Skip to main content

"Fifty Shades of Suck" heads to the theaters!

As long-time readers likely know by now, I'm not a fan of the Fifty Shades of Grey series. Not only do I find the quality of writing to be at about a high school of a C-student (that may be too generous), but the actual content of the writing I feel is degrading to women on multiple fronts. As studies have shown, the Fifty Shades of Grey series does a very poor job of depicting a consensual BDSM relationship. What it does do is depict an abusive relationship. Yes, there is a stark difference between the two and as many consenting BDSM partners have adamantly declared, it's appeared as though author E.L. James is unaware of that very difference.

Given all this, it seems pretty safe to say I was thrilled to hear that the series was going to be hitting the big-screen, the first of which will be opening this Valentine's Day weekend! I know, what spells romance more than an abusive and controlling man? If I were a woman, I'd, as E.L. James may put it, bite my lip, raise my eyebrows, and say, "Oh my" just at the thought. Then again, given the true history of Valentine's Day, perhaps an abusive relationship is more in line with the holiday's actual roots (Saint Valentine's Day massacre) than flowers, chocolates, and Hallmark cards which prompt people to utter the words "Oh my," but in a different way than Anastasia Steele.

For as awful as the writing is in these books, while I always begrudgingly expected the film to do well at the box office (and unfortunately still do), I was optimistic that critics wouldn't think too highly of it and would provide some amusing headlines for their reviews. Well, many of the reviews are in, and while I expected just 25-30% of critics to like it, that number is currently at 33%, but seeming to trend downward (it was at 55% yesterday). With 90 of the reviews in, 60 have given rotten reviews.

Here are some of the more amusing and/or powerful review headlines thus far:

- "I expected a lot of things from 'Fifty Shades of Grey,' but I didn't expect to be bored." - Maren Longbella (St. Paul Pioneer)

- "Lacks any of the raunch or controversy promised, and is instead tiresome, banal and as thinly plotted as a porno." - Greg Wakeman (CinemaBlend.com)

- "A limp bore." - Mara Reinstein (US Weekly)

- "The fine line between abuse and pleasure is so thin it's almost non-existent. Here is a Valentine's Day movie that will certainly make bank, but you aren't helping yourself or anyone else by seeing it." - Justin Craig (FoxNews.com)

- "The film's intense commitment to being dull makes you long for sparkly vampires or werewolves." - Devin Faraci (Badass Digest)

- "Obsessed with money, willfully wrongheaded about sex and crippled by its own construction, Fifty Shades of Grey is too many kinds of awful to work as anything but accidental sociology: We get the smut we deserve" - James Rocchi (About.com)

- "It looks and feels like a sequel to Twilight, with deadly dull talk about S&M replacing endless consternation over turning into one of the undead." - Robert Levin (amNewYork)

- "Sitting through the turgid and tedious S&M melodrama that is Fifty Shades of Grey may feel like its own form of torture." - Claudia Puig (USA Today)

- "'Fifty Shades of Grey' might not be a good movie - O.K., it's a terrible movie - but it might nonetheless be a movie that feels good to see, whether you squirm or giggle or roll your eyes or just sit still and take your punishment." - A.O. Scott (New York Times)

- "I'm shocked - shocked, do you hear me?!? - that the film version of E.L. James' Fifty Shades of Grey is such a dull, decorous affair, about as erotic as an ad for Pottery Barn. Strictly intended for gluttons for punishment - by boredom." - Peter Travers (Rolling Stone)

- "Creating a genteel R-rated film from a very X-rated book is like making a Mamma Mia! movie without the songs." - Richard Corless (Time Magazine)

- "Despite the endless sex, a highly unsatisfying encounter. Cold as a fish and almost as dumb." - Rafer Guzman (Newsday)

- "Easily amongst the seven or eight best Hollywood productions ever made about a woman contemplating whether or not to sign a dominant/submissive contract." - Matt Singer (ScreenCrush)

- "What's important is that the novel began life as Twilight fan fiction. That tells you everything you need to know." - Daniel M. Kimmel (New England Movies Weekly)

- "For a movie where people are naked for a large chunk of time and play at bondage and dominance (without ever really seeming all that committed to it), it sure is boring." - Bill Goodykoontz (Arizona Republic)

- "'Fifty Shades of Grey' should be fun and frisky and, most of all, hot. Instead, it is a reserved, sanitized, overinflated downer, as sterile as Christian's sleek luxury penthouse." - Dustin Putman (TheFilmFile.com)

- "If this were a parody of romance, the film might be considered valid; but somehow the cast and crew appear to treat the venture as realistic." - Harvey S. Karten (Compuserve)

- "Maybe the smoulderingly sado-obsessed hero does not have a penis. It could account for his tastes. And his decor." - Peter Bradshaw (Guardian)

- "Maybe in future installments there will even be something that resembles a plot. For now, the entire movie is about as sexy as a root canal." - Rex Reed (New York Observer)

- "An unashamed and genially preposterous fairy tale, a kind of 'Cinderella' with restraints, '50 Shades' is about as believable as 'Jack and the Beanstalk,' albeit considerably more kinky in intent." - Kenneth Turan (Los Angeles Times)

- "In the end, there's nothing here we haven't seen before. But there's also nothing as agonizingly awkward as James' prose." - Stephanie Merry (Washington Post)

- "A flaccid S and M movie that's more infuriating than titillating? Happy Valentine's Day." - Joanna Langfield (The Movie Minute)

- "'Fifty Shades of Grey' doesn't entertainingly cross the line of good taste so much as trip and fall on it." - Colin Covert (Minneapolis Star Tribune)

- "The sex scenes are the best bit because the story is so abjectly terrible." - Leonie Hayden (Flicks.co.nz)

- "As exciting as a  rectal exam." - Bill Gibson (Film Racket)

Perhaps the most amusing observation of all was that so many of these critics, even the ones whom despised the film, seemed to agree that the writing was better in the movie than in the book. When's the last time you heard that? I can't remember a time, personally. There have been times I've heard someone say, "The movie was almost as good as the book" or even, "The movie is just as good as the book," but not until now have I ever heard someone say, "Wow, the movie is so much better than the book, especially the writing!" That'd be like me saying, "The visual imagery is so much better in the book than in the movie, even though there aren't any pictures in it, well, besides the author on the back cover!" Yes, that's how bad these books are...

Ending on a serious note, as much as I and others want to poke fun at the inferior quality of the Fifty Shades books, abuse itself is never something to joke around about. So, on this Valentine's Day, and in the days, weeks, and holidays to come, let's not provide money to those attempting to glamorize abuse; let's instead provide money to those attempting to help those whom have suffered from abuse. If you're interesting in donating money to women's shelters or perhaps want to spread word about it to others you feel may be interested, go to the following link and try to make a difference: http://www.joyfulheartfoundation.org

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/15/news/la-ol-fifty-shades-of-grey-sexual-abuse-20130815

http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2015/fifty-shades-research-hits-big-in-2014/

http://www.dailyillini.com/opinion/columns/article_2c185574-b240-11e4-a97f-f77deff97121.html

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fifty_shades_of_grey/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"