Poor Things, Explained: Empowering or Exploitative?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 май 2024
- Go to zocdoc.com/THETAKE to download the Zocdoc app for free and book a top-rated doctor today.
Poor Things, the new Yorgos Lanthimos film starring Emma Stone, has been racking up nominations and wins on this year’s award circuit. But it also sparked a bit of controversy thanks to one major feature of its plot… So what is the film actually about, and is it empowering or exploitative? Here’s what you need to know about Poor Things, those scenes, and the message the film is trying to convey!
Join our Patreon to unlock the members-only series “Total Take," vote on what we cover next, and more: / thetake
Read articles on film, TV and culture: www.the-take.com
Follow our socials: linktr.ee/thisisthetake
CHAPTERS
00:00 Poor Things
00:37 How Bella Takes Control
01:37 Poor Things = Weirder Barbie?
03:20 Expanding her mind in more ways than one
04:30 Zocdoc Plug
06:13 Story through cinematography & costume
07:18 The truth about those scenes
10:29 Wild, but still relatable
CREDITS
Executive Producers: Debra Minoff & Susannah McCullough
Chief Creative Director: Susannah McCullough
Associate Producer: Jessica Babineaux
Writer: Jessica Babineaux
Narrator: Jessica Babineaux
Video Editor: Jessica Babineaux 
Кино
Go to zocdoc.com/THETAKE to download the Zocdoc app for free and book a top-rated doctor today.
Are you guys done posting to Spotify?
Idk if the film is exploitative or not. All I know is that I should of done more research on the film before I went to go see it with my mom.
SAME YUP
@@lar_s Tell me, did you also (very, very briefly) long for the sweet release of death during the screening?
Saaaaame. I picked this movie for my birthday outing and saw it with my mom and brother. 🫣
oh no! that would of been awkward lols! FURIOUS JUMPING!!!
I took my brother to go see it 🤦 We still loved the film regardless, beyond the constant awkwardness
As a victim of sexual exploitation from a very young age, this movie sickened me. If Bella's physical body represented her mental age and showed her as a TODDLER or INFANT during this movie every time men were having sex with her, I doubt people would like this movie nearly as much. This movie more so feels like it is glorifying sexual exploitation and disguises it as feminism. You know those animes where the main protagonist is like a 40+ year old man who died and was reincarnated in the body of a little boy and is having a romance with another little girl except he still has the mental age and maturity of a 40+ year old man? Yeah, that's basically this but the opposite and instead it's a little girl in the body of an adult woman who is being exploited sexually by anyone who wants her.
i'm so sorry that this happened to you and I wish you all the best 🤍 your perspective is very important. terrifying how people won't see anything wrong with a pedophilic movie as long as you don't cast a ten year old actress and don't tell your audience explicitly "hey, what you're watching is Bad"
By your analogy, it wouldn’t be glorifying sexual exploitation of those who can’t consent though because Wedderburn is unequivocally positioned as a predator and an antagonist. In anime where there are these large age gaps and the story makes excuses for them, the couple ends up together but Bella very much discards Duncan. Max at least shows reticence about the arrangement Godwin proposes but it’s also framed as him in a somewhat paternal role similar to Godwin’s at first. Max also doesn’t stop her the second time she leaves and by that time, she arguably has matured to the mental age of an adult.
It is not to say that framing Bella’s sexual experimentation as “liberating” isn’t problematic but that I think the movie doesn’t ignore and in fact villainizes people like Wedderburn that willingly take advantage of someone who even if she is in an adult body, shows a dubious ability to consent
@janettewong9900 how does it villianize him? He is not held accountable in any meaningful way.
@@terrancehall9762exactly
@@janettewong9900 His GUARDIANS willingly let her go overseas with a man who was going to use her sexually and did NOTHING to stop that.. Yes, Wedderburn was a predator, but Godwin and Max enabled him. Then what comes to her "development", she hurt everyone who ever cared for her with no signs of remorse, and degraded herself all throughout the film and we are supposed to celebrate that? This movie had a very twisted and harmful view on sexuality and female empowerment. The message it tries to convey is harmful to people, and the movie was boring and disturbing.
Remember Big? The kid sleeps with a woman while in a man's body. Even as a kid myself I knew that was screwed up. Reminds me of this
The difference is that Bella is physically and chronologically an adult, despite mentally being a child.
At least Bella’s brain does mature rapidly.
Her body may have aged, but not her brain (at least until the latter is convenient for the plot).
Josh in “Big” may have been physically an adult, but he’s mentally and chronologically a teenager.
Bella is a developmentally disabled adult, and Josh is an overgrown teenager.
That being said, Bella and Josh can’t consent to sex due to their limited mental capacities.
I thought about thr parallels with Big too but would say that Big is meant to be non-sensical escapism (which arguably could be worse) but it does let the audience a way out.
Poor things is meant to disturb and therefore leaves no way for escape but forgets that principle when Bella "owns" her body, despite knowing she is a child. The film judges selectively when it shouldn't be judging at all and definitely shouldn't be trying to entice viewers like it did with the apple scene by lasting far too long.
That's technically called " niice "
I haven’t seen this film, so please correct me if I am wrong about how this is done in the film. But portraying brothels as sexually liberating is pretty gross. Back then and even now, prostitution is primarily an avenue for desperate poor women. It’s the opposite of having sex freely, especially in the time period it takes place in. Prostitutes were and are regularly abused by customers and pimps, and are financially forced to have sex with men they don’t actually wanna have sex with. Again, I haven’t seen the film yet. I’m going based on how the video discusses the film.
In the movie Bella tries to argue that sex work would be better if the women chose their customers - the ladies would have agency and the guys would feel desired. The woman who runs the brothel then explains to her that some men actually like the idea of forcing themselves on someone that would never willingly choose them and I believe this to be a fair and legit point. She is physically assaulted by her pimp lady too (and is constantly aware that if she contradicts her at any point she could be attacked again) so I don’t think the movie is trying to glamorize sex work. The only thing I wished the movie tapped in was std’s and how the risk of catching something would affect her mentality towards sex work and sex in general. In the movie it makes sense that Bella never knew about the other possible negative consequences of sex, but I trusted the brothel sequence would bring some awareness to her on that matter, unfortunately it never touched the subject and that is probably my only qualm with the film.
@@soniachristine9450Thank you.
I don't feel like the film was saying brothels are either good or bad. I think it was mostly showing the realities of the options women had. It's important to point out that Bella has no concept of sex as good or bad, moral or immoral - she just goes along with her instincts since she has not been taught etiquette or shame, especially around sex. I found that concept pretty liberating watching the film, even if I wouldn't personally enjoy most of the things Bella does. Being a woman comes with so many expectations and societal pressure, and Bella just ignores it all.
Exactly! I don't like when Hollywood try to glamorize prostitution!
@soniachristine9450 so you're basically saying her pimp reaffirms the correlation between rap3 and prostitution
I don't think it is empowering or exploitative. She is just a person experimenting the world and finding new things. And when you experiment, you get a taste of the good and the bad.
Thank you. Sometimes its as easy as this. But people like to rant. And by a lot of comments on the internet you always realize that people are only in it for the rant and forming opinions on things they havent even watched... tiring. It ruins every good discussion
Well said. I was trying to find the words. I can see/understand the controversy and both sides of the argument but for me I felt something else. She was just a person experiencing life and new things. That took many forms. I don't think its an easy-or. Just a person learning how to be and became her own person.
THIS
She didn't experience the bad, really. The worst she experienced of working in a brothel was men being bad at bed
so being A WHORE is the alternative to being under a mans control ?
WOW just WOW.
I consider myself a very progressive person and feminist, and this did not land for me at all. It’s blatantly trying to say something groundbreaking about female bodily autonomy, but takes away a woman’s choice to end her own life by brutally mutilating her to place a baby in exploitative situations with men. It makes no sense to me.
All the themes felt so surface level- I hated the storyline of her discovering poverty and inequality, only to throw money at the problem and no one explaining to her that that’s not a solution or how the world works. She never ponders the potential trauma or discomfort she might be experiencing during her time as a sex worker. I think it’s comical that she’s in socialism club but lives in luxury at the end of the movie, never exploring the irony more thoughtfully. Her ex husband being used for a goat’s brain was played for laughs, but it felt a little “women win, men crawl at our feet/revenge fantasy” feminism which isn’t the way (granted he was a dickhead but can’t he just die in peace?). She ended up learning no lessons and was no better than the God character. Why not spend more time with her learning about surgery, and how she wants to use it to heal, rather than for revenge? Lastly, I was baffled that she forgave God in an instant after finding out the reality of her situation. That’s not human, that a woman written by a man being easy to forgive and gracious when she should’ve been outraged.
The messaging just felt very performative on so many fronts. I’m so confused why so many people adore this without asking any questions. I understand the glimmer of Yoros’s catalog and previous hits, but it doesn’t excuse him from messy and problematic story-telling.
THANK YOU oh my god. I was so weirded out how they just brought up the poverty thing and made her cry about it or whatever, "Poverty bad" and then never really touched on it ever again. It gave me such "just found out women have to go through menstrual cramps😡😢" vibes. And that bullshit "we are our own means of production" line about working in the brothel made me roll my eyes so hard. Completely incongruous with her recognizing that the workers of the brothel are a "machine" that the madam exploits. Also, the way that of course Toinette (the Black brothel worker) took the fall for Bella when she asked why the women couldn't choose their customers. She faced the consequences of Bella's actions and had to suck that guy's dick for no money (hmm isn't there a word for being forced to work for no money??!) then of course becomes her like girlfriend(???)/solace/protector character. Wack. Seemed very "Black best friend" trope-y where she didn't have much of a life or narrative or story beyond helping and supporting Bella.
love this commennt, you hit the nail on the head, I really wanted to like it but I really didn't
Thank you..
It's not bad liking that movie. That's up to everyone in my opinion but for me it just didn't hit right, especially because it was labeld as a feminist movie.
I can see what they tried to depict, especially because it's also a satire but it's just not hitting the spot because of reasons you already wrote.
(I was also questioning the choice of why Bella was literally experimented with and fell down a fricking cliff and then having almost no scars or marks on her body. I know that is nitpicky, but it just came off as a bit ..off, as if women can't be sexy with scars.)
I agree with you, very good points. I found it very exploitative and--as a feminist--I'd love to see more films in which a mature, intellectual woman seeks and enjoys her own pleasure--without being kidnapped, prostituted and laid bare before the camera, and in the company of men twice her age. I addressed this issue in a recent column at the Sexpert site, where I write as the Feminist Sexpert.
I believe that all things y’all said on the comments are part of the message of the film. Like, it’s not showing on the film but the public is discussing it. Like I agree so many things were portray in such a superficial level but that’s like what’s “between the lines” already
if her sexuality is just one part of her growth, why did the script dedicate like almost half of the movie for those scenes? Seriously, there was only like one or two scenes showing her interest for books and reading, yet we had to watch like 50 sex scenes for them to make a point? Also, when Bella started her sexual journey with Duncan, she still had the mindset of a child, heck she didn't even know how to walk properly yet.
I left the movie disgusted. People are pervy and are deliberately ignoring the glaring issues. The movie immediately sexualized a beautiful woman, despite her mental capacity. I thought that the filmmaker wanted us to believe that sexual experience made Bella 'more mature'. This does not apply in real life AT ALL, and that's what made me feel really sick. Some people will never be sexual, despite their beauty
If anything, because of what she suffered and went through, wouldn’t it make more sense for her to at first be scared or uncertain of sex but then grew to have control of her sexuality by taking it back?
It might make more sense if maybe her body remembered the pain and trauma she went through while her mind was developing and not understanding why she was in pain or cried even though the men kept saying for her to ‘enjoy’ it, but while I saw it, I felt not only uncomfortable but kind of offended as it almost felt like the most ‘mature’ thing she could do is have sex…while not having a fully developed mind…and in the Victorian Era…
YES! And we're supposed to believe that becoming a scientist was her lifelong dream when we see her reading or in class... 4 times? But we see her having sex almost constantly.
I SAID THE SAME THING!! It was literally 2 scense where she was reading a book and like 10 scenes where she was having sex. And youre so right she couldn't even WALK properly when she first started doing the deed. This movie seems to be normalizing a certain type of behavior.
