Jamie Dornan

[scarlett210]

The thing is, I don't think a lot of people expect 50 Shades to do well. So if it flops, people will just chalk it up to the fact that it's the crappy source material and move on. And if it does well, happy surprise!

Besides, the main problems with John Carter and Green Lantern is that they were mega-expensive to make and failed on a grand scale. 50 Shades won't have that kind of budget, so it doesn't have as far to fall.

[Hamatron]

Oh, I know. I agree with what you're saying. I was just providing some examples of bombs that crashed careers since it was brought up. Ironically, this movie probably stands on similar plane to Twilight. They obviously aren't casting anyone high-profile or pricey. It's just a high-profile film because of all the things we've mentioned earlier.

[thneed]

And in addition, The Postman, (and Waterworld and half a dozen other flops on his imdb) were very much Kevin Costner films. He was a big part of why they were made, they were promoted as "Kevin Costner in x." Same with John Tavolta and that ridiculous Scientology vanity project, that he executive produced. Same with Eddie Murphy Wears Prosthetics and Does Funny Voices, Parts 1-12.

Also, John Carter was very much, "Let's try to sell Abs McGee from Friday Night Lights as a big summer tentpole action star." The idea was never to try to bring in the fans of the Edgar Rice Burroughs books. Whereas here, the idea is exactly to bring in fans of the book. If the movie flops, I bet the blame falls 100% or EL James (and on older women, for not being a lucrative market). If the movie is radically different from the book, the blame could go to the studio or the director. But the actors? I just don't see it.

But this movie is all about the source material. And maybe it will be better for Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson if the movie flops - people won't attach them to it, but they still get the money and the connections.

[Deleted]

I'm almost finished watching The Fall (which is wonderful), and yeah, he's absolutely chilling in it. For the first episode or so I thought he was hot yet creepy, but now I'm finding him just plain scary. Gillian Anderson steals the show, though.

[Karen]

Honestly, Fifty Shades got lucky. I thought they'd have to settle for a handsome model with no experience. For Dornan's sake, I hope the script is different enough to make the film tolerable. It's a gamble. If it works, he becomes huge. If it doesn't, he might still be lucky and, as said, get a visibility boost and some connections while the author/script get blamed for the flopping and awfulness.

[Deleted]

Oct 24, 2013 20:34:20 GMT -4 Freelance Exorcist said:

Don't know why my comment got singled out, but okay.

It didn't. I replied to you comment about interest in the project cooling off. The rest of my post was not directed at you, hence why it was separated from the reply. I'm not sure what else I could've done except make an entirely new post, which isn't exactly the norm here.

Yeah, they're talking about the casting, but what will happen when people lose interest in that? A lot can happen between now and next year, like another fad coming along and stealing 50 Shades' thunder.

The book was published in 2011 and is still a talking point 2 years later. Besides, you said that interest is cooling off now. I just pointed out that I'm not seeing that.

Could you clarify? Because it sounds like you're saying that because there are other movies out there that suck but make lots of money, that people should just shut up about this one. That's not cool.

I didn't say people should shut up about this one. I am awfully bored of people saying the exact. Same. Things. Over and over, but that's an issue that comes up in a number of threads here. But I do find it curious why some things get shrugged off in one movie/celebrity/song and endlessly criticised in other. If there's a reason why the suckiness of the 50 Shades movies (which, I might point out, are yet to be seen by anyone) bothers people more than the suckiness Michael Bay films, then I'm interested to find out why.

I'm sure that when there are stories going around about fanboys sending death threats to an actor simply for being cast in a film, they get their fair share of criticism as well.

Ben Affleck got death threats for being cast as Batman. It's also interesting to me that you didn't know that. Perhaps it wasn't reported as much? I doubt they'll get their 'fair' share of criticism. Since when have men and women ever received the same condemnation for the same behaviour?

Oct 24, 2013 20:31:26 GMT -4 Mutagen said:

Yeah, exactly.  Not every criticism of 50 Shades can be categorized as "lol girl stuff." 

