Fifty Shades-Who is going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
http://screenmusings.org/movie/blu-ray/9-and-a-Half-Weeks/pages/9-and-a-Half-Weeks-314.htm

Mickey in his hey-day. Absolutely hawt.


no
just no

reminds me of Boy George in that shot

Okay: so that's Kim Basinger, not Rourke. But, I will grant you that her hat does kind of resemble Boy George. I have to agree that Mickey was so s xy in that movie!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is so boring looking, is the girl supposed to be kind of nerdy? I would have expected a really attractive girl not a homely one.

Although I didn't read the books, I think the homely look was on purpose.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought she was homely. I never know what passes for attractive nowadays in Hollywood.

[Anonymous]

I was pleasantly surprised but I admittedly had very low expectations. I thought Dakota Johnson was well cast for the role. And they made the best of the story that they could.

Was it great? No, but neither was the book. It wasn't the worst movie I've seen, either. Was it entertaining? Yes.

[Anonymous]

These books and movie are for women who have never had good sex. I mean if you haven't had it, you would love this movie. Those of us who have had our world's rocked regularly...meh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My question on here is...

Did anyone actually see it and LOVE this movie? Five stars??

Do you think just because a movie hits Number One at the Box Office opening weekend means that it is a good movie? Or do you think people just went out of curiosity? Or perhaps it was the only date movie out??

I think a better date movie would have been the Sponge Bob movie, but hey...That's just me.

Welcome to the apocalypse. Hope you like leather!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My question on here is...

Did anyone actually see it and LOVE this movie? Five stars??

Do you think just because a movie hits Number One at the Box Office opening weekend means that it is a good movie? Or do you think people just went out of curiosity? Or perhaps it was the only date movie out??

I think a better date movie would have been the Sponge Bob movie, but hey...That's just me.

Welcome to the apocalypse. Hope you like leather!

Ha! We did go to Spongebob this weekend! Skipped fifty shades.

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry to revive this old thread, but I just saw the movie on dvd (yes, I'm very late to the party). The movie was blah. It didn't turn me on at all - was it supposed to? (I'm sure my DH was hoping it would). I think they miscast the male role. Is the book any better? Is the 2nd book any better? Should I read the books? Most movies miss certain details from the book, so I'm wondering if I should read the books to get more details. I didn't enjoy the sex scenes, but I liked the emotional interaction of the characters. Would the book provide more of the emotional/mental interactions? I'm thinking it would.

[Anonymous]

I just watched it on demand, after having read all 3 books over the summer of 2012. Of course I had people in my mind when I read it, but I don't think the casting was that awful. I'm a fan of Jamie, and think Dakota did very well. I think she portrayed Ana quite well.

Were there better choices? Probably, but I was fearing it would turn out like Kristen Stewart in Twilight, so pleasantly surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who thinks the lead actress in Fifty Shades is "homely" is nuts. She's a very pretty girl and ANY of you would have called her pretty if she wasn't an actress.

This is coming from someone who loathes Twilight, Twilight fanfics (of which Fifty Shades is one) and shitty writing in general. Never watched this movie myself and don't really plan to, but I do roll my eyes at people who call the main actress "homely" just because she doesn't have her tits out and put her hair in a ponytail. Hollywood Homely, lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just watched it on demand, after having read all 3 books over the summer of 2012. Of course I had people in my mind when I read it, but I don't think the casting was that awful. I'm a fan of Jamie, and think Dakota did very well. I think she portrayed Ana quite well.

Were there better choices? Probably, but I was fearing it would turn out like Kristen Stewart in Twilight, so pleasantly surprised.

I just watched it, too, out of curiosity. Was okay. Or maybe my expectations were so low, there was no where to go but up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just watched it on demand, after having read all 3 books over the summer of 2012. Of course I had people in my mind when I read it, but I don't think the casting was that awful. I'm a fan of Jamie, and think Dakota did very well. I think she portrayed Ana quite well.

Were there better choices? Probably, but I was fearing it would turn out like Kristen Stewart in Twilight, so pleasantly surprised.

I just watched it, too, out of curiosity. Was okay. Or maybe my expectations were so low, there was no where to go but up.

Yeah I'm the PP you quoted, and I think just after hearing all the negativity I was expecting far worse than what I saw. I'll watch the others, curious now to see how they handle certain situations and what not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry to revive this old thread, but I just saw the movie on dvd (yes, I'm very late to the party). The movie was blah. It didn't turn me on at all - was it supposed to? (I'm sure my DH was hoping it would). I think they miscast the male role. Is the book any better? Is the 2nd book any better? Should I read the books? Most movies miss certain details from the book, so I'm wondering if I should read the books to get more details. I didn't enjoy the sex scenes, but I liked the emotional interaction of the characters. Would the book provide more of the emotional/mental interactions? I'm thinking it would.

The books are horribly written. Horribly. But there is a lot of background detail not covered in the movie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry to revive this old thread, but I just saw the movie on dvd (yes, I'm very late to the party). The movie was blah. It didn't turn me on at all - was it supposed to? (I'm sure my DH was hoping it would). I think they miscast the male role. Is the book any better? Is the 2nd book any better? Should I read the books? Most movies miss certain details from the book, so I'm wondering if I should read the books to get more details. I didn't enjoy the sex scenes, but I liked the emotional interaction of the characters. Would the book provide more of the emotional/mental interactions? I'm thinking it would.

The books are horribly written. Horribly. But there is a lot of background detail not covered in the movie.

Yeah that's how it is for most movies based on books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who thinks the lead actress in Fifty Shades is "homely" is nuts. She's a very pretty girl and ANY of you would have called her pretty if she wasn't an actress.

This is coming from someone who loathes Twilight, Twilight fanfics (of which Fifty Shades is one) and shitty writing in general. Never watched this movie myself and don't really plan to, but I do roll my eyes at people who call the main actress "homely" just because she doesn't have her tits out and put her hair in a ponytail. Hollywood Homely, lol.

Agreed.