Amen
I'm a bit exhausted with the narrative that sex is such a vital part of understanding the human experience when that is just not true for a large group of people. Like, asexual people always get swept aside and othered when we talk about sexuality as some centerfuge to being human. I felt the film absolutely overemphasized Bella's sexuality as it was the hinge of each and every chapter of her growth. To me and my sister, who I watched the film with, we both left the theater incredibly unsurprised that a male writer/director focused largely on his female protagonists sexuality as a means of understanding and becoming a part of the world. Yes, female sexuality is one avenue to feminism and female liberation. However, it is no groundbreaking thing to see men explore women as people through our sexuality, the way they are most accustomed to doing. There are some movies that men have written about women that slap. This one felt incredibly naive, predictable, and old hat imo. But hey, art is subjective. I'm just more interested at this point about men viewing us outside of our sexual value/function. What happens if we get old, or we're ugly, or we don't like sex? What are we then? I just think that's a more ambitious thought exercise
Asexual people and old people have sex too.
Asexuality is not the same as celibacy, since you can be celibate and still have sexual desires (see priests).
Also, there have been TV shows that acknowledge older women desiring sex like “Grace and Frankie”, “The Golden Girls”, “Hot in Cleveland”, and “Sex and the City”.
And that's why this film in the end boils down to the cliche male perspective of women but its made to look like some feminist empowering film when it's really objectifying women as just for pleasure and a woman believing in this concept as well and using that to her advantage. More disturbing is they bring in the child aspect to this as well. The whole film is messy as a plot. Visually interesting but plot wise it's null.
Yes THANK YOU! I felt the same, really
wait they have sex with her when she's essentially a baby?? WHAT
@@carlf.9035 - The pill was invented by men in order to be able to exploit women sexually without the consequence of pregnancy. Playboy magazine owner Hugh Hafner was a huge advocate of the pill. Womens liberation has mainly led to the average man getting more sex than he ever had before and women getting reimbursed less than ever before.
I watched having no clue what this movie was about and I felt extremely uncomfortable and anxious entire time. Not a good watch in my opinion.
I know that this movie was also a satire in many ways and I do have nothing against people liking the movie, but as a feminist movie it just didn't hit it or doesn't fit at all.
There are so many things that needed to be more experienced by the main character or talked about with (especially the poverty scene and the one with her "fiancé" when she came back to the estate) but just when I thought that they would get to what wrongs had happend it never came to it.
I also don't get how anyone thought that "feminist" and the "born sexy yesterday trope" is a good concept together.
I get what they wanted to depict with a vulnerable woman at the beginning that learns with every step, getting more self-aware, but with almost no deep dive or reflexion of the things and abuse that had happend ... it feels like they made no big deal out of the importance and meaning of grooming and it's impact.
The nitpicky parts I had about the movie:
In the end, as a lot of comments already described, it just doesn't come off as authentic when Bella is seemingly forgiving for everything that had happened to her instead of being enraged.
The other thing I sadly did not like is the fact that Bella fell down a fricking cliff with water that is as hard as concrete from this height and not having any scars or disabilities on her body. I know she is supposed to be this astonishingly pretty woman but it seems so ... off, as if women can't be pretty with scars.
The prostitution of Bella, a child with an adult body, seemed a bit uncalled for. I know I know .. shock value or depicting what some women had to do in that time period for money.. but..
If you got a "toddler in adult body concept" please no.
Bella isn't facing any things like body hair, period, etc..
It's strange that non of these were shown and sex (without problems) was almost the most important topic for Bella and her growth.
I hate to write negatively about someones hard work and the visuals + acting in this movie are beautiful but it was just so confusing how this concept won an award. Also a bit concerning. I am open for other thoughts tho!
her noth having any scars, being so perfectly, including her lack of body hair, is one of the most un-feminist things about this movie. is so unrealistic and tottaly a male-gaze viwe of the story.
it honestly seems like everyone is acting llike the movie is great because of the director, but is a bad sotry and a bad idea. Even if is pretty, and even if you can find some metaphores, what's there is there, and is not a feminist movie ust because there is sex
I haven't watched it, just heard about it. The directors said it's about "a woman living without shame" I believe. I guess it's supposed to be feminist because she's not ashamed about her exploration of the world. But that starts to break down when you think about it:
-shes not ashamed because she's not a woman: she's a toddler. She doesn't feel ashamed about being in sexual relationships because she doesn't even know what they are, she's been groomed. It would be empowering if someone with the mind of an adult learned to define relationships for herself but as I understand it, she's having relationships be defined for her by all the men in her life because she doesn't have the capacity to understand, and they do
-they left out all the things men make women feel ashamed of in real life: periods, STD's, unintentional pregnancy, scars or any physical signs of what Bella's been through in her life (or prior to it), body hair, weight changes, ect. It's easy to say "this is what a woman looks like when she's not living her life in shame!" when you the woman you write doesn't possess anything that society shames women in real life for having. It makes me doubt if there even was supposed to be a message. Feels more like an excuse to dress up a pretty girl in high fashion clothes and write her into a bunch of sex scenes
@@andynonymous6769 you said it ALL. Oh my god, so true, everyone seems to be worshipping this movie and director just because it is a pretty movie and has famous actors in it. I'm 100% sure that, if this was an anime (Wich probably there is one similar) people would be so mad and all the videos would be about how awful it is.
The premise of the unashamed women could work really well if you had, for example, a women that comes from other culture. Like the first wonder women movie has Diana not understanding the point of the western society rules
@@andynonymous6769 yeah thanks, the last part of your comment was the exact same impression I got, but since I didn't know Lanthimos exact thought behind it (if any) I remained rather neutral.
@@gisela_oliveiraI watched the movie a few days ago and when I left the theater, I had a bad taste in my mouth. I was thinking "was that really feminist?" But after pondering about it, I realized I need to frame this movie for what it is, a satire first and foremost.
I don't think the intention was for this to be a serious analysis of feminist subjects (despite it being marketed that way). Rather, this is a sophisticated comedy that uses exaggeration and ridicule. First with the world where science can combine animals but then with the characters.
Every single character is just an over the top representation of a particular trait. Duncan was a narcissist, or God was a mad scientist, but in an cartoonish way.
Bella is the same. There's an idea that women are more emotional than logical, well what about a women whose only emotional, that's Bella. Her behavior is whatever she feels at the moment, with no regards to social conventions or personal safety.
But no one in real life acts like her, especially women since, while they are emotional, they are also very sociable and understand decorum. Woman don't really act based just on feelings because they understand the social consequences of their actions (or inactions).
I understand this is not a true depiction of feminism, however I don't believe it was the intention.
Yorgos last film was "The Favourite." If anyone were to watch it and criticize it for its historical accuracy, they would go mad because there was no intent to be faithful to the real story of these period.
Similarly, Poor Things will upset anyone that tries to look for the accurate feminism.
It looks like neither the creators of Poor Things nor the creators of this video have ever listened or read any stories of survivors of sexual abuse as children. There are so many where they are blamed for being too "sexual" and "provocative" at a very young age, and for "wanting it themselves". And many were too young to realize what was happening to them when someone took advantage of them. Very good for the fictional character Bella if she wasn't traumatized and only enjoyed and discovered the world through sexual activities involving other much older people. However it's hardly possible in the reality and only supports the arguments of victim blamers, so the message of the movie is like laughing at trauma and experience of sexual abuse survivors. You're not supposed to have sex with a child not because it's just morally wrong but because it literally affects person's brain and creates a trauma that one has to fight their whole life later. I find it especially questionable that the movie emphasizes that it wasn't masturbation that made Bella enjoy the life at the fullest, it was someone's penis, as the movie only becomes colored when she has sex with a man, not when she discovers her own sexuality.
Yes to all of this, thank you for putting into words what I couldn’t.
I can’t believe people are ok with this movie. I was so disturbed.
great point at the end. also the portrayal of a brothel is very much a liberal man's idea of it. no, most women there aren't happy and aren't "enjoying" sex with men they would never touch otherwise, sex with violent men. they don't enjoy the risk of pregnancy and the risk of catching an illness. they have zero protection and the man can usually do whatever he wants with her. on top of that most prostitutes end up there because of extreme poverty, because they were groomed young, because a rich foreign man came to them and promised that once she goes with him to his country he will find her a great job... sure it might be an okay experience for some women but not for the most of them and I think that's another harmful "feminist" idea this film tries to convey. in short I really don't trust it when a man makes a "feminist" movie because there's a 99% chance it's gonna be something along the lines of this.
One can interpret the transition to color that way. One can also interpret the transition to color as simply Bella being out in the world on her own for the first time.
Excellent observation!!!
I was actually looking forward to this movie, but I left the theater feeling extremely angry and uncomfortable (and not in the "artsy" way). I think they attempted to make a feminist movie but ultimately failed in doing so as they missed the point completely.
Exploring female sexuality and the experience women have with discovering their bodies and what they enjoy is great to see and I would've liked this aspect...if it wasn't exploited through several unnecessary sex scenes which lingered on Bella's body constantly, assault that was played for laughs, consistent violation that was dismissed, and the portrayal of this happening to a child without any care or thought placed on it (a part that I see people dismiss a lot or explain away as the point the director was trying to make when it's clear there was no intention but instead a hope that the fantasy element would mask her age).
Apart from Harry, none of the main male characters were ultimately good people. And this would be interesting to explore, if they were properly condemned for their actions but Godwin is redeemed for the violation and murder of a woman and Max for pursuing Bella, who he notes is mentally a child. In fact, they added a rather over the top antagonist late into the film in order to make the other male characters appear "not as bad".
Ultimately it was a movie that attempted to be feminist but failed through a lack of female perspective and proper nuance. It was crafted for the male gaze and did little to discuss the ways sexism exists apart from the obvious (which it still mishandles). It's not always a man trying to mutilate you, sometimes it's the kind family friend who knew you as a child and tries to take advantage of you, or an older man who feels entitled to your body because he wanted to "see what happens".
THANK YOU. I’m so disturbed by society. Hollywood is grooming the public to accept pedos
I agree, Bella at the end then marrying the man who knew when she was child-like, didn’t sit right with me. I’m no prude, but wrapping things under the cloak of “feminism” doesn’t absolve it of criticism.
It looks like they had a list of things that should be included in a "feminist" film, but completely missed their point
This movie was such a letdown for all these reasons! There was so much potential with this storyline and Emma's character, but this is "white man does white feminism" and gives directorial title to wipe his hands clean of his own deeply oblivious and ingrained misogyny.
I don't understand why this movie has been loved so much from a large part of public. A part from the actor's and actresses performances that were really good, I really didn't feel the feminism message and I quite agree with you. I can relate and understand the meaning, but for me the result is very superficial in its topic
I found the amount of time spent on the sex aspect of her growth and agency and only adding other aspects peppered in (and totally ignoring other very obvious factors involved in creating agency as a woman) was totally imbalanced. It made the central focus of her character development about sex since it was the majority of the screen time devoted to her discoveries. I feel like it would have been SO much more interesting if instead of the extended brothel scenes, she was able to discover more about her empathy and where that came from, or we got to see her going to med school and the struggles she'd face doing that as a woman, or more of the intersections of race and feminism experienced by and through her lover. Like, I'm not sure what the exact run time of the whole brothel sequences added up to but it was SO LONG and so unnecessary and really didn't add much or challenger her much or change her understanding of herself in any interesting ways.
The baby brain thing doesn’t offend my real-life morals because the way it’s depicted in the film is just so fantastical and silly, there’s no way I can take it seriously. No baby in real life develops cognition as fast as Bella does. No baby in real life has ever had their brain transferred into a mature body that was then resurrected Frankenstein-style. The metaphor of growing through exploration and experience matters more than the literal word.
I totally disagree, it seems to be normalizing bad behavior at best. I still enjoyed the movie overall. But the initial idea of the film def gave me the ick. It would've been better to rework that idea imo
The physical landscape is fantastical but the social structure and the interpersonal relations are supposed to be true to life. I won't make up excuses for this faux feminist film.
@@maryjaneshoe-fm4yr What is the true-to-life equivalent of Bella Baxter, whose brain goes from that of a baby to a mature adult within the span of a year or so, all while inhabiting a mature body?
