Fifty Shades of Grey - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Fifty Shades of Grey Reviews

Page 1 of 229
January 15, 2017
as a lover of the books, I have to say I loved the movie, even though I would have loved for them so have gradually came the fist love seen as in the book. I also wish there would have been a few more love scenes like if the would had put the full bathtub scene like the book, or the silver balls haha. but I still loved it. any over of the book, whom reads it for the actual story and not just the erotic part would love the way portrayed the amazing book.
January 15, 2017
Hearing that a sequel to Fifty Shades of Grey was going to be coming out this February, I decided to see this movie, but I really didn't know what I was getting myself into, because it's got the universal reputation of being really bad. But you can't expect a great film based on a dumb ass erotic book. In result, it's not so terrible, it's full of sex, which is always cool, it's got some nerve, that's for sure. But what the fuck was the ending supposed to mean? I hope that it's connected to the sequel, cause without it, it means nothing.
January 13, 2017
Based on the book, i think they do a pretty good job translating it into a movie, although- i feel a bit uncomfortable watching some scenes
January 8, 2017
I'm no, no thank you, never again
January 8, 2017
One of the worst movies I have ever seen... Should've made a movie loosely based off the book, because the writing in the book , in all honesty, wasn't that good. I believe the only reason it was so successful is because it wasn't the normal run of the mill romance novel. Too much like the book IMO, boring , bad acting along with the bad writing. Horrible , just skip it , you'll be better off. 0 stars
January 7, 2017
Edit: Just watched the unrated version....not too different...on second watch acting is pretty bad throughout, just better than I expected when I heard worst actor and actress and chemistry between mains for 2015...I still enjoyed it....probably because I liked the books once I got past the first book....

First half of the movie was surprisingly good, then the quality just went downhill. ..sad
January 5, 2017
Boring, ridiculos, absurd.
January 2, 2017
More like 50 shades of boring. Acting and screenplay was somewhat comical at times. Entire movie felt too fake.
Super Reviewer
½ January 1, 2017
I won't even get into why the novel sounds like utterly asinine stuff and concentrate why the movie is probably a lot more tame and also nothing to get excited about. Sure, there are some entertaining and amusing parts and, of course, a few sex scenes that show a lot of Johnson, but once the whips are whipped out things get really repetitive until there suddenly isn't much of an ending and the film just stops. Especially the last 15 minutes with all the crying are really boring and annoying. Avoid and watch porn instead.
December 26, 2016
Nothing is ever as good as the books, but i liked this movie
December 25, 2016
Yes, I watched it. No, it wasn't very good.
December 21, 2016
Terrible romance, hilarious comedy.
December 13, 2016
Is it a great movie? No. Way more sedate than the books. Wish they had better actors in the main roles.
½ November 30, 2016
Blander than the coffee they serve with take out.
½ November 29, 2016
Fifty Shades Of Grey is a well shot and semi well acted bore fest that relies on it's Twilight fan fiction inspired best selling novel of the same name
½ November 28, 2016
I might have been previously too harsh on the Fifty Shades film when I reviewed it before. It's still definitely not anything exciting to watch... but compared to the book, it actually is better.

When making a film based on a terrible book series, you already don't have much to work with-- especially when the book's author constantly hounds, harasses, and pesters the director into giving her as much creative control as she can possibly have. If it weren't for E. L. James being a harpy on set, this film actually might have had even more intelligence associated with it. As it stands, it's already better than the novel (of course, a piece of shit cake is better than the novel), but think of how much better it would be if the terrible author of the book wasn't affiliated with its production?

There were, I admit, creative changes made in the script that never happen in the book that would have made the story poignant-- a word James doesn't understand, and never can understand.

I hated the Fifty Shades novel with every fiber of my being. It's romanticized abuse and the protagonist is highly unlikable. In the film, however, she has a personality that her blank slate counterpart in the book doesn't. She has a bit more fire, and a bit more strength. Not too much, but more. It's like the producers of the film KNEW that the book was terrible, and wanted to turn it into something beautiful. That's never easy to do, and I have to admit that I feel sympathy for them when having to deal with the book's author hounding them the entire time, picking apart every little thing and demanding things "be added" or "be removed" or changed.

I'm less fascinated with the film itself than I am with what the film COULD HAVE BEEN without E. L. James' influence. She needs to realize that there just are more creative people than her, and to allow some breathing room. Her books are boring-- PAINFULLY boring. But the movies have a chance to turn that possibility of saucy narc-and-supply relationship into something engaging, enthralling, and fun.

I know that James will remain glued to people on the next film as well. I can only pray that they don't allow her to dog them around in the same manner Christian proudly does in her awful books.
November 21, 2016
Well, I finally watched it. I'd read the book and it was just disturbing. No, not because of the content, which is just normal erotica, but by the horrendous writing. EL James is a talentless hack. The popularity of this book is just sad on many levels. Ladies, there is much better erotica out there. In fact, I'm quite sure I could write my own better erotica. In any case, while the first 15-20 minutes stuck to the book, that's what made me almost turn off the ridiculous thing. Seriously stupid dialogue with absolutely no character generation at all. Just straight into it. However, I'd like to at least point out the positives. One, I'm so glad they used an actual writer for the screenplay. Kelly Marcel changed up quite a bit, especially toward the end, that made the movie pseudo tolerable. While Jamie Dornan had the arrogance down, I expected a taller, blonder, more Nordic look to Christian. And, while Dakota played the timid girl-turned-submissive quite well, I honestly expected someone more attractive. Yet, given the crappy content, they both made it work as best it could. I admit, I liked the ending much better than the book as it leaves anyone enjoying the film, yearning for the follow-up, which was really the intent all along.
November 11, 2016
I don't know why this movie got such bad reviews. I actually enjoyed it quite a bit. It reminds me of the movie "9 1/2 Weeks" with Mickey Rourke and Nicole Kidman.
½ November 5, 2016
If there is one thing Fifty Shades of Grey proves, it's that Hollywood has no interest in catering to the female gaze - even when making a film that is supposed to be a female erotic fantasy. Ignoring the issues that exist with the story and the misrepresentation of S&M practices, this is a film that refuses to accept what it is. All the sex scenes, which are devoid of anything resembling titillation, focus almost exclusively on the body of Dakota Johnson. Even with a female team behind the camera, the heterosexual male gaze cannot be quashed. When in comes of Jamie Dornan the film is down right prudish. We get to see almost nothing of his physique, with the camera quickly shying away from even a brief glimpse of his bare ass. No such reservations exist where Johnson is concerned. We get to see her naked in all her glory, being restrained and whipped, even if both are too tamed to shock or titillate. Fifty Shades of Grey shows a fundamental misunderstanding of heterosexual female desire, which is made more problematic with a target audience of straight women and on behind the camera. Maybe it's because everyone knows this is the epitome of trash and they are just collecting a paycheck. Dornan in particular looks like he's sucking on a lemon the whole film and is only there because the producers have some solid blackmail material on him. Dakota Johnson is the only one who manages to escape the energy sucking mess. She takes the mess in stride, realizing Fifty Shades for what it is, a chance to make a lot of money and get herself noticed. She delivers lines that make George Lucas look like a great writer of romance like she's in on the joke. She knows she's making trash and she's going to have fun with it. Johnson's efforts can't make Fifty Shades good. There is no power on Earth that can manage that feat, but she does make it bearable, even when she is reduced to writhing around restrained and naked.
October 14, 2016
Page 1 of 229