According to various reports, E.L. James was not happy with the recent film adaptation of "Fifty Shades of Grey", as she says that she wishes the film would've stuck closer to the book. Anyway, it's also been rumored that she got into a lot of arguments on the set of "Fifty Shades of Grey", during production. Apparently, her and Sam Taylor-Johnson (who happens to be the wife of Aaron Taylor-Johnson) didn't see eye to eye half the time, as Sam wanted to make the best adaptation that she could out of the book, but E.L. James just wanted the film to stick closer to the book.
Anyway, it's being reported that E.L James wants to have more creative control over the sequels, and she's trying to negotiate it to where she'll be writing the scripts. As far as I know, Sam Taylor-Johnson isn't signed on for any of the sequels, so odds are she may end up being replaced. Anyways, what are your thoughts on this?
Should the author of "Fifty Shades of Grey" herself, E.L. James, be allowed to write the scripts for the next two...or should i say three movies because let's face it...you know if the next movie is a hit, then they'll probably split the last book into two movies to make more money off of it...anyway, do you think she should write the scripts for the next few sequels? why or why not?
It is her intellectual property, so if she can negotiate a contract that gives her more power over the adaptation -- well that's her prerogative.
I haven't seen the movie but the books were terribly written. I could see her wanting the movies to stick to the plot, but if they want to make changes to dialogue or cut some stuff due to repetitiveness... well, I'd be letting them.
The impression that I got from the books was that her writing is not good enough to make a quality movie script. It's easy to skip parts or brush past them when you're reading a book, but when it's being performed I think it would be glaringly obvious and really detract from the movie (which I'm guessing wouldn't be fabulous to begin with).
I've never read the book, and I have zero intention to. However, I have seen the film for the sole purpose of reviewing it on this site, which I already have. And from what I already saw of the first film, the story was already repetitive and stupid.
All the characters are virtually unlikable. Anastasia Steele is a moron. Christian Grey is a dick. And everyone else might as well drop dead because you barely even know who the rest of the characters are in the film. And before anyone brings up the logic of.."But you have to the read the book to understand it...blah blah." First of all, I don't have to do anything but pay taxes and die. Anything else i do in my life is optional. Secondly, I believe Roger Ebert said it best. A great film adaptation should NOT require the viewer to read the damn source material just to understand it. And if the film does require you to read something just to follow what's going on, then that's just bad storytelling. I"m sorry but i'd have to agree with Roger Ebert on that one.
As far as your assessment goes about E.L. James, your probably right. I never read the book, so you would know more about her writing style than I would. However, I did research more into this situation. Apparently, she actually wanted to write the script for the first film too; similar to how Gillian Flynn did for "Gone Girl." I don't know if you know who that is, but she wrote the original book that the hit film, "Gone Girl", was based on, and she wrote the script for the movie adaptation as well.
However, from my understanding, Universal Studios and Focus Features was rather hesitant about granting her request to be a screenwriter for the first movie mainly for the reasons you just said. However, she was given the opportunity to produce the film, and she did play a part in some of the movie's casting choices. Like I know she hand picked Jamie Dornan herself to be Christian Grey because she's a huge fan of "The Fall."
However, the studios did inevitably sign someone else to write the script for the first movie. And based on what I read about the situation, E.L. was actually happy with the first draft of the script that she read, but Universal wasn't because they were scared the film would get an NC-17 rating, so they asked for it to be toned down to be more of a hard "R-rating" instead.
Needless to say, she didn't like the revisions, and she feuded a lot with the director, Sam Taylor-Johnson, on the set most of the time.
And because E.L. wants more creative control, it's preventing actors like Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson from committing to future projects for now because they have to keep their schedules open for if and whenever the next film is going to shoot. Plus, it's being speculated that if Universal does grant her wish, then they would have to push back the release of "Fifty Shades Darker" to allow E.L. the time she needs to write the script considering she's never written a movie script before.
I'm sure she was happy with the dump truck full of money they pulled up to her front door to buy the rights, though.