Apparently hot take for some people, but adult people with mental abilities that would rather suit a child exist and those people also have the right to claim their bodies and explore their own sexuality on their terms, just like everyone else.
I dunno, the age is very important aspect of the film, it's a constant in the performance and stages of Bella's journey. They could make it "she has a completely new brain but thinks like an adult" but they didn't so the age has significance here
I really enjoyed this movie! It was beautifully designed and Mark Ruffalo was brilliant as the petulant man-child. However, there was so much sex that the film seemed only to be depicting Bella’s sexual awakening, rather than what should have been a more general blossoming to encompass all of life’s pleasures. Yes, there was the scene with the natas and her growing interest in reading, but I wished that there were more of these - Bella marveling at the colors of a sunset, the feel of a sumptuous fabric, the smell of the briny sea air, etc. She’s a child who is exploring the world for the first time; why should she prefer to stay in her hotel room with a man she instinctively realizes only wants to possess her?
Side note: I love the perspective her character provided on the idea of sex work. It seemed so natural and obvious to her that if she needed money, she could sell her time and company to get it. Sex work is only degrading if we see virginity and purity as something of value that is taken from us. (I agree with this stance in a detached philosophical sense, but sex work in practice is much thornier and often not a choice)
I think your criticism is fair except for this one point of Bella preferring to stay in her hotel room; that wasn’t her preference, which is why she kept sneaking out while he was asleep, much to his chagrin. And the way I read Bella’s character, she was not initially aware of his possessiveness and was at first primarily delighted that this man whisked her away and caused a sexual awakening within her. It’s only once she is confined to the ship, forms friendships with others, and matures a little that she becomes truly aware of his possessiveness and begins to resent him for it. (And at this point, the sex scenes between the two of them evaporate.)
I completely disagree that virginity and purity aren’t something of value. They very much are and that is why sex work is disgusting disgraceful and degrading
@@bellbanana yes, this a good point! She does gradually realize Duncan’s (is that the name?) true nature. It’s sometimes tricky to critique movies because I don’t have “the text” in front of me to refer back to
I thought this movie was supposed to be about growing up in general, but yeah, afyer watching it it's totally about exploring sex and that's absolutely fine and cool. I just wish there was deeper analysis of, for example, working in a brothel and it's downsides and why it's generally considered awful life
@@Rumpelgrls no one cares what you think.
The way I saw it, aspects of Bella were developing at different rates. Within the body of an adult, her brain was developing at breakneck speed. The mind-body connection, however, was taking longer, which in a weird alternate-reality-way makes sense--You can learn the idea of how to execute a handstand instantly, but it takes much longer to actually train your body to do it--Hence why her coordination and speech were more infantile in comparison to her brain. As she first engages with Wedderburn, she seems more like a preteen than a baby. That doesn't make it any less creepy, it still is, but it makes us question the morality of it all, which is the point. Bella having the body of an adult and the mind of a girl is basically what a teenager is, and although Bella continues on from Wedderburn with the same joie de vivre as before, it becomes very clear that he was exploiting her youthfulness just as men feel entitled to do in real life. Sometimes, the twisting and reimaging of reality in a story can help us perceive real life from a different angle, and that's what Poor Things does with underage consent. It's a thought experiment.
The criticism of the focus on segggs in this context and what gets screen time and what does not - therefore invalidating real human needs of the protagonist against those of the director is:
1. Child Brain
2. Mæle expl0itati0n
3. Sнe was imprisoned as an experiment, the first thing she does is 'funny нumping and jumping' only (still being a child brain) - instead of exploring the world, ice cream, carousels, other People, real human connection first - but hey, once she's walking through Lisbon.
4. She says, she wants to change things - what things? Ways of 'funny нumping and jumping' as a Professional, no further exploration of her wish to change things.
5. She learns, that she is in her mother's body - consequence? None. What for, no biggy. No need for further emotional exploration.
6. Her only real friend, fellow Professional, how is their friendship being portrayed? - 'funny нumping and jumping'. And talking about walking to some кommunist event. No further exploration. (Thank you, I stand corrected - it was a socialist event. I guess, would they have actually explored that storyline 20 seconds more, it would have reached my inattentive mind a little more.)
7. Br0tнel Mum says men like it, when a woman doesn't like it - the consequence for Bella? - sniff test & game before the 'funny нumping and jumping' Business.
8. At the end of the film, still handwriting of a 6 year old, she marries this nice guy (yeah, the nice one from the beginning, who made a contract over her lifelong imprisonment to marry her, before she ever left the house), calls it 'practical love' - how romantic and deserving of a woman.
9. The only time, she gets tested for Seggsually Transmitted дs, is after nice guy asks about it before marrying her, so the male viewer doesn't get turututood off, for no other reason, especially not for the sake of Bella's segggsual and physical нealth. Because until then, it wasn't even mentioned, and of course, not done.
10. The term 'funny нumping and jumping' itself is ridiculing and sweetening the fact of segggs, its harmful aspects and its consequences for women all over history and the present and is not liberation. That Bella never learns the real name, is the alarming signal of her naivety being expl0ited.
That's the essence of male gaze and I could go on and on and on, because the movie is so full of it. And portraying it as a reasonable journey for a child brain in a woman's body is just gaslighting.
THANK YOU ! so true ! I felt like it was all about male gaze and how they see women's sexuality without having a single clue of it. I was disgusted by all the seggs scenes as if it was the only thing she could explore in a new world rather than art, nature, travel or people she is simply "jumping" with an older man.
Thank you!! Yes!
I think that's a good point of the reasons I didn't like this movie as much as many others do...
I couldn't agree more. For me it was quite hard and triggering to watch this film tbh.
Very well put! Totally agree
I was quite disappointed that the chance to explore the interesting concept of ‘if a woman had a new second chance of life how would they view the world’ was mainly focused on sex. I was not surprised that it was made by a male director and I’m not surprised that so many male reviewers love the film because I think it is ultimately a male fantasy (e.g. a naive child-like woman who becomes a prostitute and finds it fun)
Despite Emma Stone producing the film (which does give her a fair amount of agency when it comes to being naked and doing simulated sex scenes), she’s the only woman involved, since all the other producers are men (Ed Guiney, Andrew Lowe, and the film’s director Yorgos Lanthimos).
You are blind
@@manolisbarbas2031How so? You can disagree with someone without insulting them.
Thank you. Finally someone sees the light. Also the fact that she calls it “furious jumping” indicated (to me) that she wasn’t ready to fully grasp the concept, and therefore still had a childish maturity that all the men in the movie gladly took advantage of.
I find it weird because as I saw it the whole point of Ruffalo's character was to ridicule and criticise that fantasy
My frustration with this idea of Bella experiencing life via sex and finding her pleasure is that it never goes beyond that. She never makes meaningful connections. It's all about her and her curiosity, but she doesn't develop empathy. She's stuck in interest in people, things, knowledge, and at no point, other than the moment where she has a bird's eye view of human suffering (which has a distance in it), does she make intimate emotional relationships.
And before you say something about males not being portrayed forming relationships - That's just more aboutism and we're left with more individualistic storylines that only cater to self centered concepts.
What? She loves God, she kind of falls in love with her girl friend AND with the boy from the beginning. She also has a bond with the burdel lady. Even if those people were not the best and did not have the best intentions, she did make connections with them. Also with the two friends she has on the boat. Did you saw the movie?
@@palomavazquez2992 I did watch the film and I didn't see her form deep emotional relationships. They're pleasant, and the characters are magically enamored and fascinated with her, but it looks like they have a more one sided relationship with her. Bella doesn't really love the man she was about to marry, she mostly enjoys the company of the women at the brothel, and with God she has a somewhat parental relationship, but mostly she sees him as a role model and loves his mind. That's why she eventually forgives him for what he did to her.
Look, this is my opinion, you don't have to agree.
@@marvelousmrsnunya I think you expected to watch her make connections like any other person or like every other movie. but that's the point, she isn't like the others. She's a creature. In Spanish, their translated the name of the movie as "poor creatures". She's not going to relate with others the same way the rest of human beings do. But maybe she'll "learn" eventually and fit her way of love to the way the world teaches her. I don't think that because she doesn't have a scene with a "deep conversation" or whatever with the characters, that she doesn't care for them. She goes back home because her creator/ father is dying and she wants to be there, not only to discover the truth, but to say goodbye. She kisses McCandless. She invited her friend to live with them at the end. She does care for them. Only not in the way you wanted to see.
Yes! Really my biggest issue with it is that Bella and none of the characters are real or act in any way even inspired by real people? Like I don't get who this movie is for when it doesn't have empathy, real (not "crazy" or caricatured) anger, true empathy, real sadness (some characters are supposed to get sad but it doesn't work with their characters at all), etc.
@@palomavazquez2992 well, I didn't "want" anything from this film. I still think it's very artfully made. I even enjoyed it. I just find it a bit tiresome that so many movies nowadays promote this new trope of "sexually independent, bossy and spicy female character that is too cool for mature connections". It's almost like we're going all the way to the other extreme. It would have been nice to see a female character explore both her sexuality and her emotional depth that is not infested with either immaturity or trauma and neurosis (like it is portrayed in so many movies nowadays).
Again, these are all my opinions and my own interpretation of the film. To each his own.
Some interesting vision about the PARIS (spoiler) segment, is that Bella reaching adulthood needs to find a way to support herself. She finds Prostitution as a way of living, doing something that she actually enjoys and is good at. She also discovers politics and how economics works. Some people feels this part slow, but I think it is important to show as the maturity procees of Bella: not everything is new and exiting anymore, but she gets the time to learn valuable lessons and see the reality as it is. Eventually, she gets bored and lost interest in this job and this life (much people can releate with this, even at enjoying and being good at a job), then she doesn't need to explore anymore, but to move forward.
I think that if concentrating on the journy and evolution of the character, it is possible to find so many layers on this movie and feel related. Loved it.
Prostitution it's not a job.
That its a big problem for me, and the fact that it looks like she never made a mistake, when it's part of human experience to make mistakes. I understand if the movie wants to take that way, but they can't show it like something normal or good.
@@recetasfaciles2816So you’re saying Bella is a Mary Sue? 😂
@@recetasfaciles2816 For some people it is; and it's hard work that deserve respect.
In the movie, Prostitution could be a metaphor for All Jobs. I find this idea interesting
@@fabricaHumanoide if the intention was to make a metaphor, why it was made through something that it's really serious as prostitution. I mean all that scenes we're just see her in every position and with every kind of man we could imagine.
My issue on this film is that, if this and barbie are nearly the same I both plotline and cinematography, why was was barbie put do down but this was raised up? And I can't help but to think that since Emma character was a sexual being and Barbie wasn't is what made the male Oscar pickers like this movie more than Barbie
But that's my opinion
It's not like the Barbie movie at all...the plot is somewhat similar but the writing and the meaning of the film are completely unique. I don't know where you got that the cinematography was similar but it is not.
Thats an interesting point, I do think this movie was written better and the transformation was more subtle and nuance though.
I’ve seen both and Poor Things is nothing like Barbie.
Barbie was critically lauded and nominated for several oscars too, so this comparison doesn't make sense to me
The oscars love the ‘cool, edgy’ movies that include alot of sex. And people are fine with it because it’s ‘art’ 😒
The movie is a clear representation of the trope “born sexy yesterday” coined by pop culture detective.
Was thinking exactly this while watching!
And yet this movie is about her empowerment, not about the acquisition of her by the men who view her in a sexual light. Had the film been told from the perspective of the male characters, sure. But we follow her experience.
I think it rather subverts that trope. All the sex that goes on is not shot or meant to be appetizing, it's supposed to be uncomfortable and odd because it's a new experience for her that SHE is discovering. Of course with someone who wants to take advantage of her, but she's not bound to Duncan emotionally since she's not in love with him
Maybe, but it's also showing that tropes aren't a bad thing.
this
While I do understand the argument that it's a little icky having Bella engage in intimacy with a juvenile brain I think these scenes illustrate an important point about the fetishization of young female sexuality as well as normalizing how young people experiment with their bodies and sex. I didn't find these scenes to be exploitative, a lot of them (especially in the brothel) to be messy and unerotic. How Bella seeks to take control in a setting where woman are customarily degraded (the brothel) is another testament to her character growth and her understanding of applying the autonomy she has always possessed.
the scene with the sons watching seemed more wrong than any of the other sex scenes.