Except I haven't said anything about the specific criticism of 50 Shades. All I've ever objected to is the constant and ubiquitous hatred and mockery for this particular piece of 'misogyny and bad prose'. Shit gets put out all the time, yet I haven't seen this kind of reaction to something since, well, Twilight. After a while it just feels like bandwagoning. And I don't think it's a coincidence that out of all the crap Hollywood/the book world puts out, the things that get singled out for the most hatred and ridicule are the things created by and enjoyed by women. This exists across the board. Trash for women (chick lit, rom-coms) is way more derided than trash for men (action movies and books that deal with thirtysomething male problems).

[Mutagen]

Oct 25, 2013 5:17:12 GMT -4 @ronette said:

Shit gets put out all the time, yet I haven't seen this kind of reaction to something since, well, Twilight.

Which also presented stalking and controlling behaviors as "romantic."  Women have no obligation to play nice with something directed at them that portrays such retrograde crap. If there are other women who like it? That's fully their right and they should be left alone. But the source material itself isn't holy and untouchable.  It's a piece of pop culture, with (god help us) influence.  And women who actually don't think it's cute when a guy gets all abusive and controlling - which by the way, includes women who might have actually experienced things along that spectrum - are not being anti-woman if they express their objections as mockery and laughter.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that out of all the crap Hollywood/the book world puts out, the things that get singled out for the most hatred and ridicule are the things created by and enjoyed by women. This exists across the board. Trash for women (chick lit, rom-coms) is way more derided than trash for men (action movies and books that deal with thirtysomething male problems).

Yes, I know. I don't appreciate the derision of "girl things" either.  However, I think it's also gross when actual criticisms of the book get blown off as "you're just dogpiling on woman things" or "you're just not kinky enough to get it" (when some of the most vociferous critics of the book are BDSM practitioners who resent their kink being conflated with abuse, and presented as something that needs to be "cured" - hello, kink-shaming). Just because I don't tack a full addendum of all my problems with 50 Shades onto every "Lol this prose sucks" comment doesn't mean that isn't a huge part of my contempt and derision for this book.

[Deleted]

Oct 25, 2013 7:32:23 GMT -4 Mutagen said:

But the source material itself isn't holy and untouchable.  It's a piece of pop culture, with (god help us) influence.  And women who actually don't think it's cute when a guy gets all abusive and controlling - which by the way, includes women who might have actually experienced things along that spectrum - are not being anti-woman if they express their objections as mockery and laughter.

I'm completely missing how this in any way addresses what I said? Who said anything about needing to revere 50 Shades as a holy text, or think that's it cute, or anything? Taking a look at how society treats something does not require loving and worshiping that particular thing.

However, I think it's also gross when actual criticisms of the book get blown off as "you're just dogpiling on woman things"

Except nobody here is doing that. I actually said I wasn't talking about the specific criticisms of the text (which we all know, as we've heard them a zillion times now), but why certain people and things are singled out to be continuously kicked. And nobody's choosing to address that. Whether there is or is not something insidiously sexist about what gets selected is what I'm talking about; I don't understand why it's being deflected as "But it's my right to hate 50 Shades!" You can hate 50 Shades and still examine this. Or, you know, ignore it, but I don't get the need to pretend I said something I didn't.

[Hamatron]

Like I said earlier, the difference between 50 and some other shitty film in pre-production in that a lot of people have already read the book it's going to be based off of. That's not the case with Michael Bay movies.

Also, this board has a lot of woman on it who enjoy talking about pop culture. This is a book that is marketed at women, and the movie will presumably be marketed at us which isn't common (unless it's a rom com). Michael Bay doesn't make shitty movies for women. In fact, most shitty movies that get media attention at this level are made for teenage boys and, on the pretty rare occasion, teen girls. So of course we're going to have a lot to say about 50. Hollywood isn't exactly a bastion of feminine empowerment, people probably want to come here to vent and speculate and remind ourselves about how offensive source text is.

I get that you don't like the negativity in this thread, ronette, but like I said earlier, there's a lot of stuff in the book that doesn't get talked about in the media that is very upsetting as a feminist. People are just venting their frustration here because no one is talking about it in the media. (Though I am sure some film critics will enjoy talking about these issues too when the flick comes out. It will be interesting to see what Jezebel or Bust have to say, too.)

[chiqui]

Yeah, Michael Bay Transformers movies were based on TOYS, fer god's sake.

I made a thread in literature for the book since there wasn't one. Let's snark away over there!!