Fifty Shades of Grey


When college senior Anastasia Steele (Dakota Johnson) steps in for her sick roommate to interview prominent businessman Christian Grey (Jamie Dornan) for their campus paper, little does she realize the path her life will take. Christian, as enigmatic as he is rich and powerful, finds himself strangely drawn to Ana, and she to him. Though sexually inexperienced, Ana plunges headlong into an affair -- and learns that Christian's true sexual proclivities push the boundaries of pain and pleasure. USA Today: Zero chemistry


Sitting through the turgid and tedious S&M melodrama that is Fifty Shades of Grey may feel like its own form of torture... Perhaps worst of all, chemistry is nil between Jamie Dornan as billionaire Christian Grey and Dakota Johnson as curious college student Anastasia Steele.


The New Yorker
There you have the problem with this film. It is gray with good taste—shade upon shade of muted naughtiness, daubed within the limits of the R rating. Think of it as the “Downton Abbey” of bondage, designed neither to menace nor to offend but purely to cosset the fatigued imagination. You get dirtier talk in most action movies, and more genitalia in a TED talk on Renaissance sculpture.


This movie is atrocious beyond words and the first movie from which I've ever walked out (an hour and 17 minutes into it). The session was full of giggling middle-aged women, wetting themselves with anticipation - I cannot believe this book and movie has appeal. Are women really so bored, so desperate, that this is what gets them off?? The acting was appalling - I guess that's the end of Ms. Johnson & Mr. Dornan's careers. And I wouldn't be surprised if the actors who refused the role of Christian Grey are secretly relieved they had the sense to reject it! The script was laughable. No chemistry between the two leads. As for the 'eroticism'.....it was completely lacking. Stilted, awkward, poor cinematography, cheesy scripting. Just terrible.


Do not waste your time or money with this. Review provided by a seo consultant "Fifty Shades of Grey" is based on a badly written book, so why someone thought they could make a decent film out of it is beyond me. Actually, I don't think anyone believed they could make a good film, the producers just wanted the money that would come in from all people who for reasons known only to themselves read the book.


I had a free ticket and I had to go in order to do a story on it. Bottom line, I'm not doing a story on it.


Okay, here's the problem, and this is what breaks my heart. We no longer know what good or great is. I am no follower of Ayn Rand, but in The Fountainhead, she predicted the rise of mediocrity, mediocrity being considered great and the norm we shoot for. It only stands to reason that at this point, some things can't even rise to that sad level. This isn't mediocre, it's pathetic. I can't believe there are people complimenting the actors. But then I can, because they have come to accept mediocrity. Something I fight against with all my heart.


There is one other problem. The book sucked; in order to like it, one had to use his or her imagination. The success of this book lay in the fantasy aspect. Sometimes imagination is more powerful than just about anything and can give you an erotic experience. Just like it is in social media marketing. This film doesn't fulfill the most inane imagination, let alone someone who really has a wild and creative one. The only fantasy it can give you is how fast you can get out of the theater.


There were people around me laughing. The ones who weren't left, and from what I found out in the lobby, actually demanded and got their money back. When was the last time you saw people leaving a movie in the middle? I'm not sure I've ever seen it, and I'll guess I've been going to movies longer than a lot of you.


I lament the loss of artistic soul, of creativity, of going for the best. I miss the days when Billy Wilder was a writer and a filmmaker. What are we left with but a horrible book was written on a first-grade level and the resulting bad movie?


+++
The movie adaptation of E.L. James’s best-selling book “Fifty Shades of Grey” was always destined to be a blockbuster; the quality of the film was beside the point. After all, the erotic romance novel, based on saucy “Twilight” fan-fiction, did great business, despite being a 500-page lesson in how not to use a thesaurus. Millions of readers paid their dues, skimming countless boring scenes with a narrator who says nothing more profound than “holy cow!” and “Double crap!” so they could get to the good stuff: bondage-laced sex scenes between the story’s innocent protagonist and her impossibly hot, impossibly rich damaged-goods love interest. So you have to hand it to director Sam Taylor-Johnson and screenwriter Kelly Marcel for making a film that, while not as titillating as the book, is a much better adaptation than the source material deserves. By Stephanie Merry


+++
SHOULDN’T WE ALL feel a little embarrassed about the fuss we made over 50 Shades of Grey? I don’t mean the book’s fans. I mean the anti-; the book’s critics; all of us who committed time and energy to blog posts and commentary and long essays attacking E. L. James’s novel. The focus and outrage we brought to the 50 Shades backlash were remarkable, as though we were not so much critiquing a bad book as fighting a war. The situation seemed so grave. If millions and millions of women were getting off on the idea of being sexually subjugated; if the secret fantasy buried in us all is that we meet a very rich man who’ll spank us — is this the end of feminism? Is society as a whole doomed? Obviously! We must fight this scourge, we all agreed. With our opinions. The movie “Fifty Shades of Grey” opened last week and sold more than $300 million worth of tickets worldwide. That is more than seven times the amount it cost to make the film.


A sequel seems probable. However, the writer of the book it is based on reportedly wants more creative power in the making of a sequel.


The industry newspaper Variety says E. L. James plans to write her own script for “50 Shades Darker.” But Universal Pictures is “resistant” to the idea. The studio has not even officially announced that it is making a sequel. It is holding discussions. The movie has not done nearly as well with the critics. Several movie critics called the film “boring” and “tedious.” A USA Today newspaper review said watching it “may feel like its own form of torture.”


