Y'all don't like Poor Things either huh? | Khadija Mbowe
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 май 2024
- ✨ Leave Twitter behind and get your actual news from Ground News. Go to ground.news/Khadija to get 30% off the unlimited access Vantage plan this month only or subscribe for as little as $1/month
Titles and thumbnails are click-baity because most folks won't click or engage otherwise, which means RUclips won't recommend it.
0:00 Play
1:44 thanks Ground News
3:59 Poor Things
5:46 not that much furious jumping...
9:39 we don't wanna see it
21:04 we don't know how to talk about it
29:20 credits
********Khadija’s Socials************
Instagram ✨Twitter ✨Tiktok ✨
@khadija.mbowe
*MERCH*
letsflawnt.com/
/ letsflawnt
*Patreon*
/ khadijambowe
*Podcast*
theleftovermillennials.buzzsp...
Marigold Music Program:
/ marigoldmusicprogram
Sources 📚
Navigating the Delicate Balance of Sexuality and Storytelling in POOR THINGS
geektyrant.com/news/navigatin...
‘Poor Things’ is a hypersexual, strange trip
www.montanakaimin.com/arts_an...
Furious jumping: why Henry Cavill is wrong to be cross with sex scenes
www.theguardian.com/film/2024...
A ‘failure to launch’: Why young people are having less sex
www.latimes.com/california/st...
Almost half of gen Z viewers want less sex on screen, study finds
www.theguardian.com/culture/2...
Gen Z don’t want sex or romance to be shown in movies or TV shows anymore
www.unilad.com/film-and-tv/ne...
Sexy movies are a hard sell to Gen Z. Can Poor Things change that?
www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment...
Consent at Every Age
www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/usa...
Vids 🎥
Born Sexy Yesterday
• Born Sexy Yesterday
What People Aren’t Saying about Poor Things (2023)
• What People Aren’t Say...
Leave Twitter for the birds and get your actual news from Ground News. Go to ground.news/Khadija to get 30% off the unlimited access Vantage plan this month only or subscribe for as little as $1/month.
Dude, people get their "news" from Twitter. I genuinely shuddered!
That's horrifying! Yes, media literacy is *vital* in this day and age. People do stupid things and make terrible decisions based on very poor sources of information and Internet mobs. It's global gossip, given some sort of legitimacy because it's on a computer. We (metaphorically) burn witches! Mobs ruin people's lives based on misunderstood gossip that they heard 250 characters of, from someone who has an agenda and horribly misrepresented the situation. And *everything* has an angle! Every bit of information you see beyond putting a wardrobe together, has an agenda, a bias.
I dunno if this company can be trusted but I suppose it's better than nothing, and they'll live and die based on whether they fulfil their promises. So good thing, but I'm not gonna buy it cos I already know better than to trust... basically anything... as a source of news! If i do take news, I'm aware of who it's coming from and what likely problems there are with it. Again, better than nothing, but it's a sick world full of fuckers out there, who lie and cheat and don't even feel bad for a second.
Still, we can't leave media literacy to apps to do it for us. You can see obviously where the sources of abuse could be there. If they get big, they'll find it harder to be independent. We'll have to see, they've set themselves high standards. But this is still something desperately need to learn for themselves. How to take the media apart and think _why_ they're saying what they are, and how they are. Much of it isn't secret, people just don't look. Just knowing a few of the tricks is helpful.
Media literacy and critical thinking ought to be taught in schools. More important than maths or science! Which are important. Critical, rational thinking is a foundation of science anyway so that'll help students. They should be taught, and the reason that they aren't, might be that so many powerful people rely on hoodwinking and lying to the public. If they were called on their scams, it'd be harder for them to get away with it! So a politician, say, isn't likely to support a class on *"how to spot lying politicians".* Nor a big company support *"big companies abuse the shit out of everything and everyone, then paste a happy face on it".* So it's hard. It relies on true democracy, the will of the people. It's not an easy thing to sell, even though it's more important now than ever. Since the quality of news and information has gone down the toilet.
20:42 You sound so condescending. I think your opinion is wrong but I'm not gonna make assumptions about how you came to it and what it means about you.
Also some people aren't comfortable talking about sex because it's personal for them or because they're not with people they want to discuss it with. It doesn't automatically mean there's something wrong with them and that they're not as insightful and open as you are.🙄
@@Every5HoursBlckFemicide15 why did u choose to say this on the pinned comment that has nothing to do with ur comment lmao
LOVE Ground News, great easy to see who owns the source the political leanings and MOST important the level of factual information. Finally an easy way to know who is writing the stories. Putting on my old fossil hat, kids and millinials stop getting your news from freakin twitter and social media dear GFod you went to school didn't you? You whine about how crap the world is then be a freakin adult and educate yourself so we have a freakin democracy. Apathy and laziness is never an excuse~~!
@@Every5HoursBlckFemicide15 someone's mad lol
Godwin did not teach Bella about consent, but I think it’s interesting to mention that his character was also a victim of nonconsensual abuse. He was his father’s scientific guinea pig
Yep. All of that. Consent was never a thought in his head because he was taught something along the lines of the means justify the ends. He and his dad learned so much, but they never stopped to ask, "Should we? Introspection is not in the forefront of the minds. Nor to ask/think about the ramifications. I think that it can be reflected in the thinking of a lot of people, especially those who have the power and money to be able to do what they want with people even if it's not right. But they don't want to stop and think because that could delay progress and "science." Like my guy, why are yall so ready and willing to hurt people for the sake of "science?"
Absolutely!
THAT BIT!!! I would sometimes find myself frustrated (if not outright angry) with Godwin but then I'd remember, "I mean look at how his dad experimented on him-how would he know any different?" and that extra nuance makes this film just for me.
Yeah I really liked that. He was almost a monster himself, and before him, his dad was even more monstrous. It wouldn't even occur to him to think of consent. He doesn't understand what it means.
I like that they show him blatantly showing affection to Bella, clearly having some sort of empathy contrasted with his remarks and other behaviours that show that he possibly doesn't understand empathy at all. Shows how conflicted a person becomes when they have feelings but consistently have been conditioned to ignore them for whatever reason. It goes deep, and provokes thought.
After all, it's called "Poor ThingS," plural. And I don't think those are the only characters the title is referring to.
When we makes these subjects taboo, the people who engage in harmful behavior are the biggest winners.
I'm part of the kink community and I remember how shocked I was when I first joined at how valued open communication and negotiation is around everything. Years later and those skills have been so useful to me to avoid said people who engage in harmful behaviour.
YES!
EXACTLY
💯
CLOCK IT! inexperience and lack of education leaves people to be taken advantage of because they don’t know any better
I really hate the “Gen Z hates sex scenes” take. It’s such a gross oversimplification of the issue, and feels like the new “Millenials are killing X industry” headline that news sites used to spread.
I feel like it’s used as a way to discredit feminist analysis of the way women’s bodies are treated in media.
I can’t help but feel like we’re going backwards sometimes, we can’t criticize anything without someone screaming we hate fun. The one that really irks me is when people imply you must dislike something because you don’t understand it. No, I dislike it because I processed what I was shown and disagreed with the conclusion and conception tbh. Feminism is dead etc etc.
But also do folks really want the return of old James Bond esque sex scenes where it was just rapey?
YES you get it, i've been thinking this for ages. basically any critical analysis is met with 'oh people are just overly prudish haters these days!' like no, the issues have been going on for decades if not centuries, and most people (even those who think they're progressive) are perfectly fine being complicit in them.
@@ladygrey4113 um no….
If you are older than Gen-Z … (pre-internet boom) you were fed all the same conventional, curated messaging… if you wanted an alternative… you had to go research it yourself. This led to so much intriguing art, creativity & intellectualism. However now Gen-Z literally has access to “everything all at the same time” (in terms of information) … & the result is an extremely simplistic population, who just expect to be spoon-fed knowledge … & not bothering to look past the surface of any particular thing. Not shade.. just an observation.
Here’s the thing, someone will always scream about keeping things as they are, that it’s how it’s always going to be, so if they’re gonna keep screaming about it, then we’re just gonna give them something to scream about. Culture and perspective is constantly evolving, it’s exhausting, Never ending cycle will keep going.
It’s so frustrating because anytime I bring up that I didn’t like the movie, I get shot down for being seen as a prude. I don’t mind sex scenes; I’m all for fucking and sucking!! But the part that gives me an ick is that there are no consequences for Bella being preyed upon by all of the men in her life. She’s not affected by any of it, and the only character that’s criticized for molesting her is Mark Ruffalo’s character. But the original love interest is somehow innocent when he originally intended to marry her when she was still a baby? Bella’s sexual assault comes off as empowering and comedic, and the entire movie I never felt empowered or laughed, I just felt horrified for her.
it is extremely sexist that this is a common response. reject reject. anyway ia lol like honestly i's fine to like it, the film is FINE, but this shielding off from this critique woof.
same. it was emotionally harrowing to watch her lack of ability to consent be taken advantage of, and yet at the same time it didn’t feel like the film really dared to treat it as serious and damaging as that is? it wanted to draw parallels to actual csa in the beginning, but didn’t seem invested enough to tackle the aftermath of that, or at least in a way that would make be able to resonate with it. i wouldn’t have minded all the explicit sex scenes if she had been consenting, but she wasn’t!
I dont think that max (her younger love interest) ist portrayed as innocent at all. I understand the thought that the scenes where the men take advantage of her are not highlighting this behavior enough. But one may recollect that first, this takes place in the victorian england, second, lanthimos (seems to) often call up the viewers to actively watch the movie, thirdly, bella actually does not seem to be hurt by this because she encourages and repeats it (probably because of her quasi non existent emotional dimension in the first half of the movie but her fully physical approach to happiness) (of course not actively knowing yet that she is being taken advantage of by duncan) and May therefore be a case Not universally applicable for this part. For the First Sex scenes I think it is intended for the audience to be disgusted or estranged because of the exploitative nature of duncan (or his ignorance of bellas naitivity and mental age). The explicit scenes in paris are of yet another nature as then bella is way more developed and self assured, yet also (,continuing experiences from the ship cruise,) besides other, growing less fond of the physical urges as main drive.
The excessive/„overdone“ representation of sex scenes (which are not erotically portrayed btw) May also be seen as another poke towards polite society and norms.
She wasn't a baby though. I agree he was predatory but by the time they were engaged she was past her early developmental stages.
I like to think that the sex in the movie is as much fantasy as the chicken with a dog's head. In the fantasy world of the movie, a woman can easily have an orgasm simply by being penetrated (it's never that simple in real life), and risks of an unwanted pregnancy or a STD don't exist. In a world where sex is so simple, what happens to Bella is understandable and I can enjoy the movie. But there's almost nothing that can be translated to real life and it lacks the level of complexity necessary to have something to say about feminism or whatever.
If I had to describe poor things I would call it a Freudian journey (compared to the hero's journey). A character explores first her ID then her ego and then her super-ego. It is a journey to full personhood.
That's one of the reasons there is so much sex in it. Bella cares only about food and sex at first.
On the boat, she starts reading and learning, and when she sees human suffering she starts caring about morals and other people.
The hardest thing to defend is that Bella has a baby's brain. It is certainly a big ick that makes all the men in the movie look like disgusting pigs. If that plot point is too disgusting for someone, I can sympathize with that.
But in my opinion, it is taking the film way too literally. Especially if you consider how weird and surrealist the whole movie is. Bella develops rapidly. By the end of the film, she has outpaced anyone else in maturity, especially the men. Looking at this through a realistic lens won't get you far.
I really love this explanation. It both highlights the nuance of the movie, but also the sticking point that I think people (myself included) have an issue with.
Right, I could see the movie working without that plot point since she could easily still be childlike due to her lack of experience rather than her brain being literally underdeveloped, and maybe that would make the story easier to take for some people, but is the point of art always to be easily digestible?
To be clear, I don’t think art being shocking or provocative is its highest purpose, but would we even be analyzing the themes in Poor Things to this degree if it didn’t include parts that some find problematic?
Love this take!
Yesss thank you for this point
All of this!
I also don’t understand how people miss the point that it’s very well indicated that her maturity is exponentially faster than what it “normally” would be - by the last 1/3 of the movie, she not only doesn’t have the odd gait of someone trying to control their body but the way the world is shown is also much more realistic. Her world starts off in black and white, then bright fantastical colours in Portugal, then darker saturated colours on the steamer and in France, then by the end, the scene in the garden has bright lighting and natural colours.
The way the scenery before she starts to read and learn about the world is very “Burton-esque” and I interpreted it to be coding of the story of the Buddha, where Bella moves away from her gilded existence long enough to see what human suffering is.
Thank you for your distinguishing between the "born sexy yesterday" trope and the plotting of Poor Things. imo the movie also chose to highlight the specific ways that all the men around Bella (with the exception of the friend she meets on the ship) are predatory in nature towards her, even Ramy's character and Gott. And they are predatory towards her because of her childish nature, which is gross and imo the movie portrays it as such. Mark Ruffalo's character being a complete joke and a buffoon sends that home, especially when he turns on her as soon as she starts to display her own signs of agency, intelligence and maturation. I really liked this film a lot, but I am a young millennial, so maybe there's a generational gap in there somewhere
I am a younger millenial who is tired of "feminist" media pushing beautiful women having wanton sex with odious men as liberation. It's old and tired and annoying.
The performances in the movie were great. I don't think Emma was coerced - she produced the film. We know the impact media has on society. This movie has a woman with a child's brain. Those men aren't shown to be creeps. They're all portrayed as goofs and Bella is never in any danger in those situations. In a world where many predators accuse children of tempting and teasing them, why does the movie portray Bella as in control the entire time? It's creepy! Even the "nice guy" doctor falls in love with her child brain. Ugh.
@@125loopyA possible thing you missed is that her brain is growing, she's maturing over the course of the film. While her brain started out from a baby she's not stuck there and her development is skewed from the normal human one we know. And while yeah a woman having sex with whiever she wants to and gaining some power with it isn't new, it's not a crazy concept. And portraying the people taling advantage of her as idiots isn't necessarily a bad thing, it also shows just how small and dumb their characters and beliefs are. And idk about never being in danger when the ending of the film involves her being threatened at gun point. Then again this whole film isn't meant to be realistic or possible in our real world in the first place. So why expect it to be like a trauma dump or revenge assault film?
never in any danger? her old husband repeatedly threatened to kill her and wanted to drug her in order to perform FGM on her! mark ruffalos character gets more abusive and controlling over time and seeks to ruin her life after stealing her money! as well, shes NOT in control the entire time, she learns throughout the course of the story how to establish her autonomy and respect herself and her boundaries. she wasnt even allowed outside of her house at the beginning of the film. i think your distaste for certain aspects of the film made you blind to what actually happens in the story
@@125loopy This is exactly the kind of critique Khadija was talking about lol
Ok, but why's it protraied on screen. You can show the devlopmend of her character and the interactions without showing anything graficaly, using people talking of it or her thoghts for example
I disliked the movie, but not because of any misunderstanding or discomfort regarding the themes and intent. I'm just thoroughly tired of any mode of female sexual exploration tinted by male imagination, even in "feminist" portrayals such as this one. I think 1) women deserve more stories that explore the realms of what sexual experience could look like divorced from male want or input, and 2) that it's not a coincidence that most of the nuanced media men release related to women centers around our exploration of our lives via sex. It is a realm where male artists feel most comforted and interested for a reason. I'm over it
I don't really think this movie is tainted by male imagination, and I don't think just because a cis woman writes it then it will speak to all woman because that would pretty much ignore intersectional experiences
I don't know, I think people should also be more self exploring about what you really find annoying about a movie... Still it's fine if you didn't enjoy it, I just don't agree with you about this movie in particular, the issues you mention are real and valid in most media
But... We still live in a world that think people with vulvas don't masturbate, what it might be an eye roll for some might be an eye opener for others and that's fine I think
@@TheTiredPotato Okay, we just fundamentally disagree. I think the contemporary argument whereby because one experience of a group in-member cannot be all-encompassing, its pertinence is completely diminished comes across as silly.