This film needs so much justification, over explanation and clarification, meaning the plot doesn't connect. They're trying to force so many different topics to cover the underlining twisted perversions of men fetishizing younger kids. At different parts they try to bring in redeeming scenes so to make you forget the disturbing premise and normalize it. The bottom line is, we don't have to be okay with this film and normalize it's premise if it doesn't sit well with us. What's wrong is forcing it down people and telling folks they're wrong for not feeling comfortable with the film. There are several reasons to not be and what we should all agree on at the least, is that is okay too. Let's stop making big Hollywood directors and actors the arbitrary of truth for different individuals and their experiences. That's not the job of any film, star or screenwriter man with his own perception of women and life as we know it.
@carlf.9035 no one is telling people who are uncomfortable with the film that they are wrong to feel that way by and large. However the general reception and response to the film has been successful, meaning that it has connected for much of its audience/people who have seen it.
@@anthonymartensen3164 No problem. But I don't think general response has been that great on a mass level. I also am not sure it's been featured in most theaters. But if so, why do I keep seeing a million ads for it. It's like the only film from 3 months ago, they keep still running non stop ads on.
Yes, it's making a point about fetishization of young female sexuality... while fetishizing young female sexuality...
I feel that the issue is far more complex than about maturing. First Emma Stone can be whichever project she likes as long as she feels comfortable! And it is a good thing that Bella initiates the sex as well. But we have to keep in mind that Bella is not explicitly told what sex is during these instances. For most of the movie she refers to it as “jumping” and her lack of understanding is exploitative of her actions. A random man asking to test her thighs for example. Plus she is still a child - a toddler in the scene with the apples (which is a pretty traumatic experience bodily). She is openly taking advantage of, made much darker by the audience being told that she took her life before because of sexual abuse and here she is essentially living it again unbeknownst to her.
The sex happens so often, and so much played for laughs. It eats all the time left for other types of development. A male director just made it all seem more male-glazy. It gives the impression her having sex is the only thing that is making her human.
It is exploitative in the way it portrays female empowerment.
I dunno I’m usually pretty liberal with these subjects but this is the first movie I ever had to walk out on because all of the scenes caused me intense anxiety.
I agree with what a lot of what you're saying. I watched twice and the 2nd time I def regretted it ngl. But you're right they really did spend SO much time on the sexual nature of growing up that it took away from her as a fully realized adult. Its kind of interesting if you think about it. When she becomes the fully realized woman, that's when the show pretty much ends and the only aspect that is really highlighted during her journey is the sex. She had 10 graphic sex scenes and only 2 or 3 when she's actually reading books and thinking. A STRANGE man definitely wrote this book and another strange man made this movie.
its really not that deep
But sex IS jumping.
WE make it out to be more than it is with politics and economics. Which she learns about later on as movie progresses. Personally I found Bella unashamedly seeking her pleasure liberating, world would be so much better if we approached sex the way she did at the beginning.
Also the movie portrays both her empowerment and her exploitation. It isn't a simple case of this or that. Because she's learning the world is a complicated place. That was the point.
@@Lina-qn5hj yes, that's exactly how a child would perceive sex. as jumping. which is what Bella is : a child. being exploited and groomed by older adult men. and played for laughs, or as empowering. which is why it's gross.
@sainttheresetaylor2054 I'm so sorry Bella didn't turn to the camera in the middle of the movie and said "I'm being exploited right now and it's bad actually" but not every movie has to beat the viewers over the head with its message like a tiktok video
I saw this film blind a week or so ago, and I found it intensely repulsive. Bella literally has the mind of a child and acts like it for most of the movie. It just felt like paedophilia, particularly before she gets to Paris, which is the first time she actually feels mentally old enough to consent. To have that juxtaposed with scenes where I'm supposed to laugh just felt alien, like the film had been written by someone who had absolutely no empathy.
I wouldn’t say it was written by someone lacking empathy, but it was written by a man, Troy McNamara, who thinks a childlike woman is sexually empowering.
Add the fact that she can barely walk through most of the movie, you know , like a child
@@rorohosso do you think Emma Stone didn't have any idea what she was doing when making artistic decisions with how to portray Bella? Do you think there weren't intelligent decisions made as to the artistic choices for bringing the world/story/and characters to life? Do you think Emma Stone should be ashamed of herself for coming up with a physicality for the character in what is clearly a movie that is portraying a version of our own world that is also clearly some sort of alternative fantasy world?
@@anthonymartensen3164 My answer to all three of your questions is no
@rorohos then may I ask what your specific issue with the film is? Because I don't think we're supposed to assess Bella as a literal child in a superficial way. I think the implication - as depicted by necessity due to the confines of telling a limited story - is that Bella goes through significant developmental stages, albeit in varying aspects of her being, throughout the film. And that it's clear that in order to accept the film, you have to take her journey for what it is and not literalize it.
Pros
- Ruffalo made me laugh through most of his lines. Great comedic timing.
- The dance scene was wonderfuly odd, sinister and whimsical.
Cons
- Boring unecessary b-plot ending.
- The director making the beginning sex scenes too long so they can "titillate" because it's okay! She's owning her body except for the fact she is a a CHILD! He could've pointed to this scene instead of letting it linger.
- Having characters be literal mouth pieces for the director's own obvious, on the nose musings.
- A movie can be basic and still be good. It's when the movie thinks it's saying something revelatory that it becomes embarassing.
- Judges Ruffalo's character harshly yet finds a sweet spot for the man who knew she was a child and still wanted to marry her.
- Sex is not the only thing to discover when growing up and it says nothing about your complexity of character. It is only an element.
- I hope those kids weren't actually in the room during the sex scenes.
Mixed parts.
- Thought for a second that the movie was going to say something interesting about how man is also a "poor thing" in regards to Ruffalo's emotional immaturity and attachment or society's growing pains but after the ending I feel I might be giving the movie too much credit.
- The fantastical elements of the beginning start to fall away and it starts to feel like Diet Gilliam.
- The madam saying knowing both the good and the bad makes you whole and therefore you can own the world was interesting. Except for the fact she might have just been saying that to keep Bella working making the point ambiguous. Maybe a pro.
- Yes bodily autonomy is important. That doesn't mean society should look away at behaviour that can be self harming. Especially prostitution where while some might come out the other side with a stable mind, many will be broken. We can have empathy for those who are forced into it, without being approving of the practice.
- Bella being a sociopath who literally needs to see grape and babies harmed to feel empathy was interesting but the movie doesn't seem to be aware that this behaviour makes her unempathethic to the audience leaving the supposed emotional moments feeling very cold.
- The set design was amazing, but I believe there was an intended artifical feeling to them, having pretty landscapes hide something horrible underneath. This would be more impactful, if Bella acknowledged the beauty more instead of being merely slightly amused by it compared to her fascination with "furious jumping".
Same this movie could’ve been great. Had they tone down the scenes like there was just way too many jaw dropping scenes and not in a good way, movie made me very uncomfortable, even just watching it by myself. It was very confusing and not in a sense because of how it was playing out the character was not adding up at all and it was creeping me out that they chose the child’s brain.
With the ramp child, pornography issues, this was just not settling with me
“- I hope those kids weren't actually in the room during the sex scenes.”
Bro, I almost forgot about that part. 🤣
One of my favorite little details is the meaning behind black and white beginning. There's the obvious meaning that her world is very closed off and small, AKA "black and white". But then I also realized that it could also be referencing the fact that infants can't see color well. That's why lots of infant toys and books are in black in white with lots of contrast. I'm not sure if that was an intentional detail, but I like to think it was.
9:06 um...who is teaching her to go after her own pleasure? The madame literally tells her that not being into the sex is the point for some of the men who visit. Her lover doesn't teach her to own her sexuality. I don’t know where this take came from.
people just say stuff hoping you wont catch it
When they are sexually together, is very obvious that she feels different then when she is with the male characters. You people need everything to be written in giants letters to understand? You're so lazy
Bella teaches HERSELF to go after her own pleasure. Before the prostitution the film is very explicit in showing Bella’s sexual activity as motivated by her own pleasure, with no apologies. She emphatically rejects all sexual (and social) taboos and frankly discusses her sexual pleasure seeking. The prostitution she treats as purely transactional economic activity, and is paired with, 1) her exploration of socialism and 2) her exploration of lesbianism.
I think it’s valid to question the film’s world, in which sexuality seems entirely free of consequence, either pregnancy or disease. But to deny Bella sexual agency because no man teaches it to her is, um, interesting.
She discovered her pleasure long before sex work. She was amazed that she could make money by selling sex. She pleasured herself at the dinner table, asked Duncan “why doesn’t everyone just do this all the time?” and suggested her new friend to try using her own hand sometimes because 20 years without sex were too long. The madame made it about money.
As a victim of sexual abuse as a kid, this movie wasn’t empowering at all. Just weird and creepy.
Agreed. I’m disgusted that Emma won a second Oscar for this traumatising film. It’s presenting child molester logic…..”she has sexual curiosity”, “she wants this”. “she’s just childlike but her body is ready”. It’s sickening.
@@jakestroll6518 exactly! She shouldn’t have been praised or awarded for this!
I haven't seen the movie, but from what I've read, I agree..
@@sidni.d5989 Watch before jumping on bandwagons like every no-life out there 🙄
I don’t want to watch it as I read about her having sex with a baby brain. Sorry sex is not an only body experience but mental and emotional. Very weird not to say ugly.
First of all, it's a bit unfortunate you mention an exploitative potential in the title of the video and then you don't go deeper on this in any way in the video. Personally, I found the film really hard to watch, which is kind of a thing with Lanthimos movies in general - they are hard to watch, and controversial. Whatsoever this film, to me, had multiple problematic dimensions.
First of all, Bella's character resembles autism in many ways. The way she is "unfiltered" by social conventions reminds a lot of the autistic mind, but if this reference is intentional in any way then it clearly sexualizes and infantilizes autistic women, which is an underrepresented group already anyways.
And then, she grows up disproportionally fast, becoming a sexual being with men very early on in the story. In general, she is abused by men over and over again or gets affected by the patriarchy, but throughout the film she remains within boundaries that are set by men in some way, so there is nothing truly innovative about her character.
The film portrays rather that existence as a woman is hopeless and men will always dominate you rather than offering any alternatives. Also Bella's character sparks a discussion of child sexuality, necrophilia, and other controversial topics - which is surely interesting but I would rather see these topics addressed from a less patriarchal perspective.
Sure, Emma Stone was part of making the film, but she also had to focus on acting this challenging role, and it overall stays a work done by a man about female sexuality - which isn't perfect as long as women do not get to talk about their own sexuality as men do.
Also I was disappointed that Bella's only queer relationship seems to be for the sake of the male gaze and the stimulation from watching the two women. The woman she has a liaison with appears again at the end of the film, so it is implied they somehow developed some kind of meaningful relationship, but yet the film never goes deeper on it, and Bella returns to partnering up with yet another problematic film.
Throughout the film she learns nothing about men and seems rather naive, falling into the same trap over and over again. That's not too innovative.
Women who are “born sexy yesterday” in movies like Bella Baxter in “Poor Things” are often coded as autistic.
Ironically, the role of the “born sexy yesterday” mermaid Madison in “Splash” is played by autistic actress Daryl Hannah.
Coincidence? I think NOT! 😂
I think everything in this video is true in theory, but in practice it felt like the scriptwriter and director were too busy hurrying of to wank after writing/filming a scene to really dig into the ideas. I think the actors did a good job saving bits and pieces of the themes, but it ends up pretty shallow because of the men conceiving the story.
I agree to a certain extent. During my first watch of the film, I could def tell this movie was made by men and possibly for men and men alone. The parts I enjoyed (towards the end) were definitely on par with the parts of the film I didn't care for like the being half.
Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein. Emma Stone was a producer. Why do you ignore their contributions.
Soooo Emma Stone, the producer?
@@BioshadowX emmas ONE producer bruh.
I dont think Frankenstein can be counted as a creator of Poor Things, thats a pretty wild stretch. By that logic you can probably make anyone a creator or everything.
