Jamie Dornan, Dakota Johnson begin filming ‘two versions’ of ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’


Here are some photos of your Christian Grey (real name: Jamie Dornan) and Anastasia Steele (Dakota Johnson) in Vancouver over the weekend. They finally began filming on Fifty Shades of Grey, at long last. The production was supposed to begin weeks ago, but then Charlie Hunnam tapped out and producers found Jamie after a not-so-exhaustive search. Not only did the production start date get pushed back, they also pushed the release date for the film. It’s now going to be released for Valentine’s Day 2015. That’s a long time to wait, right? But if I’m hopeful for anything, it’s that Jamie Dornan will survive this mess and go on to become a more in-demand actor.

The photos aren’t getting me very excited for the film at all. You know what it is? It’s Dakota Johnson. She really doesn’t look like Anastasia to me at all. I have NO IDEA why they gave bangs to the Ana character. Is it so Dakota will look younger? Because the bangs just make Dakota’s sex appeal drop off a cliff. As for Jamie in the Christian costume… it works. I’m seeing it.

Of course, we’re not going to get paparazzi photos of any of the sex acts going on in the film. But that does bring to mind the lingering questions about just how intense and graphic the sex scenes are actually going to be. Fifty Shades producers recently announced an interesting scheme to get around the MPAA:

Fifty Shades of Grey producers are set to make two versions of the film so they can please both fans of the explicit book and allow the movie to be shown in mainstream cinemas.

‘What we’re kind of hearing from the fans is they want it dirty… they want it as close as possible [to the book],’ said producer Dana Brunetti, who has been listening to the demands of the book’s female followers on Twitter.

After a fairly restrained take on the bondage bestseller for mainstream cinema audiences, he reveals filmmakers are planning to release a more explicit version soon afterwards. If the first version of the film gets an R or restricted rating in America it could be seen by anyone aged 17 or over. A more explicit version may get the much rarer NC-17 certificate, which is reserved for films depicting rape or drug use.

‘I always thought it would be really cool if we released the R version [18 in Britain] and then we had an NC-17 version that we released a few weeks later.

‘Everybody could go and enjoy the R version, and then if they really wanted to see it again and get a little bit more gritty with it then have that NC-17 version out there as well. That is my idea, but the fans and the studio [Universal Pictures] will benefit from the double dip… We do not want this film to be seen as mommy p0rn – we want to keep it elevated but also give the fans what they want,’ Brunetti told review site collider.com.

If the clever marketing strategy was followed in Britain the film could seek an 18 certificate for the more vanilla version and an R18 rating for the explicit cut, meaning it could be shown only in cinemas with a special license cinemas, revealed the Sunday Times.

But cinemas could legally change themselves into sex-film venues for ‘special events’ such as midnight screenings, as long as they get local authority approval, said a former adviser to the British Board of Film Classification.

[From The Mail]

The Mail’s version discusses how the film will be marketed and released in Britain, which is fine, but I still have questions about how they’ll be able to release the film in America. They’ll do a heavily edited version to get the R-rating, and that’s the version that will be released on V-Day weekend 2015. But then they’ll submit a dirtier version to the MPAA, knowing that it will get an NC-17 rating and then…? How will the NC-17 film be released? Because the American theater chains won’t show the NC-17 version at all, I’m pretty sure, so the NC-17 version will probably only be shown in a few art houses in big cities. So it might be a pay-per-view situation, I’m thinking?




Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

48 Responses to “Jamie Dornan, Dakota Johnson begin filming ‘two versions’ of ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Anna says:

    Yeah I’d hit that.

  2. Lydia says:

    I don’t know, these photos look pretty good to me. Jamie looks much more the part than Charlie H. did. I’m kinda getting excited for this. No opinion on her bangs.

    • marie says:

      I’m getting excited too! Jamie looks the part and is truly very handsome. Dakota is too old and seems “experienced”

  3. Post It's says:

    It already looks terrible.

  4. QQ says:

    Having read this AMAZING RECAP http://jennytrout.wordpress.com/jenny-reads-50-shades-of-grey/ of this claptrap and how Fully unlikeable these characters are, how Poorly written it is and how shittily depicted is this “BDSM” relationship (more like abusive) and painting BDSM as practically a goddamned mental illness ….I cant wait for this trainwreck…. i hope it tanks and doesnt reach even Striptease level funny hatewatch

    • Bodhi says:

      I stalk Jenny’s page for the 50 Shades reviews. Thanks for reminding me that I need to catch up!

    • Florc says:

      The book was utterly terrible. There is a fanbase though so it might do ok. Past the initial flash in the pan sales I don’t see staying power.

