Casting Fifty Shades of Grey

Well this is embarrassing; I've been spelling it "gray". Generally, for British versus American spellings, I prefer "e" to "a", but "o" to "ou". So they are using the one I like, but I do not appreciate it.

This post actually started as a joke, but then it caught hold in my brain, and I wanted to follow it to its logical absurd conclusion.

There was a lot of buzz on Twitter when casting was announced for the 50 Shades movie. I don't know whether it was an official announcement or a leak, but many people were unhappy, because that was not whom they had pictured and it was just wrong!

What they were not realizing is that it is quite possible that their favorites had turned down the roles. There would be plenty of good reasons for doing so. They could object to the subject matter, which I would totally get.

If their objection was more to the source material, not so much for content as literary quality or plot issues, that is also very reasonable. There is cause to believe you might not get a very good movie, and that can make people look like not very good actors or box office draws. People who are complete unknowns can't be picky, but if the movie wants to book a name, and the name believes they have a future, that's when you start being selective.

Now, if a bad movie is commercially successful, it could still be a career boost, but there are no guarantees here. Most of the articles I have read about the book listed the prevalence of e-readers as a factor in its success, because you could read it without anyone seeing you. People may be embarrassed to go to the theater. It might still do well with downloads or on-demand, but even the most successful direct-to-video feature is probably not the career boost that a moderately successful theatrical release would be.

If you are having trouble finding reliable box-office draws, going after television actors is a reasonable strategy, so Charlie Hunnam totally made sense. I guess that fell through, and Dakota Johnson has some credits but is still better known for her parents.

So, I have those flickering thoughts, like wondering if they asked Aaron Paul and Kristen Ritter, or someone who has died on Game of Thrones. Also, there is so much emphasis on tent-poles and cross-promotion now, is anyone working on that? Like maybe parties with catalogs of sheets, ties, and cuffs, like dirty Pampered Chef? Ultimately, where my mind went was that you need to go after people who say yes to everything, and my first thought was Samuel L Jackson and James Franco.

Okay, you are probably thinking that the ages and physical descriptions don't match, but doesn't it sound interesting to have a movie that is basically Samuel L Jackson spanking James Franco?

They may make questionable film choices at times, but in this case that is a plus, and as actors they both really go for it! I can see legitimate concerns about Jackson getting to into it and killing Franco, but that's what you have stunt coordinators for.

I believe Franco could play Ana as a girl, wholly committed to that, and he was recently a college student, so he could even be a little method. Jackson could really capture that controlling and damaged side of Christian.

It could work the other way too. I mean, Franco could play a rich sexual deviant who gets what he wants in his sleep, and Jackson might do interesting things with Ana, but I feel like the other way is a better fit. He's had Christina Ricci chained up, so he could build on that experience. Sometimes the obvious choice is the right choice.

And you still wouldn't have a movie that I would go see, but I bet it could still become a classic.

(No, I still haven't read the books. For more on my feelings about that, see http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/08/lets-talk-about-sex.html and http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/08/hurts-so-good.html.)