Also, whether we use the word 'tainted' or not, we are still experiencing the by-product of an all-male writer's room, which I (and apparently some other women) see as quite obvious when watching the film and dissecting how particular themes are handled. It quite literally could not exist without male imagination filling in the gaps. I can't tell you what your experience was like as a cis-woman, but I can say that many men's incorrect extrapolations about the hardships of that experience show up in this film.
If you like it, that's fine, but your last point is exactly why I place this movie in a similar category as Barbie - it's rudimentary, and perhaps that's on purpose to account for the intended audience, which I'm just not apart of. That's also fine. I do think folks should do a little more introspection as to what themes allow us to generally be less critical with our analysis than we could be.
@@louenatnine51I'm a bit confused by your first paragraph, but in my opinion if you are arguing that someone cannot write a good/relevant/resonant story about a group they are not a part of, then I have to disagree with that. I think that if an author consults and understands the group they are writing about, and has something to say about it then they have as much right to write about it as anyone. The issue you have with all male writers rooms is, of course, a problem, but in my opinion boycotting singular movies for that purpose is directing scorn at a singular work of art when this is an institutional problem. And ultimately, you are judging a book by it's cover, not actually experiencing the art before you criticise it, which is a recipe for misunderstanding and bad media literally.
Yep, when I learned about the source material and that the director was male, I noped out.
@@notlurking2128she didn’t boycott it. She watched it and with a critical eye noted how male sexuality influenced the behavior of the female character and probably the entire tone of the movie.
I haven’t watched yet since I just watched the movie yesterday and wanted to sit with my thoughts. My first reaction to the film was not that the sex scenes were overdone, but that the framing of mental disabilities and womanhood had a lot of gaps. There’s minor concern about Bella’s ability to consent to sex. There’s no mention of menstruation. There’s so much sex and yet no pregnancy scare despite it being confirmed that Bella is able to carry children. Was her uterus removed? You can tell the story was written by a man by how there were so many missing gaps like that. Also sex work is safe just uncomfortable, what about violence and the diseases many women are susceptible to? There’s hints at domestic violence at the end again with no bite. Bella is just the luckiest woman in the world I guess.
All I kept thinking about was pregnancy and STD’s.
I think that’s because I’m an actual woman.
Also, girls don’t masturbate like that and certainly not as babies. Apples? Gimme a break.
I had a lot of similar thoughts too. The movie asks for a lot of suspension of reality for the sake of fantasy I guess.
Plot armor for male viewers i guess, don't wanna ruin how they view women
So I am half way through the book, and the author actually writes about Bella menstruating. He writes that because Bella has had an adult body all her life and have therefore always menstruated, she lacks the discomfort and shame about her body that a lot of girls feel during puberty. Bella has also not had people telling her that menstruating is something gross or shameful, so she is more free in her body in a way.
I don't think that it was not Just hints. He pointed a gun at her in the end
I see few people talk about the relationship between Bella and Toinette (whom she met in France). Toinette never forced Bella to do anything, cared about her interests, and respected her beliefs. And their sex scene was the only scene that felt like it also portrayed love and respect. I felt it was very beautiful . We needed more of of her and less of Max imo.
Yes! That is the only reason I didn't like the marriage proposal to Max near the end (I didn't understand if they got married at the epilogue). The relationship between bella and him for me felt unbalanced. He was infatuated with her. But at the beginning when we see them together they are not equal. Also he is patronizing, because well she is still childish in his eyes. And at the end we don't have enough time for them to develop a bond before the proposal. I would like for them at the end to be friends and fellow scientists/doctors while she is with the person who knows her best. Toinette.
Toinette is essentially a magical Negro (as well as Jerrod's character)
I agree with having more with her and Toinette. So much in this film and in her were not development enough. It needed more intrigue, depth, drama and plot. The visuals were not enough to maintain my interest and curiosity for 2:20mins. And then the arrival of the husband is abrupt only to end frivolously
It was the only sex scene that I could actually watch the others made me actually sick
@@justapotato2281I actually assumed that at the end of the movie Bella was in a romantic relationship with both at them.
I agree that we shouldn’t assume that Emma Stone didn’t want to do the sex scenes, and i think that sex should be more explored in film, seeing as, as you said, most people spend a lot of time thinking about it. I do however feel that the movie felt male gazy at times.
It just didn’t get weird enough for me. Throughout the film, especially in the beginning, Bella has her weird mannerisms and expressions, but they seem to go away when she has sex. I would’ve liked to see her make funny faces and weird movements, seeing as she is a person that is not as affected by social norms and how a person should behave. To show that when you’re carried away and experience pleasure you don’t think about being appealing to anyone, you’re just caught up in the moment. But instead they made her beautiful and appealing to the eye, which feels male gazy to me.
The weirdness in the sex scenes almost always stems from the male characters, and contributes to how women have been portrayed as perfect and always appealing to the man and the audience.
The lack of body hair ties in to this point. Where is her armpit hair??
I also wish they would’ve mentioned periods or even better showed it. Seeing as this is also something that is not talked about and would be something that, i believe, Bella wouldn’t have cared about, but would maybe shock the other characters, leading to maybe a similar conversation as the one about sex work. Where Bella is logical and Mark Ruffalo (don’t remember his character name lol) is so affected by societies norms but doesn’t have any good arguments to say back to her.
If the film had gone a bit further and allowed for Bella to be weird during sex and show the female body, not always as appealing and sexy, i think it could have done a lot to demystify women having sex and showed that they are also capable of being weird, unattractive and uncomfortable to watch. Bodies are strange, make strange noises, and look unappealing some times, especially during sex.
I feel that there is freedom in being weird and disgusting, and that this freedom isn’t as easy to embrace as women, seeing as media and porn have taught us that we are the objects of desire, so we have to be appealing, cause it’s our job to turn on the man, audience and maybe, in turn, even ourselves?
I always joke about "what would happen if I made Cookie Monster noises when I orgasm" and I would LOVE to see that played out on screen as the anti male gaze lol
i like this take! i’ve seen (what i felt like) very shallow takes on why there should’ve been more periods or mention of sexual violence or contraception and im like?? does “feminist movie” mean we have to hit ALL aspects of female liberation or can we just do a few things well? but i think it would’ve sharpened the message if your tweaks were implemented
I haven't seen the movie but I like this discussion in general. Would love to see all these applied in film
true! i liked it but this would’ve made it better
people's obsession with "the male gaze" is ruining their ability to actually engage with sexuality.
I'm genuinely lost in these comments in the best way possible. I love that you've cultivated a community over here where the content is so thought provoking that the comment section is almost like a literal extension to the video. Theres so many points down here from all sides. Even the ones i don't necessarily get behind are so interesting.
The line on the ship "You're in my sun" was just *chef's kiss*
Frfr that was definitely a turning point for Bella and I loved that. Showed growth and no longer bending at the whims of someone else.
It's a very confusing experience to be a sex-repulsed asexual living in this society. Sometimes I think that to be "normal" I should see sex as any normal, neutral, mundane thing and not have any complicated feelings about it, but at the same time allos who actually _are having_ sex (or want to) clutch their pearls and treat it with the same squeamishness of giggling 5th graders. I guess you're supposed to both have it and hate it.
I am a sex-repulsed ace (aroace) and I agree
Hello fellow ace! I totally agree, the mixed messages we get are very confusing. I feel like, at least in the US, Christianity's influence has a lot to do with it.
Yeah, as an autistic, sex-indifferent, aroace guy who talks pretty openly about sexual topics, it's funny when I have to stop myself from discussing very surface-level things and be like, "Oh right, y'all allos are weird about this stuff."
@@sushiroll3795 yeah, i’m also ace and i think it’s funny that i’m way more sex positive than most allos i know
the same thing goes for nudity, i’m very comfortable with it bc i don’t automatically see it as sexual
@@lb.a157 I’m also in South America, but I feel like our experiences are very different. My friends and I do talk about sex, but as for ppl in general, I feel like they are more uncomfortable to talk about sex than I am.
I was admittedly a little freaked out by the movie at first, especially as a survivor of CSA, but the second I heard mark ruffalo’s character complain about Bella losing her childish way of speaking I was all in, instantly understood what Yorgos was getting at. Bonus points for Bella and her lesbian communist friend talking about seizing the means of their own production. Also the costumes and sets were gorgeous and whimsical.
Why are you assuming that her friend is lesbian? There is no clear indication of that
@@muratbilgehan5142 it's completely unimportant to the movie whether she identifies as bi or lesbian or pan, though, isn't it? Lesbian is not a slur. Since she stays with Bella in the menage a trois, I think the assumption is valid, even if we can't be sure... hope this helps
@@annnee6818 Thanks, you are right. Of course it is not important to the story, but that misses the point. My question was how she knows that and your example is not enough. I actually think it relates to real life and it is indeed an important topic that we don't just assume what sexuality people have without them saying it or having clear evidence. Otherwise we contribute to the spread and establishment of prejudices and stereotypes which we fight at the same time.
@@muratbilgehan5142 Did you watch the movie?🤦🏿♀️
@@BabyDoll-xx9rk Yes, why?
As an asexual adult woman, I don’t have issue with sex in general. I just dislike the pedestal it gets in society, the stigma one gets by not conforming to it (yes there is a stigma).
I also don’t like that self discovery is shown as only possible if you’ve had sex. There’s an assumption that you’re not mature or an adult until you have sex, you’re infantilized. It’s very condescending. People look at you as not fully lived. They almost will pity you because they think, aww poor you, how can you have never experienced the most greatest thing ever??
Sex is not on my pedestal. I value other things over it. I’ve discovered myself without it. And I enjoy my life fully. It’s so interesting to me, there’s all this discourse about whether sex is liberating or not. But to me, freedom from sexual desire is what’s truly liberating (well it has been for me anyway 😌)
I don’t really have a strong opinion on the film, I haven’t even seen it. But speaking broadly about film/tv, I guess I’m just tired of sex being centered in stories all the time; not saying those stories don’t have value, but stories about, or featuring, the asexual experience do too.
I think I just find sex a bit boring to see/read in a story as well. Especially when they shoehorn it in, in a gratuitous way.
Thank you for this comment!
Wow the first line is how I felt most of the time, sex shouldn't be in a pedestal sadly it's have and the way ppl infantilized when you haven't experienced i feel like they think I'm losing something, I just not into it but yeah always in a pedestal and I hate it, as you highlight in many movies sex scenes are reforcing it's a central part in human beings, but when it's not the big thing in life? Rarely find a good asexual representation.
I feel the same. Personally I’m actually quite exhausted by all the focus on sex, reproduction and romance. I just wish to see something else, but am bombarded by those three topics every day.
@@laymayday sometimes it seem like everything is about it and also I'm bored of it, more disturbing and disgusted.
i agree
I personally did not like the movie for several reasons. 1. I read the book and it does a much better job of explicitly showing how the male gaze and infantalization is an issue. It explicitly says that she did not have sex and that was just a fantasy of the man reading her letters. 2. She is never truly affected by anything she experiences. 3. The film does not take itself seriously enough. 4. It does not show the actual reality of sex work. I have been a sex worker, and it is not just a happy time where it's super enjoyable. 5. I hate that whenever anytime womens journey, whether self exploration or liberation, it is always for the male lens and always explicitly sexual. 6. The baby brain needed to be much better explained. She was still using terms like furious jumping far into the movie. She was not mature enough shown through her actions, mannerisms, and words. 7. I personally don't think the movie was deep enough and felt like feminism lite. 8. They did not and do not need to show graphic scenes to show that something is bad. I am a csa survivor and have been in therapy for over 10 years. I have come to terms with what happened and am at peace about it. This does not, however, mean that I want to see it in graphic depections or descriptions. I'm honestly disappointed in khadija that she would defend a movie like cuties. I'm in no way a prude given that I'm a hypersexual swinger, and it's really weird that it's boiled down to everyone who didn't like it hates sex. 9. You can not be decontrusting or subverting something while actively doing that thing. 10. Every man in this movie is not shown as terrible or gross, just silly and goofy. 11. The sex scenes are all for the male gaze whether or not emma was directly involved in the process. Women can also do things for the male gaze, hence internalized misogyny. 12. The movie itself felt pointless and went nowhere. Everything just happened and didnt do a good job of actually driving the plot. 13. Where tf is her body hair?
Anyways I think people are reading too much into this and it's just not a great movie even without all the weird aspects.
from what i’ve seen in the comments, i’m kind of disappointed that they lost a lot of the framing in the original book in the adaptation. i think i would have had an easier and more interesting time engaging with the film if it had been presented a bit different, and the changes the film made seemed like it made that harder for me
@@ErikaCartet I definitely agree. I just really disliked how male gazey it was and that it's never truly discouraged.
This is the best take.
reading the book right now and i couldnt agree more. the book really nails Bell's character and how the men around her were always concerned for their wellbeings first. I loved her self-discovery and how Hooker and Astley, even though unintentionally, influence her compassion and caring for other people. Bella in the books is
Amazing analysis, very well explained. You expressed some of the things I knew I didn’t like about the movie
but couldn’t pinpoint
honestly, as someone with sexual trauma, watching this movie was really triggering for me, not so because of the sex scenes, but because of the intentions of most of the male characters and their need to posses women through sex and the fact that's never really impacting Bella in anyway.
Personally this movie never felt empowering for me, cause it felt as if someone used the flip card of "sex can be empowering only when performed for the male gaze". Sex can be truly empowering for anyone but this movie ain't portraying that.
Yes I only saw half of it. I couldn’t watch all the way through. It’s not the reality for 99% of women to be unfazed by this. It’s soul destroying and destroys your whole sense of self. I’m 28 years old still stuck in life because of what happened to me as a child. It’s also scary because men already think rape and pedophilia doesn’t affect us for longer than a week.
Same here. Its kinda filmsy how much people will try to make the point its subversive because the men/abusers in this film are obvious losers. Because the impact of the statutory SA on Bella is entirely glossed over or not even considered. Its kinda just like, these men are silly idiots, shes actually more in control really, and is bettered by the trajectory they set her on through their abuse. Thats the same narrative people people to diminish the seriousness of SA irl, its at the core of the film, and it doesnt align with any read of this movie as empowering.
