Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Digital Art / Hobbyist Member JamieFemale/United States Group :iconselfimprovementteam: SelfImprovementTeam
 
Recent Activity
Deviant for 3 Years
Needs Premium Membership
Statistics 350 Deviations 1,262 Comments 8,289 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

Favourites

Friends

Watchers

Groups

deviantID

SpontaneousKlutz's Profile Picture
SpontaneousKlutz
Jamie
Artist | Hobbyist | Digital Art
United States
Hey all I am Jamie!
From the UK but residing in the USA.

▂ ▄ ▅ ▇ █ ♪♫♥ MUSIC IS MY LIFE ♥♪♫ █ ▇ ▆ ▄ ▂

Point Commissions - Open by SweetDuke Commissions - Open by SweetDuke Requests - Ask Me by SweetDuke Trades - Closed by SweetDuke Gifts - On Hold by SweetDuke

Adopt Customs OPEN - Stamp by Drache-Lehre Adopt Breedings NOTE ME - Stamp by Drache-Lehre
Interests

Donate

SpontaneousKlutz has started a donation pool!
72 / 3,000
Really want a premium membership!
Please help!

You must be logged in to donate.

Activity


Adopts for Sale! by SpontaneousKlutz
Adopts for Sale!
Out of creative boredom I made these pretties!
I want to keep like 3...But I have too many characters as is haha
So! I will accept Deltas or Paypal or points :)

Price: 2.64$/4Δ/25:points: 
Δ: SpontaneousBeauty
$: ravens.fly217@live.com
Points : SpontaneousKlutz

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Lines(c) :iconbasebubble:
Designs(c): myself
Loading...
  • Mood: Irritated

I saw 50 Shades of Grey at the cinema the night it opened. I was expecting to sit there and critique Mr Grey on his flogging technique, have a cheap laugh at his attempt at kink, laugh at the audiences amazement at basic kink, feel superior to the wannabe kinksters in the cinema who haven't seen anything raunchy since Sex in the City 2, laugh at the bad writing, and compare it frame by frame to Twilight.

And I did all that.

I also thought I'd be laughing at the people calling it "50 Shades of Abuse", I thought they were kinksters who were overreacting to the bad technique, or vanillas confusing kink with abuse, or conservative nut-jobs who think lights-on-sex would invoke the wrath of the lord.

Jesus christ, was I wrong. This wasn't a movie about a young woman finding BDSM, this wasn't a kinky love story. This was the story of an abusive relationship hiding behind sloppy BDSM. I'm disgusted that any time I'll come out to a vanilla in the next 10 years this film is going to be the first thing that goes through their head! I can basically group what was wrong with the movie in 5 categories: Abusive manipulative behavior hiding behind consensual kink (AMBHBCK?), Mr Grey is an asshole, unsafe or generally bad BDSM, unrealistic characters, and filming fuck ups.

(Note - This writing apply only to the movie adaption of the story. I don't recall any of the following problems being in the book).

(TRIGGER WARNING. This is an review of a story of emotional and physical abuse - so it will be talking about these topics. I saw first hand this movie notably upset an emotional abuse survivor, and it could do the same to others.)

 

Abusive manipulative behavior hiding behind consensual kink

The emotional manipulation was subtle at first, and, just like abusers in the real world, built up over time. To best explain what I feel he's doing, I'm going to describe the Mr Grey Emotional Manipulation Method (tm) (r) (c) in parts and then put them all together at the end.

One of the demands made of Anastasia by Mr Grey was that they sleep apart, and, he defines sleep to include subspace and subcoma. She hates this and is constantly requesting post-sex, post-play, and overnight company. The play shown for each of their first few plays was intimate and light, then, (obviously after some heavier action not shown on screen,) he's shown taking her unconscious, worn, body to her own bed, placing her in her bed, and then leaving. Several times, he sits in the lounge room and plays the piano, and she wakes up alone some time later. Where do I begin with this? People in a coma can suffocate, a happy sub-space can turn quickly to a drop, and I absolutely refuse to leave an unconscious sub alone for these reasons (and others). This isn't manipulative on its own, but it is one of the foundations for his manipulation - for the purposes of explaining it I'm going to call this "The Encourager".

He stated both implicitly and directly that Anastasia was the cause of a particular problem that was actually his fault and his alone, and he was unloading his emotional responsibility onto her. Anastasia was blamed for him feeling aroused, angry, upset, and more. We all obviously know it's never the Dom's fault he's angry, its the sub fault. This contributes to a part of the manipulation I'm going to call "The Notifier"

She was taken to a foreign city for play - separating her from friends and family. She was actually tricked into flying to another city - picked up directly from work for a date early in the film and taken to a helipad. This was delivered under the disguise of "rich guys can spoil a woman", but helped him confidently say "there's the door, walk out it if you want", trapping her with invisible bars of an unknown city. This is, "The Isolator".

