50 Shades Review

JackLuis

Literotica Guru
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Posts
21,881
Australian morning show personality Lisa Wilkinson saw Fifty Shades of Grey the other night. She did not enjoy it.

"I've got something I wanna get off my chest," Wilkinson begins ominously as her fellow Today anchors coo with delight. She then launches into an Ethering that will set the standard for Fifty Shades panning for generations to come.

Jamie Dornan as Christian Grey is a thirtysomething jerk of a billionaire who never seems to work. An emotionally crippled narcissist no one could love. Meanwhile, Dakota Johnson is the one-dimensional lip biting—COULD SOMEONE GET THAT GIRL A CHAPSTICK?—pathetic Anastasia Steele who, for no discernible reason, falls in love with the aforementioned jerk and singlehandedly sells women across the world short. Yes, Fifty Shades of Grey is more appalling than appealing. It's domestic violence dressed up as erotica. And if there's one thing this movie is not, it's erotic. One star out of five, Dicky. And that's only because of the excellent Choc-top I consoled myself with later. And I know you're wondering, as to Pete. No, he didn't get lucky last night, because, after two hours of complete drivel, I need more than a Choc-top to pop my corn.

BSDM will never be the same.
 
Last edited:
I seem to recall a similar slating came from the people on this site when discussing the book./
But then, the media never did get it completely right, did they ?
 
I heard an interview on NPR with the director of the movie, a famous photographer. She seemed much more interested in speaking about her art than the movie - sounded completely over it.
 
I'm sure she's busy cashing the check for it--and humming happily to herself.

I suppose we'll get a whole new frenzy of hate threads now by folks angry that they hadn't thought of making money this way--because, of course, they just know they could do it better.

Didn't read the book; not seeing the movie; finding something else to hyperventilate over.
 
Last edited:
Sam Taylor-Wood. I really like her. I've seen one film by her, Nowhere Boy, which I adored. I have zero interest in 50 Shades or BDSM but I will watch this on Netflix when it comes out, curious to see what she does with it.

Obviously she probably took this gig to increase her profile and if it makes bucks, she'll be more in demand. I read one review of the film saying it's obvious she had to capitulate on most of it to the idiotic writer, but that a lot of the scenes when it's just about Dakota Johnson are very nicely done. That her one accomplishment was to make "Anna" interesting and real.

She's an art person transitioning to Hollywood. She's done some fabulous videos. And she has a hot 27 (24?) yr old husband. I like her.


I heard an interview on NPR with the director of the movie, a famous photographer. She seemed much more interested in speaking about her art than the movie - sounded completely over it.
 
Sam Taylor-Wood. I really like her. I've seen one film by her, Nowhere Boy, which I adored. I have zero interest in 50 Shades or BDSM but I will watch this on Netflix when it comes out, curious to see what she does with it.

Obviously she probably took this gig to increase her profile and if it makes bucks, she'll be more in demand. I read one review of the film saying it's obvious she had to capitulate on most of it to the idiotic writer, but that a lot of the scenes when it's just about Dakota Johnson are very nicely done. That her one accomplishment was to make "Anna" interesting and real.

She's an art person transitioning to Hollywood. She's done some fabulous videos. And she has a hot 27 (24?) yr old husband. I like her.


Yeah, it sounded like she's been directing him in a recent video she's done. The interview certainly made me aware of her, where I wasn't before, so I'll be looking out for her work. And yes, probably see the movie on Netflix or Amazon Prime.
 