Yeah I wouldn’t necessarily call it “empowering” and I think that’s one of the issues? People trying to hail it as female empowerment through the sex scenes when the movie isn’t only about the sex scenes and more so about self discovery. At least that was my read on it 😎
@@caterpilllllar1000000% the multiple abusers being reduced to comedic foils almost rehabilitated them. My audience loved Mark Ruffalo every time he was on screen I just don’t know how people could find that behaviour funny???
Stop your malicious pretending. If you can't solve your ingratitude issue, be a critter and go off into the wilderness. Nobody will notice. You're not helpful to anyone that everyone owes you.
I honestly cannot see this movie as a feminist reimagining of Frankenstein. It's so intensely removed from the story and themes of Frankenstein that it barely uses the concept as window dressing. Making the "Frankenstein's monster" a baby in a beautiful woman's body practically unmarred by her violent death just doesn't make much sense besides an exuse to make a beautiful baby-brained entity. Frankenstein's monster was outcast and hideous, a result of his amalgamation of body parts in the pursuit to create the perfect man.
The apparent allergy to ugly women pursists in this movie. Frankenstein's monster was hideous, but Bella had to be beautiful, stupid but beautiful so that she is manipulated and sexually desirable. Women are simply not allowed to be ugly because audiences don't want to see ugly women even in a movie that is supposed to be based on a book about the humanity within a hideous monster and the absence of parenthood.
I don't even see this movie to be about female empowerment. It's a sad tale of a baby and the fetishization of innocence and ignorance.
Give me a woman who is hideous and finds her value and her sexual life. Give me a woman who is beautiful but does not have sex because beauty doesn't equal sexual interest.
👏👏👏
Frankenstein itself is already more feminist! Mary Shelley was the OG feminist!
A film from last year that amps up the feminism of Frankenstein is Birth/Rebirth. It didn’t get wide distribution but I saw it at Sundance and it was favorite film from the festival.
Genuine question, but where is it explicitly said that this movie is a feminist reimagining of Frankenstein? Isn't it an adaptation of a different book? I mean, of course people would draw comparisons between the two, but aren't these books two separate things? Or is the Poor things book literally a retelling of Frankenstein? I agree with your points, I'm just genuinely a bit confused because I've heard other people rip this movie to shreds because it doesn't make Frankenstein justice, but was it really supposed to? I haven't read either books so I wouldn't know, I'm genuinely curious
This. My complaints are about how every time there is female nudity or sex in a movie or show, it is always women that fit the beauty mold. Show some normal women and fat women and women in wheelchairs and women with acne and so on. Also, show more dicks... actual dicks. Most male nudity is men with prosthetics and they are praised for doing full frontal.
Its wrong to see the movie as a remake if frankenstein. I dont judge del toro's pinoccio by its adherence to the disney movie
27:14 fucking yes! People shat on that buzz feed article of women saying they felt like “sex positivity” was just another avenue for men to pressure them into sex and i forget who but there was a feminist who criticized the free love movement for not really interrogating how is sexual liberation really liberating if the male patriarchy can still benefit from your sexuality?
+
Contrapoints just released a video about Twilight which goes into the debate between sex-positive and sex-negative feminists that arose out of the 70s sexual revolution. Would highly recommend!
YES! I got absolutely shit on for saying I would never do porn or sex work for the public because if men consume it, they’re benefitting more culturally and gratifyingly and I just find that unethical to my views on the current state of men/women/sex. I’m not saying you can’t do sex work, I’m saying look at your consumer base and understand who’s benefitting from it and don’t be mad if somebody questions sex work in that way.
The “gen z are prudes” take I keep seeing in articles and across all media platforms is so irritating.
Obviously Gen-z aren’t prudes but some Gen-z folks romanticize a more censored past. They are unaware that all forms of “perversion” existed in back then too… This only becomes an issue when the “purity culture” crowd applauds & agrees with uninformed gen-z’rs… and treats them like they are special because they romanticize “traditional values”.. 🙄
It's very hard for many people to stay out of other people's sex lives, for some reason.
And the birth rate is dropping. Lately there's been all sorts of measures to keep women having babies - the abortion ban being the most obvious.
For any action there is a reaction so I wouldn't be surprised if Gen Z is put off by s*x because for the last few decades media has been growing more and more overs*xualized and usually not in a healthy way.
They're really trying to make the working class (women) they've been underappdeciating for generations continue to make more workers to be exploited, or soldiers to send to wars no one agreed to 🥴
Agreed!! Maybe the Gen z'ers are so exposed to sex, sexualization in everything, in their parents "open" attitudes they just are tired of it. Sex needs to be discussed but not glorified, beautified, a mandate that if you aren't doing it you are weird. Love the ugliness being showed truthfully and discussed.
I love your idea of saying something “activates” you, instead of saying “triggered.” Words are so powerful
Yeah I feel like the word triggered has been beaten into the ground where it's lost its meaning and even being used in situations where it doesn't apply to the context
Neuron activation
It’s also the language used in psychology to describe two different experiences. A “trigger” is not the same thing as being “activated.” Conservatives have just done everything they can to make sure normal and useful medical terms practically useless so people with PTSD can’t talk about their conditions openly. That is by design, I expect.
Thank you for the ACE/ARO acknowledgement at the end! It is rare that ACE/ARO is mentioned in these types of discussions and usually not in such a positive manner.
Yeah, I appreciated that, too, as an AroAce person.
I appreciated that too, people always assume we're super clueless about sex so its nice to see it acknowledged that thats not necessarily true
i feel like the reason why it’s uncomfortable is because she’s literally a toddler in that body… why does nobody else say this? I felt like I watched a handicapped person work in a brothel in the 1700s. it was gross. And I like sex, but that was uncomfortable for a reason.
I think it’s an important part of the plot! It’s a tale about grooming and using her childish naivety. As soon as she matures the men in her life start to loose interest in her. The fact that it’s literally a toddler’s brain in a woman’s is a surrealist plot device.
I hated it. The baby brain, hypersexual connection. Just felt like hollyweird being upfront about their disturbing attachments to children. They're trying to normalize it any way they can.
did you even watched the video???
@@CaroBana1why use words like "plot device" when the person you are responding to has the media literacy of a jar of peanut butter?
On the subject of how sex is portrayed, it was good that Bella was sex positive and wanted to explore what she liked but it was bothersome how she conveniently didn’t have any limits to what she was comfortable with. Which is not to say that there aren’t people like that who exist, but Bella is not having “sex” in the broader sense of the term and the film is clear on that. She’s doing BDSM, role playing, sex in front of other people, etc, and the way the film made her at worst indifferent to her experiences sort of feeds into the criticisms of this film just being pornography. Yes, sex positivity can definitely be having a willingness to do everything, but it’s also having limits to what you want to do and expressing them, and the film missed an opportunity/didn’t find it necessary to show that. And I’m not asking for an SA or kinkshaming scene but the film is set in a brothel and could’ve brought in the experiences of other workers and what they’re comfortable/not comfortable with doing and Bella’s reaction to that.
Agreed Bella never states what is too far or uncomfortable for her but I will say that the film definitely differentiates her enjoying and not enjoying sex.
In Portugal she’s clearly into it and wants more. In the brothel she often just looks uninterested. She also has that line where she points out how it would make more sense for the sex worked to choose the client rather than the other way around. I think while her finding a limit or being more explicit and saying she hates certain things would have made it clearer it might have also shown sex work as always awful. As it was it kind of treated it like a shitty job like yeah it’s not enjoyable but hey I’m here to get paid let’s clock in and out which was really interesting.
Sex itself isn’t pornographic. Even when she is enjoying herself in the early stages of the film it’s not filmed in a sexy way. I and clearly most of the cinema found it awkward, weird and funny. The only ‘sensually shot’ moments I can remember from one watch was the initial peeping shot in the house when she gets undressed (which someone could argue was pornographic but in the context of the film I’d say was supposed to be creepy) and the scene with Toinette which is the most consensual moment and therefore seems pretty intentional.
Bella does attempt to state that she isn't attracted to one of the men that comes into to the Brothel, but the head woman with the ear biting problem explains to her that when you are in the business of sex work, your income depends on being agreeable to what the customer wants. Since most of the wider varieties of sex that she has (bdsm, being watched, etc.) come in the scenes when she's living at the brothel, we can assume that she is now mature enough to understand desire for pleasure vs. Need for money in a capitalist system, and reserves herself to make money how she can while gaining an education about the socialist movement. She has stopped using sex only for pleasure and uses it for practical reasons to reach her personal goals that aren't based on physical reward.
Isn't she a child ?
@@fixsationon7244honestly this is exactly what bothered me about it. Isn’t she a damn toddler? How is this empowering??
@@LikeTheProphetwait, you believe she had the maturity and comprehension level of a toddler until the end of the film? Its pretty much the whole point that she is developing and learning (and even pointed out that she develops very quickly) throughout the whole film. She started with a babies brain... like everyone that ever existed.
From a production aspect: intimacy coordinators have also drastically changed the production of sex scenes and the kinds of tools / consciousness of storytelling that is present on set. Emma and Yorgos have spoken about working with an IC and how much they added to the production.
Yeah, I also saw an interview that talked about how few people were on set during these scenes. They kept it to the minimal.
It’s so dangerous that people think that intimacy coordinators paid by studios have removed risks. It reminds me of when studios were required to hire a teacher/social worker to mind the child’s welfare on set. And then we sat back in that false confidence for ten years while Nickelodeon and Disney kids were slowly driven to breakdown.
@@jakestroll6518intimacy coordinators don't remove risks, people in the production, directors and actors do and those that care work WITH intimacy coordinators to make that happens
and by all accounts it is what happened in the movie
@@jakestroll6518no one says they have removed risks. They have made things better as they didn't exist or weren't a requirement before. There's a reason SAG negotiated IC be a requirement in the contracts
@@TheCyberQuaker SAG negotiates a lot of ineffectual nonsense, so that’s not really an argument. The point is that coordinators are hired and paid by the studio and that immediately creates a conflict of interest. It’s just a matter of time before the horror stories start coming. The ONLY solution is to make all intimate scenes by AI. End of story.
I can’t find the original source, but Roger Ebert once said something like ‘it’s not what something’s about but how it is about it’.
Thanks for your willingness to discuss these difficult topics.
Love Ebert!
I’m 26 and about as sex positive as they come as a bisexual polyamorous person, but I also believe privacy and shame do not need to be synonymous. People don’t necessarily feel shame when they see sex and feel something negative about it. Those I associate with are far less ashamed of sex and sexuality, but resent its use as a marketing tool or control tactic, which leads to the knee-jerk disgust.
For me I think I’m just tired of seeing women specifically having sex on tv, being topless, etc. call me a prude idk lol. maybe it’s because we went through the metoo movement idk however it’s all the same naked women. I want to see sex scenes focused on men’s body it’s just not even and that’s why I personally am turned off by it. Will that ever happen? No. Because the people who write these movies and direct them are predominantly men and the idea of scenes focused too much on men’s bodies having sex and their genitalia physically repulses them. It’s hard to really enjoy sex scenes in a society that is constantly objecting and overly sexualizing women and our bodies, as a woman. In the moment you’re not thinking oh well Emma is a producer she had a say, like no it’s just another sex scene another movie were women are naked etc.
Exactly my point of view. Left the cinema feeling sad
I get sick and tired of people saying, "Oh, Americans are just too prudish!" No it is not! It is very openly sexual to the point of boredom most of the time.
I grew up watching movies from other countries, I always love when boobies are shown simply in a nonsexual manner as well, because women can't in most places but I guess thats just me🤷🏽♀️
Agree whole heartedly
I agree. I used to think maybe i was prudish, until i watched media that didnt put an objectifying eye on womens bodies while also showing both male and female nudity respectfully
I think the infantalized beautiful woman is portrayed a lot in the male perspective in cinema,
(like Lars Von Trier and Quentin Tarantino for example) because it's a fantasy in a way that 'highlights' the qualities of beautiful women, but not the complexity of them. Which is intriguing to think about why they want to do that in the first place. Is it just sexism to where they fantasize about the uncomplicated gullable beautiful woman? Is it the base urge of the male sex drive distilled into these images of women? It's a disturbing and yet curious phenomenom in cinema in the male perspective.
When someone is infantilized, they're easier to control. They won't question another's logic, nor will they hold others accountable. It's perfectly possible to appreciate beauty along with whatever else comes with it, but some struggle with that I guess
I think people didn't like Poor Things because the movie peels away the power of norms and acceptability forcing people to actually SEE and HEAR other perspectives and experiences. People don't want to see a complex evolving perspective.
no i didn't like that a woman with a child's brain was being prostituted 😅 i wish it was more freudian and perverse without centering male perspectives
It’s not ppl don’t like the idea that they were normalizing sex w a minor technically.
Tbh I thought it wasn’t developed enough in its perspectives it felt very surface level and toe dipping into each experience, but felt skated by to me and my friends who I saw it with..
I actually read this in Khadija's voice ❤
I totally agree. I think especially within the internet age, everything tends to get flattened out into an explained in three minutes version of itself. But life is complicated.
@@mlw9195 girl… no they didn’t 🤦♀️
Honestly the not wanting so much sex on screen, to me, is because it feels like its the Go To Plot Device almost every film uses at some point. Someone needs to engage with someone else? Theyre fucking now. Someone needs information? They get it through sex. Someone meeds money? Sex work. The film wants to show us 2 characters have bonded? Theyre having sex now. The film as gotten a little boring plot wise? Its fine, have some Teens Having Sex cause Thats What Teens Do, and ignore the plot!
In most cases it feels lazy and unnecessary. Yeah ppl have sex for a myriad of reasons... but it shouldnt be your go-to plot device, as a writer! I wanna see people skillfully manipulate information out of their opponents, or sneak around to find it themselves. I wanna see cunning actions to get $ out of ppl without cutting straight to sex. I wanna see characters growing fond of eachother and doing unexpected things for eachother as a means of demonstrating the growth of their relationship- not just "theyre screwing now so u know theyre in love." I wanna see actual plot points instead of just "This person fucks this person and now theres drama around that."
Im tired of sex being a trope. When sex scenes come on screen I want them to *matter.* I want the movie to be incomprehensible if I skip the sex scene because *something important happens* or *it means something.* It doesnt feel like thats how it is in most movies, its just used as a "sex sells, lets add more!" Same with a lot of TV shows like Shameless and Euphoria. They have whole seasons of just X has sex with Y and thats the plot. Its lazy! Do your relationship drama arcs but have more to it than gratuitous sex scenes and shallow writing!
You can show character agency, growth, maturity, cunning, prowess, and desirability without just going to sex to show it!!!
P.S thirst traps also make me uncomfortable but less so cause it doesnt even try to say theres a narrative. Its just Kyle on TikTok boing horny and it isnt fucking up any story Im actually invested in.
I mean, people have a lot of sex in real life? Sex work is very real? Sex is usually required to make a baby?
Yes. Sex is a trope at this point. 💯 agree
@@toffeestrange7706 Yeah, it is very real and common. And I have no issue with it being used as relevant info. But it feels *overused* and lazy at this point; like more of a crutch than a storytelling device. We don't see characters shower, take a piss, or change their underwear unless it's relevant or somehow related to setting the vibe for a scene. But sex is just kinda thrown in there to fill runtime or 'spice up a script', when something more interesting could've happened. Instead of a sex scene, we could've had a scene of the characters, who previously had very little chemistry, emotionally bonding. Give me a reason to *care* that they're having sex. That kind of thing.