She was asked to sign a nondisclosure agreement too - ensuring that she couldn't ask anyone for help without threat of being sued. On a more subtle note, because she couldn't discuss her relationship with anyone, she had no-one to ask "is this normal?". This would lead over time to her having no-one to ask for help - more "The Isolator"

Continuing on from the general theme of cutting of her connections to the outside world, at one point, she announces to him that she's visiting her family tomorrow on short notice. He gets really upset and angry about it. While she's visiting her family, he uses specifically formulated language to suggest that he's seeing another girl, setting off jealousy and subtly punishing her for it. There's no collar, relationship, agreement, or contract or anything at this point, so she hasn't done anything wrong. This is also a radically different scene in the book (where they just joked about it round the table). It's a stand-alone example of manipulation, yet is a sub-manipulation contributing to the "Isolator" component of his bigger manipulation.

Partial romance was offered to her to seduce her into signing the contract. It was implied repeatedly that romance was not what he wanted long term, so reasonably conjectured from phrases like "I will use you for only what I want", is that he probably wouldn't continue romance long term. He was hot one moment, and cold the next, with his warmth aligned to how she's feeling about the contract. This is "The Encourager" again, as well as a bit of "Notifier".

In one scene, he explodes angrily when she asks "what's wrong?". (It's not the subs fault your business empire is falling apart). A short hot / cold intimacy exchange follows, in which she is basically emotionally blackmailed into hard-limit breaking play. This verbal exchange, essentially word for word, I've observed first hand between abuser and victim. He explodes at least 3 times in the film - a nasty red flag on its own, but for the purposes of this list its another "Notifier"

He sold her car without her consent. Yes, he bought her a new, better one, but still - giving a gift is great, but you don't throw out her old one without asking, this left her at his mercy regarding travel. (Reading the book and the movie and connecting dots I can actually conject that the car had a tracking device in it - but this isn't explored either way in the movie.) This is another "Isolator"

Conditional gifts were given unconsentially. These covered several aspects of her life. Her laptop, her car, etc. It took away her concept of self-ownership of property. One of the last scenes showed her returning all the gifts he'd given her - leaving her without a car and without a laptop. Had this break up occurred deeper into their D/s she would've had even less property, perhaps not even owning her own clothes or shoes, for example. Large, excessive gifts from abuser to abusee are an example of what I'm calling "The Counter-Exhibit".

About an hour in - it became clear that he was setting up an abandonment trigger in her. This is a sub manipulation; He would emotionally bring her close, and then push her away when she upsets him to 'punish' her. He repeats this over and over. By the second hour, the mere concept of him being in a state which suggests potential break up is enough to scare her. I'm close to 2 survivors of intentional abandonment triggers, and his technique could've been taken from their stories. This sub-manipulation forms an additional form of "Feedback".

Putting all the pieces together of his emotional abuse, we get a simple functional way to manipulate Anastasia into doing things.

  • Encourager, we define something long term that motivates the abused to perform general actions over the course of her abuse. This is usually a target state in the abuser requested by the abusee, and the abused is required to 'work' to achieve it. In this movie it was affection and warmth from the abuser - a fairly common one in the real world.
  • Notifier - the notifier is how the abuser submits an action request to the abused. Mr Grey did it through a variety of methods, most not subtle at all. The simplest non-trivial example was withdrawing emotional investment (or adding anger) during discussion to emphasise particular requirements, but for the majority of actions he simply said what was required and then fobbed off her objections.
  • Isolator - metaphorically, these are the dividers which turn a swimming pool of possible options into a swim lane. They stop the sub from escaping, and they limit the way the sub can commit an action into predictable paths.
  • Feedback. Feedback is how the abuser lets the abused know whether they've succeeded. It can be anything from a violent punch in the face (task 0% complete) to a passionate love making session (task 100% complete). This is the reward or punishment for the abused for progress on their action - a measure of how far down the metaphorical swimlane they've gone. Hot and cold behaviour is a great way to provide feedback to the abused, snapping or triggering behaviour works even better. He did all of these.
  • Counter-Exhibit - Continuing from the Isolator, the Counter-Exhibit is evidence provided by the abuser that he's not abusing you. It stops the abused from seeking advice from themselves. Some very common examples of this in the real world are apologies the morning after from the abuser to the victim. "I'm sorry I hit you, I was just really angry, I'm not angry now, I promise it wont happen again. The abused takes this counter exhibit and uses it to rationalise her past choices, and decides she's not being abused - it was just a bad night. In 50 shades, her constant showering in expensive gifts was an exhibit to both her and her friends that there was no abuse going on - that her relationship was in fact envious, as well as the positive feedback she received for completing actions successfully.

