I haven't read the books. I doubt I'll even go see the movie unless it has an R or (fingers crossed) an NC-17 rating. But I am hoping that Sam Taylor-Johnson's adaptation of 50 Shades of Grey, the erotic book club smash, succeeds at the box office. And I'm not ashamed to say it.
When it comes to feminism on screen I think there are two types: procedural feminism and substantive feminism (a theory I've adapted from contract law). Procedural feminism is the behind the scenes, technical process of filmmaking (female director/writer/producer, largely female cast, success with female audiences, perhaps crossover male appeal but that's not as important to me). Substantive feminism is the actual content of the film (passing the Bechdel test, female agency, woman characters not being a romantic prize but having substantial parts in the plot).
Ideally a film would be both procedurally feminist and substantively feminist (Bridesmaids comes to mind as do the Hunger Games films). And there are of course those which are just substantively feminist, which is not a bad thing at all (Gravity, Neighbors, Rear Window).
But let's not forget about those films which may be just procedurally feminist. I believe this category is often overlooked but extremely important. Perhaps it's even more important than substantively feminist films. Putting more women behind the cameras and having more women see films marketed to them which then become successes in the way male-targeted blockbusters are means more studios will take a chance on them. Then perhaps we will have more films that hit both types of feminism.
 |
| The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, marketed like a blockbuster, performed like a blockbuster |
I can't say anything about what 50 Shades of Grey is like content-wise; the premise could be gloriously sex positive but I'm afraid that it's executed conservatively. However, having a female director make a movie off a screenplay written by a woman based on a book written by a woman that is directly and perhaps exclusively marketed towards women cannot be a bad thing. This is especially true since 50 Shades is being marketed as a blockbuster like Twilight and Hunger Games, both female-marketed movies that made superhero-type business. Casting and directing rumors, a teaser, a full trailer--all have been doled out meticulously, well in advance of the Valentines Day 2015 release date. It's good that the distributors are not hiding the movie. And they shouldn't either. There's a large potential for 50 Shades to be a huge success at the box office.
But box office success isn't guaranteed. Not that it is for any movie but 50 Shades is particularly vulnerable. The problem is that this movie is already being treated with derision and I think there are a few reasons for that. One, it is an erotic thriller (or at least erotic drama) and you know sex=funny. Also, the straight male audience (Hollywood's own favorite unicorn) are probably threatened by a movie featuring sexuality not aimed at them (the female gaze will likely be prominent and that's too scary).
Because the straight males aren't interested, then 50 Shades is immediately treated as radioactive waste (it's a phenomenon called "
girl show ghetto"). So women might also stay away out of fear of being associated with something that is being publicly mocked. Because this is a movie that will probably be a romantic melodrama, the critics will most likely assassinate it in the reviews. (Don't get me started on the institutionalized misogyny in modern film criticism; we'll be here all night.)
But but but if 50 Shades is a success, then it will be yet another indication that woman-centered movies don't need Hollywood's own favorite unicorn, the straight male audience, to be a legitimate success. History has proven time and time again that women go see movies marketed towards them and will guide them to blockbuster success. These films just have to be marketed properly and it seems like 50 Shades is on the right track.
 |
| Maleficent: worldwide total is $736 mil |
After the successes of Maleficent, Mamma Mia!, The Hunger Games 1 and 2, Lucy, The Devil Wears Prada, The Fault in Our Stars, The Heat, Bridesmaids, The Vow, The Other Woman, Frozen, Tangled, Brave, The Twilight Saga and Divergent, Hollywood should be aware that the female audience is powerful and hungry. And these films all belong to diverse genres. That all these films also vary in quality is a good thing for better movies to be made. Of course, some of those had crossover male appeal but it seems like Hollywood is not counting the ones that didn't. The lesson Hollywood learns is that it's good that women are seeing these films but the ones which should be repeated are the ones that men saw too.
None of the films listed above are erotic dramas though so it's hard to see where 50 Shades will fall on the scale. I can only think of one other "sexy movie" marketed to women in the recent past. Magic Mike was marketed as a girls night out male stripper comedy and was also subject to the same derision that 50 Shades is getting (probably males reacting to nudity that's not for them and women protesting the implication that they want anything to do with it). Magic Mike went on to gross about $167 million dollars, roughly 24 times its $7 mil budget. That it turned out to be a sensitive, somewhat existential dramedy was a surprise to most (myself included). But its colossal success in the face of pre and post release ridicule gives hope to 50 Shades' own success.
 |
| People made fun of it, grossed over $150 mil |
Admittedly, 50 Shades isn't directed by a respected mainstream director like Steven Soderbergh. Director Sam Taylor-Johnson has only made one feature film before, the John Lennon biopic Nowhere Boy (79% on Rotten Tomatoes). Screenwriter Kelli Marcel created the short-lived TV series Terra Nova and wrote the Disney/PL Travers biopic Saving Mr. Banks. Magic Mike also had bona fide movie stars Channing Tatum and Matthew McConaughey. 50 Shades' Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan are not box office draws yet. So basically the whole movie is a gamble.
What makes 50 Shades of Grey exciting to follow is that there really hasn't been a movie like this in a while. The Twilight movies are shooting for the same audience I guess but those films are much more chaste and younger teen friendly. 50 Shades would be the first time an erotic drama would be marketed directly to women and with a female writer/director. For all I know, 50 Shades might be a bad movie made off a bad series of books. But if the movie is successful with women and only with women, then maybe Hollywood will wake up and realize once and for all that women form a sizable portion of the audience
Take for instance the romantic-comedy What If starring Daniel Radcliffe and Zoe Kazan. On the surface, it's a typical "friends or lovers" comedy that is fairly predictable. But there are a lot of fun, unique bits in the movie. Look at the Oscar winning 2010 movie The Fighter. That was a fairly typical sports drama, with drug and family problems. But director David O. Russell gave that film so much panache and flash and it had a crackling script and ace performances. And even something like The Bourne Legacy, which is not the crowning achievement of the Bourne series, is well-paced with decent acting and action. What it does well, it does well enough that you can sort of overlook its flaws and lack of innovation.