@@nope6021sex scenes to me is never overused. When a filmmaker does it then it’s necessary to their point of view. You might not agree but to their story it is
I dont consider poor things as feminist. Sex scenes are much more male gazy for me, and bella is just exploring her borders under the surveillence of patriarchy-power relations. The movie does not challenge these systems but just shows how to live in the system. I still love the film and characters tho.
so many contradictions: why are they male gaze? do women look at other women having sex differently? it does not challenge the system? just read the comments throughout the internet: challenge is the only word to describe the film- a true masterpiece
@@SteveGaudi1976Yes, there is a difference between the male gaze and sex that includes women's interests.
For fuck's sake, the phrase "Yours [body] is to give freely" when it was a necessity describes the movie perfectly.
Giving women the "freedom" to live in the patriarchal system is not challenging that system. We are free to give ourselves to men when they want us to, and we are free to be shamed for that, and it all is linked to their desire and their thoughts on that matter.
That movie doesn't challenge this system, really, it just depicts it: the growth of a woman in this world and her success through abuse.
And, sadly, people like to watch women being successful only after they endured abuse.
@@mydeershikaxoxoga this is the story of Bella in Victorian's time not a story of every woman. You cant possibly look into it as something that can realistically happen. The main theme is the self-discovery of a woman without shame and genrational/social constraints. If that's not feminist I dont know what is. I dont think Bella's abuse was enjoyable or anything. Regardless. yes abuse is unfortunately part of our journeys (both men and women). With all due respect, the term 'male gaze' is bullshit, truly divisive and vague concept.
@@SteveGaudi1976 That tells me everything I need to know from you.
@@SteveGaudi1976 if this was a story about a woman exploring her sexuality without shame, then why does she not have armpit or leg hair? Girl can barely manage using cutlery but somehow manages to keep her appearance pretty in line with a lot of dude's sexual expectations for women
Yorgos became the very voyeur the book criticizes. At the end of the book, we see Bella for who she really is, without that ending context-in my opinion, the message of the film and its source material is lost. She doesn't really learn about the harshness of the world, really, (which is another conversation within itself) She is coddled, molded, and "shown brand new things" through the eyes of men. I didn't like the movie, as a disabled person, I felt there was something of transhumanism in the movie as well, although I can't quite place why. I appreciate the subversion in humor, but it fell flat ultimately to me. When the source is stripped of context, though-the Bella that is created isn't the Bella in her true form (ie, we're only reading-and seeing the male perception) without the starkiness of her true self, I can see, and understand why people are upset. I understand the point of the movie myself. It is designed to make you feel uncomfortable. It's a satire on how men/the patriarchy view women and AFAB people, and for me, I just wish it was done better. Sex, consent and just general autonomy with disability are actually at the helm of this movie, and while you're right, this movie is about Bella, Bella herself (as a character) is a satire of how men view women, her creation and self actualization can also be argued as still driven by men, as you can see at the end of the movie, where to me, the cycle is implied to repeat. I'm just one person, though.
2 people actually :)
What would you say are the differences between Book!Bella and Movie!Bella?
I agree with everything you said here. Fictional characters by nature do not have agency, and we need to be more comfortable criticizing the choices made FOR the character/story, even if the choice was intended to be empowering. Sometimes I think we treat fictional characters too much like we do people.
Three people actually
In the book, the entire story is told from the perspective of Max McCandles, and we see a letter from Bella, who calls herself Victoria McCandles MD, saying his account is "full of lies" to make himself feel better about his own ego. She even says she "shudders" at his account and burned his manuscripts, but decided to keep the one bound copy bc it was the only mark he made upon the world - and the only evidence "the poor fool" existed. The movie omits this completely, only showing us McCandle's perspective. As the comment says, Yorgos becomes the voyeur, the unreliable, limited, and importantly, false storyteller, and by omitting Bella's own account, he erases her voice from her own story. Bella is also "born" menstruating, she's taught about sex and pregnancy and disease by Godwin, and Godwin takes her on the cruise where she sleeps with many lovers, but never has PIV sex with men because she doesn't want babies. She is already quite experienced sexually, primarily with women whom she chose, and more mentally mature by the time the lawyer finds her and kidnaps her. She also initially lies to the lawyer about having to "do something terrible" to get the money, when really she just pockets some of his winnings to save him from his gambling addiction. It's a funny turn because he then feels consumed with guilt that he forced her into prostitution, and she does this knowingly to manipulate him. The movie made her even more infantilized than the book. Which is... a choice.@@Owesomasaurus
i feel like attributing the dislike towards this movie to an aversion to talking about sex is dishonest ngl. imo it was about the portrayal of sex in this movie. the movie is fine being raw and real in many ways but not when it comes to body hair or menstruation? especially considering that bella’s body is one that has HAD a baby before? and there are no physical marks of that except for a scar? it feels like those scenes were there to titilate the viewer rather than be a real representation of much. (not to mention contraceptives or barriers against STI’s were literally never mentioned, even in passing) additionally after all the sex bella partakes in she never once expresses her preferences towards the act. she never says she doesn’t like something or says she wants to do something specific. she just likes sex. all of it apparently. which i feel is another sign that they dont really care about empowering women in this film. also yea they mention philosophy and socialism sure, but do they ever give bella the chance to apply the things she learned beyond just saying the words? and they dont really tackle consent at every age in a good way, considering she ends up with the same man that preyed on her when she was a child. i guess he changed but the fact that the movie just NEEDED her to end up with a man somehow and couldn’t just let her be with her girlfriend from the brothel is kinda fkdhfkjshkhv. idk maybe im missing something.
I honestly don't think you're missing something, more that people in support of the movie intentionally ignore those details because it doesn't fit their narrative that the work is subversive. It makes very little effort to consider Bella's perspective from an informed lens and instead relies on the discourse of sex vs. no sex to hold itself up as saying anything.
She does express not enjoying sex actually. Particularly when she is a prostitute in France.
nah, you got it. that's the take
You’re completely on point and this is why I don’t really watch movies anymore in general. Everything is shown to us through a misogynistic lense. I’m so over it.
@@psychomaia yea i feel like thats where the incorrect "genz don't like sex in movies" idea came from because as khadija mentioned in the video, we seem to love our thirstraps so its not really about the fact that there is sex but rather most of it portrayed through the male gaze wether the directors realize it or not.
Maybe a reason why the audience focuses on the sex scenes so much is because the movie is SO long. First impressions are everything and if I’m watching a toddler-minded woman be sexualized for so long, it becomes harder to get past.
If Bella refers to sex as “furious jumping” she’s not in a position to consent. She is never really told that what she’s doing is wrong or something to be shameful about until after the fact and it doesn’t stop her, so framing liberation around having sex, consensual or not feels a bit hollow. If she grew up in an environment where she was punished for touching herself at the dining room table, and grew up around judgement from others, it would be a different story. If they wanted to drive home the manipulation of men, they should have adapted the book better. Omitting the epilogue from the story undermined the presumed thesis of the story.
I mean, Godwin is explicitly called out by Bella for creating her the way he did and manipulating/lying to her, Duncan is portrayed as a complete moron who is obviously trying to control Bella to everybody but her and Bella eventually realizes this and tells him as much to his face, Bellas ex husband who's name I forget explicitly calls her his property and winds up with a goats brain for his troubles, and Max gets grilled by Bella to prove he has at least a base level understanding of respecting women and feminism before she'll agree to marry him. Even Max gets called out for being weird and controlling in the first half, and ultimately he does let her leave. I think the film does a very good job at letting us know all these guys are shitty to varying degrees. Also, Godwin and the maid do shame her when she discovers sexual pleasure
I mean seeing things from Bella’s perspective, why should sex ever be seen as something wrong? She had a grown woman’s body, not a child. Since she was so logistical and scientific, her view is it’s just a hole and stick, they’re good together. It’s very simple, which I think is an interesting view on sex since our society has added all of these extra layers to it
Ok, just by the movie’s premise I can understand the knee jerk reaction to Bella’s “conception.” I do wish that the knee jerk reaction, which is the first reaction, wasn’t what led people’s opinions on everything. Like it’s okay to sit with something, breathe, and let an idea cook. Instead, folks come to the table of discourse with raw meat and we all get cerebral e. coli via cross-contamination.
This is such a perfect metaphor!
agreed, i absolutely love this metaphor : )
This is how I feel about cuties too
@@tacticalmisandrist please elaborate 😕
Exactly this. What a metaphor
11:29 YES THANK YOU, I thought I was going insane when I walked out of the theater and saw people doing the exact thing to Emma Stone that the film criticizes society for doing to grown women.
Aroace here, and to me sex is like, “it’s just another thing some people to do and some don’t”. Idk. Like, “what’s the point of being so freaked out and/or obsessed with it” is basically my mindset. I’m perfectly happy with talking about it or not talking about it.
i have the same opinion, i don’t feel any particular way about it, but i do understand why people are obsessed/freaked out by it. reading all these comments makes me think people overestimate how well children deal with certain experiences. i work in neuroscience research, particularly criminal behavior, but you’d be surprised how much of that is rooted in sexual trauma.
i was having a conversation with my mom the other day about how parents expect their children to turn into productive and morally responsible adults, when they did absolutely nothing to help them achieve that, or they displayed behavior that completely opposes it. it’s the same situation with sex. you can’t tell children that sex is evil and wrong and then expect them to just grow out of that mindset. for most people, that will stick with them for life no matter what they do. children’s brains are literally shaped by experience, they form specific pathways based on what they’ve seen and heard. that’s incredibly hard to change, once their brain stops developing. they can find ways to counter it, but it’ll always be there. personality disorders are so hard to treat because it’s not a issue with chemical balances but the actual physical condition of their brain. of course every brain is different, neuroplasticity and everything, but generally speaking this is how it goes.
this sounds very pretentious and stuck up but i swear it’s important lmao- you can’t talk about these topics with the intention of productivity without understanding the human brain. honestly you don’t even need a degree, reading some scientific journals will give a better idea on how to approach the whole concept of relearning. that’s what they’re for after all. the question is “why do we have such intense opinions about sex” right? well because that’s the information our brains were given, they put it into the little sex file in the filing cabinet, locked the drawer and threw away the key. habitualness is not consciously determined.
children are so incredibly fragile. here’s a personal example- my brother scared me with a c-3po cardboard cut out when i was 6, and that developed into a phobia that heavily impacted my life. it was so bad that i completely stopped talking for 3 whole years. even though im an adult now, every time i see a mannequin or statue i feel intense dread. that instinctual reaction will never go away, because it’s physically ingrained in my brain. but therapy and medication made it easier to calm myself down enough to be able to live normally. our brains are literally computers, you gotta specifically pinpoint the root cause to fix a bug.
so it’s actually very easy to understand why people have intense reactions to anything. it’s because that’s how their brain is wired, it’s not their choice. they don’t choose to be affected by it, but that’s what their brain was programmed to do. my mom is a sex indifferent asexual, so naturally my opinion on sex reflects her attitude towards it. it’s nothing to be ashamed or proud about, it just is. it’s possible to disagree with someone but still understand why they have that opinion.
a disclaimer though: everyone is different, i can’t predict why someone is the way they are without knowing how their childhood played out. what their parents taught them, what environment they grew up in. there are a trillion different factors to take into account, so it’s more of a general explanation of child brain development. there’s always an outlier that makes us question if our theories are correct lmao- but our brains rely on patterns and relativity, so there’s an answer to everything we just haven’t found them yet.
this is, quite frankly, most non terminally online, borderline incel/femcel, people's point of view.
normal people with healthy relationships aren't always being weird about this stuff.
yeah I think some people need to get over their disgust with sex. if its relevant to the plot leave it in. Also have more ace characters in media who say they aren't interested.
@@malum9478 thats the thing. A lot of people dont have healthy relationships to it because of how we raised. You have to fight through all the shame, guilt, and other baggage to finally get to be healthy.
It's not that the subject matter shouldn't be shown or discussed, it most definitely should. It's that the film fetishizes it and then frames it as her liberation and freedom, not as a violation of her bodily autonomy - and more troubling, so do most of the (majority male) critics. The point is made in numerous ways that if it weren't for prudish societal shame, this would be fine. See, she likes it! And then twisting feminist words, they justify it by saying it's her body, she can do what she wants with it - even if she only has the mental capacity of a 6 year old. In the film's distorted lens, shame is just a societal construct that serves no purpose except to get in the way of our unbridled pleasure, disregarding all the complex issues that surround intimacy. The film acts as if there are no consequences whatsoever for her and she may as well have at it. And her baby brain is growing rapidly, so whatever, we can't pin down her age, so get out of jail free card. It's all just a fun experiment, no possible physical danger or emotional trauma to be weary of. She's not tainted by society's morality (nor does she seem to have any emotional response whatsoever to the act of sex, which rings false) and can "enjoy" sex without pathologizing or even focusing on her pleasure, bc it's just "angry jumping," what's the big deal anyway? There's no discussion of pregnancy, assault, disease, menstruation, consent of any kind, psychological trauma, female pleasure or even her own erotic fantasies or desires. Almost all of her erotic experiences are driven by the men around her and their fantasies, not hers, she's just a receptacle, and surprise! She loves them all. At least according to the three men who brought this monstrosity to life. I don't think the film is critical about the issue of consent at all and it practically applauds Bella, as do the critics, for being so "brave" to explore her sexuality, with whomever, doing whatever, because hey, it's an experience, and we should all be so lucky as to accept with gusto all life has to offer, good or bad. Except she isn't exploring her sexuality as a woman, a male writer, a male cinematographer and a male director are. And she doesn't have to be a sex worker, but she chooses to, and then continues to despite voicing her disgust with her clients and the general experience. At one point in the film she says, "if it is disgusting, why should I keep it in my mouth?" as she spits out food she does not like. Why does this logic not apply to her awful experiences in the brothel? Why does she say she does not want to sleep with someone, but then does so anyway, indefinitely, until Godwin's illness calls her home? Why would she keep doing it if she could have left at any time and the experiences are not just unsatisfying sexually, but barely consensual and even painful (she cannot pick the man, the man picks her, the Madame controls her w physical and psychological violence etc... and god knows what age she is at this point, maybe a preteen, teen at most?) And if we truly want to have a conversation about sex work, how about talking about all the risks, and how women who wind up on the street are often taken in and trafficked, and how the patriarchal system pushes women into this oftentimes traumatizing work that is a last resort, not a plush luxury resort for a guilt-ridden, upper-class white woman after a brief glimpse at poverty porn island, who can leave anytime she wishes. Yorgos essentially called us prudes, but it's not about sex scenes or even problematic sex scenes, it's the POV of the filmmakers/writers, esp a male filmmaker, male screenwriter and male author trying to explain female desire in a way that very much feels like a severely reductive male fantasy. The film shoots her in those sex scenes in a way that objectifies and shows off her body for the benefit of the male gaze, and is more similar to heteronormative p0rn than real life sex. He treats her like a blow up doll and she seems to love it. But this feels like a pedophilic, male fantasy. It does not express her experience of sex from her POV, and there was no consideration of the mechanics of female pleasure or orgasm. It was more about acrobatic positions and PIV almost exclusively. And these sex scenes do take up over an hour of the 2 hour 21 min running time, so yeah I think they not only equated self-actualization to sexual awakening, but prioritized it as the most significant aspect of her life and identity. Then they slapped on a faux feminist ending to absolve themselves. In the book, Godwin actually does teach her about contraception and sex, she knows about pregnancy and she was "born" menstruating. She specifically doesn't have sex with men, only women, bc she doesn't want to get pregnant, and has many lovers before ever meeting the skeezy lawyer, implying she's already matured quite a bit past where we find Bella in this adaptation. Oh and one glaring detail left out - the book makes it clear that this whole story is from an unreliable, male narrator's point of view, not Bella's, and in the end of the book Bella denounces his story as a lie to prop up his ego. All of this is not in the film, making it seem as though the unreliable, limited, male account of her life is truth, erasing her own voice from her story. And sure you could say the point is to make us angry, but largely this has been deemed a "feminist fantasy" and in interviews etc... they discuss Bella as liberated, not victimized. So even if I give them the benefit of the doubt and believe they want to critique, not celebrate these problematic sexual encounters that make up more than half her journey to enlightenment, then they have failed to deliver that message and the critics are celebrating it as 'brave" not decrying the patriarchy.
yessssss this take is brilliant! you made so many great points. I don't know how anyone who calls themselves a feminist can't see past this. It's truly concerning, this movie is shallow af in my opinion.