As for Emma Stone, I can't speak to her exact role, but the producer is not normally involved in doing things, they are the person who brings together the creatives to create the film. They'll hire the director, screenwriter, oversee casting, oversee the editing. They will look at dailies, but they dont shoot the film, they arent the final decision maker on creative choices. Maybe Emma Stone was super involved since she was acting too, but I think you can see Yosgos' gaze in the way the film was shot (for good and bad), and I think he was too titilated by what he was shooting to avoid the creepiness people talk about@@user-pq4fc1mc7q
I've seen Poor Things twice now and it's my current hyperfixation tbh. Its just magnificent. I'd love to see it win Best Picture over Oppenheimer but that's sadly not going to happen.
It’ll never happen
@@serious261 I'm aware... hence why I said that.
Good, this movie is for perverts hiding behind “art”
I’m with you on that wish.
As I addressed in a recent column written for Sexpert, where I am the Feminist Sexpert, I do consider this film exploitive and not at all feminist. An individual with a mind of a child does not have agency to become a sex worker. The man who supposedly 'liberates' her kidnaps her, and then there is the hideous scene involving the presence of two minors that I don't even want to discuss. And to me, it's so odd--in many films that involve a man's sexual awakening, he visits a brothel as a customer. In films that address a woman's sexual awakening, she visits a brothel as a worker--meaning that she is learning to be the pleaser, not the pleased. Nothing revolutionary about that.
So I’m guessing you’re a SWERF?
Unsurprising since no women were involved in writing producing or directing this film
@@TheDonovanu Actually Emma Stone co-produced the film, as well as starred in it.
Granted, that’s one woman, since the other three producers are men: Ed Guiney, Andrew Lowe, and Yorgos Lanthimos (the film’s director).
But you’re right that the film’s screenplay and the book that it was based off of were written by men: Troy McNamara and Alasdair Gray respectively.
look at this take , perhaps the lens of mainstream criticism is not as wide, intersectional and progressive as we think...
.
"This is something I desperately hoped some autistic woman would talk about publicly because from the moment I saw the trailer, and then confirmed resoundingly during the course of watching the film, I felt it depicted my existence and brain entirely. Behaviours, thoughts, abstracted enormous way of viewing the world and its largeness as I grew up and developed, her way of walking and of talking (though for me this stiltedness fluctuates with my fluctuating functionality), disjunct between oppressions of society and self, and everything else. It was perfect. But also difficult to watch the audience respond with humour and delight to her way of being and unique (or odd), curt mannerisms in social interactions when in reality it is something that has caused mainly hostility, discrimination and real violence towards me. I do however appreciate that in the world of the film itself, her existence and behaviours are depicted as complex in their reception. A master work for the autistic liberated woman."
@@pedrova8058 the sexual exploitation of neurodivergent women is also a problem, but I wouldn't compare their brains or autonomy to that of a baby.
however, fuck them and fuck anyone who focuses on hyper sexuality as a way to liberate women, which is just a veiled attempt to benefit men. the fact that Bella is not deeply impacted by the ways she was sexually groomed is another point of contention for me, and something I don't think any neurodivergent woman whose experienced sexual exploitation would relate to.
By definition, this story is 100% male gaze. In the book we learn this in the first few pages. 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. Yorgos (and/or the male screenwriter Tony McNamara) becomes the unreliable, limited, and importantly, false storyteller, and by omitting Bella's own account, he erases her voice from her own story. In the book, 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 sees the world and sleeps with many lovers, but notably, she 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. In fact, she probably had more lovers than him at this point in the timeline. His grooming is not her sexual awakening in the book, as it is portrayed in the problematic film. He's only one in a sea of sexual experiences she's already had of her own free will and with full knowledge of potential consequences. This version would at least prove she understands consent to some degree because she says no to PIV sex with men bc of the consequences. 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.
The film shoots her in the sex scenes, and in general, in a way that objectifies and shows off her body for the benefit of the male/female-desiring gaze. We are seeing Bella through that peephole - not *her* point of view. The sex scenes are more similar to heteronormative p0rn than real life sex. It made me laugh when the lawyer declared himself the best lover on Earth. 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/AFAB pleasure or orgasm - namely everything but PIV sex. In other words, less phallocentric and more clitorocentric. It was more about acrobatic positions and PIV almost exclusively. "Furious jumping." Yorgos essentially called us prudes, but the issue is 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.
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, using a strawman, cartoon villain of a husband 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. In the movie, there's no discussion of pregnancy, assault, disease, menstruation, consent of any kind, psychological trauma, emotion, 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, she cannot control the experience, 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.
And sure you could say the point is to make us angry at how Bella is taken advantage of by patriarchy, 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.
The book isn't that much better, but at least it openly acknowledges it's flawed point of view from page one, whereas horrifyingly, this is being called a "feminist fantasy." Something Bella herself would "shudder" at and "burn" because she hated it so much. I've loved every other Yorgos film since Dogtooth, but this is a huge disappointment and missed opportunity. If you want female gaze and female desire (a male-desiring gaze), take a gander at the female-directed and written Saltburn and lmk how many female nude scenes you count. That the academy ignored Saltburn, but lauded Poor Things proves that it views the sexualized female body as high art and the sexualized male body as debasement. It's just another case of male gaze masking itself as "empowering" and using every cinematic gimmick to distract us from the central issues at hand.
I will say, this is Emma Stone's career-defining performance, and the score was perfect. I only wish the story was more deserving of her talents. And tbh, Yorgos's talents. I love him and I hate that I hate this film.
Really well written and insightful comments.
this comment summarises my feelings perfectly
Wish this film was set in Scotland - as the book originally intended
Why
@@izzywoods794 maybe because england is overrepresented in media and nothing is set in scotland lmao
Well you are in luck, you can make your own film adaptation of Alasdair Gray's book :)
Your videos are usually very intelligent and nuanced, but the argument that this movie is automatically empowering just because Bella the fictional character likes and initiates sex reminds me too much of when people respond to the criticism of female characters being constantly sexualized through their outfits by saying “But that’s how the character LIKES to dress! Are you saying women shouldn’t dress how they want? THAT’S not very feminist of you.”
For Bella, sex is empowering because of the puritanical Victorian era she’s living in (despite there being brothels 😂).
@@beethovensfidelioActual historical Victorian society wasn’t short on brothels, just long on hypocrisy.
Right? Like if adult men sleep with 14 year olds it doesn't make it ok if the 14 year old "enjoyed" it. That's STATUTORY RAPE. That's a child.
I just wondered how can someone pose so elegantly during sex but not even walk properly
That's the money shot of the 'film'
People wouldn’t have had much of an issue with the movie if it hadn’t including so much nudity/sex scenes. She has a child’s brain. And yeah, you can say she grows quickly but the plot is basically her learning about life and experiencing everything as an innocent child/minor. Sometimes I feel like Hollywood makes these type of ‘empowering’ movies just so they can live out their nasty, perverted fantasies and put it on screen. And it’s not like Hollywood isn’t filled with creeps.
Yeah if Bella had a mature brain, then no one would complain about sex and nudity.
@@beethovensfidelio People are allowed to complain about unnecessary sex & nudity. Too many tv shows and movies are getting into this habit thinking it gives their show/movie a more serious tone and that’s not always the case. There’s plenty of tv shows/movies I love that include nudity & sex; Gen V, Game of Thrones, Daredevil, Deadpool but they don’t always over do it, and it actually adds to the story
@@qtasma I’m not a fan of gratuitous nude scenes and gratuitous sex scenes in films either (especially if actors were tricked or coerced into doing those scenes), BUT “Poor Things” isn’t gratuitous about its sex and nudity, since they’re part of Bella’s arc.
“Poor Things” would’ve been a different movie story wise if it weren’t for the sex and nude scenes.
Now yes, it’s possible to do a movie where a woman discovers herself without sex.
See “Wizard of Oz”, “Alice in Wonderland”, “Girls Just Want to Have Fun”, “Labyrinth”, and “Mulan”.
However, there’s nothing wrong with a woman having sex and being naked.
If boys can discover themselves through sex, the same can apply to girls.
Ironically, people today are just as puritanical as people in the Victorian era.
It feels backwards. 😂
Two adults having sex in front of two young boys is not normal. Did you forget that was in the movie.
Yes that's not normal but it wasn't framed as a normal thing. So I don't really get the issue with it (it's not like they actually had sex in front of the two young actors)@@theoutabodies5653
I think this is a strong movie and I enjoyed it overall. Through its fantastical nature and often absurd humor, it confronts questions of an ethical nature in our reality, the majority of which are related to sex, gender and socio-economic status through the lens of agency. Bella and the film itself take a cavalier approach to all of this in the far more consequence free environment of art relative to our lived reality. As funny and enjoyable as this film often is, I think the viewer should ask ethical questions of the film as they relate it to "the real world" and I think the film actively invites these questions. Bella, well along in her rapid maturation in the film, decides/resorts to sex work as an activity to make an income and to engage with the world within terms that she largely finds satisfactory on a number of levels. Within the fantastical world of the film and between she and the film's overall cavalier nature, she finds this mode of employment empowering and a way to further learn about her world without being socio-economically above it. While I would not say that sex work is inherently wrong (or right, for that matter), it is inherently more dangerous and frequently comes with a social stigma that the world of this film sets aside other than by indirect and secondary references to unscripted violence and transmittable diseases (and birth control is a non-factor altogether). I think this episode/aspect of the film is meant to draw questions of comparison between reality and the world provided here. Bella suffers no violence beyond her limits and is seemingly free of disease. She, eventually, returns to her family (as hybrid as it is, yet family in all that matters nonetheless) and suffers no indignity from their perspective nor her own. Why should she? Why do people engaged in sex work in our reality suffer from indignity amongst a variety of ills? I don't presume to have the answers for everyone, but I have my own perspectives as the questions are brought before me by this film in a de-familiarized and fantastical manner, which undoubtedly affect my perspective on the questions within reality. The film's strength is that it isn't dictating how I should think, but is directing me to look again from a different perspective. Maybe my point of view has changed, perhaps not, but I like this film's attempt at re-vision in the broadest and myriad senses.
I took her exploration of and frankness about sex to be voluntary and subversive rather than coerced. Her world expects her not to speak of or act on her desires in polite society and to bend to the sexual desires of men, but she chooses to explore her lust unashamedly and initiates her experiences with Duncan and the brothel clients. She never bothers to care whether she looks attractive to them or what they might like from her.
It seemed like she went into these relations with open eyes, even questioning the logic of how brothels worked and infusing the sessions with her clients with fun games and silly mind-puzzles to enrich the experience. To me, though the world was full of predatory men, she went forward in life with the ability to see through them and engage with them as she wished.
I noticed that she did fit the "born sexy yesterday" trope, but the way she made her own choices, learned from her mistakes, and chose to reject men who wanted her to be their "sexy baby" made me feel the trope had been subverted. Also, when she said she forgave God, I took it to be a metaphor for human life in general. She said she was mad at him for what he did, but that she enjoyed life so much she was willing to overlook his misdeed - life can be so horrific sometimes we regret ever existing, but overall, we are grateful to be alive.
and i think this film could be a social experiment showing how easy it is to make like 200 people in the theater laugh at pedophilic scenes just as long as you don't cast a little girl and just as long as you put pretty pastel colors and funny music over it. like do people need Funeral March in the background and dramatic indian soap opera style cuts to the little girl crying and trying to run away to realize that pedophilia = bad... it COULD be a great social experiment if the producers weren't serious about it.
Duncan is the bad guy in this movie
@@manolisbarbas2031 yes but it's because he's rude to Bella and not because he's predatory
Thanks for this. I was hesitating but now I watch it. Can you please do "Anatomy of a Fall" next?
Thank you.
I just watched it, and immediately noticed the intimate scenes weren't there to turn on the spectator. There were an ilustration of Bella's experience as a human evolving. Even the shots weren't sexualizing because there were no close ups to one her body parts. It was her whole body or face expression. Amazing movie
I would agree as far as the prostitution scenes but not the scenes where she is pleasuring herself. They last far too long to be merely pointing at the concept and it's almost like the film forgot she was a baby.
They wanted to say something about owning your body but forgot that autonomy only works ethically when the mind is grown.