And that's how basic emotional abuse works. Its an easy trap to fall into and become the victim to an emotional abuser. I know this not just because many people around me had this happen to them, but also because I personally fell into one once.

 

Mr Grey is an asshole.

I'm going move into my second category of pointing out things he's done which I consider absolute fuck-tard behaviour by Mr Grey. I'm not including intentionally manipulative behaviour - that's the previous section.

A consistent theme shown throughout the first part of the movie was negotiation was one way. Anastasia has to negotiate and give ground, but he never does. He doesn't give ground in any of his cruelest demands, yet she is reminded several times that this "is a negotiation" when she protests her case.

She was asked her to sign a contract before common things were explained to her. "What's a butt plug?" was asked - to the amusement of the audience - however considerable pressure was placed on her to sign it before she was given clear understanding of what she was being asked to consent to. It's fairly intuitive that uninformed consent is not consent.

Despite her not signing the contract, or even informally agreeing to it, protocol was being enforced. He stated something like "Nothing will begin until you sign this and give your consent", yet he was punishing or calling her out for specific things in the contract like touching him without consent or consuming excessive alcohol, and telling her to kneel at the door waiting when he walks into the room - before she's consented to anything or signed the contract.

He doesn't care what state she's in, her mood was irrelevant to him. And while one scene he shows his skills in reading body language, but in the rest, he is totally ignoring her feelings - as if trying to teach her that her feelings are irrelevant. He behaves like Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory - viewing her state of mind as a hindrance in getting what he wants, and unwilling to consider any part of the other person's position.

He broke into her apartment when she was asleep - they were at a down point and he 'made it right' by walking in on her, and waking her up at the right moment. Doms, don't try this at home! Unfortunately, he's rewarded with kinky sex, so everyone will take the wrong message home from this scene.

Looking back from the end of the film, I don't think he ever answered a non-trivial question from her honestly and openly. He always dodged the issue and turned it back on her somehow.

The final play scene showed her crying scared during a play, and then run away from him, and, while you may hear it argued she never "RED"'d, he had just not a minute before said "fuck the contract" - so she could've easily believed she no longer had a safe word.

Oh, and He ordered her to go on the contraceptive pill without negotiation. Before any contract signed or consent or anything. And she does. On top of this, this is the USA where abortion / contraception issues are a considerably more controversial social issue than Australia.

 

BDSM technique fails.

The amount of simple BDSM mistakes was surprising to me, as I'd read online that the actor had taken lessons and even attended local scene parties in order to get an understanding of what he was portraying. He visibly used tightening slip knots for limb restraining, he does a partial suspension despite her stating that suspension is a hard limit, the only clearly portrayed flogging hit her lower abdomen, as did a crop, and the very first spank shown in the film landed squarely on the base of her spine. He also was unable to separate play from sex and viewed them as one.

A spread eagle rope bondage scene was shown - in which all 4 of her limbs where visibly restrained with slip knots. Now, I'm no angel when it comes to knot selection, but jeez, a percentage of the audience is going to try this for the first time within an hour of the credits rolling, and I suspect they wanted to show an easy knot so that the "50 shades of grey collection silk bondage rope" would sell well.

She states suspension is hard limit. If you connect the on-screen shots of her contract with the dialog, its actually her only one, as his only other suggested limits ("anal and vaginal fisting") piques her interest and she asks that it be not included in the limit lits. Yet, in one of the long play montages about 70% through the movie, a partial suspension is shown with her wrists in suspension cuffs, cuffed to a movable overhead grid and her feet momentarily coming off the ground.

He cropped and flogged her, on the front of lower abdomen. The area with lots of sensitive squishy bits and not much in the way of protection. This is not a good idea to hit - eg one of a partner's other partners gave her a few good hits with a small tawste in that area and 2 days later there are moments where we're considering a trip to the emergency ward due to pain.

The first spank shown in the film was targeted towards to arse - but fell on the base of her spine. As a guess I'd say they wanted to show her face and the first spank fall in the same frame, and chose a well layed out frame instead of something safe. Now, it wasn't a very hard spank, borderline sensation-play levels, but still, members of the audience are going to try this at home.