    • Alexandria says:

      Love Jenny’s recaps! I also follow Das_Sporking, and her “sporkers” do a fabulous job of tearing this crap to shreds. Here’s a clip from one of their postings:

      “And why shouldn’t you conflate the two? After all, it’s “only fiction,” right? It’s “just a story”! You shouldn’t because most people don’t know AND THEY WILL BELIEVE BULLSH*T LIKE THIS! There are an amazing number of people who think that you can’t print something in a work of fiction if it’s incorrect! Think about that—and then realize how much damage lazy writers do by not bothering to get facts!”

      Plot ran away and joined the circus…

      “They’re unreadable because they’re a poor man’s fan fiction and the original source (Twilight) was just as poorly written and edited. “Suethor” E.L. James was so busy getting off on her main characters and living vicariously through her books, that she barely took her hands out of her pants to write a decent story. These books have NO PLOT! Oh there’s plenty of filler, bland and repetitive sex scenes, and wish fulfillment (E.L. Basically wrote herself as Anastasia/Bella Swan, who has the perfect body and scores the hottest guy in her universe and lives happily ever after)!

      “But I repeat: NOTHING HAPPENS! What little plot potential E.L. created in each of her books was shat away because she didnt want anything bad to happen to her (self-insert Anastasia) or her byronian love-interest from hell, Christian Grey. Her books are poorly-edited, if edited at all, and that’s just a slap in the face to the readers and literature in general. I’m sure her editors probably made corrections but James, being the brilliant writer of our generation that she is, most likely poo-poo’d them away because the tale that she’d weaved was perfection!

      “So now you have one large fan fiction (Master of the Universe/FSoG) that was sliced into three novels, for maximum sales. Each has no plot, each is poorly written and poorly edited…her characters are NOT great examples of a TRU WUV story: Anastasia is a weak, woman-hating, anorexic, alcoholic, possible schizophrenic, twat who does NO growing as a character and changes herself to stay with her abusive boyfriend. Christian is an asshat, jealous, abusive, spoiled, inconsiderate, abusive, elitist snob, who does NOT grow in these books as a character in a realistic manner (Ana’s magical VANILLA VAGINA is NOT a cure).”
      Take that 5SoG apologists.

      • Luna says:

        I didn’t like the books either, but i think is gross how people talk about the author. Not neccesary

      • Alexandria says:

        @Luna, I agree up to a point. The entire post above is from one of their recaps, and their style is verrrryyy hostile and sarcastic, but all said in good fun.

    • lunchcoma says:

      Jenny’s recaps were the only thing that got me through hate-reading the book. Though, in retrospect, my theory that it wasn’t fair to criticize something unless I’d read it ended up in a lot of self-inflicted pain. It was so, so bad.

  5. Tapioca says:

    Because nothing screams “Valentine’s Day movie” louder than a soft-core porno about an abusive A-hole and a gold digger.

    Might be alright on a pirate download with a group of drunken friends and, say, one shot for every “Holy crap!”, two for every time she comes with no foreplay?

    • mickey says:

      Adding more fun to your game…

      “oh my”

      –bites lip–

      –rolls eyes–

      ……..you and your friends will be wasted……

      • AlexandraJane says:

        three for any mention of either the inner goddess or her subconscious. you will last maybe 15 minutes!

    • Diana says:

      Let’s add every time someone mentions how skinny Anna is and how she needs to eat assap! And you have an ethilic coma on your hands.

    • mia girl says:

      Diana – Ha! So true… I never understood why all the “skinny – you need to eat” stuff in the book.

      Tapioca – Let’s also add to your list every time:
      – they drink white wine
      – CG calls Jose “that boy” (even though he’s not much older than him)
      – ridiculous helicopter related lingo is mentioned

      And if they actually include the “tampon” scene in the movie, you and your friends MUST each consume an entire bottle of tequila.

    • Decloo says:

      I would expect this to be more of a movie that you wait to view in your own home, for obvious reasons.

  6. aims says:

    Some of the book is based in my city, as a matter of fact I was in the Heathman over the weekend. I understand that filming in Canada is cheaper, but it bums me out that they couldn’t at least stick to the surroundings of what is depicted. There’s plenty of things being currently filmed here.

  7. m says:

    Damn, hes hot. And the fact that hes married and about to be a father means that the fangirling will be manageable. I can get behind this one…

  8. Agree says:

    Sorry, no way this man obsesses over this woman not without many months of getting to know you lol

  9. CaribbeanLaura says:

    I haven’t read the book, and am a big Charlie Hunnam fan, but I have to concur with T fanty on this one. I would cuff it, then hit it, then realease it back into the wild to be free.

