A Lot Of People Went To See “Fifty Shades Darker” Despite It Being Terrible

February 12, 2017 / Posted by:

Part two of the BDSM for boring people Fifty Shades epic, Fifty Shades Darker, premiered this weekend. Inexplicably, it’s a hit and Deadline is reporting that it’s going to open at #2 at the box office, right behind The Lego Batman Movie. In fact, they’re saying it’s “the fourth-biggest opening ever for an R-rated film, behind the first offering, Deadpool and The Matrix Revolutions.” Box Office Mojo estimates that it will make close to $50 million this weekend alone.

Really? People are paying $12 bucks to see that mess? It can’t be because of the fiery chemistry between Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan. In fact, the trailer makes it seem like they have so little chemistry, that their characters might even be related. The Flip or Flop couple like each other more than these two. And look what filming has done to the previously sessy Jamie. He went from this to this. He’s obviously had some dark nights of the soul during this venture which have rendered him balder? And somehow shorter? *sad-face*

Vulture had a round-up of all the catty things the critics are saying. It’s a big round-up. There’s a lot of cattle lowing in this herd.

“As soon as Fifty Shades Darker kicked off to the opening strains of a whispery Coldplay cover, it all came flooding back. Here we are again: watching two anatomical marvels writhe meaninglessly in the moonlight, like a burlesque performed by bots.” — Laura Bennett, Slate

“Kind of strange that in a purportedly kinky movie, the two main characters only ever seem to achieve orgasm in the missionary position, with a soundtrack that seems to have been selected from some MOR Spotify user’s fuck playlist.” — Jesse Hassenger, Brooklyn Magazine

And my favorite:

“As with the first film, Johnson and Dornan have about as much chemistry as a box of Wheat Thins being blindfolded by a box of Triscuits.” — Allison Shoemaker, Consequence of Sound

As for the film, their take on sex is apparently “as much clothing as possible?” Here’s what looks to be the biggest problem with this shitshow:

“Has there ever been a film in which the hero has so much sex without properly taking off his trousers?” — Donald Clarke, Irish Times

Why don’t they just do it through a hole in the sheet? Isn’t this (god help us) a trilogy about fucking? Admittedly, I watched the first one. I was hungover and it was a Saturday afternoon. Look inward before judging me! Dude barely got naked. You sort of saw his bush? There was nary a dick to be found! How are you going to have a trilogy (oh yes, there’s another one on the way) about kinky fucking when there’s an absence of full frontal? And as for kinky, he didn’t even put on a harness! I might have traveled into my own mindscape with that last observation.

PicFacebook

Our commenting rules are pretty simple: If you make any overly offensive comment (racist, bigoted, etc..) or go way off topic when not in an Open Post, your comments will be deleted and you will be banned. If you see an offensive or spammy comment you think should be deleted, flag it for the mods and they'll be forever grateful and give you their first born (although, you probably don't want that).

src="https://c.statcounter.com/922697/0/f674ac4a/1/"
alt="drupal analytics" >