All play is sexual to Mr Grey. No play did he keep his pants on. I'm not saying I'm concerned with people who have sex during play - as even I do this occasionally - I'm writing here that it was shown that sex occurs every play. They used BDSM as a form of foreplay, and, at least not on screen, it was never shown as being stand-alone. I'd almost go so far as to say they only did fetishised sex with adequate foreplay, rather than BDSM.

 

Characters

The unrealistic characters were difficult to fathom at times; Mr Grey was just a richer Mr Big, he had too many achievements under his belt, his employees are all hot chicks, and, while he wasn't a Mary Sue, his one imperfection was a slap in the face.

Something which urks me in many movies is the concept of a female supporting character being the reward to the male character for accomplishing the goal. "Congradulations Mr Bond on averting Dr Evil's plan to block out the sun - as a reward, take Ms SexPunToCome out into the sunset". 50 Shades of Grey reverse the gender objectification. Mr Grey was the reward for Anastasia. He was the bait dangled in front of her if she performed the goals of the story. The billionaire hottie partner was her reward for being a good little sub and, at the end of the day, taking the abuse.

Mr Grey is way to qualified for a 27 year old - doing a little cross-referencing with the billionaires list, I think the real life inspiration for the professional side of Mr Grey is actually Richard Branson (They both own and actively manage a telecommunications company, both have pilots licences, both have helicopter licence, both are billionaire paradigm-shifters who surround themselves with hot chicks.) Could Branson have accomplished all that by 27? Not likely. After a quick Wikipedia browse, in the USA, you need 1,200 hours of helicopter experience and 1,500 hours of light aircraft experience in order to carry passengers, and you can't start till your 23. No way could you get that much practice in that short a period of time while actively running your own company.

The only male he employed was his driver, everyone else at his entire company was a hot chick in a short dress. I'd love to see a sex discrimination audit of his company. And they didn't really seem to do anything beyond "Personal Assistant" and "Walk around looking sexy". "Mr Grey? Where did our R&D budget go?" "Oh, I spent it on hiring hookers to walk around the halls looking pretty! Fortune 500 here we come!"

The only good thing I found in the Mr Grey character (from a literary perspective anyway) was he wasn't quite a Mary Sue (character with perfect attributes and no flaws). Turns out he was abused as a child and had his birth mother drink herself to death. Everyone in the audience goes "oh, that explains it - he's fucked in the head because of bad upbringing - its not his fault he's an asshole". It perpetuates the cycle of abuse conjecture, and makes abuse victims feel predetermined that they're going to commit abuse.

General fuck ups and filming annoyances

And then we have the filming annoyances and general fuck-ups; welts appeared before the crop touched the skin, over exaggerated camera angles, suspension with unsecured wrist cuffs, and makeup and contract sync symbolism overload.

First crop was shown to run over her arse - there was already a welt on her arse... despite having only had 3 spanks shown before. If they've been doing other play not shown to the camera, at least allude to it, else you have a virgin whose "never done anything" who somehow has done welt-worthy kink.

Each shot of Mr Grey in her presence was from below. Good god do I know that chin well by now. The symbolism got old real quick. You could tell he was standing on a crate or something as other shots he was about the same height as her.

There was a partial suspension (by wrists) shown. Now, the cuffs they were using looked awesome - and I totally want to track them down because they were better than my suspension gear, however she was in them so loosely that she would've slipped out had she lowered her hands.

She was shown with visible, natural complexion. Freckles, acne, normal hair, realistic human flesh, and, surprisingly, pubic hair. At first I was impressed at the lack of photoshopping and realistic appearance. Then, over the course of the movie, as she gets closer to signing the contract, her imperfections disappear, and as she chickens out, they come back. And while there was equivalent symbolism in American Beauty, this one was re-enforcing the concept of "single sub equals ugly" - which isn't a healthy message to put subconsciously into peoples heads.

 

Conclusion

So my visit went like this: about an hour in, I got my phone out and started noting the mistakes made in the film. These were mistakes made by most newbies, myself included. During which time the sub sitting next to me was face palming every other minute... and then dots started connecting in my head, and his earlier action's intentions became clear, so much so that the second hour of the movie I was pretty much taking notes of all the abusive behaviour, and in the final minutes I was basically comforting the traumatised sub next to me. I was glad when the credits rolled, because another few minutes of watching the culmination of emotional abuse and I'd of had to of walked out to have saved the subs mental health.

I apologise to the kink scene for going to see it - because my $16 will partially go back to the producer, and influence his decision to produce a sequel. Please don't go see it. Torrent a cam if you must, but for the love of all things kink this movie does not represent us.

