Cinquanta sfumature di grigio

Hopefully, as a heterosexual female student in her twenties with a love of film that spreads across all genres and decades, this will come over as a fair assessment of a film that genuinely did nothing for me.

Have not read the books, though have heard conflicting opinions that has mostly been intense dislike. The reason for watching 'Fifty Shades of Grey' was not due to wanting to hate on it, being a negative person, curiosity but for the reason of being at a film night with friends recently and 'Fifty Shades of Grey' happened to be the film choice. Just for the record, the general consensus ranged from indifference to hating it with a passion.

There are two minor pros. The best thing about 'Fifty Shades of Grey' is most of the beguiling soundtrack, that has a soothing nostalgia and appropriately amorous quality, this is all for the song choices though. 'Fifty Shades of Grey' also looks good, nice use of scenery and very nicely shot.

On the other hand, Danny Elfman's score is one-note and repetitive, as well as too derivative of his recent work. He has composed some wonderful stuff ('Edward Scissorhands' is magical) but this is really not his best work. The direction has slickness but overall is too mannered which really affects the film's tone and pacing.

Regarding the acting, none of the supporting cast are of note, including Marcia Gay Harden, but a larger issue is the two leads and their complete lack of chemistry. Understated can be a lovely quality to acting, as long as it also becomes nuanced and with believability given to the dialogue. Dakota Johnson, especially in the first third, is too understated that it feels more like there is a lack of personality or emotion. Jamie Dornan looks uncomfortable throughout, delivers his cringe-worthy lines awkwardly and is just bland as dishwater with no charisma whatsoever. Chemistry is non-existent.

'Fifty Shades of Grey's' dialogue does them absolutely no favours, dialogue so bad that absolutely nobody (even the best actors and actresses) can do anything with it. It causes unintentional laughter throughout, is embarrassingly clunky and is pure smut. Then there is the story that is so thin structurally, heavy in repetition, so badly plodding and without style or atmosphere that the film feels twice as long, with the sexual elements done far too tamely and the BDSM portrayal deceitful. None of the characters are engaging or interesting, practically ciphers.

All in all, a very poor film with two minor pros and the rest of the film massively flawed. 2/10 Bethany Cox

This movie, clearly sucks, I personally couldn't recommend it to anyone, it's cringe asf the acting is well, not so good it's pure cheesy garbage.

Wow I'm really surprised at all the low ratings. I liked the film which I was quite shocked about because I hated the books. Everybody's complaining about the film but it's exactly the same as the books just LESS sex and degrading if you ask me. I mean what did you expect?! It's what the book is all about.

Also, what's this about rape? At no point in the film did I see anybody rape anyone..

I agree it's not romantic but I personally wasn't expecting a romantic chick flick when I knew it was about a man who enjoys inflicting pain for sexual pleasure..

I never had any intention of watching "Fifty Shades of Grey"...none. However, when IMDB recently revamped their Bottom 100 List and I saw the movie was now on the list, I felt I had to see it. After all, I constantly am checking out the list to see what new additions there are so I can watch them. I do occasionally like seeing a bad movie...they can be very entertaining and unintentionally funny. Now "Fifty Shades" is very different from any other film on the list (with the exception of "The Last Airbender") in that it WAS a mega-hit and lots of people liked it...though at the same time its score of 4.1 on IMDB is anemic....making it a love-hate sort of picture.

Anastasia Steele (great name, huh?) is a dim sort of lady....and I'm sorry but there's no better way to describe her accurately. When she goes to interview a big-shot businessman, Christian Grey, she has no idea what she's doing, hasn't prepared in the least and asks him only banal questions. She seemed rather dull and with little personality and it was difficult to see what he saw in her. Yet, despite this, inexplicably Grey is now obsessed with her. In some ways, he seems like a nice guy--such as coming to her aid when she's drunk in a dance club soon after this meeting. But in many, he gives so many signs that he's not normal in the least...and rather creepy and possibly very dangerous. He's incredibly controlling and in response to her getting drunk he says "If you were mine, you wouldn't be able to sit down for a week". In other words, for getting drunk and behaving stupidly, he'd paddle the crap out of her! He then has her sign a non-disclosure agreement--saying she'll never tell anyone about him!! Soon, they are embarking on a weird S&M relationship...and that's when the film shows a lot of nekkidness, though it's of the soft-core variety. But he is clear...this is NOT love and he doesn't want to be close to anyone...and he doesn't even want to actually sleep with her...just have his way with her.

