Many shades of errors part 1

Rating: 1/10 (20 February 2015)

As widely expected the movie on the first part of the trilogy was a success in terms of audience just after release. Does it really deserve all that credit? Sincerely, not. I waited a whole week before going to theater to watch it, looking for a calmer and less crowded room, and this way I would have already been reading comments in the media over the movie, pros and cons.
In general, movie adaptations of books require a huge and thorough work so each character's identity and personality are kept with integrity. From the perspective of someone who has not read the book, E.L. James work can be seriously threatened with a bad vision, casting doubts on whatever has led to such an explosion of her books sells. Many articles has been written to analyze and explain Ms. James's success, henceforth leaving room for doubts only over who indeed made the movie. I am not going any further down this road because the movie is indeed awful, full of meaningless conversations and poorly describing the edge between drama and romance that can be so easily felt by reading Ms. James's books.
From the point of view of those who actually read the romance, the situation is dreadful, a real catastrophe. Hollywood was unable to reproduce the story, showing the opposite: it has given us a lesson on how to destroy a good script. It is true that the main factor drawing attention to the books of Christian Grey is how the sexual relationship between him and Anastasia Steele evolves. Therefore, how could this movie be conceived as an adaptation of the book if sexual content was decreased in order to reduce censorship to attract more public? Isn't obvious that in this case much negative repercussion has to be generated? The issue here is that if sexual content is correctly portrayed in the movie, pornography becomes an inadequate categorization and should not reflect negatively on the actors, because with regard to this book, bringing their nudity exposed is necessary for immersive ends. The decision on not to show a frontal nude of Christian Grey was a bad start.
Adaptation ended up with severe mutilations that will compromise links with the remaining books, shall the trilogy is indeed recorded. Mainly between the first and the second books as nothing was explored with regard to Anastasia's job interviews and the SIP. Yes, this is key to put spectators in the problems of the second book and the conclusion of the third. A huge error on adaptation, from the movie's director to the very Ms. James who allowed this absurd amputation to happen. How will this be preserved in the following works I have no idea, although some corrections are possible.
Is it possible that this and other "cuts" have the purpose to just make something that resembles the book so that in just two hours of timespan it makes possible to increase the number of times the movie is exhibited in a day, thus yielding more money? Couldn't just 30 more minutes of movie track fit to make any sense of what the characters and their psychological conditions are?
The movie is wrong since the beginning when Ana interviews Christian. It seems that the people who made the movie have not read the whole trilogy, or if they did, they did it probably while driving in traffic and without paying much attention. That interview deserves attention if there is any intent to make Christian's perspective of it too as Ms. James made it in the end of the third book. If there is no will to construct that part of the third book then yes, there is no need to focus on that interview much, but if they do it, I can only feel sorry of how this will be showed up.
Adaptation of the book to the screens should have kept more dialogues between Ana and Kate, fulfilling the need of more scenes to make spectators acquainted to Ana's problems. This way people could also feel more immerse and feel the characters, especially when a movie is not about action such as this one. Not to mention some chronological steps that became inverted in the movie generating confusion and loss of sense.
Unfortunately there is no room here to show many majors of those barbaric mistakes.
I do not know what has been planned for the next movies, if they are ever made. I must confess that in order to fix up the whole thing this first part should be thrown to garbage, as it is rubbish, and must be remade. Maybe the best could be to look for a European director, one that is more compromised with art. A helpful thing could be to look for one or two critical readers of this trilogy in order to help build these movies because it seems, again, that the people who made this first one did not read anything or if they did, did not paid much attention on key elements that help to put the story into context. For example, where is the big "U"-shaped sofa in Christian's living room that is necessary for the family to sit and wait for him while he is disappeared in the second book?
Make a "non-disclosure agreement" with them but do not hesitate in doing so ;-). There are plenty of nice and more sophisticated things that can be done to save and make the movies more just to the original books without consuming too much of spectators' time. It is possible to save the horrible movie you have done already. I put myself at your disposal if you like as the first thing I want for everyone is a good movie and people like me, who enjoyed so much this book and read it more than once undoubtedly has the means to give you different and valued opinions and perspectives.