It's shallow and tired AF - take a look at the Criterion Collection and you'll find many, many films "art films," probably not coincidentally set in Paris, in which rich, beautiful, white housewives "liberate themselves" via prostitution and we get to watch it all. This couldn't be further from the realities of sex work.@@user-ut2ot1gh9p
I love your review I agree with everything you wrote. You've made me think about how people project themselves onto others and it's interesting that you've said that the male writers thought that her self actualization was just her sexual exploration and I wonder that maybe that way of thinking was not just to serve some type of a voyeuristic male fantasy, but maybe that it also comes from how men are brought up to believe that their own self worth comes from their sexual accomplishments.
Honestly thank you I haven't seen enough readers of the book weigh in I remember hearing about the book when I first heard they were making this movie and after watching it I didn't think I could sit through a whole book of it'd be as Male centered as the movie I'm curious about the plot of the book now.
Thank you so much for saying this. The movie just feels like a male fantasy with a “feminist” label slapped onto it.
Tbh as someone in Gen Z I don't even think too many of us are like anti sex scenes in movies or whatever. There are a few who are sure, but most people in my life don't really care. Most people I know who have seen poor things who are in Gen Z who bought up the problematic elements of the story weren't even approaching it from a puritanical anti sex lens. But we're trying to have a conversation about consent and how sex is treated in media. But it seems like the way the media reports on it is that we are all prudish weirdos who hate anything sexual which isn't true. I myself don't want to see the movie because the way Emma Stone performs the character in the clips I've seen seems ableist to me, and it sounds like the movie doesn't really have a discussion on that consent. But I have no problem with sex in media I think we should normalise sex and conversations around it.
I was thinking the same thing, thank you.
I have two sincere questions:
1. What exactly do you see in _the way an actor performs the character_ ableist? Do you mean the first sections of the movie where her mind is literally the one of an infant or a small child, or do you actually feel like the way she is portrayed later makes her look disabled in a caricaturistic way? Or did you simply feel uneasy when watching her interact with other, "normal" people and think an anti-ableist would make her completely indiscernible from these "normal" people?
2. Why do you think the discussion about consent needs to start explicitly IN the film, as in actual characters speaking about consent right in the film, (like, you know, Bella does at the end with her abusive husband, but that's another point) and not us, the audience, discussing that after we've watched the movie that clearly raises the topic?
@@sasha_chudesnov Not OP but I would say its ableist how the structure of the narrative celebrates Bella 'overcoming disability' as her arc. It also glosses over the psycological impact of grooming and SA on disabled people, for example, the fact she marries someone who groomed her, and never expresses the symptoms of trauma that go with this. I'm not speaking for all survivors but it would be an extreme minority of people who would not experience trauma under these same conditions, and their exclusion is a choice which speaks.
and before you say, 'its not real/doesnt reflect reality' and 'it raises the topic for discussion' - not only are you giving the creators undue credit, but that discussion is a pointed one which revolves arohnd the idea that dubious consent is even up for debate in this scenario. more so, for so many disabled people, this form of SA is a reality. nearly 9 in 10 women with autism experince SA. I know people with disabilities who experience the world comparably to bella in the first half who experienced grooming and SA for years from someone close to them, flying wildly under the radar somehow because people will fight to unsee SA and ita uncomfortable, not silly or funny or sweet, reality when its signs are all there, just like the supporters of this work.
@@sasha_chudesnov
1:The way in which she performed the character to me from the clips I've seen seemed ableist to me. I know I'm not alone in feeling this as I've seen disabled people call it out. And while not disabilities I know many neurodivergent people like myself that thought the performance itself felt like a caricature of that experience.
I do not think an anti ableist approach would be to have her act completely "normal" or even have people treat her as such. Especially considering the time period in which the film takes place in. I do however feel like the performance itself has aspects of it which are built into false stereotypical notions that personally make me uncomfortable as it feels like it comes from a perspective of "Laugh at how weird she is."
I'm assuming good intentions on both Emma and the directors ends here however it comes off as tone deaf and un-empathetic to me.
It is worth noting I have not seen the movie so can't really give as in depth a comment on this as someone who's seen the movie and dislikes it for these reasons however.
2: I didn't mention anything about starting the discussion of consent within the film. I think you misread my comment.
To clarify I mentioned that many people in my generation wanted to talk about the sex and how it's depicted in film, and other such things relating to the sex in the film and other Media.
My complaint here was that the way older generations and "journalists" and other personalities don't actually listen to what we are saying/said and just jumped to conclusions and wrote down what they think we are saying down. My complaint is that the narrative around Gen Z is almost entirely constructed by older people who don't actually listen to what we are saying or even seek to care.
What I did say that could be misread as me talking about that however, was the fact that I said depictions of sex in Media should be normalised as should conversations around sex and consent.
This itself I think is a statement you probably agree with me on reading between the lines of your question.
Hope that cleared some things up. I probably didn't write my original comment all that clearly.
Too many people take art too literal. Sometimes is just a metaphor or symbolism. And yes, there has to be art that is "controversial". If all art plays it safe, then we would have a problem.
Oh media literacy is very lacking these days. People cannot seem to grasp basic allegory much less dramatic irony or anything more complicated
@@nezahuatez It's always been the case though. I've seen a lot of older movies where they almost always tell you the plot or what's happening.
@@nezahuatez it's scary to see how much people lack media literacy and understanding arts and get offended for no reason at all. Like it's a movie not a damn political party.
movies can have political under tones to it. let's not forget that.@@nobodyelse7911
i've truly noticed this weird phenomenon where characters/plot choices are "controversial" or just kinda out there and people interpret it as if it's a moral problem with the movie/creator that a character is complicated or does bad/questionable things. i've sat with my friends watching incredibly well written movies like parasite and they will be completely turned off and become morally outraged at the movie just because the characters are bad people, which for parasite is like the entire point and theme of the movie. it's like if someone got morally outraged at the lion king and decided the movie was a bad influence bc scar is a villain and simba doesn't help his dad
I love this movie because as a neurodivergent woman who was very sheltered, i relate to bella heavily.
Thats how i viewed sex and the world before men hurt me and I had to understand how men view things. Her confusion to men actually liking women not enjoying sex is so relatable and how she tried to fix/innovate things from a practical perspective
That is so me, i always tried to find solutions so we all could be happy but the men around me didnt care my happiness and just saw me as a sex toy because i was comfortable with my sexuality
I love that one quote from that scene in the brothel "we must experience the good and bad in order to be whole" It really help me look at my painful experiences as a woman so sees sexuality as natural find peace and healing.
How did you find the whole? I just feel shattered and betrayed.
So many times I thought I was accepted as an equal...only for things to turn into a one sided fantasy, where it was suddenly very important I was afraid and vulnerable or treated as if sex was my only personality trait.
It was like everything else we shared, just vanished sometimes.
How did you ever trust again? I can't even trust my own judgement.
I've written and deleted this over and over again. And I still don't know whether this is all a terrible mistake.
@juststatedtheobvious9633 what you want through was undeserved, and I'm so sorry. You are a person, not a possession. You're feelings will always matter.
To be honest, I don't trust. It's hard for me to trust still. For me what I did was try to live a life independent and detached from men. Focus on loving and healing yourself, focus on building boundaries so no one can infiltrate your space and hurt you..
One of the most powerful things I realize is that I truly do not need a man's validation or love to survive and that I can be my own love. Don't listen to the words of others before your own words. It's hard but I learned to just wave off the hurtful things men say as just another hate filled misogynist.
And you will be okay. You survived trauma, you will survived healing. You are beautiful, some people are just unable to see it but that doesn't mean it's not there 🫂
@@Eulogy080 Thank you, but any beauty you see is only a reflection of your own inner light.
Myself..? I'm not sure...
I should have admitted our pronouns were the reverse of your experience. It was a cis woman who taught me to fear sex at an age when I was still learning how to cut paper snowflakes in school. And it was mostly cis women who understood what it was to be terrified and ashamed and trying to help everyone else, just to avoid... They just knew, because they had been there too. Whether they built me up or tore me down or both. All had their own stories of tragedy and triumph too.
In the end...
You trusted me, more than I trusted you. The ugliness inside me was afraid you'd think this was weird flirting or trying to censor you or... I don't know. Every horrible thing. I'm sure I can imagine more if I let myself.
But.
You reached out to give a little help, to someone in pain. And that act of empathy , makes me want to be beautiful inside again.
It's a small first step forward? When, before, I didn't even know where forward was.
You have made a difference.
Thank you.
@juststatedtheobvious9633 your input also opened my eyes. I have complicated feelings dealing with men. But the more stories I hear, the more I see men can especially be victims too. You are definitely not like the men who hurt me. The ability to understand those who have hurt you is the trait only the kind hearts and empathic have... the most tortured humans of the bunch.
I am so glad I could help. I do not know you, but I am praying for you growth and success. I am giving you my love, human to fellow human.
THIS !!!
For me this is a movie about AUTONOMY, and a huge part of crafting a self that you are comfortable in is learning to embrace your body as a whole, and all it can do for you. Figuring out your personal relationship to pleasure is important for everybody, it is a step in everyone's journey, regardless of whether sex appeals to them or not. What really struck me about Bella was her lack of internalized shame due to the circumstances of her creation-- yes there is a debate to be had about the state of her mind, but she is in an ADULT body, which means her body responds to sexual stimuli. In real life, people don't make it to the point of having a sexually developed body without internalizing the stigmas their culture has placed around sex, but Bella, who is notably not real, does! It makes sense to me that someone who is pure id, all about the instant gratification (of food, or dropping a plate on the floor), who is trying to understand the world around them and their place in it, AND THEIR BODY, (which she's clearly still discovering as she doesn't have fine motor skills at the beginning of the film,) would, as she did, figure out how to masturbate and be excited about it. It makes sense that she'd have an interest in that aspect of her self, and since she was shut down by the people around her when she wanted to understand and explore her urges further (Defoe and Youssef's characters were horrified by her discoveries and tried to shut it all down), that she'd follow a man who was making her feel good and telling her that he'd help her figure out that part of herself. Obviously Ruffalo's character is a creepy, predatory piece of shit for being attracted to her naïveté and helplessness, but the movie agrees that he is, it's not endorsing his behavior. I think that in a movie about autonomy, about crafting your self to be what you want to be, even in a society that tells you you should be something different, the only staring point to tell that story that makes any sense is the body, and your control over it.
Well put!
Autonomy of a child or a mentally disabled person? They can't consent to these sex acts with older men. Don't you find this disturbing?
i agree
people really like to throw the "born sexy yesterday" trope towards bella, but the whole film if anything is a critique of that kind of mentality that used (mostly) be fodder for a man's romance story. I think the film exists in an interesting space where it is still based on a book written by a man decades ago and adapted into a screenplay by a fellow man, so there is this otherness I think to Bella that really came to life because of emma stone.
If anything the film is critical of, it is the men that desire Bella before she is able to mature as a person, while she is still naive and ignorant as a child. That is Duncan's greatest indication of his narcisissism, how insecure he gets the more she matures and the less she needs him, and we always see him for the slimy man that he is for trying to control her and hold her back.
All men in the film try to control her one way or another, and take advantage of her innocence and naivete, yet those two of her traits are also what make her bold and what make her unashamed, which is also what keeps her out of most of these men's grasp (unless it's on her terms). In the end this is a fictional story, whose relation to our reality works in the way of metaphor. An interesting way to look at Bella is in parallel to the monster she's been based on, Frankenstein's monster. The monster was written as someone who was good looking from afar, but the moment he moved and mouthed noises people noticed how "off" and "wrong" he was. Bella very similarly looks like a picture perfect pretty white woman, but the moment she opens her mouth or starts acting off her own will she disturbs those around her. The main reason why she also intrigues them or fascinates them as well is that she is unashamed about it.
Poor Things isn't my favorite Yorgos Lanthimos film and probably not my favorite film of the year, but it's in my opinion a beautiful fairy tale that was a real delight to see, especially given its nuance and care in the way the story was so detailed and filled with meaning. It was a very inspiring beginning for my year that legit got me out of a depressive episode.
👏 👏👏
🤌🏿
Your first two paragraphs articulate it so well why I don't understand all this sweeping critique..
What book are you talking about?
@@faerie5926 I was wondering the same thing. I don't remember Mary Shelley's Frankenstein having a monster that was handsome from afar. The creature was a huge, hulking man who was made to be beautiful, but who wasn't. He was, however, articulate, eloquent, and surprisingly well educated. Man quoted Paradise Lost at his father! I also remember him having immense strength, speed, dexterity, and I seem to recall Victor describing him as having "surprising grace" as well at one point-- though I could be wrong.
I’m wondering if you’ve heard about how Bella’s character is considered by some to be an autistic coded character? As an autistic adult woman myself I can say this movie hit me in so many ways and actually made me feel seen. There’s an infantilization that often happens to groups with social or learning deficits, like there’s a strict recipe for what makes an adult and how to earn your agency. Like I was a sensation chaser as a kid, which is common in autism, and did lots of things that were considered shameful or weird for a child to do and instead of getting guidance and information on my body I was made to feel gross and other. I feel people forget that children get curious about their bodies too and they need safe spaces and information about why that is and what the boundaries are for that around other kids and adults. I agree with all your points in this video and love your content! I hyperfocus and binge your video essays so hard lol. Thanks for all you do to spread education and start great conversations both internally and externally!
came here to comment on this! bella’s character was so important to me. it’s not that i feel like a child in an adult woman’s body, but i’m so used to being infantilized as if that’s what i am when ppl realize i’m autistic that seeing that articulated on screen was really powerful. sex has always been such a confusing and convoluted thing for me to understand in terms of the performance of it all and seeing bella go through that same confusion (in all aspects of life, not just sex) made me feel less alone.