What I find so bizarre about the whole "Fifty Shades" phenomenon is that in the 21st century, the actions of BOTH Anastasia and Christian are the exact opposite of what society is telling us folks should be like or what romance should be. There really ISN'T any romance...and he doesn't want to date her. It's not so much just the S&M aspects that I found bothersome...it's more that you have a man who dominates a woman and controls her and she is passive and does whatever he says. Her needs are also not particularly important and he wants to control every aspect of her life and breaks into her apartment when she isn't home. This is NOT the feminist idea of today...at least not what folks SAY they want in a relationship. I simply do not understand this dichotomy...nor why folks loved the books and films...yet also claim to hate them! I also worry that a film like this could set the stage for date rapes, as here in the film it's supposed to be romantic...but in real life, it could get you imprisoned. Weird.

So although I found the message strange and possibly dangerous and the writing occasionally silly, what about the techincal aspects of the movie? The movie is very polished--with lovely and very appropriate music, excellent cinematography and is very artistic. For this reason alone, although I didn't like or respect the message, the film deserves more than a few stars on IMDB.

I should add that although the film features a lot of nudity, I really didn't find it all that exciting to watch...mostly because the film was just creepy. It also didn't come off as sexy....just creepy. And, it probably would NOT be a great date night film...as your date might think you are...just creepy. Watch it if you'd like...I just didn't particular enjoy it nor understand WHY it made so much money...I just found it, believe it or not, to be rather dull.

Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)

** (out of 4)

Rather silly adaptation of the E.L. James best-seller about a shy, timid virgin (Dakota Johnson) who meets the elusive billionaire Christian Grey (Jamie Doman) and soon both of their lives change.

Writing a plot synopsis of this thing is pretty pointless since I'm sure the target audience is already going to know the story. I guess this is where I should admit that I haven't read the book so this review won't be comparing the two or complaining about what the movie did or didn't do from the book. No, this review is just going to be based around the actual movie and for the life of me I can't see what all the hype is about. I don't expect everyone laying their money down to be some sort of film buff but the "shocking" material on display here has been going on in European movies for four-plus decades so why it's just now reaching American shores is pretty funny in itself but that's off subject I guess.

As for the film, there are all sorts of major issues with it but we can start with the laughable screenplay, which would have been rejected by the Lifetime channel and in fact, I'm going to guess that it would have been rejected has a five-year-old written it. The dialogue is without question some of the most laughable I've heard in a very long time. In fact, the movie seems to be lost in what decade it is because there are times that the "F" word is used and it's used in a way to where it's supposed to be shocking. Really? It's going to take more than that. The entire character development between the two lead characters is another joke and after a while you really can't buy into any of the melodrama and you've just got to sit back and laugh.

The performances are another problem but then again, even the likes of Marlon Brando and Elizabeth Taylor couldn't work with horrid material so I'm not going to be too harsh on Johnson and Doman. With that said, the lackluster direction by Sam Taylor-Johnson doesn't help either as there are many times where another take should have happened. The scenes with Johnson playing the shy girl just aren't very believable because the actress can't sell it. The scenes of her explaining she's a virgin are laughably bad. Doman really doesn't get much to work with and especially since he can't crack a smile and has to give off dumb, overly-serious facial expressions throughout. I will say that the actors have a nice chemistry together but that's about it. The supporting players are all equally forgettable.

Yet another problem is that the film just isn't erotic. FATAL ATTRACTION, BASIC INSTINCT and even something as silly as BODY OF EVIDENCE are just a few recent films that packed a lot more punch than this one. I mean, is sticking an eraser around your lips really erotic anymore? A lot of the lack of erotic-ness has to be blamed on the director who just seems to have been the wrong fit for the material. Nothing from the erotic nature to the serious stuff works and everything is poorly edited.

So, why the two-stars for all the negative stuff? As bad as the film is, thankfully it reaches the level to where you can't help but laugh and be mildly entertained as to what's going to happen next. Again, I haven't read the book so I don't know which one is better but the film is pretty flat from start to finish.