It seems like I'm giving this blog a theme with all the rants I'm posting about books and movies. I guess they're just all that I feel like talking about. Maybe I'll talk about makeup or boys in the next one.
Today's post is inspired by all the media surrounding the "50 Shades of Grey" movie. Let me just start out by saying that no, I haven't read the books. Nor do I intend to. I do have friends who have read them, however, and they have told me that they're not as bad as they're being portrayed. I considered reading the three-book series just to write an educated post about them but decided against it. Mostly because I'm lazy but also because I also have a pile of other books I have to read, as I've stated before. But I feel that I don't need to have read them in order to say what I intend to say so I'll just get straight to it.
"50 Shades of Grey" is erotica. It's a known fact. It can also be categorized as romance but who are we kidding. Anything with explicitly written sex scenes can be counted as erotica. I've read plenty of books with sex in them and can easily tell the difference between romance and erotica. Simply put: If the book has three or more synonyms for "penis" and "vagina," it's erotica. Also, plot. Plot is very important. If it's intricate enough, sex scenes are put in the backseat and aren't entirely relevant when it comes to the main story line. Hell, you could even skip them. But if they overshadow the plot (hence, the BDSM in "50 Shades") then it's clear that the plot isn't strong enough and cannot be carried without them. Erotica.
Good. Now that we've gotten that settled. Why in the name of all that is holy is this book being made into a movie? I mean, I could see full-on porn being based off of it. But a full-length motion picture? Seriously? This is just doomed to be a disaster. They're going to have to water it down a lot to get an R-rating. And even if they accomplish that, will it even be that good? I've heard snippets of the main plot from friends who have read it and don't think it seems all that interesting. It's main appeal is the sex and its, ahem, interestingly written scenes. Maybe that's why the cast hasn't been announced yet. Maybe the executives who were dumb enough to fund this project have seen some sense.
Having read a few excerpts of the text (Hamster. Enough said.) I could tell that this wasn't the greatest book to begin with. The main reason for its publicity was that it was first written as a "Twilight" fan fiction. Which I have the utmost respect for. Being a former fan fiction writer, I am proud and envious of the success of writers who got their start in fan fiction. It gives me hope. But still, when your story is as poorly written as "50 Shades," I almost take it back. E.L. James's success gives writers false hopes of publishing. She didn't get all of this attention because her book was good. She got it because she was riding the "Twilight" bandwagon in the steamiest and most controversial of ways. Is she setting a good example for future writers? No. She's "inspiring" them to write something controversial to get media attention and let themselves be remembered as that one lady who wrote that sex book. She's a fad and will be remembered for all the wrong reasons. She could have had the potential to be a truly fantastic novelist whose stories (yes, even erotica) would have been remembered because they were good, not because they were bad and falsely revered. Now she's the pinnacle of bad writing done right, which shouldn't prove as any encouragement to those wanting to break into the industry.
And they want to make a movie out of it. That's about as screwed up as the media can get.
/endrant