@@fernweatherfriend 100% relate and agree! So many things society sees as “childish” I view as strengths of myself which make me more considerate and and open minded as a person. Don’t even get me started on the word naive lol
I haven’t seen the film, hadn’t even heard of it before I opened this video, but as soon as Khadija started talking about it I thought I wanted to see the movie for this reason. I’m an autistic and asexual afab person and was lucky enough to either not be sexualised or maybe was just too oblivious to notice. I’ve only started exploring my sexuality by myself and with others recently in my late twenties but there’s this weird infantilisation either way.
When I was openly asexual and not interested in sex I was infantilised by everyone.
When I decided “hey I’m still asexual but I’m actually kind of curious about all this sex stuff” people freak out like I’m a kid and not an almost 30 year old who has spent the last few years researching online and getting to know myself before even considering being intimate with other people.
You can’t win lmao
@@bellatrixau3809 literally exactly! I’m either too childish or not adult enough like what 😂
Yes yes yes yes. As an autistic socialized woman, Bella’s outlook on the world and how she interacts with it mirrors my experiences and I know I have autistic friends that also felt this way.
im a sex worker because i have to be, as you mentioned many people live this way. i think for me, many sex scenes can be jarring when you need a break from your job, and that is it. especially since i can only guarantee not to see them if i watch kids shows or family shows. im really not complaining, i have always rolled my eyes and fast forwarded just from exhaustion anyway. but i dont think its fair to say people are pearl clutching neoliberals (that neoliberal part seems so very unrelated from the topic that i had to laugh) because they might have a similar fatigue. there are a lot of reasons to be tired of it. especially for people whose lives revolve around sex. as fun as people who dont do irl full time say it always is, its a job that is specifically stressful, exhausting, and potentially traumatizing. i really dont want to hear about pearl clutching neoliberals when i have been a fssw of over a decade and i dont pass that judgement and i even feel similarly.
but they can just fast forward like i always have. idk. both sides seem to have not thought out this weird discussion.
You don’t have to be a sex worker, it’s a choice
@@Fatima-kp8hi People don't always have the luxury of choice. Especially when it comes to work.
@@Crazy_Diamond_75 you can work at McDonald’s - sex work is a choise
@@Fatima-kp8hi be fucking for real i dont think mcdonald's is paying their workers anywhere close to the money sex workers make
@@Fatima-kp8hi Maybe McDonalds doesn't pay well enough.
I disagree that Poor Things wasn’t about men. I mean, it was mostly about Bella, for sure, but I was so disappointed with the ending where they show Bella and these other female characters sitting together living their best lives apparently and I only knew like one thing about each of the other women. None of the other women really mattered. They would introduce an interesting female character but then neglect her to focus on a male in Bella’s life instead. And I didn’t mind the sex stuff, but I was bothered by how it really felt like it came from a man’s perspective. I mean, Bella’s sexual awakening being putting a large fruit/vegetable inside and immediately feeling immense pleasure?? Maybe that’s some women’s experience, but I feel like for your very first time, that probably wouldn’t immediately bring you to orgasm. Most women can’t orgasm from insertion alone in general. Idk maybe I just misread those scenes since I did only just see it yesterday
Completely agree
Same thoughts here
I agree! The fruit thing was so weird for me, and at the beggining of the film sex discovery seems to equal orgasms. It changes when she becomes a sex worker, but I think to discover your own sexuality, even at beggining, is a lot more than to experience pleasure
yeah the fruit thing definitely took me out of it being a raw, real look at sexual awakening/self-discovery from a (cis) woman/girl’s pov lol. in a way it felt very disconnected from the actual experience of women or of female pleasure despite also feeling like it wanted to be about that? like, it definitely did nothing to demystify women’s pleasure and sexuality, and parts of it just felt like a continuation of that - it not having any of the messiness and strangeness of bodies and sex and letting that be extended to women. idk, it was very odd
Finally I'm kind of tired of seeing feminist films or shows where the only female character in it is the protagonist the rest are all men in their life and I'm sorry but I'm at a point in my life where I just don't give a fuck about them 😭
i had no problem with a young woman exploring her sexuality, i just feel like the long closeup shot of her orgasming felt weird, male gazey, voyeauristic, more words. i havent read the book and imagine it could be better in that regard, because of the nonvisual medium.
also showing prostitution as a fun gig to do for self exploration felt weird when practically every prostitute in the real world is forced to do it. they could have just shown the perspective of other women in the brothel and it would have been at least a little bit better. also the "we are our own means of production" line...
also your point about the born-sexy-yesterday trope, let me present max mccandles. he is at the end of the movie married to bella, his former child wife. he saw her grow up, was in a lot of ways a father/uncle figure i assume. so i dont see how he doesnt fit the trope. she returns grown up but still interested in him, even tho he wanted to marry her while also saying "she was a child". and in the closing sequence hes living his best life. the only thing that is differnt here to older sexybornyesterdays is nonmonogamy. and thats the only "radical" thing the movie wants to add to the status quo. for all its hints at socialism, it really doesnt say anything about class at the end of it. but yk free love !
I hear you but I really don't think it made prostitution look fun. Smelly men. Standing in line waiting to be picked. Bad sex. Ears bitten. It looked terrible! She made the best of it but didn't it make her question humanity? And the point about some men liking that we don't like it. That needed to be said in a mainstream movie I think.
would the only way to show and normalize female orgasming on film to be not showing it at all? i was uncomfortable in the scene because im uncomfortable watching/knowing anyone else’s personal sexual ventures, but just seeing her (the main character no less) experience and enjoy sex doesn’t read as male-gaze oriented to me
haven't watched but you make a great point, when will we get the exploration of women's sexualities where we actually see a sex scene from a POV shot of some actress underneath a sweaty weirdo limply thrusting? then i'll accept all of this 'GOSH ITS FEMINIST SEE I SHOWED A NIPPLE' tomfoolery. absolutely not sarcastic here, this needs representation tbh
@@micolea1569 have you watched other movies? Women orgasm is not a new concept in film… It made me feel uncomfortable because it was too pretty too male gaze and it was a baby… And I guess people who liked the film will always find the positive, but this wasn’t a triumph in filmmaking sorry, this wasn’t a Lolita which wanted to make the reader uncomfortable, this is just surface level feminism by men disguised as a deep film…
@@KatherineAcosta20 agree to disagree😄
I think that Kathrin made a great point in her video "It Wasn't That Bad" is R@pe Culture' of talking about the language around sex and how even describing the violence of SA is very sexualized. And because of the shame of being sexualized, survivors can't the help that we need.
We all need a comprehensive understanding about sex and relationships.
I still haven’t seen this movie, but as someone who works with toddlers - I can’t stomach watching full sex scenes of a character who is at infancy through childhood stages of development. There’s a part of me that wants to give the movie a chance so I can have a solid opinion on it, and generally sex scenes don’t bother me, but….
You’re valid in feeling that, knee-jerk reactions and disgust do not make you intellectually inferior. It’s ok for you to not want to watch something like this.
@@elizabuga4337 thank you for your reassurance
It’s pretty clear that the sex scenes begin when the character has matured into probably teen years? I know Stone and Lanthimos plotted her development carefully, though they don’t have a chart on screen. She’s definitely not having sex with anyone in Bella’s child years. Her speech is still not full Victorian upper class English even when she is clearly an adult, but that is the result of her strange development path, not because she’s still portraying a child.
@@rabbitfishtv you can't side step the pedophilia with this argument. What happens to a child who is exposed to sex as a toddler? We rightfully call that abuse and sexual exploitation of children leads to developmental issues. You see this movie plays with people's minds... Children often exhibit really disturbing behaviors experiencing sex because they're too young. But in this movie she has sex as a child and then develops into a more awakened liberated enlightened woman... But that's not reality. The opposite happens. When she's at the table pushing a cucumber up herself in front of the man she considers her father and tried to masturbate the maid... It's problematic.
@@rabbitfishtv I really hope you're right! my friends who saw it were disturbed and told me it was when Bella was at the toddler development stage, so I believed them. Idk, maybe I'll give it a shot and just pray you're right
As a gen z girlie myself, I def fall into the category of “there’s too much seggs on screens” not talking about this movie in particular but I think sometimes the full blown out scene is not needed in some movie or shows. There was a time where the most we see is the characters taking off their clothes then fade to the next scene. Lately, especially in shows with a teen lead, there has been full blown out scenes showing nudity. Though the actors are grown the characters are suppose to be teens, it’s just weird. On top of people sexualizing everything on social media with gen z spending majority of our times online, it’s overwhelming. I think we are in a sexual positive society, we gotta find a line where we can talk about sex in a healthy way without overdoing it. And lately with a lot of things it’s just one extreme to the next.
yeah frr rn we’re overdoing it like i went to see this movie with my dad and it was so awkward because it felt like the seggs scenes were like 70% of the movie and this is the second movie it happened like u can’t watch anything with ur family anymore
You can check warnings online before viewing things
@@thedreammweaver6274 sure, but that’s not always reliable.
That's my issue with the movie. We see her literally grow up, it should not start with sex. It wouldve been so much more interesting if 1. She was simply resuscitated and not operating as a literally toddler. 2. If her exploration of the world didnt start with sexuality. It's not just the sex scenes. They're very male-centered, redundant but so be it. Most dialogues start with the topic of sex, her exploration of other aspects of life as she's travelling the world such as suffering and human nature are glossed over. It's a shame. To me this movie feels very male-gazy, first wave feminism, morally questionnable in a way that is not thought provoking but disturbing. It's a shame because the topic of sex couldve been beautifully handled and explored. The brothel section of the movie was actually the most interesting to me. But even then, it was treated as the bubble-bursting reality check it shouldve been for a character like Bella. The children scene was unnecessary at best. And if it was meant to be a criticism of sorts, the delivery was poor.
Bella gets SA'ed and literally says she enjoyed it. THAT'S the issue. We should absolutely address the topic of abuse, grooming and SA but it does nothing but make us go backwards when the character actually being a victim verbalizes how she loves it.
Not all SA is done in a context where the victim has the tools or knowledge to understand what happened. That was the case of Bella. The movie is pretty clear in that what Duncan does is terrible and exploitative, Bella just wasn't aware of that at that point of the movie.
Contrast that first SA with the attempted one at the end of the movie, see how Bella reacts once she grows
Groomed victims often have complex feelings about their abusers. I’d argue that the film holding the position of “sex feels good” and “sex that feels good can be abusive” is advancing the current conversation about sex abuse, not detracting from it. Sex often feels good. If you don’t know that it’s inappropriate for someone to be touching you in that way, how else can you interpret the abuse in that moment (assuming you’re feeling pleasure of course)? The experiences of victims are not always outrage and anger- I’m saying this from my own experience. It’s easier to picture a victim who’s indignant or depressed than it is someone who is neutral or accepting of their abuse experience. There are no perfect victims. Sometimes we care for our abusers despite the abuse. That being said, I could def see how these perspectives can be misunderstood and perverted, but for empathetic and thoughtful people, I think it’s a safe topic to broach.
I also dont understand why this focus on sex if not for shock value OR for only seeing women through their sexuality. Both is equally bad
What does first-wave feminism have to do with anything? I don't understand the relevance in the context of the comment, never mind the plot of the movie. Are you implying that the film's creators think feminism begins and ends with the right to vote?
I think the focus is on sex because she is a teenager and for many teens, including me long time ago, sex is a constant presence. Feeling turned on, and discovering masturbation, are all chapters of adolescence. Also, that is not how she first discovers the world. I would argue her first introduction to the outside world comes around the time when the young student comes into her life and she tests his patience, asserts her power, and plays around with him. She also discovers violence. The sexual curiosity comes soon after that.
Forever grateful to my mother for telling me to let her know if someone ever “tried to do something bad” to me when I was 4 or 5. Of course I didn’t know what it meant, no 5 y/o would, but it built the foundation for talking about these taboo things and instilled in me trust that I could go to her as a safe space. And also that it was possible that people could harm me, even though I didn’t know specifically what they might do. You can lay the foundations of these conversations from really early on
I think that the audience can only be so interested in having "that conversation" if the movie is interested, but Poor Things truly doesn't seem interested. The issue of her being a child is effectively never reckoned with, there's no consequence or trauma from any of the SA, and she marries Ramy Youssef's character because "sure why not".
A movie like RAW is a much more "difficult" watch, but that movie has SO much more to actually say about sexuality that it ends up doing a better job at justifying its inclusion of those scenes
That's because she isn't really a child, it's a metaphor. Consequently there is no SA depicted so no reason for her to be traumatized.
I hate sex scenes but I loved this film because they had a point, and weren't trying to force a romance or be erotic.
I think the main problem with this movie was that we did not in fact get the story of a young woman growing up and exploring the world as well as her se*uality. If we did get that I don't think people would have minded the se* (Bridgerton, etc.) But we got the story of a child, without them ever wanting to deal with the psychological distress I imagine this would have caused a child. I definitely agree with you that discourse needs to exist about se*ual violence more.
We were supposed to get a "feminist Frankenstein" which is supposedly feminist by being about a woman and that one line about "your body is your own". It is blatantly telling how when the creation is a woman, she is suddenly primarily interesting due to her sexuality. While the creation in the original novel (by the way an interesting piece by feminist standards, written by Mary Shelley at the age of I think 18, whose mother was a famous women's rights activist) deals not with the creations se*uality but with it's intellectual development and human experiences outside of se*. I also didn't really feel like this movie criticized it's male main characters a whole lot. Sure they were made fun of, but in the end most of them were still allowed in her life. When I was at the cinema, people, mainly men, were laughing in all the wrong places. About the whole "born sexy yesterday business", I would argue that some of those films also deal a whole lot with the female character's development and role but I don't think that is an excuse for that trope exactly? Or at least it doesn't explain why it needed to be in this movie. This could literally just have either been about an actual like young adult woman of like twenty finding out about the world and her se*uality or about an actual child finding out about the world but without all the se*. Love the passion for life bit!
Ok so preliminary thought: why are we concerned about who *gets* to participate in sex scenes in movies instead of the true reasons/motivations why directors choose to include them?
I definitely enjoyed the movie, but I think the ending lets it down. Bella goes on this whole journey of self- & world-discovery and learns a lot about the ills of the world, and even engages with socialism & sex work. That feels pretty radical to me! However, the end in which she buys into private property ownership and individual “liberation”? Nah, that could’ve been done way better to me.
oooo interesting take!! i wanna see ur video on it
especially bc she ends up doing the same things as her “creator”, it doesn’t feel like she really grasped the concepts she had learned and instead it’s more of a “men bad so i made him half animal hahaha i’m chilling now” which like, cute but i wanted more.
i didn’t like this film and this was one of the reasons! they let her say buzzwords like socialism and liberating the poor but then in the end nothing happens? she never applied anything she learned and just ends up assimilating to the status quo :(
ask yourself a question: why do you think Bella "buys into private property ownership and individual “liberation"" and "ends up assimilating to the status quo" and how the story might've looked if she didn't? That's more important than being pissed about the movie not being radical enough imo.