I suppose we'll get a whole new frenzy of hate threads now by folks angry that they hadn't thought of making money this way--because, of course, they just know they could do it better.
Yes...and they'd be right, wouldn't they? Writing such a story far better is easy. Getting it out into the zeitgeist to make a ton of money is the hard part. The list of bad books that sold like gang busters and got made into movies is long and nowhere near equal the the number of good books that sold like gang busters and got made into movies. Shit, like cream, rises to the top, it seems ;)
 
Yes...and they'd be right, wouldn't they? Writing such a story far better is easy. Getting it out into the zeitgeist to make a ton of money is the hard part. The list of bad books that sold like gang busters and got made into movies is long and nowhere near equal the the number of good books that sold like gang busters and got made into movies. Shit, like cream, rises to the top, it seems ;)

Who knows if they'd be right? The author of "50 Shades" probably thought so too. Just thinking you can write better than someone else, doesn't mean you don't actually write worse crap. ;)
 
Yeah the trouble is, though, pilot - there ARE a lot of people who do write a WHOLE LOT better!

And a thousand times more who think they do and don't. Even the ones who do and who constantly have to hate on an author who made the topic a fad seem too dumb to realize that there are coat tails to ride that weren't there before. She created the audience for them--they didn't create it for themselves if they now are getting play off that topic.

The bottom line is that she's cashing checks, has brought to the fore a whole field of interest that others can mine (if they stop whining and go to work), and there's a whole bunch of folks who haven't gotten it done on their own who are chewing sour grapes, complaining on pure conjecture that they could do it better, and probably will continue crabbing ineffectually about it here on the AH. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
A friend of mine – now gone to join the choir invisible – spent the best part of 40 years writing what can only be described as ‘quality stuff’. It earned him a decent reputation, many good reviews, and about three and sixpence. And then, just short of his 65th birthday, he started writing (under a pseudonym) not-very-good (in my view) raunchy romance. As a man with degrees from both Oxford and Cambridge, he found that his new calling caused him the occasional sleepless night. But it did allow him to finally indulge his taste for fine dining and expensive wines.
 
Who knows if they'd be right? The author of "50 Shades" probably thought so too. Just thinking you can write better than someone else, doesn't mean you don't actually write worse crap. ;)
Agreed, but you didn't specify who these folk were outside of the fact that they were haters. That's an awful lot of people. You can't argue that none of them can write a better story. You can only argue that better or not, it's unlikely that the majority of them could catch a similar wave and ride it to that sort of popularity.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that Fifty Shades not-so-good-writing might have been key to it's success. I can drink a tasteless but popular soda and say I can create a far more flavorful drink. Maybe I can, maybe I can't. But even if I do mange to create a more flavorful drink, it may be that sweet and unflavorful is exactly why the soda was popular. In which case, I will lose out no matter how much better my drink is.
 
Agreed, but you didn't specify who these folk were outside of the fact that they were haters. That's an awful lot of people. You can't argue that none of them can write a better story. You can only argue that better or not, it's unlikely that the majority of them could catch a similar wave and ride it to that sort of popularity.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that Fifty Shades not-so-good-writing might have been key to it's success. I can drink a tasteless but popular soda and say I can create a far more flavorful drink. Maybe I can, maybe I can't. But even if I do mange to create a more flavorful drink, it may be that sweet and unflavorful is exactly why the soda was popular. In which case, I will lose out no matter how much better my drink is.

As in all things, there is no accounting for taste. ;)
 
I guess I am in the minority, but have never have been know for good taste. I ignored some of the lapses in books and enjoyed the story. It got weaker in the third book, but she made up for it with the chapters from Grey's point of view. I most likely will not see the movie in the theater, my wife would prefer something closer to You Got Mail.
 
BSDM will never be the same.


BDSM is not the name that applies to 50 Shades. It is female fantasy that is replacing the worn-out supposed 'romantic fiction' of old.

The bedroom fantasy of submission and domination is never understood by males
- and explains why guys write less romantic domination stories.

E L James has captured a new romantic for women.
 
I have a naive -perhaps - question: there are a goodly number of well-written and true to BDSM books out there, written before, during and after the "rise" of FSOG. So what made it take off the way it did? Marketing? Luck of the draw and word of mouth? The supremacy of mediocrity?
 