Wrong. This is exactly why people think Hollywood is full of creeps. Poor Things is such a vile and sick movie, fantasy or not. It's about a woman with a brain of an infant who is constantly groomed, fucked and raped by older men without her even understanding what sex means, only referring it to something like "furious jumping". It's not about "empowering women", it's about degrading them.
@@SteelpeepsExactly
good point... that makes this movie very creepy....@@Steelpeeps
Where is this *"scandal"* happening exactly? In news articles, in the cinematic world, in movie theaters? Just curious
the artist formerly known as twitter, and some film critics. the vast majority of everyone loves this movie lol
Because y’all are weirdos who like to infantilize women into sexy babies
@@redbluebae4397And women like to infantilize men into sexy babies.
See the colloquialism “himbo”!
Also, older women aren’t exempt from preying on young men and boys.
See Mary Kay Letourneau, Brigitte Macron, Sam Taylor-Johnson, Debra Lafave, and Asia Argento.
well professional hater AJB of the Vulture culture desk gave it a 1 star "review" because she saw it as full of misogyny and resented all the people who called it a "feminist masterpiece" or w/e. she recently caught flack for her equally bizarre review of the Beyonce concert film but aside from her tirade and assorted twitter idiots there's no scandal lol wish this had a less clickbaity title
@@looney1023 ah okay... I was confused :)
Emma Stone is PHENOMENAL in this from start to finish.
She was wonderful, she could definitely win at the Oscars, but I haven't seen the other films where the women are nominated.
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it’s still weight against the fact that all of the marketing heavily pushed towards the misinterpretation of the sexual elements of the film with which somewhat negate some of the agency that the plot is trying to convey. There is also an argument to be made, and still didn’t have a lot of agency in her decisions because she was maybe weighing other priorities, i.e. further in her career and reach by sacrificing choices in this movie. For example, some pop stars who have sexual images when they’re younger grow up and leaders say that while they thought they had agency over their image, they were still mostly shaped by expectations of society around them, but it could be a little bit of both
Very well analyzed. Thanks for sharing.
My cousin has the intelligence of a 5 yr old.
He’s a grown man with the mind of a child.
He’s bright and full of life.
he loves learning, playing and doing harmless little pranks.
He loves movies and puzzles and animals.
He loves playing dress up and writing stories.
The whole family watches over him.
He is the joy in our family.
If anything like what happened to Bella happened to him.
We would hunt down the people who hurt him.
Just because he looks like a man does not mean he’s a man. He’s just a boy.
I think the core difference between that situation and bellas is that she is not held back by a condition that disables her ability to grow and learn. I think this film made me question those situations too because at first the doctor is fiercely protective of her until SHE insist to see more of the world than his house. At that point, I too was questioning the line between protecting and controlling. Though he wants her to be safe, she would rather explore knowing there will be bad parts. She even states that she understands it could be really bad but she still wants to experience all of it, good and bad. The doctor let's her leave reluctantly, knowing she will be hurt by that creep lawyer and the real world but also knowing that him holding her one place will not stop her from growing. Its not a film to watch if you don't like things that make you question your own personal opinions and thoughts about things. In all respect, your cousin is only able to grow and learn to certain extent. Bella has a baby brain but grows into a independent person learning philosophy and anatomy..things a baby would not understand. Things she herself in the beginning would not understand.
@@shelby-jj7oi damn
I agree that this film is not free from fair criticism however Emma Stone chose to read the script and play this character. Keep in mind, the nature of sex in this storyline is relevant to Bella's arc of maturing unlike other movies that use it for shock value. Comparatively, in mainstream blockbusters men are allowed to look attractive and do shirtless scenes free from judgement such as the MCU.
If Steven Yeun can agree to objectify himself in a PG-13 movie for younger teen audiences then Emma Stone can do the same in an R rated film.
It is relevant to a certain point. We got the message clearly, there was no need for the extensive brothel scenes and a million more shots of her nipples or her having sex with her female colleague. At this point it was just the gaze, no message
The overabundance of sex scenes takes the place of character development. All I learned about Bella was that she hated to be controlled snd liked to fuck men.
I actually judge Stone for co-producing this reductive take on feminism.
So much of the film seems to be focused on sex/sexual awakening. I don’t temper the book as much
Are those shirtless scenes presented in a sexual context?
Wish there was more female representation behind the camera - on the surface this appears to be another case of men telling a woman's story with he exception of Emma Stone in production. I admit, I am just going on what I saw in this clip - I may be wrong.
You’re not wrong! The writing, directing, cinematography, producing, and editing are mostly done by men.
You are absolutely right
I think we need to stop equating "male gaze" with "male director" or "male writer". Bella isn't sexualized by the film at all. The characters that exploit her view her as a sexual object to control, but the film is firmly not on their side. By asserting her agency (through learning, reading, making friends, falling in love with a woman) she foils them all. When we see Bella pleasuring herself or her pleasure during a sex scene, again, it's not sexualized. It's depicted just as fact; an observation of the experiment.
I think the film depicts a lot of toxic male behavior, and that's hard for people to take, especially people with sexual trauma. That's fine. But to say the film itself is exploiting the character is an overly simple reading (which also diminishes the input of the actual women involved in the production).
The amount of sex in the movie vs the book and how it affects the character and plot is ok to question
U can’t be serious, stop wording salad yr way out of weird sexy baby films
Thank you! If it was a male modern Frankenstein (which there are many examples) sexual curiosity wouldn't be put into question, rather that the main character is already attributed as a human (ex: Big, Bicentennial Man, etc.). When we do the gender reverse on science fiction even women associate a female main character with questionable qualities, and I believe, subconsciously, we articulate that as more of a monster.
100%!!
Tf are you talking about, the main character is incredibly sexualized. They could have covered her up or given a different camera angle. There was very little male nudity on film compared to all titts out bella. If she weren’t pretty the plot would have fallen apart. She is the embodiment of “born sexy yesterday” trope
This film is so suspenseful. Till the end you don't figure out if it is a feminist empowering movie or a satire of women.
It's a shame because the Bella of the book is different from the film, Max is different, and the wider themes are explored. Yes, the sex is there and the depiction is still quite indepth but we get more of her growth and goals. Bella of the film is compsumption and petulance, little of the kind, sweet person who actively goes out to help people and the world. It is her stated goal in the book. It just misses the mark for me.
I personally found it pretty liberating - the idea of a woman getting a blank slate with which to do what she wants in life instead of being conditioned by shame and pressured to conform to society's expectations 24/7. And making no apologies for any of it.
they could have this same idea without the child brain part...
@@gisela_oliveira it's based on a book, and that's the plot. I saw the new brain as a metaphor for rebirth and blank slate. Not everything in art is meant to be taken literally.
@@melissab3217 being based on a book doesn't make less problematic. Even if is art, is bad taste art, is a movie and has characters and has no respect for those characters. The main problem is not even having this story, but the way they say is feminist and empowering, when is not.
@@gisela_oliveira to each their own. I personally loved it. As a person who's been abused, I found Bella's attitude throughout the film extremely empowering and freeing.
Woman gets a blank slate without social conditioning and somehow manages to wind up in situations fulfilling male desires all the same. Wow how groundbreaking. Only men can write this crap.
This movie was pedophilic, the scene with the dad teaching his two sons how to have sex. Absolutely disgusting and revolting no matter how you claim it’s “art” there is a line somewhere. REVOLTING film.
Im amazed that people think way too much about this film and dont accept that the very premise is patently impractical in terms of realisticness. The film is not meant to be taken literally, although it is meant to be a parable of the real world in many ways.
It doesn’t help that a lot of people in the comments section are incredibly puritanical about the film’s sex scenes, Bella’s nudity, and Bella being a sex worker (as if that’s something immoral).
People here seem overly religious, conservative, prudent, like they don't experience pleasure, or know what sex is?? Come to Europe and relax for a bit, the comment section is giving me a headache. Do they even enjoy movies, or art, or just here to bitch? Gezuz.
Exactly that. The more they try to explain, the more they miss the whole and simple point.
I think some people have got stuck on the "mind of a baby" thing without taking into account that she grows throughout the film. By the time she meets Wedderburn she definitely doesn't have the mind of a baby anymore - she can walk, speak, is starting to question those around her and think about what she want, has had her own sexual awakening - she's definitely still too young, and Wedderburn is a creep and does exploit her - but she isn't a baby anymore.
Thank you! I think people are taking this film waayyy to literally. It seems like they don't understand absurd ideas - this was based on a book - or have watched Yorgos Lanthimos' work. He even has references to his other films in 'Poor Things' that I thought were clever. The film was hilarious, and if you can't see it, and just caught in social commentary, or saying "why was this not mentioned, and not all women..." this film is clearly not for you. People in the comments don't seem to have a distinguished sense of humour.
She is still literally a child and everything that happens is sexual abuse
@@Laura-gd4ku Her development from child to adult proceeds at a rapid pace. There is no comparison or correlation with reality. Just look at the universe it takes place in. Look at Willem Dafoe as Godwin, who had been through all kinds of torments and had been subjected to sickening violence that wouldn't let him stand on his feet. It's an absurd form of storytelling that tries to capture our essence as human beings. Have you even seen the movie? How can you take what's happening so litterally and be so utterly dull?
@@elimo3901 That still doesnt change the fact that she was not a consenting adult in the first part of the movie. I am not against showing this or having stories about it but in my opinion it plays her abuse for laughs and I dont think thats "provocative" or "smart" its just very boring.
I think the film tries to be more than it actually is, it looks revolutionary with all its sex scenes but I dont think its message is very deep or that there is a layer of hidden meaning. So if you call me dull, thats fine but I dont think the movie as as smart as you think it is.
@@Laura-gd4ku That's fair, and yes for some the sex scenes are too much. I get that you can tell a story without portraying the sex itself, you can simply insinuate it. Emma Stone was a part of the process as a producer on the movie, so we know it's not the case of filming unwanted scenes as we now know have taken place with other films.
For me, art is a reflection of reality and here we witnes Bella's exploration of her sexuality, so I think those scenes belong. When you first discover sex, with yourself and others, a fantastic new world opens up. Especially with a partner who has experience. I'm not saying that these two characters are each others equals, but that's also how it often is. Furthermore, in Bella's later development, we see how she retrospectively has gone through an exploitation and therefore also rejects Wedderburn, who, conversely, is much less adventurous and much more compliant than he would dare to admit.
If people thought the sex scenes were unpleasant, which actually only show pleasure, then it's probably really about their own shyness. After all, films and art help uncover what we don't like about ourselves or bring hidden and repressed desires to light. Otherwise, it would be boring art if everything was predictable, neat and orderly. To each his/her own!
I am a huge yorgos lanthimos fan and the favourite is literally my favorite movie. But i found this movie to be horrible and exploitative. I have no idea how people are claiming that it is empowering. It's so strange to me. You can tell that this is all about a certain kind of man's perspective because it is the male characters who go through the most emotional growth in the movie. It really feels like the screenwriter was trying to work through his own objectification of women with this. It's like a guy learning that women have choice and an inner life, not a woman herself.
She calls him God because that's his name: Godwin, not Goodwin, like you said.
I think comparing it to Barbie is very reductive...
or at least, not applicable. Why even compare those two films?
Makes sense to me. Its about two women who arent really women, and dont know how to behave like real women in a real world.
@@paulinegallagher7821But Barbie is a doll and Bella is human.
Barbie becomes human and Bella was born human.
It also bugged me that they were compared. Just because they both feature female leads? I did not care for Barbie.
Literally 'The Idol' but because it has the cinema bro aesthetic instead of the pop girlie one - now we have to take it seriously 🙄
Young woman getting exploited and sexualized by the men around her, but by the end we learn that ACTUALLY she is in control (after several degrading sex scenes of course) ...yeah sure
what exactly is degrading about the sex scenes?
To be fair, Emma Stone has more power than all of the cast on Euphoria and The Idol, except maybe Zendaya. She’s the producer on this movie, and none of the sex scenes are aesthetically pleasing. They’re stylized and comical.