While I don't completely agree with this take it is definitely a very valid and interesting one, however for me interpreting the ending like that doesn't detract from the film for me. I think there is a very strong case to be made that Bella has a serious streak of selfishness within her. Yes she gives away all of her and her companion's money but her desire to do so is born out of a complicated mixture of wanting to help for the sake of helping and helping because it'll make her feel better about herself, and in the end she ends up in a place not too dissimilar from her father as a result of her chasing after whatever she feels like in the moment, others be damned. Queen of her domain within the walls of their home, seemingly doomed to repeat the same cycles of abuse Godwin was forced into by his father. At the same time though she now has a found family, and an incredibly unconventional one at that, that will help Bella grow even more and maybe allow her to truly break the cycles of abuse she has a perceived as well as fed into. I believe the ending was very deliberate in how it was portrayed and I think it's a little unfair to expect someone that has about maybe a year of real world experience to suddenly become an absolute paragon of socialist virtue in a film about grappling with the contradictions and complexities of society. None of us are that perfect.
gyrl I get what you're saying about the point of the Cuties movie, but to have actual children still be used for such a point and feeding into that, to an audience that has access to it worldwide and anytime, doesn't make it not irresponsible and gross.
Khadija has already gone into the subject in more depth with a lot more nuance and probably didn’t feel like re-litigating every point
the same with Poor Things, wanting to break or critique an oppression by reproducing it the very same way, without adding a very clear "break" (? in German we call it "Bruch", which is like a twist") is not the way to go, especially if you want to be understood by people who are not already knees-deep in the conversation, and if you really want to prevent adding more harm.
@@malegazeofficialthere are multiple breaks in the film where it clearly does not advocate for the oppression depicted onscreen. You just want to be and about the movie cause it challenged you.
@@aandromaliuss sorry, where was the break on the disabled-coded acting?
I like Poor Things, but in defense of people who are upset about the SA, it's not just that the SA is displayed. The lack of condemnation of the SA leads people to believe the movie condones SA. That's how people tend to look at film. If the movie portrays an act without meaningfully criticizing it, it seems like condonation. Again, I enjoyed the film, but to do that, I had to look past the SA implications.
But Duncan is portrayed as a loser who gets his comeuppance, do you need the movie need to turn to the audience and say this is wrong?
No, Bella would need to say that he assaulted her, and admit that it hurt her or changed her in a way consistent with trauma. She seems to just absolve the male characters who hurt her by saying “well, you gave me new experiences, so I’m grateful actually”. Stone is implying she has complicated feelings through facial expressions and body language, but because Bella never outright grappled with that kind of trauma and instead immediately moves to the next thing and forgives, it falls flat, at least for me.
@@mckennaa3641i think the issue isn’t with what happens or doesn’t happen with duncan. it’s about seeing how it affects bella, and her ability to grapple with it and reflect on it afterwards in a way consistent with csa. i felt like it drew parallels to it during but then didn’t do enough to explore it and its effects after the fact
I commented this as a response but I want to share my perspective here: people are not seeing this as the fantasy that it is. Many are commenting that the movie does not address the trauma of sexual assault / manipulation, but that’s the whole point - that’s the fantasy. Bella gets to stumble through all of this manipulative sex and situations that would be scarring in real life (kidnapping, sex work out of necessity, gun to her head domestic abuse) without it meaning anything to her. Every single time she just gets to walk away from it when she decides to. What should be a source of shame, trauma, and control for the bad men in the story actually doesn’t mean more to Bella than scratching an itch. And when she does gain more context and realizes she is repulsed by some of the sex she has had before, she simply expresses disgust in it and takes her life in a different direction. The fantasy is that her life never ends up being defined by the attempts of men to scar and control her. Characters who in the real world inflict lifelong pain on women are reduced to pathetic idiots who Bella shrugs off. Poor Things is a fairy tale for grown women, not an educational heavy drama about sexual manipulation for young girls.
Thank you for this! With all the arguments I was hearing online, I was beginning to wonder if I was just incorrect for liking the film. But your review is what I had in mind when I watched it. It didn’t feel like “they’re getting around pxxxphilia by making an ignorant woman”, it felt like “Bella doesn’t care about social standards and does what *she* wants.” When she first discovers her body, I *felt* that, because I also discovered sexual things way too young for me in my opinion. But also it shouldn’t be a shameful thing for *you* to discover your own body. I felt something in me relax when I watched it.
"I felt something relax in me when I watched it"
me too! I've had a similar life experience and I felt this too.
what is considered too young to discover sexuality? like it’s something dirty that corrupts you.
unless you were assaulted, for which i apolodgise ❤
Check out the consent at every age article in the description! It doesn’t talk directly about that, but I’ve found it very helpful
oh my god you put into words thoughts i couldnt myself. i relate so hard
It's not shameful to discover your own body independently, but the film is basically about a child in a woman's body getting exploited by multiple men without ever being traumatised. The idea that girls "want" to have sex is continually used to dismiss SA victims which is why it's so disturbing that the film doesn't acknowledge that Bella can't consent. While the men are portrayed as creeps, Bella never actually learns what consent is or understands that the men effectively groomed her.
i loved this movie and it hurts me to see other women talk about hating it so intensely. of course their feelings are valid, but i wish i could show them that the movie is NOT glorifying any of the horrifying things within. there's some real criticism in the male gaze that haunts it, filming techniques i'd do without, but overall i adored it.
i thought it was funny and refreshing! most born sexy yesterday tropes never end with her gaining actual autonomy, just her getting a partner.
@@Me-vn3gz yes, and the movie clearly condemned every man who took advantage of her. bella became sharp and questioning and apprehensive as time went on. really it's a tale of how men ruin women, and how women can pull themselves out of that destruction.
I think a lot of ppl missed the point of the movie. I'm a csa survivor, and was worried I would be trigger due to some of the subject matter. But the film is about the point that our society sexualises children from when they are born. And how disgusting it is.
The Kamera filming Bella was never exploitative and predatory like the men surrounding her. While that's just a part of the puzzle, I do think that indicates the intention of the movie.
not only are there consent issues bc of bella’s lack of understanding, i couldn’t stop thinking about how victoria never consented to her body being used to get off all these random men.
I do agree with another user who said they didn't watch the movie and didn't like the many raunchy scenes in it. And I don't agree with Khadija when they said that if you felt uncomfortable watching all those steamy scenes, then you might have to reevaluate your relationship with s3x. I'm sorry, but what's the correlation here? I can be sexually active and have a very positive relationship with sex, yet find all those sex scenes annoying and pointless. I don't really see the correlation here. They really lost me on this one.
I did watch the movie and yes, I didn't like it. I did enjoy seeing Bella explore the world (and yes, even herself) and basically growing up; and it's quite clear she's surrounded by men who either wanna "use" her or make choices for her even when she's perfectly capable of doing so. But still, I do think the movie is a little bit too voyeuristic. I'm a feminist myself, and I don't think this movie in particular is feminist per se and, while Emma Stone herself was a producer so there's a big chance she was comfortable filming all those scenes, I do think at one point it brought nothing to the plot. We get it, she develops more self agency and wants (rightfully) do things her own way, but were all those s3ggs scenes really necessary to convey such a message? It really dragged the movie far too long imo (and i don't have any issues sitting there and watching longer movies), but i do feel lile at the end they didn't serve any purpose rather than a voyeuristic one. I'm by no means saying women shouldn't be s3xually active if they want to (I, myself, am not ace/aro), and we as a society should definitely de-stigmatize such topics (again, s3x and sentimental education), but on the other hand I can't help but think it was too much. Indeed, just like Khadija, the scenes I enjoyed the most were those were she was on the boat with her newly made friends + those where she joins a socialist club. I can't help but see a very male based perspective in this film, and I do think we (as a society) could talk more (and better) about it without necessarily showing naked women's bodies om screen for 3/4 of the movie.
The cast did a great job, but I do hope the Oscar for Best Actress goes to someone else whose performance wowed me the most (I'm no film critic, this is purely based on personal preference).
I likes the cinematography of PT!, but tbh i don't think it's Oscar worthy.
I love how Poor Things has opened so many conversations about this subject. We shouldn't be afraid of films that make you feel uncomfortable, especially when in the end it makes us have honest conversations like this one.
IMO the movie did exactly what it was supposed to, push limits and make people uncomfortable, to spark discussions and thinking, and that's exactly what art is for.
Except it didn’t push limits. Movies like this have been made by men over and over. And not only that it’s always for the male gaze. That is the issue. This movie doesn’t even disturb men according to most of the reviews I’ve read. Because again it’s made with them in mind. We don’t need another movie that shows the abuse, sexualization of women etc because it does nothing. People who don’t care aren’t going to care from watching a movie. Why is it that hardly any men are shown this way on tv? Why do we need to see her being abused over and over for no real reason at all. There are some amazing movies that evoke thought and bring awareness that don’t even show sex scenes. They could’ve made a better movie they just didnt care too. The only thing I can say I liked was the visuals.
@@user-np6hl8vc2m What you're doing is drawing conclusions for what isn't there. If you're looking for men to admit this movie made them uncomfortable, you're going to be looking for a while. IT's not because it didn't make men uncomfortable, it's because men rarely admit when a film makes them uncomfortable. It is because of toxic masculine traits, just not the ones you're obsessing over. I am a trans-woman, I watched this online with several male friends. You know what you get from a group of men who are enjoying a sex scene with "the boys"? Compliments on the actresses appearance, surprised positive exclamations or simple comments like "Lucky guy". I'll use the movie Knock Knock as an example, where a man is alone at home while his family is away only to be surprised by two beautiful young woman coming to his door, making themselves at home and initiating sex with him. That is the male fantasy that you're failing to understand, beautiful women WANTING to be with you and taking initiative. That is the kind of movie to get a rise out of men, though most of Poor Things, those scenes were dead silent, and that is telling. When she touches herself for the first time, you get uncomfortable laughs and "what the fuck?"'s. If you think most men enjoy the concept of having sex with someone who is not mentally ready for that then you are frankly insane, and using the worst people as your example for how all people are.
@@user-np6hl8vc2mthat’s exactly what I’m saying, anyone who cares already knows taking advantage of the youth is wrong. Anyone who’s cares to know already knows about the themes. These same plot points have been explored over and over again. What is this helping?
Picking up on what you said about teaching children about consent - It doesn't have to start with sexual consent! One way I have interpreted it personally, as an aunt is, when I have historically asked my niece and nephews for a hug, if they say no, or if they seem hesitant, I say "that's okay! no problem." They get to learn that at least when they are with me, THEY choose who interacts with their body.
I do this with friends, with music students. I *always* ask consent if it's not clear. "Can I give you a hug?" to my friends, and "May I adjust your bow arm?" to my students.
It starts with us and how we interact with the people around us.
When I saw the title, my hackles were up. I really enjoyed your thoughtful analysis. I loved the movie and appreciated your breakdown.
I’m uncomfortable with the entire concept because children cannot consent because of their developmental gap with adults. I read voraciously between the the ages of 7-17 but that doesn’t mean I wasn’t 7-17 🤦🏾♀️
Bella isn’t a real person and the film doesn’t take place in the real world. She’s a narrative device.
@@cartilagehead6326 I get that part but movies are used to push pop culture. This is not something that should be in pop culture. Concepts like can be viewed as a Trojan horse for other problematic ideas.
@@OhNaNa2012Based on what exactly? Nobody is arguing for pedophiles at all, its not like Cuties or something. Besides the fact that movies are really media art that intend to entertain and make money first and formost.
@@Ashbrash1998 I never said they were. I simply said these types of morally ambiguous concepts are dangerous to engage with in a mainstream film as they can back door more overt harmful concepts in process. They have banned for a reason and we as a society don’t need to play hop scotch on the grey line with something like this- not even for art or worse a capitalistic profit driven media endeavor
@@OhNaNa2012 this argument is veering dangerously close to thoughtcrimes.txt. Maybe we should also ban Frankenstein because otherwise people might think desecrating graves is okay.
I didn't watch this movie, and I don't plan to. Starting from that:
What bothers me, personally, is that we can't seem to make or watch "artistic" movies about women (but also artistic or ""deep"" movies in general) that don't feature the obligatory sex scene. It makes me feel like we don't care to engage with these stories unless there is that jangling key there to motivate us. For this movie, the sex scene even features prominently in the trailer of the movie, because god forbid you become interested in watching it without the promise of getting to see Emma Stone riding a man. And there's always this explanation that sex is a part of life that prompts artistic exploration and expression that we have the right to see and talk about openly, which I think is absolutely true, and yet it still seems weird to me that we can't usually seem to explore any other prominent aspects of adult life, without the sex scene being a part of it, holding our hand through it.
What irritates me particularly is getting told that this discomfort of mine is probably just internalized sex-negativity, when I think it's precisely that learned sex negativity that makes us want to explain these scenes as "merely artistic expression, you see, it's for the concepts, not just vulgar voyeurism". What would be wrong with it being "vulgar" voyeurism, with just wanting to watch an attractive actress fuck? But no, it's just art, you see, and you're personally a prude for not appreciating it in this movie. And that movie. And that movie. And that other movie.
I also disagree with the argument that it's important to engage with this movie in particular because "these are experiences that sex workers, for example, go through". I think it's very important to listen to and engage with the shared experiences of sex workers. But the director of this movie is not, to my knowledge, a sex worker. Emma Stone is not, to my knowledge, a sex worker either. What this makes me anticipate is not an honest exploration of a personal experience, but rather a borrowing of that experience to make the scene edgy and tantalizing. This, to me, looks like the simple desire for titillation hiding in the skirts of "art".
Sorry for the long and ranty comment, some places aren't worded quite as I'd like but it's just a rough overview of my feelings about this, that I've been having a hard time discussing with people in my life.
Edit: removed the word "gratuitous" since I didn't watch this particular movie and so it's a qualifier I don't have the information to use.
💯💯💯💯💯
Thank you!!!
Perfectly stated
I agree with your sentiment generally, but I went into this film with little background knowledge on it, and the sex scenes felt to me to be part a deliberate exploration of the topic and a part of Bella's story. She discovers her body and sex with no pre-learned ideas or shame, which is not how it happened for me. It sort of taught me to contemplate sex and sexual pleasure without feeling shame for what my body and mind feel. The men who take advantage of her and assault her do deserve judgement, which the film's framing makes clearly visible. It really distills down what is toxic in the men's desire for her. Being able to view it objectively, without the shame that usually shuts down the whole conversation helped me as a man to fully understand sex in a healthier way. I appreciated being guided along her development through her perspective, with the clarity that it provides. To me this felt like a meaningful exploration of sex as a core element of Bella's story which challenges men, not a gratuitous addition to please them.
Edit: Upon further reflection, I agree with other comments about how confined the scenes were to pleasing the male gaze; closer to porn acting than the weirdness and rawness you would expect from her that would better demystify women having sex. I think the topic served a purpose in the film but the scenes could have been executed better.
@@ben1147 I'm glad you appreciated the movie and felt it taught you something.