  • Mood: Irritated

I saw 50 Shades of Grey at the cinema the night it opened. I was expecting to sit there and critique Mr Grey on his flogging technique, have a cheap laugh at his attempt at kink, laugh at the audiences amazement at basic kink, feel superior to the wannabe kinksters in the cinema who haven't seen anything raunchy since Sex in the City 2, laugh at the bad writing, and compare it frame by frame to Twilight.

And I did all that.

I also thought I'd be laughing at the people calling it "50 Shades of Abuse", I thought they were kinksters who were overreacting to the bad technique, or vanillas confusing kink with abuse, or conservative nut-jobs who think lights-on-sex would invoke the wrath of the lord.

Jesus christ, was I wrong. This wasn't a movie about a young woman finding BDSM, this wasn't a kinky love story. This was the story of an abusive relationship hiding behind sloppy BDSM. I'm disgusted that any time I'll come out to a vanilla in the next 10 years this film is going to be the first thing that goes through their head! I can basically group what was wrong with the movie in 5 categories: Abusive manipulative behavior hiding behind consensual kink (AMBHBCK?), Mr Grey is an asshole, unsafe or generally bad BDSM, unrealistic characters, and filming fuck ups.

(Note - This writing apply only to the movie adaption of the story. I don't recall any of the following problems being in the book).

(TRIGGER WARNING. This is an review of a story of emotional and physical abuse - so it will be talking about these topics. I saw first hand this movie notably upset an emotional abuse survivor, and it could do the same to others.)

 

Abusive manipulative behavior hiding behind consensual kink

The emotional manipulation was subtle at first, and, just like abusers in the real world, built up over time. To best explain what I feel he's doing, I'm going to describe the Mr Grey Emotional Manipulation Method (tm) (r) (c) in parts and then put them all together at the end.

One of the demands made of Anastasia by Mr Grey was that they sleep apart, and, he defines sleep to include subspace and subcoma. She hates this and is constantly requesting post-sex, post-play, and overnight company. The play shown for each of their first few plays was intimate and light, then, (obviously after some heavier action not shown on screen,) he's shown taking her unconscious, worn, body to her own bed, placing her in her bed, and then leaving. Several times, he sits in the lounge room and plays the piano, and she wakes up alone some time later. Where do I begin with this? People in a coma can suffocate, a happy sub-space can turn quickly to a drop, and I absolutely refuse to leave an unconscious sub alone for these reasons (and others). This isn't manipulative on its own, but it is one of the foundations for his manipulation - for the purposes of explaining it I'm going to call this "The Encourager".

He stated both implicitly and directly that Anastasia was the cause of a particular problem that was actually his fault and his alone, and he was unloading his emotional responsibility onto her. Anastasia was blamed for him feeling aroused, angry, upset, and more. We all obviously know it's never the Dom's fault he's angry, its the sub fault. This contributes to a part of the manipulation I'm going to call "The Notifier"

She was taken to a foreign city for play - separating her from friends and family. She was actually tricked into flying to another city - picked up directly from work for a date early in the film and taken to a helipad. This was delivered under the disguise of "rich guys can spoil a woman", but helped him confidently say "there's the door, walk out it if you want", trapping her with invisible bars of an unknown city. This is, "The Isolator".

She was asked to sign a nondisclosure agreement too - ensuring that she couldn't ask anyone for help without threat of being sued. On a more subtle note, because she couldn't discuss her relationship with anyone, she had no-one to ask "is this normal?". This would lead over time to her having no-one to ask for help - more "The Isolator"

Continuing on from the general theme of cutting of her connections to the outside world, at one point, she announces to him that she's visiting her family tomorrow on short notice. He gets really upset and angry about it. While she's visiting her family, he uses specifically formulated language to suggest that he's seeing another girl, setting off jealousy and subtly punishing her for it. There's no collar, relationship, agreement, or contract or anything at this point, so she hasn't done anything wrong. This is also a radically different scene in the book (where they just joked about it round the table). It's a stand-alone example of manipulation, yet is a sub-manipulation contributing to the "Isolator" component of his bigger manipulation.

Partial romance was offered to her to seduce her into signing the contract. It was implied repeatedly that romance was not what he wanted long term, so reasonably conjectured from phrases like "I will use you for only what I want", is that he probably wouldn't continue romance long term. He was hot one moment, and cold the next, with his warmth aligned to how she's feeling about the contract. This is "The Encourager" again, as well as a bit of "Notifier".