Worse still, the depiction of BDSM within her novels which is confused with abuse, shows the personal preference of sexual variety to be something that should be overcome. It also shows possibly harmful and incorrect techniques.



Then we get onto the worse issue of glorification of abuse. Some critics and scientists have expressed the relationship has characteristics of an abusive relationship and is not BDSM at all.*


If we delve into the actual detailed writing of the book, it can be considered very poor. In my personal opinion, the characters are unbelievable. A virgin college senior meets an excessively rich businessman and suddenly it’s all creepy contracts and teenage sexual abuse stories.


All that has virtually nothing to do with BDSM in the bedrooms of the real world – which is pretty far from being some emotionless, acquisitive power game, whether you approve of it or not – and a lot more to do with hoary conceptions of what men and women want from relationships. Anastasia wants cuddling and intimacy and movie dates and hot sex where she’s the focus of attention and a stream of luxury gifts and trips to surprise destinations. Well, why not? Christian wants to whip her and use her and then send her to bed in a different room. I’m guessing he also wants not to have to remember when her damn birthday is, but that doesn’t directly come up.


Review

Ana is just a giant mess of a human being. She's insecure to the point of it being laughable, 'klutzy' (even though she only trips twice in the entire book), and a complete ditz. She's a virgin (of course) who's never taken any sexual interest in anyone before. Right. I'm fairly certain there hasn't been a woman this naive since 'round about 1954. At one point, she thinks putting her hair in pigtails will keep her safe from Christian's lusty advances. Fuckin' really? She "flushes" constantly, and on several occasions referred to her hoo-hoo-naughty place as "down there."


Anyway, after reading the description of Christian's building (hello, first penis metaphor), I had to sit through the awful dialogue between these smarmy idiots and hope beyond hope that something, anything, would distract me enough to see me through to the end. Turns out, I found something about 15% through. I went back and counted, and kept track throughout the rest of the book, and do you have any idea how many fucking times Ana said: "Oh my" in this monumentally bad missive? Do you? I'll tell you; 79! 79 motherfucking times. "He pulled me back against his chest...oh my." "He began kissing a trail down my belly, oh my." "He's an insufferable douchenozzle, oh my!" (I'm just thankful that neither lions, tigers, nor bears were brought into this mess at any point.)


Since this is considered nothing more than "mommy porn", I will attempt to pander to that particular demographic for a moment. Were the sex scenes well-written? Well, none of it was particularly well-written. The sex scenes could be kind of...honestly, they were kind of boring. I've had more exciting sex myself, so I guess reader response to the sex scenes is dependent on reader experience. There's nothing revolutionary here, and a lot of it is just plain unrealistic. I mean, come on, he pretty much jackhammers her hymen and she walks away with nothing more than a passing, pleasant soreness? Riiiight. How about the time he gives her a handjob with a soapy washcloth? Hello? Apparently, neither one of them has ever heard of a urinary tract infection. Oh, or we could talk about her first time giving Christian a blowjob, during which Ana established herself as some kind of Queen of Deepthroat.


Now I'll be totally honest, the biggest issue I have with Fifty Shades of Shit is neither the sex nor the horrible writing. It's the plot. Thin as it is, it's still there, its core message being that, given enough time, you can change someone. While I don't have any problem with this if all you're trying to do is help them to lose weight or quit smoking, when you're talking about an emotionally and (dangerously close to) physically abusive relationship, sending that kind of message is ridiculous and irresponsible. Christian is controlling, possessive, condescending, and cruel. He doesn't allow Ana to behave as she normally would, and Ana just puts up with it, insistent that if she can give him what he wants, when he wants, as often as he wants, she can eventually begin to pull his strings. Will it work? In the books, probably. In real life? No. Almost never. How many misguided women are going to waste their lives on some emotionally retarded prick because they've read shit like this and think this kind of fucked-up fairytale will come true for them? I've known women with this mentality. "Oh, he's so dark and dangerous and threatening, but he's got a sad, lonely side, and if I could just figure out what's wrong, I could change him!"


Holy cow (crap)! Yeah, I'm very sorry but I have to use your favorite word again. LOL Awesome review, Katrina!!! Yeah, this book is such crap it's beyond me. Imagine, FSoG EMPOWERS women in their sexuality! Huh??? Oh, and thanks so much for reminding me of this verrry special term "down there". I forgot to mention it in my review...Well, my inner goddess was so delighted to read your review. :-)


Loved this:


Crap, Holy Crap, Double and Triple Crap, Oh Crap, This Crap, That Crap, any and all Crap. Speaking of crap, if I ever, ever ever have to hear/read the words "inner goddess" again, I'm going to construct a pyre out of tampons and maxi pads, light it, and toss unsuspecting women into it.


Michelle Mulkerrin TD is to appear on Brendan O'Connor's chat show this evening to review literary sensation 50 Shades of Grey. Michelle has previous when it comes to discussing the issue of fornication, so no doubt she'll have plenty to say about this dirty bike.


We hear Michelle is paying a return visit to RTÉ’s Saturday Night Show tonight, where she will be reviewing a book for presenter Brendan O’Connor. No prizes for guessing the name of the literary opus in question . . . It’s Fifty Shades of Blueshirt. Sorry, Fifty Shades of Grey.


No doubt Michelle is motivated by a passion for literature (should that be literature?) and any increased publicity would be purely coincidental. However, according to Miriam Lord, a more senior FG has already given his own pithy review of the book and explained its popularity:


And Michael Noonan drawled, in his best Limerick accent: “He beats her. That’s what it’s about. He beats her.” No need to go out and buy it now.