Well, durr. Fifty Shades Of Gray is originally Twilight fanfiction. Of course it's gonna suck, being based off of wooden, unlikeable characters that had no chemistry between them and plot twists that even a 7 year old can figure out.
Yes, that's what I expected, but I decided to go in and see it without bias, and to review it as such.
So you knew you weren't going to like it, but saw it anyway? Why? That's very odd.
Worst movie in memory, but still 3/10? k keep lurkin dat lurk bro, gl
1) Fanfiction can turn secondary characters into main, or make nice of characters who used to be unsympathetic before. There's this Harry Potter timeloop fanfic making Lockhart one of the nice guys. So, actually, being based on flat characters isn't unavoidably bad
2) "There are things that you must see for yourself" as fans of these things say. Here, on Tvt, there are positive reviews on that same 50 Shades. So, it's not indisputably horrible.
Someone pushed me to watch Utena. It makes me want to either puke or sleep after 10 episodes of 40, but fans keep saying "watch it, thinking that it is good, and if you expect it to be very good, you'll convince yourself that it's good, and you'll like it, and it'll become good". I think, it's B.S. and anything good will feel nice and interesting even if you don't expect it to be. So, watching something you don't like is normal - you can't like things you haven't seen, and you can't watch only your favourites and nothing else.
3) There are horrible films you haven't seen, so they aren't "in memory", and they are worse than 3/10. You kind of KNOW it. Like, you wouldn't expect "Chernobyl Diaries", with foolish unrecognizable characters and an excuse for a plot, or "Human Centipede"-level trah movies to be compared with chick flick fantasy like 50 shades.
Also, there are art-house movies with people eating each other, psychedelic action, coprofagy and zoophilia...
To the poster above, Xenos Hg, thank you. I always find it annoying when people label terrible things as "the worst thing ever". When you think about it, nothing can be the worst thing ever because there's no limit to how awful something can be. If I were given a choice of watching one of two terrible movies that have both been labelled the worst movies ever, it's clear that one of them is going to better than the other.
In fact, just look at how entries there are on the Wikipedia article about the worst movies. There are dozens of candidates.
In addition to my last point, I'm getting really sick of this new trend of people going to see movies that they know they are not going to like just so they bitch about how bad the experience was. There's a thing called a trailer. Watch it. Doesn't look like your kind of film? Then don't go see it! That is how blatantly simple it should be. In fact it seems that merely liking or not liking something isn't a thing anymore. Lol.
TT 454: While I agree, for some, a trailer isn't proof of quality of a film (sure, we have to point out that if not even a trailer hooks you on, what do you want more and how do you sell your film).
I haven't seen the movie, but from what very little I've read, I do have to say that for me, the book is everything wrong with Romance: Nobody is likeable (not even the minor characters), the romance is boring, the main characters are the kind I want to see dead or horribly humiliated, etc...
Then again, I'm sometimes stuck between two things: "Don't like it, Don't watch it", and "If I want to really review the thing, I have to watch it.". Sure, it bites me and I end up hating the First Hunger Games, Divergent and Spring breakers, but I can understand the opinions between the two ideas.
I'm not crazy, just creatively different.
(Chiming in a little late) I believe that the reason people go to see films they don't think would be their cup of tea is so they can confirm it. If someone just said they didn't like something, other people would ask "Well did you see it? So how do you know if it's bad if you didn't see it?" I do not believe it is a trend, but rather, an attempt to avoid such criticisms. I agree with the review - the plot was dull but it is clear that the people involved with the movie tried their best, working with what little they had.
Leave a Comment:
A failure on almost every level. 3/10
(This is for the film. Never read the series, and after this, I never will.)
The music was pretty alright. Cinematography too.
Everything else was a complete mess. The acting was wooden. The writing was basic and cliche, both the plot and the dialogue. I, someone who never read the series, guessed just about every turn of events ahead of time. The sense of chemistry between the characters was almost nonexistent - it was hard to believe they were in any kind of relationship at all.
Worst of all, it was simply boring. Nothing interesting happened, probably because nobody watching could care about the characters or their relationship at all. This was the first time I ever saw a person walk out of the theater - by the time we left, about half the audience was gone. My girlfriend and I only stayed to laugh at the hilariously bad dialogue with the rest of the audience. The only reason I don't give this a 1 out of 10 is the aforementioned music, and the scene directing. Danny Elfman knows what he's doing, but somehow even his music was forgettable in the context. And the lighting, camera work, and visual design choices were decent at points.
I see a lot of people getting mad at those who disliked the film, calling them "haters" and saying they're just jumping on the bandwagon. They're full of it. When half your audience leaves in the first hour, and the other half is laughing audibly at every other line, it's not just a minority of "haters." This was the worst movie I've seen in memory, period.