It also depends on how *those* scenes are pictured, the camera angle etc. What kind of gaze are we looking through. Is the sex scene upclose, far away, is it showing one body part especially and not the rest of the body and always ask WHY. For example, in Euphoria there is a scene when Cassie takes of her bra for Mckay because she thinks that is what he wants. In this shot the director choose to show Sydney Sweeny's chest. The director could have implied that Cassie is showing her chest by having a shot where you see her take of her bra staps without revealing anything. The shot could have ended right after we see her collarbones. The shot would have been more intimate having her face expression in focus. Why did they choose to show her chest??
POOR THINGs or FRANKENHOOKER left me so disappointed, and even more so, in the writer, Tony McNamara. The book does a better (not much, but better) job of handling this complex and problematic subject matter, not least of all by acknowledging that the story is told from a man's limited, unreliable point of view - in the case of the film, we must hope the audience sees that on its own. At one point on her two-week cruise of enlightenment, Bella says "if it is disgusting, why should I keep it in my mouth?" as she spits out her fancy dinner. She doesn't like it, she spits it out - she doesn't continue eating it, day in, day out, forever to see if she might feel differently about something she felt was disgusting. She actively expresses the disgust she feels when working as a prostitute, and yet she continues to do it, indefinitely, seemingly under the thumb of a madam who physically harms her. Then, bafflingly, she declares it a net-positive experience and the film plays it for laughs. An unsocialized human would instinctually, as we have seen, run away from a negative experience that provokes disgust and pain. Spit out that disgusting thing. Yet she continues, even though she has the means to leave or work in literally any other field or explore any other part of society. She's supposedly wise enough from exposure to those two or three books, the token black person explaining suffering for a quick 2 minute aside, and that noble street performer's song, to understand socialism, but she doesn't understand the realities of prostitution? And why prostitution? If she's evolved to the status of a grown woman capable of consent, she should be able to function in society in any number of ways that are more enjoyable. Yet she chooses prostitution even though these experiences are not pleasurable or even consensual, and she vocalizes that multiple times. There's also never any concern for pregnancy, menstruation, disease, assault or really any female pleasure. Even the slightly more consensual (felt more like a pedophilic grooming fantasy to me...) scenes with Mark Ruffalo felt like anything I'd see in regular heteronormative p0rn - a distinctly male gaze with zero attention to the mechanics of female pleasure or orgasm. And if her goal was solely sexual pleasure, why not experiment as she does in the book, with partners of her choosing, instead of partners she openly finds disgusting? I reject the character motivations on face value because she contradicts her own stated instincts, feelings and logic. If this were a critique of how society, specifically patriarchy, funnels women into these situations and treated it with the seriousness sex work deserves, including the many potential harms to vulnerable women, then perhaps I could buy an attempt at a feminist message. But she insists that she likes it and suffers nothing, after describing her utter disgust. The lush setting almost glamorized the lifestyle of a sex worker and implied this somehow led to her self-actualization and freedom. But how exactly? And can we really even call these actions free if she's being physically and psychologically coerced by the madam? If not for God's illness, she would have continued as a prostitute and I still have no idea why - except to showcase more nudity and "shocking" sexual situations. Funny that the male author, male screenwriter and male director would believe that a woman's unsocialized, pure response to sexual awakening would be to focus it all on male fantasies and desires rather than her own. Ultimately, the initially promising premise of an unsocialized female being exploring the world without social constraint became an exploitative exercise in the male gaze where a woman's base instinct is to have unpleasurable sex with men for money. Poor Things reduces a woman's journey of self-actualization to twenty minutes of ''learning" and an hour plus of unenjoyable sex she doesn't fully consent to, with a tacked on faux feminist ending to absolve itself. Only with the threat of the (sadly, once real) clitoridectomy solution to her supposed mental health issues by her cartoon villain of a husband are we faced with a worse villain than the film itself - I guess I can praise it for pointing out that tragic historical fact. But it also weirdly positions this as the alternative to the much better life of "whoring." I think everyone is loving the pretty, shiny packaging, but even from a technical standpoint, the film feels all over the place. The cinematography is novel, but it's also inconsistent and gimmicky - throwing in every cinematic trick in the book, the black and white to color cliché, the fish eye lens, the peephole, the title cards, the actually-not-original-at-all steampunk aesthetic. I've seen it before and this feels very much style over substance, with an everything but the kitchen sink approach. Even Emma Stone's performance felt forced and over acted due to this screenplay's more childish cruel portrayal rather than the books more cheerful and loving persona of Bella which didn't feel anymore believable as she uneventfully matures towards the dreadful ending. I just wish the story was more worthy of Emma's talent.
Sadly most people won’t read the book or look into it for context on why this is such a stale “feminist telling” when the biggest twist in the book give Bella the most agency
It’s not like Hollywood is known for making faithful film adaptations! 😂
I would love to read the book after I've watched the film. Usually everything can't make it into the film.
When i first found out about the movie i was so excited. Then i found out Emmas character had the mind of a child, making the movie part of the born sexy yesterday trope, and i was immediately uninterested. I know the movie must really be something because its getting nominated and such, but personally im still not entirely convinced
My thoughts exactly!
It is a good film (my personal favourite from last year alongside "The Holdovers") and while it does include that trope and does include some sexual scenes, it is never portrayed as a good thing and Emma Stone's character (Bella Baxter) takes more and more control over her life including her sexuality. I'd also mention, that the first times she has sex her mind is still not totally developed, it is not a child's anymore. It is strange and hard to explain, but she develops in her own way by experiencing more and more. While often she doesn't understand things, she does understand when she is being abused and doesn't put up with it. Without spoiling the ending, it does have a good, encouraging ending.
I watched it yesterday and the sex part is like 70% of the movie. It troubled me and at times didn’t felt necessary
Yes, the movie is literally a commentary on the trope.
@@samavargas8343the sex is integral to her character and its definitely not 70% of the film. I personally find most sex scenes in films uncomfortable but I thought Poor Things handled it really well without being gross and objectifying.
Of course people can have their own interpretations though. It has been very interesting to read conflicting ideas on the film.
I saw it in theaters and enjoyed it. Yes, the baby brain thing didn’t sit well with me but I watched it through to the end see how they’d tell this story. Wedderburn actually didn’t know about the baby brain thing (not saying it’s okay) so to see how much he didn’t want her after she gained some independence and mental growth was an interesting way to depict Bella’s push against the patriarchic society she was in. The movie grew on me by the end when you find out her background and how this was like a second shot at life with freedom.
Give me a break. Duncan could tell that something was severely off based on Bella's speech pattern and how she carried herself and how do we know that Duncan and Dr. Godwin didn't have a talk about her off camera?
Victoria didn't want a shot at life. That's why she killed herself. The ethics of experimenting on a body without the donor's consent was hardly explored in this shallow movie.
@@maryjaneshoe-fm4yr Godwin seemed like he didn’t want Wedderburn to know anymore about Bella due to being extremely protective towards her. To me, Wedderburn seemed to think she was some whimsical woman who did whatever she wanted, not someone with some type of disorder.
@@maryjaneshoe-fm4yr Duncan is the bad guy
another 'born sexy yesterday' trope movie
had a bit more nuance than that but def backing up that tree
yeah, except the female character ends up owning all the men who 'took advantage' of her, unlike the actual trope. Bella Baxter comes back to London as a boss and is not beholden to any of the men that had objectified her during the course of the story. So, no, the film isn't romanticizing her 'sexy innocence', but rather her growing beyond that... it's sorta the point of the whole thing smh
That's how the male characters in the film perceive her, but the film is smarter than that
It’s more like a subversion of the trope, but then again subversion is not the same as aversion.
I started thinking of other films about the fantastical growth of a male characters during a film or story. Like The Big Fish or even Pinocchio. I was hoping the lessons in life wouldn't have to go through sex for Bella, as it is not for male characters. Not one of them need to sell their bodies to learn a lesson. There was not any love either. All love was forced on her by men, she didn't feel it. So what was the lesson in all the sex? Don't love men, because they can not be trusted? Use, so you aren't being abused? Don't get me wrong, pretty, entertaining film. The plot bothers me so much though. Can't female characters decenter men ever, but only after being fucked over?
I feel like people put way too much stock into the idea of this movie needing to empower women, specifically sexually
I saw it more broadly as an adult fairytale of what would life be like for girls and women if they never internalized the kind of shame and gendered expectations put upon them by men in a patriarchal society, that what would it be like for Bella to be motivated to live what the audience considers to be a fairly hedonistic life in pursuit of the truth. So many people here are saying how it’s “unrealistic” and that’s very much the point - I see it as being in the same class of fairytales for adult women like “The Marvelous Mrs Maisel” and “Midsommar”
I find it very hard to entertain any argument about “realism” in a movie where it’s fairly clear to the audience that Dr. Baxter blithely describing the increasingly bizarre and horrific things that he endured from his father which are roughly akin to the Steampunk equivalent of what Thanos did to Nebula and clearly played for laughs.
100%. It is not meant to be be about empowerment but more on how a person(and woman) who did not understand social norms would behave in a world of said social norms. A commentary of what we take for granted as the done thing or the done perspective. Although I did enjoy how she spoke her mind. It demonstatrated we should speak our mind openly more then we do but less then we maybe fantasise of doing. has rifts of fight club but on conversational conflict.
It felt like a film adaptation of an adult comic book
I'm sorry, are you kidding me??? You are actually brushing through the "she can't consent having the mind of a baby", but coming up with the idiotic excuse that "well, she began sexual exploration by herself!"? What??? Do you realise that it is perfectly normative to have 4 to 5 year-old children discover and explore their own genitals, but that in NO WAY makes it acceptable for adults to participate on that exploration. It's horrifying that people are actually thinking this is to be okay. It's not. She was not an adult woman, she only had an adult body, but in no way that makes her journey one of "sexual liberation". All I saw in the movie was a child being abused by adults and being in a "stockholm-syndrome"-like state throughout the film.
I guess the kids you've been around are geniuses then. They matured super fast if you think she's at that level throughout this film... you have adult kids if they act like her at 5...
@@The_Tortoise_and_the_Hare dude, you didn't get what I meant. it's normal for 4 or 5 year-olds to become aware of their genitals and start getting particularly curious about their function and differences between male and female genitals, and may even start (some, not the majority) engaging in forms of masturbation, but it's still "innocent", it's not sexual in the sense that they don't relate genital features and physical pleasure with sexual attraction for anybody else. And when adults take advantage of this curiosity (while it's completely innocent) to make sexual advances, that's awful abuse, and that happened with Bella. She was a child discovering things about herself and the world, and adults around her took advantage of that many awful ways (one of which was taking advantage of her curiosity for physical pleasure and make her think it was okay to go from that to having sex with another person whilst not fully understanding all that that implied to make an informed decision - emotional vulnerability, potencial pregnancy, diseases, etc.)
@@MsInescruz well we view this movie differently. I see her as maturing super fast, she's not a child when these things start to happen, yes when she was discovering herself it was childlike, but she matured so fast. Also except for when Mark's character touched her down there, she was the one instigating everything. She enjoyed it, You know how sometimes people who recieve parts from other people they end up also liking some stuff they did without even knowing the person they recieved a limb from. So you know the brain and the body kind of merged and so she already probably knew a lot just based on sensory rememberance in the body. My point is I do not see her as a child when these things happen.
@@The_Tortoise_and_the_Hare "she enjoyed it"... do you know how many children/ teenagers, after having been abused, often refuse to accept it as such (abuse), because they enjoyed it. When they finally realise that it's abuse, they feel an awful lot of guilt and confusion over having enjoyed it... It may be seen as what you described, that for some reason, she just grew up faster but... isn't also that an argument for a lot of abuse perpetators? "she was mature for her age", they say. You could interpret this film as not portraying a realistic learning/maturing journey and just say she sci-fi character that just grew up 18 years in a span of a few months, but... the fact that that is not made clear is exactly what bothers me. It was either not important for the director to make it clear that she was able to consent or not, which is worrying, or he expected us to assume she couldn't consent, and still thought the "empowering" messaging by the end wouldn't become problematic by this fact. It's troublesome, either way, in my opinion.
