50 Shades of Grey movie casts a new male lead -- but will it help?

I don’t get all the hoopla about Fifty Shades of Grey.

It was a terribly written book with terribly boring characters. To be fair, I only read the first book, but that was more than enough for me to realize that it wasn’t my thing.

When you’re talking about the book, it failed as fiction because it was so vapid and it failed as erotica because it just wasn’t hot.

Now that the book hoopla has all but disappeared, fans are now turning their attention to the movie adaptation.

When news broke a few weeks ago that Sons of Anarchy actor Charlie Hunnam had been cast – fans revolted. Interestingly enough, Hunnam is a serious actor and he could have lent some gravitas to the role of Christian Grey.

Hunnam, though, didn’t like the attention he was getting from the film – and the book’s crazed fans – and he dropped out of the role last week. He cited a bevy of reasons for pulling out, but it was obvious he didn’t want the attention the role would bring to him.

Dakota Johnson, the daughter of Melanie Griffith and Don Johnson, earned the role of Anastasia

Steele. She is still in the film and, as a relative unknown, she’ll probably be fine – although most of the online polls I’ve seen have been lobbying for Alexis Bledel.

On Thursday it was announced that Jamie Dornan had won the coveted role of Christian Grey. Who is Jamie Dornan? He’s a male model that I’ve seen in exactly two things: Marie Antoinette and Once Upon a Time.

I think Dornan has a certain charisma about him and he’ll probably be fine in the role. I still feel a little bad for him.

The Christian Grey role – and the Anastasia Steele role, quite frankly – aren’t roles I would embrace as an actor. Why? They both look like Showgirls-sized anchors around the necks of the actors that take them.

What do I mean by that? Ask Elizabeth Berkley if her career ever rebounded after Showgirls. I think 50 Shades of Grey has bomb written all over it – and it could ruin the careers of the actors attached.

There’s no way to get around the fact that 50 Shades of Grey is soft-core porn. You don’t see the actors on those skin flicks on Cinemax making it big after those movies – and I don’t think you’ll see the actors in 50 Shades of Grey overcoming the stigma of being in this movie.

Sure, the books have a contingent of teenage fans that don’t know any better. I used to read V.C. Andrews as a kid, too, and 50 Shades of Grey is really no different than V.C. Andrews. I also think the movie will be just as much of a bomb as Flowers in the Attic was.

This movie has a lot going against it. First off, the buzz has already died. If they wanted this movie to

be a box office hit, they would have rushed it into production and released it a year ago.

Second, there’s going to be a certain stigma attached to this film. A lot of people aren’t going to flock to the theaters to watch a film about bondage. And those that are into those things can just order porn on their home computers.

I’m actually hoping that Dornan pulls out of this project. I think he’s a talented guy, and I don’t want to see his career ruined.

As it stands, this is one film I won’t be catching in theaters or when it’s released on DVD. The book was bad enough, I have no intention of seeing the film.

What do you think? Is 50 Shades of Grey going to be a box office winner or loser?