case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-09-14 03:43 pm

[ SECRET POST #2812 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2812 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.

__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.

__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 047 secrets from Secret Submission Post #402.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2014-09-15 04:11 am (UTC)(link)
Are you serious? The character dynamics are EXACTLY as they are in Twilight! I remember reading a comment that called it "Spot the Twilight character" (which still makes me laugh)--seriously, there are almost NO original characters in 50 Shades.

(Anonymous) 2014-09-15 02:28 pm (UTC)(link)
You've never read it, have you.

(Anonymous) 2014-09-15 02:58 pm (UTC)(link)
nayrt

...except... not really. They are both terrible books, but honestly, I wouldn't have realized 50 shades was a fanfiction by just reading it. Both series have generic, shallow romance characters that are a dime a dozen in the women's erotica section at the bookstore. Empty shell of a female protagonist who is somewhat naive and swept off her feet by brooding angsty guy with a secret? Yeah, really original. 50 Shades did change the plot, though, and sure it's similar, but here's the thing: that's how most books in that genre read.

I say this as someone whose guilty pleasure is terrible romance novels, so.

(Anonymous) 2014-09-16 10:55 am (UTC)(link)
Calling your pleasures weak is for the weak.