Cinquanta sfumature di nero

Neither as good or as bad as so many commentators seem to think. It has high production values. The direction is unobtrusive. I haven't read the novels, so cannot really comment on the source material. Dakota Johnson hit the corruptible ingenue character pretty well, and looks smashing while doing so. Jamie Dornan, though... In my comments on the first movie, I compared his depth of emotion to a terminator. In this one, he at least attempts some emotional scenes. He doesn't do them very well, but he tries. Supporting cast, especially Marcia Gay Harden, were pretty good, with the exception of Kim Basinger. There is really no reason to see this, except as a continuation of the first movie. It could never stand alone.

The predictable plotting and the boring dialogues makes this sequel automatically uninteresting. "Fifty Shades Darker" is worst than the first movie because the characters have learned nothing and repeat the exact same unhealthy relationship. The two beautiful protagonists do their bests to treating sex like a pleasurable activity but is not enough and the result is not good. The thriller narrative, involving persons from Grey's strange past, exposes the shallowness of the story. What made the first unit of this trilogy so much better than the current version is that everything was then new. But now that we are familiar with the equipment in Christian's lavish penthouse, the novelty is gone and the boredom is here.

It's really not as dire as many of the armchair critics around here are making out. It's essentially just a well made, but derivative melodrama with some of the old BDSM thrown in to spice things up.

I have to admit I didn't notice much different with the change of directors. It does seem to follow on fairly logically from the first film, but if you're stepping in for the first time, you shouldn't have too many problems picking up the gist of things. I'd never try to argue the storyline is all that deep.

Dakota Johnson makes the film for me. She is a very appealing Ana and carries off the the vulnerable/strong character thing really well. Unlike some of the other reviewers around these parts, I think she succeeds in displaying plenty of chemistry with Christian. And speaking of that well-known male dominant, let me just add that I think Jamie Dornan plays that part quite well. Yes, he does appear kind of wooden and emotion-lite, but that's the way Christian is written in the books. And as many are aware, author EL James had a very big influence in the adaption of her books to the screen. For a start, her hubby Niall Leonard, is the sole script writer! All those expecting a vastly different screen persona of Christian are just whistling into a gale of a wind.

It was fun seeing Kim Bassinger turn up playing Elena, considering she starred in Nine and a Half Weeks, back 30 years or so ago and that film kicked up the same sort of reaction from critics as 50 Shades etc. ( It was also a commercial hit.) I'd never try to deny that the films all share great similarities. But that's Hollywood for you! What goes around, definitely comes back around!

Now about those little balls ...

You know what you're going to get when you watch this so why all the low ratings? It was never going to win an Oscar. It's a decent watch and I quite like watching how their relationship develops over the three films. It's easy watching and whilst I agree he can be a bit wooden at times, I think that's the point of his character. He's not comfortable with emotion! I think it's an easy watching love story and shows how two people develop and compromise when they love each other. Yes, it will never win awards but it is enjoyable. And for the record, I never read the books until years after they came out. I'm not a die hard fan of them at all as found them quite repetitive, but I did enjoy the films.

One of the worst movies I've seen in years. Terrible acting, no plot and pointless sex scenes.