That certainly would not add any shade to the movies. It would be better, if she concentrates more on her writing skill.
I saw a quote about "50 Shades" a couple of days ago that made me laugh. It said "The only reason '50 Shades of Grey' is considered a 'romance' is because the guy is a billionaire. If he lived in a trailer, it would be an episode of 'Criminal Minds.'" Haha!!
Not everyone likes every book or every movie. Some people do like these ones. I don't see it as something to get bothered about.
Before reading the book or seeing the movie, here is something worth considering: http://www.miriamgrossmanmd.com/an-open … s-of-grey/
I think that the author of this article makes the exact same mistake that the author of Fifty Shades did - not understanding or bothering to do any research into what a normal BDSM relationship is like. Studies have shown that people who participate in BDSM are just as psychologically healthy as people who enjoy "normal" sex. Just because a woman gets off on the idea of handcuffs doesn't mean she's abnormal.
I also take issue with #6. You can experiment with your sexuality outside of a marriage or long-term relationship without being terribly irresponsible. That's the author's personal bias shining through.
We disagree wholeheartedly. Kudos to you for reading it though. If folks considered those points I believe the slide society is making would slow down, but it won't stop, so good news for those cheering it on I suppose.
The slide being what, exactly? Abusive relationships? I agree with some of the points but not 1 & 6. I think you can be a healthy, independent, strong woman with less than traditional sexual preferences. I don't think BDSM and abusive relationships go hand-in-hand.
The slide being a shift in what is acceptable by society. In some people's view it's a wonderful thing. To others it is very sad and troubling. I belong to the latter camp. Few, however, would disagree about the changes occurring. It's just a matter of how they view them. My point was simply that issues are raised in that article folks would do well to consider in advance. If they conclude as you do, that's fine. I appreciate them giving it a thought.
I find it sad and troubling that people should think they get to judge how other people choose to fornicate. My morality is my morality, so long as it is consensual, others can do whatever they heck they wish in the bedroom, or read books and see movies about anything at all that pleases them..
Would it be safe to conclude your totally missing the point of the article means you didn't read it?
The article saying that what the two characters do within a consensual agreement is pathological and harmful to be exposed to?
Yeah I read it and found it judgmental and hysterical.
Oh and insulting. Both to BDSM lifestylers and members of the cinema-going public who are presumed to weak in the brain to watch fiction without getting mind-warped by it.
We can do whatever we want. I can, you can. We can prefer things that are healthy and things that are not so healthy. Very few of us come without baggage. But we all can have opinions on anything and everything. That is how we come to the decisions concerning how we will choose to live. In the opinion of the author of the article, this is not a healthy lifestyle. If the matter were about diet and someone said, 'Burgers and donuts are not preferable for a healthy lifestyle." would you be insulted? It's just an opinion. bBerean offered an article on Fifty Shades of Grey, as something to consider. That seems quite reasonable in a forum post about Fifty Shades of Grey.
Civilization sets many boundaries. Should they not? If someone enjoys asphyxiation should it be legal? Is it good for them or society? Do you hold their partner accountable if it goes to far and they die or suffer brain damage? Do you really believe nothing should be limited by society as long as it is between concenting adults? Do you think these examples won't affect children? Just the beginning of questions your responses bring to mind.
I don't have a problem with the law saying you can't choke someone. That covers a very broad range of scenarios, so I don't see the need to make it legal because two people enjoy it in the privacy of their own bedroom. People who do it are going to do it regardless, I'm sure.
To my knowledge, it's very rare that one person accidentally kills another person via asphyxiation. Most accidental deaths are cases of autoerotic asphyxiation. I suppose they would be held accountable and that's probably something people should think about before participating.
I'm not sure what example you're expecting this to set for children. Do you mean that a child's parents will set a bad example by participating in BDSM? I don't know about you, but I have never known anything about my mother's sex life and I'm happy to keep it that way. Do you mean seeing the previews on TV for movies like Fifty Shades? I don't think kids are going to see a 30 second commercial and all of a sudden be into BDSM. Do you mean the acceptance of sexuality even when it's not the norm? Hey, I think that's a good thing.