@@MsInescruz why would he expect people to assume she couldn't consent, for me I assumed she could, and did. People obviously view this movie very differently. I didn't view it as anything bad, and could almost in a way relate to Bella, but it's more in the way of she was the way I wish I could be. We should assume she matured very quickly because she became more mature than me I'd say by the end, and I am 32 years old, but I'm not very mature for my age, I kind of sometimes feel like I'm stuck at 14, but my life wasn't that great, but that's beside the point. Some people take it as she's matured very quickly which I do, and other's take it as she's still a baby. So based on those things people will see the movie really differently.
Are they done posting to Spotify?
7:39 can you show those scenes here on RUclips?
Gee, it's almost as if the movie was supposed to make people uncomfortable about a subject matter in the first place.
Also, people being appalled at sex in movies but not continuous gore and violence is weird as fuck. AHS and it's mediocre ilk continue to thrive but one sex scene in Oppenheimer sends people reeling
I avoid R rated horror & crime movies. Life is too short to subject my poor eyeballs to ultra-violence. I loved much of "PT", but even horndog me thought there could've been fewer sex scenes.
I tend to agree with this sentiment.
bad guys offing bad guys or good guys offing bad guys is nothing controversial
but mature scenes in movies can be controversial when power imbalance, age difference, lack of consent etc, is involved and it is something that many people have experienced in real life, that's why it's completely different than gore and violence in movies
@@FruityHachi people have also experienced gore and violence in real life and they still watch those movies.
Your point?
@@dlobelow760 name which movies romanticize bad guys being violent towards good guys that people who experienced gore and violence watch?
How did she not get pregnant?
Puberty is controlled by the brain.
Beautifully filmed, written and performed.
Loved this film! Great analysis. Ruffallo and Stone were such a joy to watch!
The most accessible, quirky, funny, brave, effective film of 2023. After watching it, I know I will view it a second time as it has been loaded with teasers and references across much of human understanding and knowledge. It went by so quickly, I just want to see it yet again. Stone's nudity was shocking; the scenes were well thought and demand the viewers reaction and challenge those reactions. Few films confront the viewers in this way. I'm a better person I believe for having watched Poor Things.
I used to love your essays for how insightful and analytical they were, but they’ve now become another “movie podcast” that just re-tells the plot of the film and adds zero value.
And so predictable, I can guess "the takes" just from reading the titles. Sad.
Did we watch the same video?
They still do good analysis...on their Patreon (that you have to pay for...)
What video did you guys watch? Because this whole video is about analysis.
My sister is a non-communicative adult with developmental disabilities, some of Bella very much reminded me of her. Coupled with the fact that the disabled are often abused and taken advantage of, this movie just didnt do it for me
IVE BEEN WAITING FOR THIS ONE
Feminism gone so far it reverted back to sexism in full circle
Lmao😂 💀💀 true
That would explain white feminists, SWERFs, and TERFs!
"Movie explicitly about and making a commentary on a trope is criticized for invoking said trope"
This is just the next movie in a long line movies that people miss the point on. Just because it isn't as in your face as Barbie' "DO YOU GET IT???" doesn't mean it isn't working towards the same goals, and it does it dozens of times better because of it.
One line is arguably as in your face as Barbie: “I am my own means of production!”
@@eponymouscharacterI’d say that line is forgivable as there’s a good chance it could still go over the heads of general audiences
I prefered Barbie's brand of feminism because Barbie's journey of self-discovery wasn't dependent upon sexual relationships with men.
@@maryjaneshoe-fm4yrTo be fair, “Barbie” was a PG-13 movie, and dolls don’t have genitals, so sexual libido is out of the question. 😂
@@maryjaneshoe-fm4yr I think it's more realistic in that's the world girls and women grow up in. They don't have other women shouting platitudes at them telling them their self worth, instead they are forced to figure out what and who they are and what they value in the world. Is it fucked up? Yes. But that's the point.
Again, exactly the commentary of the trope. Born sexy yesterday is reality because it doesn't matter if you're twelve or 24 growing up female, there will be men who treat you like meat regardless.
I really really liked this film (and consider a deeper version of Barbie) but my biggest problem with female empowerment films made by men is the lack of women of color in them (not this one though), and the lack of interaction between the main female character and other women who may be in the story. All her deepest relationships seem to center around men which is the kind of thing that happens when the story is told from a white man's point of view.
She does have female relationships: Toinette (played by Suzy Bemba) who becomes a close friend to her and Martha von Kurtzroc (played by Hanna Schygulla) who shares some wisdom with her. Sure, none of these are the most important relationships in the film, because the film isn't about them; you can't put every aspect of somebody's life into one film.
@@LucaNemes214I would also add the woman who hires her in her brothel. She also shares some wisdom to Bella.
I don’t have a problem with that. The character herself wasn’t an ordinary person - she was an experiment - and so was not exposed to normal human relationships. For instance, no parents or siblings. So it’s unsurprising that her deepest relationships are with men and is no fault of the filmmaker or writers (nor of their gender or race). In fact, therein lies the opportunity for social commentary and driving the plot forward.
tl;dr: it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
You're right
I didn't care for the only black woman in this film. I thought her pleasuring Bella was really indicative of white feminism, in that its not mutual but rather one sided.
You completely missed what the “controversy” actually is. It’s not that the sex scenes are gratuitous , it’s that this film sells a version of bourgeois or also called white feminism that essentially says sexual empowerment is the ultimate expression of female empowerment. THATs the controversy around this film, even I don’t fully understand the critique but I know you’ve got it wrong or you’ve only barely glossed over it. There are some excellent reviews on letterboxd that do a great job of expressing the real critique of this film
I didn’t see any female empowerment while watching this movie - this is a twisted movie and I love it very much for that, but it is NOT A feminist movie
Meh I still think there were too many sex scenes
there is a little bit of video in your advertisement
2:09 As a literal interpretation, Bella calls Dr. Baxter "God" because it's short for his first name, "Godwin". Though, with the nickname and how Bella phrases things, I don't think it's an accident that it gives off religious vibes.
Too much sex. Not needed . Nobody is sharing how much of it is sex
agenda. normalization of hollywood’s fetishes
well if you don't like having sex just don't have it. She enjoyed it a lot so she had it a lot.
@@The_Tortoise_and_the_Hare just ignore how bella is the equivalent of creepy anime ppl that say “oh she’s not 7 years old, she’s actually 3,000 years old in the body of a kid”.
This movie is constant visceral sex which adds nothing to the overall plot of the movie. This is disgusting to consider once we find out Bella is essentially at worst a toddler and at best a teenager for most of these scenes
@@Regenperf you guys are literally almost driving me insane with the way you twist everything to fit how you see it. You can't view it in a real world lens, it's fiction, it's something that could never ever happen in real life. A brain isn't anything really, a brain is connected to the body it feels through the body, the mind is made up of experiences. She's not a baby, the brain isn't a baby, it's a brain, ir works like a brain. And since it was placed in a mature body it matured way faster, I know that the brain isn't fully developed until 25, but the brain's way of thinking is shaped by experiences, and she was treated like an adult, yes, she hadn't developed those parts that make us think about consequences yet and things like that. I don't know how I can even explain it so you get it because you are very stubborn with what you believe it to be. But a brain is a brain, it's shaped by experiences, it's not like if you put an adult brain into a baby that that baby would be an adult all of a sudden, or do you think a baby with an adult brain should be treated like an adult?
I saw the film earlier this month and really enjoyed it. So many things to enjoy. The performances, the unusual setting, the character development.
I agree with much of what was said, the sex scenes never felt gratuitous. The way it was shot and the way that it fed into the character development of Bella was excellent to see. Finding out here that Emma was a Producer makes a lot of sense. She had agency as an actor in the same way her character Bella did.
The character’s growth is important throughout the film and she seeks out many things. It does raise many hypothetical issues: if an infants mind was in an adult body and experiencing rapid maturity and learning, how would one deal with true age and also consent. The film could have spent more time examining that, but given its faux Victorian era setting, that would have felt our of place so it was best left for the 21st century viewer to ponder during and after the film.
I could question how well adjusted Bella is at the end of the film. One could expect that the many things that she went through were traumatic, but the film does not view or treat Bella as suffering from Trauma, quite the opposite. We could question whether that is realistic, but in a film about a Frankenstein’s monster does suggest that pure realism is not core to the film. The Sci-Fi nature of Bella’s origin may relate to her unusual development and lack of trauma (fan theory). Likely the film makers wanted an inspiring story with a positive ending rather than to showcase trauma. There are plenty of other films that examine the consequences of trauma so it is fair for this film to avoid that.
I find that the story is very inspiring. Bella, likely thanks to the procedure that created her, appears to demonstrate a few Austistic traits (likely unintentional but the creators). Her lack of masking and confidence to be herself is actually quiet and empowering story and the lack of forced masking could also be a part of her lack of a trauma response. If only all people with ASD could grow up in a world that does not force them to mask and could avoid the related trauma.
As a person with ADHD with Autistic traits...love this comment. I felt like that watching the movie ❤
Interesting to know some of production history of the film but ultimately am a bit surprised at the generally supportive tone of the video for this movie. Agree with what feels like the majority sentiment in the comments that setting aside the creator intentions, the movie undercuts the argument that the film was somehow interested in broader and deeper themes as the final product came off as a pretty reductive and thoughtless message of sexuality as the endpoint of empowerment. Also agree with another commenter that the movie's careless lack of interest in the issues of poverty and sex work except ad set pieces/plot points made the whole thing feel like a rather cheap and shallow engagement on issues that deserve more thought.
Yes Bella was a toddler at first. But she clearly developed faster than “normal” so at some point she was also a child, then a teen, and finally an adult. I think she reached maturity towards the end of Paris and definitely adulthood when she understood why Victoria jumped off the bridge. She wasn’t very emotional because of her upbringing, but she developed empathy and reached emancipation through knowledge, not really through her sexuality. I hated the beginning which the voyeur imagery on someone who was basically a toddler, but that was part of the story. You were not supposed to find it sexy or appealing. And when there was sex it wasn’t sexy at all, it was weird and uncomfortable. We were also never even inclined to root for any of the male characters. Except a maybe a little for Godwin who had himself been abused so much too.
I feel like too many people are missing the point of the movie.
I was excited for it, but left the theater DISAPPOINTED. The whole movie I was thinking “SHE’S A CHILD” and even some times I thought “Is this… pro-life?”. Disappointed. One outta five⭐️
No it isn't pro life, Alistair Grey is rolling in his grave
There is something that still feels wrong with this movie. The fact that it is a guy who decides to use a women body to experiment sems awful to me. Like this idea of men still doing what they want with women. Then, the idea of assuming that a child mind would developpe like that is awful. Childs need tons of time to developpe critical thinking and a sens of self. Its a very vulnerable age that makes them vulnerable to exploitation. This looks like a women not having enough understanding to make enligthen choices. Finally, the fact that the movie assumes that giving a child brain to a women is the only way to make her free is litteraly WTF. We dont need to be a child to understand and go against social repression. In the same way we dont need to be a child to be curious. This movie feels weird and disgusting to me.
Just watched it today. Movie was decent, but had absurdly amount of sex scenes, it actually took me out of immersion. I'm surprised it is a PG-16 when 1/3 of the movie is just sex. They can explore or portray enjoying the company of someone without sex.
PS: the camera work reminds me of the AI Balenciaga videos on how they pan around lmao
This film is kind of disturbing to me because she has a brain on an infant! The men who were having sex with her were so creepy and nasty!
My favorite film of the year. I think the people angry haven’t actually seen it and are just going off of online speculation
I have seen it while not angry. The twist of the film was really strange AT BEST
Stop hiding behind pseudo intellectualism and just admit yr a shallow perv like the rest of fake artistic Hollywood
I was excited to watch it and completely cringed in the cinema when the film showed that it's okay to have sex with kids if they look like grown-ups and have tried masturbation
@@alinadolzhenko6963 thank you ppl who have no issue w the premise and the story tells themselves want to sweep past this and get to the other aspects of the film. When it sets a precedence
Exactly.
Absolutely loved POOR THINGS! I ve seen it 3 times in the cinemas and one of the best films Ive seeen in over a decade. I highly recommend it
sad for you
I loved it as well, visually, the acting, it was hilarious! I love all of Yorgos Lanthimos' work, he's so talented and unique. McNamara wrote a stellar script.
OK, but what do the huge shoulder clothes mean?
18th century French fashion 😊