I have a naive -perhaps - question: there are a goodly number of well-written and true to BDSM books out there, written before, during and after the "rise" of FSOG. So what made it take off the way it did? Marketing? Luck of the draw and word of mouth? The supremacy of mediocrity?

A little bit of everything, I think, plus just luck. The original story, "Master of the Universe," had a big online following from what I understand. So when the story was published -- originally by a little Australian company -- there was already a built-in audience. Having that fan base helps with just about any endeavor.
 
I have a naive -perhaps - question: there are a goodly number of well-written and true to BDSM books out there, written before, during and after the "rise" of FSOG. So what made it take off the way it did? Marketing? Luck of the draw and word of mouth? The supremacy of mediocrity?

Marketing. In most cases the reading public doesn't make best-sellers; the marketing departments of publishing houses do (and in many cases the publishing house identifies that it will be a best-seller even before it's been edited, and the money thrown into developing it and marketing it from there is what determines it will be a best-seller).
 
I have a naive -perhaps - question: there are a goodly number of well-written and true to BDSM books out there, written before, during and after the "rise" of FSOG. So what made it take off the way it did? Marketing? Luck of the draw and word of mouth? The supremacy of mediocrity?

In my opinion, 50 Shades of Grey benefited from a cool name and a cool book cover.

A lot of times it's that simple.

Same thing with the Top Lists here at Lit. Same thing with superheroes. In the comic book world, a cool name & cool custom equals success.

That, plus a tremendous amount of luck.
 
Agreed, but you didn't specify who these folk were outside of the fact that they were haters.

I was posting about the periodic yammering about this on Literotica, and if you haven't caught on to who whines about this here incessantly, you've been living under a rock.

I have no idea how well the book is written. I haven't read it and don't intend to. I do know that it's opened up that room of fiction for everyone else trying to write, get attention, and make some profit in it. And I also know that just saying one writes so much better than someone else does who made millions off it hasn't proved that to any significant point until/unless they can play in the marketplace with that too. Until that happens it's just sour grapes.
 
In my opinion, 50 Shades of Grey benefited from a cool name and a cool book cover.

A lot of times it's that simple.

Same thing with the Top Lists here at Lit. Same thing with superheroes. In the comic book world, a cool name & cool custom equals success.

That, plus a tremendous amount of luck.

The name and book cover are marketing. What you haven't mentioned is much more important. I've seen the books taking up multiple front-out rack positions at Wal-Mart, in gas stations, and even at rest stops in the UK. That didn't happen by accident.
 
Whenever someone in the media points out FSOG is just fetishization of domestic abuse dressed up as erotica, I keep hoping they mention it started out life as especially bad Twilight slash fiction and connect the dots.

Alas, it never happens.
 
Whenever someone in the media points out FSOG is just fetishization of domestic abuse dressed up as erotica, I keep hoping they mention it started out life as especially bad Twilight slash fiction and connect the dots.

Alas, it never happens.

Which dots, exactly? Or do you mean that the same dynamic was at work in Twilight? Because nearly every article you read notes that FSOG started out as Twilght fan fic.

I'm not being flip -- I am curious as to what you mean, exactly.
 
Which dots, exactly? Or do you mean that the same dynamic was at work in Twilight? Because nearly every article you read notes that FSOG started out as Twilght fan fic.

I'm not being flip -- I am curious as to what you mean, exactly.

You got it. Yes, that Twilight is basically a slightly better written and edited version of FSOG plus loads of sexual repression, which makes it more pathological and damaging for a reader that internalizes its message.
 
You got it. Yes, that Twilight is basically a slightly better written and edited version of FSOG plus loads of sexual repression, which makes it more pathological and damaging for a reader that internalizes its message.

Thanks. I thought that was what you meant but wanted to be sure. I haven't read Twilight either. Sometimes I feel like I should but... ugh.

Yeah, someone should say that too.
 
Back
Top