Just because someone sees it doesn't mean they're going to want to do it. I don't get any sexual gratification from pain so I don't enjoy BDSM. I've been exposed to it, I've read about it extensively, I've even tried it! I don't like it, in the same way that I don't get turned on by feet, in the same way that I don't get turned on by role play... your sexual preferences are unique to you and just because people say it's not gross or perverse or wrong doesn't mean your sexual preferences are automatically going to change.
Kudos to you, Aime F, for having the knowledge and courage to speak up on behalf of those in alternative lifestyles.
I've neither read the book nor seen the movie; I don't feel the need to:
There was a time, before my husband became disabled, that we manufactured a line of "toys" for this particular subset of folks. We had to do a LOT of research, for CYA purposes, as well as to become familiar with varied preferences.
The BDSM lifestyle is not about abuse; it is about edginess, and tweaking the erotic sensations to the max. There is, in fact, an entire set of rules and protocols that are required to be followed, the first and foremost of which is mutual consent. Any activity that makes either party suddenly uncomfortable can be immediately halted with a 'safe word.'
The reason that spanking, in this arena, is not abuse, is this: the skin itself is the largest organ in the body, with the most nerve endings. Since everyone has a different tolerance for pain or discomfort than any other person, what is a spanking using only the hands for one person may be painful, and barely noticed by another, there are all manner of implements used, to fit each person's tolerances and preferences. These range from the hands to riding crops to leather slappers, even up to wooden 'frat paddles.'
What happens, is the skin, (once reddened by the stimulation of the spanking), becomes hyper-sensitive, and then any touch with anything else, from fingernails to a feather, becomes a very erotic sensation. That is the point at which the participants "get off" on their practices.
It is also about temporary release of control and that can be very freeing. It might surprise you to know that many, many people involved in this lifestyle are those in high-stress jobs, including health care professionals, lawyers and the like. We knew many.
Don't forget choking... that's a favorite of many and who doesn't want a "safe word" when being intimate with the person you love? lol
Anyway, opinions are many and Im glad we can all share them.
Choking, along with other types of extreme edge-play, such as cutting, needle play, and incorporating excrement are not what I was talking about. We never encountered people who were into any of those things, which I agree, can be very dangerous.
You're absolutely right. But I think the point is there is a difference between "getting off" and being loved. Spanking and all sorts of things that we may "get off on" may be the norm now... but when we ask the man who is supposed to love us most in the world to abuse us in some way... something isn't right... at the very least, it's not love. I guess it just depends on what you want.
@ bBerean: I read the article to which you linked. I think this doctor has more psychological problems than the people she treats! This is a copy of the comment/reply I left to that article:
"It’s Hollywood, okay? Anyone with two working brain cells knows that the movies are all about fantasy, not reality.
While it is true that there is an alternative lifestyle known as BDSM, there are rules and protocols within, and it is not wanton abuse, and nothing at all fitting your condemnation of the lifestyle based solely upon your opinion of a Hollywood MOVIE based on a book, also fantasy/fiction.
It is only very loosely based upon the BDSM lifestyle; more movies and books are incorporating this theme of late, and they all play fast and loose with the interpretation of what the lifestyle is about. And that’s what Hollywood is about. Physician, heal thyself! (Before you go making condemnatory judgments on others.) You have homework to do.
I know. I’ve been involved with many of these people–we used to make many of the ‘toys’ they enjoyed playing with. They were also some of the most down-to-earth, straight-shooting, honest people we’ve ever met. Never once did we get ‘backstabbed’ by one of these folks, as we did several times by so-called “straight-arrow” people in our every day life."