    • JanieJ says:

      @CaribbeanLaura: “I would cuff it, then hit it, then realease it back into the wild to be free.”

      I love it!

  10. Dani2 says:

    I still think that pushing it all the way to February 2015 is a bad idea. They might need a fauxmance to keep the fangirls interested.

  11. lisa2 says:

    I don’t get the ratings thing.. I mean it is not porn where they are actually having sex. it is simulated sex. NOT REAL. I think people should be mature enough to know the difference. We see death on screen and we see very graphic blood/gore an that is understood as fake. But when it come to sex on screen the ratings system goes nuts. if they were having actual sex then yes that rating would be appropriate. But not fake sex.

  12. LadyRay says:

    YEEEEEEEEEEEEES! I cannot wait to see this movie. I’m so glad I have a new movie to replace Twilight. I foresee bad acting, cheap camera shots, and awkward sex scenes. Just pure comedy.

    Thank you baby Jesus.

  13. Buckwild says:

    Anastasia looks like a hobo lady with the bangs with styling. She looks like an older lady who is trying to look young. GAH.

  14. Sabrina says:

    I think he looks better with a bit of scruff. Here he just looks kind of bland.

  15. Naye in VA says:

    Ughh they both look so bland

  16. Andrea says:

    He’s really handsome but I’m not looking forward to this film franchise at all. It’s Dakota. I’m so sick of seeing the privileged kids of celebs continue the Hollywood nepotism.

  17. paola says:

    I’ve never read the book. should i watch the film though? Maybe the book was so bad that the film will turn up to be good?

  18. Lee says:

    Anastasia looks like a sad knock off version of Andy Sachs

  19. Nanou says:

    Dakota Johnson looks like a younger version of EL James.

    • lady mary. says:

      LOL! she is indeed a buzz kill,nepotisim sucks!!!!!,but Jamie looks quite bangable

    • stellalovejoydiver says:

      Considerung how much of a say E.L. James has in this production, this was probably intentional. Bleurgh

  20. Evi says:

    So there are two versions: crap and crappier?

  21. Jay says:

    NC-17 is reserved for rape and drug use? What planet are they on? Watch This Film is Not Yet Rated and try telling us that again. I’d have an easier time believing NC-17 is reserved for films that DON’T portray acts of female sexuality as rape.

  22. Jaja says:

    This movie is going to be a hot sexy mess. Luke Grimes was cast as Grey’s brother. Jamie AND Luke? Yes, a thousand times yes.

  23. Megan says:

    That chick is really unattractive. I don’t find the guy all that cute either.

  24. Katija says:

    I’m so over trying to be cool. I will gladly admit that I am excited to drunkenly watch this with all of my best girlfriends at the booze-y theater.

  25. GMarchetti says:

    Duh, it’s beyond obvious: Rated R theatrical version, and then an Uncut/Unrated/Whatever They’re Gonna Call Version for the Blu-ray release.

  26. Lark says:

    I love Lainey’s take on this, and I agree with her that Dakota is an “enhanced” version of the author (hence, the bangs). Jamie is looking good. I’m starting to feel kind of bad for Dakota though…people seem to be associating her with the “character” already, and I have a feeling that she (as a person) is going to be conflated with the character to some people…and because the character is so obnoxious, people are going to start finding her that way…..Jamie’s a man, so he’ll probably escape that with double standards and all….Anyway, Dakota was adorable on Kate and Ben and probably could have had a decent TV career…but I think while this film series has the potential to actually earn a lot of money at the box office, that it is going to turn her into a “joke.” And it’s kind of depressing to think that this crap is probably going to earn a ton of money.

  27. Shoe_Lover says:

    FFS- the fans want it dirty? if they want to watch something “dirty” just go to redtube and you can watch all sorts of BDSM p0rn. Its hotter and more accurate. if they want to read about actual BDSM there are plenty of books better then this mess.
    i hate the books, i hate the idea of the films. the only good thing to come out of those books are Jenny Trouts hilarious recaps.

  28. Nanou says:

    I’ve just Rita Ora has been cast as Grey’s sister.
    I’ve stopped reading the first book a few weeks ago, mostly because there’s no plot at all, like it’s been said above and yes, Christian Grey bores me but that’s probably because we see him through Anastasia’s eyes. And Anastasia has no personality.

  29. Tig says:

    I think he looks the part- which is good. Wish I could say the same for Dakota. It will really be interesting to see who they end up casting as Elena. I guess they could put that off till they see how much $$$ this pulls in. I am assuming the 2nd won’t be made unless first does well.