In one scene, he explodes angrily when she asks "what's wrong?". (It's not the subs fault your business empire is falling apart). A short hot / cold intimacy exchange follows, in which she is basically emotionally blackmailed into hard-limit breaking play. This verbal exchange, essentially word for word, I've observed first hand between abuser and victim. He explodes at least 3 times in the film - a nasty red flag on its own, but for the purposes of this list its another "Notifier"

He sold her car without her consent. Yes, he bought her a new, better one, but still - giving a gift is great, but you don't throw out her old one without asking, this left her at his mercy regarding travel. (Reading the book and the movie and connecting dots I can actually conject that the car had a tracking device in it - but this isn't explored either way in the movie.) This is another "Isolator"

Conditional gifts were given unconsentially. These covered several aspects of her life. Her laptop, her car, etc. It took away her concept of self-ownership of property. One of the last scenes showed her returning all the gifts he'd given her - leaving her without a car and without a laptop. Had this break up occurred deeper into their D/s she would've had even less property, perhaps not even owning her own clothes or shoes, for example. Large, excessive gifts from abuser to abusee are an example of what I'm calling "The Counter-Exhibit".

About an hour in - it became clear that he was setting up an abandonment trigger in her. This is a sub manipulation; He would emotionally bring her close, and then push her away when she upsets him to 'punish' her. He repeats this over and over. By the second hour, the mere concept of him being in a state which suggests potential break up is enough to scare her. I'm close to 2 survivors of intentional abandonment triggers, and his technique could've been taken from their stories. This sub-manipulation forms an additional form of "Feedback".

Putting all the pieces together of his emotional abuse, we get a simple functional way to manipulate Anastasia into doing things.

  • Encourager, we define something long term that motivates the abused to perform general actions over the course of her abuse. This is usually a target state in the abuser requested by the abusee, and the abused is required to 'work' to achieve it. In this movie it was affection and warmth from the abuser - a fairly common one in the real world.
  • Notifier - the notifier is how the abuser submits an action request to the abused. Mr Grey did it through a variety of methods, most not subtle at all. The simplest non-trivial example was withdrawing emotional investment (or adding anger) during discussion to emphasise particular requirements, but for the majority of actions he simply said what was required and then fobbed off her objections.
  • Isolator - metaphorically, these are the dividers which turn a swimming pool of possible options into a swim lane. They stop the sub from escaping, and they limit the way the sub can commit an action into predictable paths.
  • Feedback. Feedback is how the abuser lets the abused know whether they've succeeded. It can be anything from a violent punch in the face (task 0% complete) to a passionate love making session (task 100% complete). This is the reward or punishment for the abused for progress on their action - a measure of how far down the metaphorical swimlane they've gone. Hot and cold behaviour is a great way to provide feedback to the abused, snapping or triggering behaviour works even better. He did all of these.
  • Counter-Exhibit - Continuing from the Isolator, the Counter-Exhibit is evidence provided by the abuser that he's not abusing you. It stops the abused from seeking advice from themselves. Some very common examples of this in the real world are apologies the morning after from the abuser to the victim. "I'm sorry I hit you, I was just really angry, I'm not angry now, I promise it wont happen again. The abused takes this counter exhibit and uses it to rationalise her past choices, and decides she's not being abused - it was just a bad night. In 50 shades, her constant showering in expensive gifts was an exhibit to both her and her friends that there was no abuse going on - that her relationship was in fact envious, as well as the positive feedback she received for completing actions successfully.

And that's how basic emotional abuse works. Its an easy trap to fall into and become the victim to an emotional abuser. I know this not just because many people around me had this happen to them, but also because I personally fell into one once.

 

Mr Grey is an asshole.

I'm going move into my second category of pointing out things he's done which I consider absolute fuck-tard behaviour by Mr Grey. I'm not including intentionally manipulative behaviour - that's the previous section.

A consistent theme shown throughout the first part of the movie was negotiation was one way. Anastasia has to negotiate and give ground, but he never does. He doesn't give ground in any of his cruelest demands, yet she is reminded several times that this "is a negotiation" when she protests her case.

She was asked her to sign a contract before common things were explained to her. "What's a butt plug?" was asked - to the amusement of the audience - however considerable pressure was placed on her to sign it before she was given clear understanding of what she was being asked to consent to. It's fairly intuitive that uninformed consent is not consent.

Despite her not signing the contract, or even informally agreeing to it, protocol was being enforced. He stated something like "Nothing will begin until you sign this and give your consent", yet he was punishing or calling her out for specific things in the contract like touching him without consent or consuming excessive alcohol, and telling her to kneel at the door waiting when he walks into the room - before she's consented to anything or signed the contract.