To begin with allow me to pose the same questions to you as I posted above: http://hubpages.com/forum/post/2711356
I can address your question by repeating the reply I posted to Sed-Me:
"Choking, along with other types of extreme edge-play, such as cutting, needle play, and incorporating excrement are not what I was talking about. We never encountered people who were into any of those things, which I agree, can be very dangerous."
But, beyond that, in talking only of what might be termed "ordinary" BDSM, spanking, blindfolds, cuffs, etc...just how far into people's bedrooms do you think the government should go? They are already too far in that door as it is, what with all the outrage and uproar over same-sex relationships.
It's none of their business--none of anyone's business.
And, it's also true that many people do unsafe that have nothing to do with sexual or para-sexual activity; bottom line: people can be stupid, and yes, sometimes they make such stupid choices that they die as a result. These bad decisions range from jaywalking to trying to beat a train across the tracks, to Evel Knievel type stunts...just watch some of the TV shows dedicated to celebrating these morons!
You can't fix stupid. Such lessons, sadly, usually must be learned the hard way. "Ah, but Monsieur, they are too dead to understand," you say. True--but they'll probably make smarter choices the next time around.
So your 18 year old daughter gets drunk, (legal in some states), finds someone attractive who is into these things such as asphyxiation, agrees to give it a go, (consent), forgets the rules, (who makes those? I thought there should be no rules), and passes out then suffers brain damage, should the other party be held accountable? Consenting adults, remember.
That's a really good point. But think about this... let's say your daughter *is of age. Could you stand the idea of her being treated this way by any man? It's one thing when we consider ourselves in these situations, but you begin to feel very protective when you imagine your child being abused.
Yes, which is exactly why I posed it that way. We should care about our fellow man, and it is natural to be especially protective of youth. If someone seems to be missing that, making it their kid may wake up that protective nature. It is relevant.
I've shared on the forum and in my hubs (on my old account) of the issues I struggle with. Without sharing anything personal, I can say I am drawn to some of this type of behavior and I share that only to say, I understand first hand the things going on in a person's life who is drawn to this lifestyle. Whether it be childhood abuse or self hatred or any of the many pains ppl endure, acting out in this way is very seldom about physical pleasure and more of psychological issues.
Don't you think caring about each other should include not judging someone based on their sexual preferences which you don't understand?
You say that these "problems" won't be solved if we accept them, yet you perpetuate the stigma that makes people afraid to talk about it in the first place. Do you really think that you're being kind or helpful by suggesting that people who you know nothing about are psychologically troubled, hate themselves, or are maladjusted?
Does the judgement stop at BDSM or do you extend the same courtesy to homosexuals, transgenders, people with fetishes, polyamorists, etc.? What fits into your box of "normal" and why do you get to decide what it means for other people?
Rather than answer the relevant questions I posed to you, you've chosen to hide from the difficult issues and redirect the narrative. Do you not see how the offensive you launch casting aspersions and attempting to force your definition of normal on society under the guise of stopping the same action by another drips of the very judgment you claim to oppose, only now with you as the judge? If you truly want to discuss the issues raised, start by answering my questions:
It's interesting to me that if you don't agree with something ppl think you "don't understand" it, or that you're "judging" other ppl. Do we not each consider most major life issues and decide what we find healthy or unhealthy? I also know ppl who are involved in the swinger's lifestyle. They are responsible, often respected ppl with friends and family. Does that mean I have to agree with their choice to include multiple partners with their spouse in their sexual exploits? No. I can like them and care about them, but I don't have to agree that their choice is healthy for them. That's freedom of thought, not superiority. They may look at me a decide my choice to have one sexual partner is stunted. I don't fault them for that b/c I understand that they have free thought.
You said: "Whether it be childhood abuse or self hatred or any of the many pains ppl endure, acting out in this way is very seldom about physical pleasure and more of psychological issues."
The research that has been done suggests that there is nothing more abnormal about the psychology of a BDSM participant than someone who likes "plain" sex. So no, I don't think you do understand it.
There have been several implications in this thread that this issue negatively impacts society, which is much different than saying "I don't agree with this but to each their own."
