01-17 06:41 pm UTC (link)
	I've been watching this community actually because there's a rather high wank factor here. I've already seen comments with the words 'otherkin' and 'furry' in them, as well one commenter telling "Vivian" to shut up and act like her book character. Yeah. I'll be keeping an eye on this one. (Reply to this)

	sashenka 2007-01-17 09:09 pm UTC (link)
	That sounds kind of fun. (Reply to this)

	sgtgeorgecarter 2007-01-18 05:50 am UTC (link)
	no chance. Theatrical Muse was much more entertaining. (Reply to this)