He doesn't care what state she's in, her mood was irrelevant to him. And while one scene he shows his skills in reading body language, but in the rest, he is totally ignoring her feelings - as if trying to teach her that her feelings are irrelevant. He behaves like Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory - viewing her state of mind as a hindrance in getting what he wants, and unwilling to consider any part of the other person's position.

He broke into her apartment when she was asleep - they were at a down point and he 'made it right' by walking in on her, and waking her up at the right moment. Doms, don't try this at home! Unfortunately, he's rewarded with kinky sex, so everyone will take the wrong message home from this scene.

Looking back from the end of the film, I don't think he ever answered a non-trivial question from her honestly and openly. He always dodged the issue and turned it back on her somehow.

The final play scene showed her crying scared during a play, and then run away from him, and, while you may hear it argued she never "RED"'d, he had just not a minute before said "fuck the contract" - so she could've easily believed she no longer had a safe word.

Oh, and He ordered her to go on the contraceptive pill without negotiation. Before any contract signed or consent or anything. And she does. On top of this, this is the USA where abortion / contraception issues are a considerably more controversial social issue than Australia.

 

BDSM technique fails.

The amount of simple BDSM mistakes was surprising to me, as I'd read online that the actor had taken lessons and even attended local scene parties in order to get an understanding of what he was portraying. He visibly used tightening slip knots for limb restraining, he does a partial suspension despite her stating that suspension is a hard limit, the only clearly portrayed flogging hit her lower abdomen, as did a crop, and the very first spank shown in the film landed squarely on the base of her spine. He also was unable to separate play from sex and viewed them as one.

A spread eagle rope bondage scene was shown - in which all 4 of her limbs where visibly restrained with slip knots. Now, I'm no angel when it comes to knot selection, but jeez, a percentage of the audience is going to try this for the first time within an hour of the credits rolling, and I suspect they wanted to show an easy knot so that the "50 shades of grey collection silk bondage rope" would sell well.

She states suspension is hard limit. If you connect the on-screen shots of her contract with the dialog, its actually her only one, as his only other suggested limits ("anal and vaginal fisting") piques her interest and she asks that it be not included in the limit lits. Yet, in one of the long play montages about 70% through the movie, a partial suspension is shown with her wrists in suspension cuffs, cuffed to a movable overhead grid and her feet momentarily coming off the ground.

He cropped and flogged her, on the front of lower abdomen. The area with lots of sensitive squishy bits and not much in the way of protection. This is not a good idea to hit - eg one of a partner's other partners gave her a few good hits with a small tawste in that area and 2 days later there are moments where we're considering a trip to the emergency ward due to pain.

The first spank shown in the film was targeted towards to arse - but fell on the base of her spine. As a guess I'd say they wanted to show her face and the first spank fall in the same frame, and chose a well layed out frame instead of something safe. Now, it wasn't a very hard spank, borderline sensation-play levels, but still, members of the audience are going to try this at home.

All play is sexual to Mr Grey. No play did he keep his pants on. I'm not saying I'm concerned with people who have sex during play - as even I do this occasionally - I'm writing here that it was shown that sex occurs every play. They used BDSM as a form of foreplay, and, at least not on screen, it was never shown as being stand-alone. I'd almost go so far as to say they only did fetishised sex with adequate foreplay, rather than BDSM.

 

Characters

The unrealistic characters were difficult to fathom at times; Mr Grey was just a richer Mr Big, he had too many achievements under his belt, his employees are all hot chicks, and, while he wasn't a Mary Sue, his one imperfection was a slap in the face.

Something which urks me in many movies is the concept of a female supporting character being the reward to the male character for accomplishing the goal. "Congradulations Mr Bond on averting Dr Evil's plan to block out the sun - as a reward, take Ms SexPunToCome out into the sunset". 50 Shades of Grey reverse the gender objectification. Mr Grey was the reward for Anastasia. He was the bait dangled in front of her if she performed the goals of the story. The billionaire hottie partner was her reward for being a good little sub and, at the end of the day, taking the abuse.

Mr Grey is way to qualified for a 27 year old - doing a little cross-referencing with the billionaires list, I think the real life inspiration for the professional side of Mr Grey is actually Richard Branson (They both own and actively manage a telecommunications company, both have pilots licences, both have helicopter licence, both are billionaire paradigm-shifters who surround themselves with hot chicks.) Could Branson have accomplished all that by 27? Not likely. After a quick Wikipedia browse, in the USA, you need 1,200 hours of helicopter experience and 1,500 hours of light aircraft experience in order to carry passengers, and you can't start till your 23. No way could you get that much practice in that short a period of time while actively running your own company.