I decide what is healthy for me.
So long as they are making an informed choice, I leave other people to do the same rather than "judging" them.
My freedom of thought ends where I start using it to impinge on other people's freedom to decide what to read, view, or do in the bedroom.
We all decide what we believe is and is not healthy. I believe when you say 'judgments' you are assuming they are in some way superior or unkind. Judgment is necessary every single day. We judge how fast or slow to drive, how to spend our finances, when to say when. Judgment is important. If I were to say every person who participates in this kind of sexual behavior is a bad person, that would be unkind judgement. That's like seeing a person in a motorized wheelchair and assuming they are lazy. Compassion, wisdom and understanding is necessary when using judgement.
So can I understand why ppl participate in the aforementioned sexual behaviors? Of course. We are sexual beings, we can all understand being driven by our passions. But are there those of us who look at these passions and judge that they would be damaging to engage in? Yes. We must use our best judgment in basically every life situation.
I totally get what you're saying MsLizzy, but who is saying the government should get involved? I don't remember reading that anywhere. And where you have drawn a line with what you call "ordinary" and have labeled those who go beyond the boundaries you have set as "stupid", the author of the article has his reasons for believing that ppl who are into the things described in 50 shades, are not healthy. No one should feel insulted, it is simply someone sharing their opinion, much like you did. He was able to share his opinion without calling anyone stupid, to be fair, but I know what you mean.
I don't really understand the outrage over the relationship dynamic, if I'm being honest. It's a book of fiction! Do you want me to start naming off all of the books I've read with unhealthy relationships? That would be a long list.
It's not saying "this is how healthy relationships work" and it's not marketed towards young girls - it's quite obviously written for adults. Unlike Twilight, which if you ask me is much worse because it promotes unhealthy relationships and is targeted towards young girls.
The fact that Christian is revealed to be a sadist is an insult to BDSM, really, and the author clearly didn't bother to do any research. It reads very much as her personal fantasy and should be treated as such. Control/non-consent is actually an extremely common theme in erotica and in most cases I don't think it translates to reality. Hopefully adults can recognize the difference between fantasizing about these things and actually wanting to live them.
Would I want my young daughter to read the book or watch the movie? No. But the same could be said for thousands of other books and movies that weren't made for young girls.
There have been so many movies over the years in which I have been disappointed that the movie strayed (sometimes greatly) from the book.
Even though I have neither seen the movie nor read this particular book, my comments are to the principle of the matter.
It has always annoyed and angered me that Hollywood thinks it can tell a story better than the original author of the story. What hubris!
Here's a read to counter the one posted earlier.
http://www.ipgcounseling.com/sites/ipgc … y_bdsm.pdf
Looks like you've found an excellent voice for the front edge of the slide. Can we agree folks interested in the topic should read both and make their decision?
by Catherine Mostly 2 years ago
Remember the passionate fighting between fans and anti-fans of the book-turned-movie, 'Fifty Shades of Grey'? Well, 'Fifty Shades Darker' is now being filmed - and there is still one more movie after this, 'Fifty Shades Freed'. The problem with these books is that they ARE written harmfully and...
by HL Keeley 6 years ago
Should Fifty Shades of Grey be a movie?
by Deseree Michele 3 years ago
Will the Fifty Shades of Grey movie live up to the hype?I have read the books, and seen the preview of the film, but I wonder will the movie live up to the hype. Very few movies ever do... With the exception of a few good movies. So what do you think will the movie be worth it?
by Der Meister 3 years ago
Why do you think Fifty Shades of Grey is such a huge success?
by Steven Escareno 3 years ago
As some of you die hard movie buffs know, "Fifty Shades of Grey" was a huge success at the box office, as I believe it grossed way over 500 million dollars worldwide on a budget of 40 million. Although I personally found the film to be a giant steaming pile of horse s***, but...
by LauraGT 5 years ago
Why is Fifty Shades of Grey so popular?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|