Just found your channel through this vid and, can I just say IM HERE TO STAY. love the conversations you're bringing to the table
I really appreciate you making this video. When I first saw this movie I knew there was so much more to it but I couldn't properly articulate what it was. But every point you're making is making that easier. You are incredibly good at recognizing the loudest perspective and not letting that affect your own thoughts. Thank you so much for all your videos
Yorgos snapped, Emma and Mark slayed. Deserves to win Best Picture this year. Yes, i'm Greek and proud of how far Yorgos has come in the industry without compromising his vision and filming style.The first scenes are literally an homage to Frankestein with the fish eye view and b/w shots.
Bella is the HBIC in the movie so that whole "born sexy yesterday" trope does not apply here. It's her point of view, her feelings, her desires, her need to explore her sexuality without restraints. She is feisty, vulgar, unapologetic and generous. Everything is narrated through her own eyes, and she controls the men around her, not vice versa, even though every single one of them wants to own and mold her into something else and tone down her rebellious nature.
I interpret the baby brain as a metaphor for the way society constantly has infantilized women over the centuries and rendered them incapable of being in charge of their own lives and bodies, especially in the Victorian era when women and children were thought to possess the same capabilities.
In the end, she is the one who proposes marriage, on her own terms, and decides to study medicine to help people.
Poor Things is everything the Barbie movie failed to become; a journey of self-discovery and realization in the male dominated world we all live in.
Interesting perspective I'll have to add to my watch list
Could not agree more. My take on 'baby's brain' is that we're not meant to treat it literally (since this is a sci-fi piece) and for me, it is meant more to signify a blank slate, a new start (after the main character's old life ended).
Yes so glad u wrote it so I didn’t have too. I just started the video so I haven’t finished it yet, but poor things to me depicted agency of our mc and how the men around her tried to use that for themselves. Even how her father figure had to change and accept who Bella is.
just reading the plot, seems like would have been my read as well, but i AM disconcerted about how many in the comments seem to think this isn't possible when there are massive numbers of under and un-diagnosed developmentally different women/afabs living out realities like this with much less agency - maybe why so many find it hard to bear witness
@@user-vu3hn3jk6r Would agree that the main character's degree of agency is not realistic - or not representative of someone moving through our actual, real world.
Its amazing how anytime people talk about guys being attracted to girls they always say "guys only care aboht looks, they just want a girl with a fat ass and a pretty face" , but now that logic has gone out the window when we put a child brain into an adult body. Why are the guys not attracted to her for how she looks? What makes everyone think they're attracted to her behavior? If you watch the movie you could see Max liked bella as soon as he layed eyes on her, and god clearly stated that he is not attracted to bella and that he sees her as a daughter. People believe whatever they wanna believe. Dont forget that "child brain" evolved way faster to an adult brain than an actual baby brain would. When she was having sex , that was not a child brain
It's the fact that she had a baby brain. Let that sink in.
Right? Why are we justifying it. It feels like someone’s weird fantasy
@@Breensprout17 exactly, all i was thinking the whole time was whose f3tish is this…
I think it’s worth noting that she doesn’t stay with the baby brain through out the intire film. Her brain is shown to develop in a inhuman speed, so while she may have started out with a “baby brain” in the very beginning, she definitely has a much more grown brain through out the majority of the movie
THANK YOU. I’m not getting over that fact or how nasty that is.
@@ulrich3844still nasty, and it still feels like it’s glorifying grooming an infant and toddler
Ugh thank you for this video!! As a former FS sex worker, I have been waiting for someone to put out this kind of take on the film.
I found Poor Things’ portrayal of sex work to be the most relatable and realistic to my lived experience I’ve ever seen in film. Bella was drawn to sex work because of her financial situation, as many of us are, but still found ways to take joy in the work and connect with her clients. This video rules!!
Awe yay, interviewing sex workers really helped my awareness around how sex work is depicted in media
Yes! I agree as a former swer, it felt as realistic as it could be in the context of a fantasy world. Especially as an autistic afab person it felt like my journey with my body, sex and just growing into personhood and autonomy.
I have so many thoughts on this (and I haven't seen the movie but the topic of shame and our inability to talk about seggs, the censorship and the shame taught TO US for enjoying it, for looking a certain way, for being "too nice" or whatever. I never felt shame until it was taught to me, til I fell prey to manipulation and only after then could i see things like the male gaze everywhere, it was literally like glass shattering, and i could only then see all the screwed up things. This is why I'm such an advocate for education, people sharing their experiences and also putting emphasis on consent - the happy "hell yes" consent we've been shamed from feeling we can express. Gosh I could go on for hours about this
as a gen z person who really loved this movie and also loves your channel i was nervous to watch this video bc from the title i thought you didn’t like it.. it was such a pleasant surprise that you do, and you explained everything so eloquently and put into words what i felt i couldn’t explain about it!
It’s not weird talking about sex or showing sex in my opinion. It’s weird that right after she was established as having the brain of a baby they show the sexy scenes.
I just unsubbed. What kind of feminist thinks women aren't getting sexualized enough by our media? And she said she likes Cuties wtf.
I don’t think millennials or gen z are ashamed of sex. I think we’re sick of it. Sex is literally everywhere. Music, movies, every other post on social media, half of friends primary source of money is OF, & almost every podcaster is having some sexual debate. I think we’re comfortable with sex, but tired of it over saturating every avenue. If we take sex out the movie, what’s left? And that’s my issue. I feel like writers add in sex scenes like a cop out. Were in a world were your shamed if youre not sex positive so it’s easy to make a movie with a bunch of sex scenes & call it deep & feminist but could the same story be made without the sex scenes? If not then the story falls flat for me. Something else that bothered me was the comment about opening your tolerance window. That’s the same shameful rhetoric being pushed against anyone who isn’t “sex positive.” Im not sure what rooms you find yourself in but sex is discussed as commonly as dinner. Maybe this point would’ve been valid 20 years ago, but in 2024 I find it void of experience. I remember the first time I seen a sex toy was super late night on a channel I wasn’t suppose to watching. Now you see people showing off their rose toys on IG. I think the world has “over sexed” itself, and we’re on the cusp of a cultural shift. Hopefully it forces another level of creativity in writing.
You literally wrote what I was thinking. It's not aversion to sexuality or sexual content, It's fatigue.
Yeeep
I see this movie as neither misogynistic or feminist. My bafflement stems from people trying to cram it into either category.
Exactly.
there is a woman so they must put it in one of the two boxes
Same, they created something so unique, nuanced, and beautiful and people still get pissy about it because they only accept what they are used to. I've always been open minded so I embraced this movie for what it was and thoroughly enjoyed it because it just comes as it is and doesn't apologize for it. It's awesome.
Wow Khadija! This is the first video I've seen of yours, and I'm really impressed.
Your ability to really look at the issues--especially such contentious issues--is rare.
And I mean that--you expressed things that I haven't heard _anywhere_ else. Subbed!
i can’t believe i just found your channel tonight, i love your energy, insight and wisdom tysm for sharing
Also Emma Stone is a 35 year old woman who is considered an A-List actress and has worked with this director before. Even is she wasn't a producer, she absolutely has the clout with her agent to negotiate not showing her body in sex scenes or having a body double. She's not a young woman first entering Hollywood. She's a professional woman whose acting choices should be respected as her own, especially at this point in her career.
There is a clear difference between the sex in euphoria, The Idol and Poor Things. Sex scenes are risky for actress not for male directors. But, in any case, if the actress is okay with the fact that these scenes can be used as porn... is okay.
Thank you for the ace/aro shoutout! We are an often overlooked community and the more people accept and support us, the more awareness people will have. ❤
Not her belting our "molestation" in the the most talented of notes @16:15
Girl, I lost it. 😂😂😂😂😭😭😭😭
Okay, I agree with u that we should talk about the activation or reaction we're having to those uncomfortable scenes. As a young millennial/ gen z (97) person I still didn't like seeing so much of Emma Stone without clothes and imo 3/4 of the movie about her sexual discoveries. I also liked the scene on the ship the most, more of the movie could have been like this.
We should talk about it but I don't know if we're ready for the conversation tbh. Most people see this movie as "feminist" because of the nudity and not because of the shown taboo breaking behaviour. I think ppl are too simple, most would have needed a clearer depiction of the wrong and patriarchal acts by ALL men in her life.
Listen, you ain’t wrong *sigh*
What if Emma wanted to do this? Why can’t women express themselves sexually that has nothing to do with men and male gaze shit?? I love my body, being sexual, love how women can embrace it. I’m on the cusp of gen x and older millennial, and I love how we’re progressing when it comes to consent and female pleasure. Things that weren’t discussed when I was growing up. However, I am not letting this younger generation make it seem sex (even in the most sexualized way, even “whorish” as some judgmental ppl would deem it) is this act that’s ALWAYS ABOUT SOME DAMN POLITICAL ACT. People want to f*ck, and it’s part of human nature.
I am also taking into consideration that Gen Z is different than any other generation in history given the fact that they have never known and LIVEDDDDDDDDD in a WOLRD without the Internet, social media, and smartphones. This has definitely given a warped sense of life, especially when this generation compared to others are feeling more isolated, battling mental illness, avoiding /have anxiety in participating in coming of age activities like getting a driver’s license, date IN-PERSON (online relationships when you’ve never met the person will always be a weird concept to me), go to dances, just being an adolescent/young person. My generation may not have been progressive in consent, female pleasure, etc…however, there was still a sense of human connection/f*cking for pleasure (just for one’s own satisfaction)/looking as sex as something BEING PART OF HUMAN NATURE, not some evil/oppressive/manipulative act. 😒
@@elisaaguilar6423 I agree, talking about and showing female sexuality shouldn't be policed. Also I'm sure Emma agreed and found value in showing herself like that, this film could be so educational about sexuality with all its facets. I just can't divorce this film from all the stories before it that objectify female bodies. We don't live in societies that see sexuality as human nature and morally neutral. The majority of ppl will never question their understanding and judgement of sexuality. And therefore don't uncover the beliefs that patriarchal society instilled in them.
I definitely hope for better attitudes about sex and see progress in that direction. But are we there yet? I don't think so. There IS uncritical fetishization of Emma Stone's character, because we live in a society that does that.
It’s a fine line between bringing it up in a conversation and having it be normalized in our media. And we have crossed the line
Thank you so much for posting your sources for the things you discuss. It is really helpful and many of the resources, especially books, have become beloved additions to my collections. Also as someone who takes media literacy very seriously, and enjoys learning and expanding, it’s been so helpful to be able to continue past your videos into my own experiences with the literature and take that into introspection. Your nuanced approach to content creation is deeply inspiring.
I've sooo enjoyed this discourse about Bella's sexuality and ability to consent in the film. Thank you for bringing light to the importance of being able to remain engaged with the material/uncomfortable for a moment for the sake of unpacking our feelings personally and collectively. And thank you for being so open about your own experience.
My perception of Poor Things is that it was more about men, a critique on masculinity. Bella 's gender Identity wasn't something solid i.m.o., she was perceived as a woman by the people around her, which were mostly men, and she was primarily socialized by and with men. I didn't perceive it as a feminist or empowering film, but I appreciate it when male creators talk about masculinity in an honest and deconstructive way, as I think this movie did. This is why I enjoyed it so much, in contrast to The Favourite, Lanthimos's previous movie, which I didn't think it was his story to tell. This and the fact that Bella was such an amazing character!
as a csa survivor myself i actually really liked seeing bella discovering her body cause i never got to do that as a teen and i have to learn that the hard way now at 30. i didn't read her as an actual child, i am pretty sure it's a metaphor, and for me it reads as a metaphor for trauma and disability. bella's body and brain went through trauma (death) and she has been disabled and now she has to learn about how her body works now and how her reality has shifted, and that unfortunately includes people predating on her. idk obviously it's up to interpretation etc. but yeah that's how i view it as someone who is affected by both trauma and disability.
also i'm convinced she learns about the world through physicality and then moves on to discourse bc that's how plato conceptualizes the way to "enlightenment", specifically playonic eros works that way, and yorgos likes is old greeks (shh don't correct me, i want to believe)
honestly great comment v insightful
@@youtubesupportsfascism well we all have different experiences. I too have also been SAed, so we just have different takes on what has happened to us. Sorry that you disagree.
Khadija, I might have to disagree with you on this. This movie received so many visceral reactions because of the premise that the protagonist was created with the mind of a Baby who's having sex with Men. As someone who's trying to be mindful of the content I consume, this movie was a deal-breaker for me. I'm all for sexual liberation and I'm sex-positive as hell, but context matters, and how this film tried to create a feminist message was just weird.
She doesn't have the mind of a baby when she starts having sex. This point I keep seeing doesn't make sense unless we are just ignoring the dialogue of the film.
Great video thank you so much!!! 1. Interrogating why we have a strong opinion about something is such a strong move. 2. a big yes to encouraging changing your mind 3. thank you for the aro/ace shoutout!
I really liked poor things however, I’m tired of seeing sex being largely portrayed as something transactional and mostly physical. I would like to see sex being portrayed on screen in healthy relationships and thinking more about the emotional, spiritual, and most importantly reciprocal ways that people can have sex. I think gen z is “tindered” out and a lot of us want more connection and are done with sex being seen something as mostly transactional. Great video as always ❤❤
yes! would love to see more sex in media like this
Gratuitous? Using another Oscar nom here: Oppenheimer's sex scenes/nudity were gratuitous, they felt unnecessary to the story, & IF they were needed Mr. Nolan, they could have been shot differently. The less is more rule of racy stuff on film shockingly would have felt more correct to a story where the USA had no restraint in war, would have been a nice dichotomy to that y'know. However... Poor Things, OMG all of it felt _so very very important_ to Bella's experience of life & who she is. Even the earliest scenes while she's still of younger mind its important to who she is as a WHOLE PERSON in the end. Also like hello....tell me Duncan's overarching character isn't supposed to be groomer/manipulator, that's that's the archetype its supposed to be, did people who were upset not realize its supposed to make you feel uncomfortable (that's a impertinent to say i know but seriously???), you're supposed to not want Bella to be with him, the correct response is "this is gross, he is gross, he is bad for her!!!", thing is we have to watch her learn that on her OWN!!
While yes me, a singular ace individual, personally could have done with like 2 fewer sex scenes if I had the power to make that call, that all really becomes neither here nor there in the end. Finding out Emma was a Producer on this makes me love this movie even more. Like I saw male director and had that initial "hnnggg oh no" but also realized Emma would have (or hopefully would have) been vocal on what she was or was not willing to do even if she only just had the actor cap on, but who's to say. But knowing she had like a whole fistful of power on what the final product looked like, Hell YEAH!!!! Plus her GG acceptance speech of Poor Things being a rom-com of Bella falling in love with herself, goddamn is that soooo right!
Im so glad you put a video out because i feel like you articulated a lot of the things i very much enjoyed about poor things. I really identify with bella's mindset. I think another point that your analysis made me think about is that we shut down the sexual elements of the art peice we dont want to engage, but we normalize the violence. There is graphic violence in the movie at times but nobody is complaining about that because we don't emotionally engage with it the same way.
as a person who identifies as being on the ace spectrum, i appreciated that mention (and the acknowledgment of the work that I know I have put in to figuring this out for myself, thanks in large part to the work of aro/aces who have come before me). ❤