The only male he employed was his driver, everyone else at his entire company was a hot chick in a short dress. I'd love to see a sex discrimination audit of his company. And they didn't really seem to do anything beyond "Personal Assistant" and "Walk around looking sexy". "Mr Grey? Where did our R&D budget go?" "Oh, I spent it on hiring hookers to walk around the halls looking pretty! Fortune 500 here we come!"

The only good thing I found in the Mr Grey character (from a literary perspective anyway) was he wasn't quite a Mary Sue (character with perfect attributes and no flaws). Turns out he was abused as a child and had his birth mother drink herself to death. Everyone in the audience goes "oh, that explains it - he's fucked in the head because of bad upbringing - its not his fault he's an asshole". It perpetuates the cycle of abuse conjecture, and makes abuse victims feel predetermined that they're going to commit abuse.

General fuck ups and filming annoyances

And then we have the filming annoyances and general fuck-ups; welts appeared before the crop touched the skin, over exaggerated camera angles, suspension with unsecured wrist cuffs, and makeup and contract sync symbolism overload.

First crop was shown to run over her arse - there was already a welt on her arse... despite having only had 3 spanks shown before. If they've been doing other play not shown to the camera, at least allude to it, else you have a virgin whose "never done anything" who somehow has done welt-worthy kink.

Each shot of Mr Grey in her presence was from below. Good god do I know that chin well by now. The symbolism got old real quick. You could tell he was standing on a crate or something as other shots he was about the same height as her.

There was a partial suspension (by wrists) shown. Now, the cuffs they were using looked awesome - and I totally want to track them down because they were better than my suspension gear, however she was in them so loosely that she would've slipped out had she lowered her hands.

She was shown with visible, natural complexion. Freckles, acne, normal hair, realistic human flesh, and, surprisingly, pubic hair. At first I was impressed at the lack of photoshopping and realistic appearance. Then, over the course of the movie, as she gets closer to signing the contract, her imperfections disappear, and as she chickens out, they come back. And while there was equivalent symbolism in American Beauty, this one was re-enforcing the concept of "single sub equals ugly" - which isn't a healthy message to put subconsciously into peoples heads.

 

Conclusion

So my visit went like this: about an hour in, I got my phone out and started noting the mistakes made in the film. These were mistakes made by most newbies, myself included. During which time the sub sitting next to me was face palming every other minute... and then dots started connecting in my head, and his earlier action's intentions became clear, so much so that the second hour of the movie I was pretty much taking notes of all the abusive behaviour, and in the final minutes I was basically comforting the traumatised sub next to me. I was glad when the credits rolled, because another few minutes of watching the culmination of emotional abuse and I'd of had to of walked out to have saved the subs mental health.

I apologise to the kink scene for going to see it - because my $16 will partially go back to the producer, and influence his decision to produce a sequel. Please don't go see it. Torrent a cam if you must, but for the love of all things kink this movie does not represent us.

AdCast - Ads from the Community

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconandso:
Andso Featured By Owner Mar 12, 2015
Jamie, great and also various work in your gallery!

I did a LOL at your movie review!
Reply
:iconspontaneousklutz:
SpontaneousKlutz Featured By Owner Mar 12, 2015  Hobbyist Digital Artist
heh thanks!
Reply
:iconandso:
Andso Featured By Owner Mar 13, 2015
No problem at all, big thanks for the great llama back to me too.

Have a great and fun weekend!
Reply
:iconaflyingpassion:
AFlyingPassion Featured By Owner Sep 6, 2014  Student Digital Artist
Thanks for the watch! :aww: I watched you back. :aww: a watch for a watch. :)
Reply
:iconbear48:
bear48 Featured By Owner Aug 12, 2014  Professional
:onfire: :squee: :onfire: :iconcollorllamapls:  :onfire: :squee: :onfire:


Thank you for the Llama :llama:

:onfire: :squee: :iconcircleplz:  :iconcollorllamapls:    :iconcircleplz:  :squee: :onfire:
Reply
:iconspontaneousklutz:
SpontaneousKlutz Featured By Owner Aug 12, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
you are very welcome! 
Reply
:iconaffirmed:
Affirmed Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2014  Student Digital Artist
Thank you for the :+fav:! :)
Reply
:iconspontaneousklutz:
SpontaneousKlutz Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
course :happybounce:
Reply
:iconhevonenstudios:
HevonenStudios Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you for the fav!!
Reply
:iconspontaneousklutz:
SpontaneousKlutz Featured By Owner Jul 8, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Of course! I love your art <3
Reply
Add a Comment: