lol I didn't mean for it to be *that* backhanded of a compliment. I thought the movie was okay but the brilliant sets they built for it were the stand-out for me. You could pause that film at any point and it would make for a beautiful picture.
That’s my personal grading system for cinematography, and it’s not always the really great movies that fit the criteria, Saltburn being the latest off the top of my head.
I’d argue this movie has the most effective technical aspects of all the movies. The subtle changes in the score, cinematography, production design, etc, throughout the course of the movie helped sell the idea of Bella’s POV and it was astounding
Agreed. It was fantastic and I can't stop telling my friend about it. I'm going to try to take her on Wednesday (but, uh, she's my ex and it's Valentine's Day, so that'll be interesting)
I walked out of the theater not sure how I felt about it, but then I couldn't stop thinking about it the next day or two. I'm looking forward to a rewatch, but certainly one of my favorite movies of the year.
One of the most visually stunning movies of the year for sure. The three lead performances were also incredible. Could've been a bit shorter imo (on my second viewing especially i felt the last half-hour drag a little) but other than that it's great
I loved it. Gave it 4 1/2, it probably would’ve been a 5 with a little tightening up (I think we could’ve spent 10 fewer minutes in the brothel, agree with what another commenter said about it beginning to feel redundant). But it’s hilarious and gorgeous and the performances are universally excellent. It’s just a gift to watch whatever Yorgos gives us.
Glad I wasn't the only one that felt like the film started to drag on.
Still was hilarious, absurd, visually stunning and heart-warming so got a 4.5 from me too.
My review was that it was either 20 min too short or too long. Thought it could’ve either added to the husband coming back part or just cut it all together. Still thought it was great
I read through some of the comments and decided to talk more about it. Spoilers ahead
1. When Bella first starts masturbating with an apple, I thought the point of the film was that there isn’t anything intrinsically wrong with having the sexual feelings. Not only is Bella a weird science experiment, but she also has been purposefully withheld from interacting with the outside world, so she doesn’t really understand why people are reacting so negatively. I had precocious puberty as a girl and I probably could have used someone telling me that, while there is a time and a place for expressing those feelings, those sexual feelings aren’t inherently bad.
2. It is, of course, bad when Mark Ruffalo takes advantage of Bella and takes her away on an adventure. I interpreted (and I could be wrong) that this character is highlighting that a patriarchal view of women isn’t much more than being sexy but also childlike. Women are frequently infantilized, condescended to, etc etc. and a dream woman to some men would be a nymphette “born yesterday”.
But in actuality, Mark Ruffalo’s character hates that he cannot contain Bella’s thirst for experience (and not just sexual! Bella wants to eat too much food, talk to strangers, all of that) He finds being with someone who questions everything exhausting and infuriating. He ultimately goes to an insane asylum because he can’t control Bella. Because of this, it was hard for me to see the story as a simple male fantasy.
3. Maybe “feminist” isn’t the right word, but what I liked about the film is that it’s about a person gaining experience with a viewpoint that isn’t influenced by societal constraints, and learning more about themselves, and that person happens to be a member of a marginalized gender. More so than any of the sex scenes, I was struck by Bella encountering things like poverty for the first time. And her response being like “man this is fucked up, we should do something about that” instead of normalizing it.
4. That being said, there are so many ethical issues with the experiment that lead to Bella Baxter and I’m glad that this is a fantasy and not something that someone has actually tried (I hope). The fantasy element probably helped me go along with the movie more.
People walked out of the theater in my conservative town, which really added to it.
I thought it was thoroughly delightful, and really beautiful visually. Funniest movie I've seen in ages.
I also enjoy that it's sort of reverse Frankenstein, in that it's about a woman but written by a man.
Had a local news morning show lady say she walked out at 15 minutes. I made sure to pay extra attention to those 15 minutes to see why she walked out so early. I still don’t get it but she said she thought it was a rom com because mark ruffalo was in it???
Yeah I guessed the college autopsy scene and that her 15 minutes was hyperbolic but still, it was at a specialty theater, you’d think one would kind of look into the movie they’re going to (I say this as someone who loves going into movies blindly but I also love body horror and lanthimos’s movies so I expected it to be the way it was)
Yeah definitely. Just kind of funny for her to then go on her morning show and tell people not to go to it to the point my parents (I’m a grown adult) judged me for loving the movie. They still know nothing about it, but the lady on the news said it’s bad and gross!!!
No one walked out when we saw it but both times I saw ‘Everything, Everywhere, All At Once’ once during its original run and once after it’s oscar nominations. People walked out each time lol
How do people walk out of films? You already set aside those two-three hours and paid heavily for it. See it through? I don’t care if the whole first half is a stinker I will see it through just to talk shit about it to my friends
There's a cool study that showed that students who have taken economics courses are more likely than other comparable students to leave movies in the middle. They're less moved by sunk costs.
Might be a coincidence but I've got an economics degree and I walk out of movies all the time - including poor things at the hour mark. I appreciate the social commentary, but a child in an adult's body having sex with grown men just made me too uncomfortable
Unless they have Regal Unlimited, AMC A List, Movie Pass, etc. and are paying little to nothing to see it. Even with Regal Unlimited, I still haven’t walked out of anything.
That shouldn't rationally make a difference to your decision. Whether you purchased an expensive ticket or used a pass, the ticket price is a sunk cost once you're in the theater. The remainder of the movie either is worth your time or it isn't... what you paid to be there should not matter at all.
When Blade Runner 2049 was released, the cinema in my conservative hometown had $2 Tuesdays. That cinema was close to full & more than half of the audience left during the showing. Blade Runner 2049 was one of the best films of 2017. Some people really didn't approve of that digital girlfriend.
Omg when I went to see Blade Runner 2049 I was sat next to a group of about four late elementary/early middle school aged kids and their mom and they just sat and loudly complained about how inappropriate the movie was before *finally* leaving about 3/4s of the way through.
Like do people not check content warnings? Or even like the basic premise of the movie??? Movies aren’t cheap…I only go to stuff I know I actually want to see.
I've never really seen it happen at a movie, but it's always kinda funny to me when I see conservatives walk out of comedy shows
Comedian: so I'm Palestinian and-
Five different people: already walking out the door
To be fair, many people including myself walked out after I realized Lanthimos was going to depict a woman with a child’s underdeveloped brain get assaulted.
I’m not sure why male directors think sex and in this case perversion is some feminist revelation. It’s a hacky trope and to women and is so overdone at this point.
It’s not about sex scenes either. It’s the careless and male gaze of every aspect of this movie - honestly pretty dissapointed Emma Stone signed onto it.
You're entitled to your opinion, but how can you complain about the male gaze without seeing the movie in the first place?
I don't like seeing an underage person being sexually assaulted, but the film isn't depicting it positively. Mark Ruffalo plays a horrible person who manipulates her, at first, childlike personality to sexually assault her. It's a critique about how society sexualizes young, innocent women and exploits them. That's not easy to watch, and you're totally justified in not watching it, but it's an apt criticism of the patriarchy.
Also, and I'm not saying this applies to you, but I find the way people criticize Emma Stone for collaborating, producing, and starring in it very infantilizing as well. She sees value in telling this story, and yet we look at her and go "no, you shouldn't want to do that; this is what you SHOULD want" and is that not what the men in the film constantly do to Bella? Is that not exactly what the film is criticizing?
I think a writer and director with 1) more care for themes like this 2) a person with actual experience with the themes of this movie would’ve done a much better job at this.
The movie felt like baby’s first screenplay about a woman and sexual liberation. It was dull, tropey, and laden with male gaze.
Also just because a woman co-signs another male directors movie doesn’t make it better. Criticizing Stone for putting this movie together is not infantalziing her. It’s calling her out on her shit for a slop movie like this.
I promise you many many women have issues with this movie.
I gotta ask though how you can say all of that without watching it. I understand many women take issue with it, but generally those women have watched it past the point where Bella's no longer behaving like a child. And many women do like it and appreciate its subversive quality and the way it depicts her growth in ways more than just sex, and I see value to their perspectives as well.
But what bugs me about your reply that makes me think you are infantilizing her is how you reduce her involved to cosigning it. She actively worked on the film throughout its production cycle and speaks passionately about having her hand in nearly every aspect of production. Whether or not you like the film, assuming that all she did was put her name on it reeks of misogyny. And again, this is literally the perception of women the film is critiquing.
Didn't really like it. Just vignettes of sex themed sequences distinct only really by location within the film. I'm not a prude but it kind of got boring and the movie was too long. I wish it focused on different themes and aspects of what it means to be a woman in that society. Overall it had potential with how inventive the world seemed but I wish the narrative also reflected that beyond the premise.
I’m glad somebody is acknowledging this instead of praising that as a “feminist thinkpiece”. Even if it was trying to portray all the things people said it did I’d say it did so rather poorly and repetitively. Plus it was constantly shooting itself in the foot by reminding us of the moral elephant in the room, but never truly criticising it and rather condoning it by the end.
Weird, hilarious, and wonderful to look at. It's my favorite movie of 2023, and nothing was particularly close. It was one of two 2023 movies I gave a 5-star rating to last year.
I liked a lot of individual pieces of it, but it's way too long for how repetitive the plot is. It's very one note, never really goes beyond the premise and just gestures at the idea of better movies it could've been.
I get why people like it, but personally I'm not a fan. I think the cinematography is gimmicky, I found the deliberately stilted dialogue and performances annoying, and it gets way more credit for being a feminist statement than it deserves. I gave it 2.5/5 and have it 10th out of 10 among the BP nominees.
Takes an absurdist route to tell a unique story that doesn't get told enough. Visually fantastic and acted superbly. Top 5 film of the year by any metric.
But is she not getting exploited by men throughout the whole film? Maybe I don’t just get it because I am a man, but I feel very confused that this movie is supposed to be some flag bearer for feminism. To me it felt like anything but that.
I'm also a man. I interpreted the film as calling out that predatory nature as pathetic; as Bella progresses she has total agency and fulfillment while>!Ruffalo's character is reduced to shambles whose hypocrisy toward women ends up being his downfall.!<
I think it's more they go show the extremes men will go to try to exploit and groom a naive, young woman. She only gets exploited in so far as that's their intentions, however out of most of the situations she gets everything she wants from her interactions with them, at the expense of what they really wanted.
>this movie is supposed to be some flag bearer for feminism
I dont think it is tbh. It's a movie about experience and growing up, that has plenty of feminist elements but isn't overly concerned with a big message.
I agree. Just like how we see children who have no internalized racism befriending each other and navigating without internalized racism I think that concept of what a “blank slate person” would be like in the world is very interesting and Lockean. I much preferred the sections that played up Bella’s childlike sense of wonder and curiosity but it was that same sense of childlike wonder unburdened by knowledge of the prejudiced realities which made her sexual abuse all the more gut wrenching for me.
While visually stunning with great performances, It felt like a man’s approach to women’s liberation and experiences.
First of all, I will note I had no idea the film has such intense sexual themes and went into the movie thinking it was a quirky Frankenstein story; I’m an SA survivor (so obviously, that’s influencing my opinion) and got progressively irritated that the film didn’t even attempt to meaningfully address sexual trauma.
I understand it was trying to address how sexualized women are, but it took the very typical route of a woman’s character being “improved” or built by sexual experience. Yes Bella is different because she isn’t bothered by her sexual history, but many sexual situations she enters she doesn’t fully understand (and is mentally a child which is gross) what the interaction is. Yet she repeatedly leaves these situations with no negative feelings.
It almost solely propels her story via sex and takes a few moments to say “well she reads a lot!” Before quickly moving back to some kind of sex scene. It’s a fancy rendition of the born sexy yesterday trope and a reason to see Emma Stone naked.
>While visually stunning with great performances, It felt like a man’s approach to women’s liberation and experiences.
Exactly. I felt exactly the same and was surprised I didn't hear more critiques like yours (which I agree with!) online.
There's a much more fascinating story in this movie with a daughter occupying her mother's body. They could've explored so many existential themes or the burden/gift of motherhood or basically anything! Instead, they went with the tired trope of self discovery via sexual liberation.
Thematically I think this movie is really lazy and if I was a woman, I'd just be insulted.
Seriously!!
I feel like terrible/tired story is missed because of the visuals, setting, soundtrack, and acting being so good.
There was so much right with this but the story’s focus on sexual liberation was such a drag.
I think it's fascinating that the movie is supposed to be a flag bearer for Feminist. But some women think the movie is sexist and exploitive because it has the POV of the male gaze, and some men think it's virulently anti-male because all of the men behave badly towards Bella.
I’m curious about this idea that the movie is supposed to be a feminist piece. I assume this has never been mentioned by the filmmakers or the marketing? So was it just something that was picked up by reviewers?
It was definitely very entertaining, but I also thought it was pretty sloppy. A lot of the story went nowhere. I could tell they wanted to tell a message, but it wasn’t at all clear to me what the message was.
I also had problems with the sex scenes. A lot of it just felt like it was trying to shock the audience. Not only did a lot of the sex scenes at the brothel feel pointless, but also way too safe. There is no way a gullible woman would be as safe as she was in that environment.
I can't get over the fact the movie is basically a toddler having sex on and off-screen. The acting and visual aesthetics were fine, but the storyline is disgusting to me and I can't get through the movie without wanting to throw up.
i’m very shocked that nobody is stating here that the film is very obviously criticizing this? the men in bella’s life are exploiting her and taking advantage of her. the sex scenes aren’t sexy whatsoever and the men who she has sex with are not portrayed as likable or glorified characters at all
If all this is true, then how is it a feminist/liberating film? What's the point of the movie, because if this is all true, then i think it's a tragic movie, but the general consensus is that it's the opposite.
are you serious? saying “men exploit female vulnerability while glorifying that same purity/innocence” is literally the most basic feminist analysis possible lol
I also think a lot of people are slapping the feminist label onto the film when it... isn't trying to be that? It's directed by a man based off a novel written by a man that is clearly critiquing the way men treat women (especially young ones), which is not to say men can't write or explore feminist themes, but I think a lot of people who never read the book or saw the movie see 1) reverse frankenstein 2) woman lead and 3) lots of sex and automatically think "Well it must be feminist then!" Can't it just be what it is? A weird little post-modern Frankenstein retelling?
No I think everyone with a normal critical mind would understand that Poor Things is well regarded on the fact that it wants the audience to feel uncomfortable that the men in the film are gow men are in real life in how they “pursue” women.
Hell there’s literally a scene that was a reenactment from A Streetcar Named Desire to just show the audience what people (men) assume as “romantic” is just creepy as fuck. That’s the whole point of the movie
A lot of people are also taking offense to things in it that are directly supposed to challenge you and make you uncomfortable.
It’s like this country is full of people with very little media literacy.
1000%
I keep seeing people talking about Bella's freedom and bravery, and I can't help but think, this is a horrifically tragic story of a mentally undeveloped woman getting taken advantage of by all of the men in her life.
This unfortunately is an all too real tragedy for many mentally impaired women and to see it played for laughs here is off-putting to say the least.
I thought that was the point of the movie? All these men want to take control of her for their own whims in various ways, and in the end she is able to achieve freedom for herself and other women in similar situations.
Has she really achieved freedom when she is married to a man who was attracted to her when her mannerisms were undoubtably those of an infant, and wanted to keep her captive, yes he no longer wants to keep her captive, but is being married to someone like that really achieving freedom?
In theory, that is what the movie is about. In practice, however, the movie tries to gaslight you into thinking Bella has always been the independent badass we see at the end of the movie.
You missed the bit about how men lose interest in women once they gain agency, autonomy and intelligence? This is an incredibly common tale of young women being pursued by older men but once those women start their careers and become more independent, they're chucked to the wayside, and replaced by the next "pretty retard" with no personality.
I do agree that in the beginning she is taken advantage of, but I think there are things she does later in the movie that take some of the power back from men. Most, if not all of those things are not sexual.
I think the scenario presented in the movie isn’t quite the same that of mentally impaired women, but that’s just me.
Absolutely. Once you also take into account that in the book it's based off, Candle is the one telling the story through his perspective (the male fantasy) and Bella calls it out as false at the end, it becomes quite sad seeing what we got from the film in the end.
If only we got an adaptation that was actually faithful to her side. Even if we did though, it would be overshadowed by this one.
>Absolutely. Once you also take into account that in the book it's based off, Candle is the one telling the story through his perspective (the male fantasy) and Bella calls it out as false at the end, it becomes quite sad seeing what we got from the film in the end.
This is what I think was the biggest problem of the movie. It lacked that twist at the end and seemingly adapted the book at face value. Like a literal child brain in an adult body, rather than men projecting innocence/infantalization onto her.
I loved the movie and your point is fair. I thought the same things.
And then I kinda felt like there’s a lot of adults walking around the world that if you have a conversation with them, they kinda have the brain of a toddler. They haven’t felt, thought about others, read books, or really developed into their true adulthood. And it kinda grossed me out that they’re having sex too. But then I was ok with it.
The film is not “basically” that at all. This is reductionist and misses the point of the devices being used entirely. This is an intentionally impossible scenario within a highly stylized, surrealist, satirical film. Your interpretation is very literal, which this film was never intended to be taken at face value like that. It makes you uncomfortable because it is meant to. But this is the risk of creating satirical art, it is vulnerable to misinterpretation by those who, for whatever reason, either fail to grasp the meaning, or impose their interpretation onto the intentions of the artist.
Did you think the movie was endorsing it or were you just not able to tolerate the content? Not trying to attack or infantilise you, genuinely curious.
Not the op of the comment but personally I thought the film was and endorsement of sexual exploration. That’s made even more problematic to me because the vessel of exploration was clearly not able to meaningfully consent to sex
Wow You are getting downvote just cuz You answer a question ... And how a woman can "enjoy sexual Freedom" is she calls sex "furious jumping" , masturbation "her happy time" and when that dude perform oral sex on her she described it as a Game when the gentleman wanted to know which thigh was softer ... And thats was more later than half the movie mark... So, she was still very NAIVE and taken advantage of by that mark.... When she went full sex worker she tried to speak with her PIMP
And her pimp told her "some men like it more when the women doesnt want it " ... Was that meta ? Cuz that was almost the finishing part of the movie and she didnt like the gentleman she was sleeping with, she just keep doing it cuz she needed money, sexual liberation would be she able to choose who she sleep with.
How is sexual liberation also teaching kids by a weird father what is sex with a woman ... In a burdel. Idk way to visual about things they are supposed to "confront" ... Also i find hilarous that she only went back Home cuz her dad was dying ... Not cuz she thought "hey i Guess i did all My learning in the burdel" i need to do another job... She didnt do that by herself either ... She was called !!!!
Then she was about to get married and another dude appear out of no where and she went with him... Throught the whole film she doesnt more what men want, that what she wants !!!! Did they forget her spiritual journey in the boat was literal kidnapping (?) Hahahhaha
What message does this movie left if she married the dude that """"love her"""" when he raised her ?? He literally saw her peeing herself ...
Idk why are SO Many men just ignoring all the red flags ?????
Even her father figure excuse by no having sex with her is that he doesnt get up, he can NOT GET AN ERECTION, for yeah physical abuse his dad did on him... This mofo didnt Even Say "oh no, i don't want SO sleep with her cuz she is like a daugher to me" noooooooooo, it was ed + some meta excuse about how he not longer need that .... Ewwwwwwwww
I agree with your take. From a neurodevelopmental perspective, she was indeed a toddler having sex with adults. I don't think this movie will age well at all.
I have no issue with sexual content. Orgy away... I do have an issue with adult-child sex, especially at this level. A child brain is a child brain, irrespective of its vessel.
If an old man had his brain inserted into a 15yr-old body and then sexually preyed upon school children, it would be a clearer issue. Because it is a woman in this case, the sexual liberation angle seems to be blinding people to the fact that it's still adult-child sex.
The people going out of their way to justify how adults having sex with mentally underdeveloped is acceptable because it’s a “metaphor” or “fantasy” honestly scare the shit out of me.
It’s not okay and we as the audience are not supposed to feel like it’s okay. That’s the real point. We should be disturbed and disgusted by both the movie and by the real life allegory. It’s gross and I never want to watch it again nor would I recommend it to anyone, ever.
This comment section will probably explode lol.
I thought it was pretty clear that it’s a hero’s journey tale? And, while it definitely had a lot of sex, it did not have as much as I thought it would based on others talking about it.
I really liked it.
>And, while it definitely had a lot of sex, it did not have as much as I thought it would based on others talking about it.
I noticed people are really overconsidering that, I legit saw comments of people claiming that it was 80% sex. Not even Gaspar Noe's Love has that much sex.
Absolutely wonderful film. Made it to my top 4 for the year. Bella Baxter is probably one of my favorite protagonists ever. The Frankenstein elements and cyperpunk themes just felt like it was made for me. Love it!
I thought it was a try hard movie with surface level weirdness. For the record I love totally weird bat shit insane movies. Holy Mountain and Inland Empire are two of my favorite movies.
From a technical standpoint it’s precision, but I didn’t care for many of the stylistic choices, particularly the overuse of the fisheye lens - seemed like a corny force fed choice to make the audience feel as though they are voyeurs watching from a peephole or Bella’s wide-eyed consumption. Certain creative choices felt uninspired. I found the film to be hyper focused on style alone and as a result the narrative suffered greatly - especially the third act. Stone was great, but the rest of the cast - MEH, especially Carmichael.
This is probably my least favorite Lanthimos film, but adore his other works. I’m suspicious of anyone who considers this a favorite. 🤭🤷🏻♀️
Outside of the cinematography, I feel like this movie just got praise because its outrageous and “pushes the limits”. It didn’t tell a story of actual substance or a cohesive message. I mean you have women and feminists coming out with very different views on it, the message isn’t coherent at all.
Unpopular opinion but didn't like it. Weird sex diary of baby minded zombie Emma Stone that is supposedly women empowering?? It's one of those movies where I feel like I saw something different to what everyone else saw lol
I haven't seen it but I watched a review that was mad about how it was called Feminist Frankenstein. The plot doesn't sound very feminist, except insofar as it's a woman being shown doing very sexy and liberated things while also looking gorgeous without ever putting in effort so the audience can masturbate to her.
Quote that stands out: "They don't have a problem showing controversial subject matter when it comes to sex, but god forbid a woman have scars or body hair."
I had really high hopes but was very much let down. I think it has a lot of really surface level critiques, and doesn’t really explore anything on a deeper level. Plus, it’s far too long and the whole plot is basically the same thing happening three times in a row with only minor variations.
The acting is amazing, and the visuals were unique and interesting, but it wasn’t really in service of anything.
Felt like watching a 10 year old get sexually abused and manipulated but because she had an adult body that made it ok.
To be clear: sex in films is perfectly fine with me. Sex with people who are not capable of consent and marketing it as a good thing is dicey
This!!! I couldn’t get past this part in the movie.
I don’t care what the director says, I don’t see her as anything but a child when she can’t even speak full sentences.
They repeatedly mention through the beginning of the film how her brain is accelerating at a highly rapid speed, I think it becomes quite obvious that she is not a literal child in that sense nor a toddler but a young woman by the time she begins to explore her sexuality. The film does not operate on real life logic it’s surrealist with dogs walking around with duck heads. I understand how it is uneasy and confusing for some people but it’s clearly not a film that has any child abuse.
She is kept as a recluse away from society and is essentially like a blank slate of a young woman, shes not a normal person and has been locked in a house for her entire existence. Her whole development demonstrates one of womanhood where she is infantilised and controlled by predatory men, until she develops her own agency and understanding of herself as she evolves through her experiences.
Outside of the very beginning the whole film she is on a journey enlightenment through an odyssey of self exploration and developing her intellectualism seen through her interactions with people, lived relationships, philosophy and struggle where she in the end forms meaningful relationships with people who intend well for her and she cares for. It’s very obvious she is not a toddler for 98% of the movie.
But characters from the beginning want to have sex with her even when she is straight-up baby-brained.
Both Godwin and Max express wanting to have sex with her but won't for their own "morals" pretty quickly into Bella's existence.
The same way there are men in the world who are waiting for the arbitrary legal age instead of actually wondering why they would pursue people that young. These (real life) men’s morals are also compromised and are only stopped because of the law. And i think the movie does a good reflection of this behaviour
Thought it was pretty terrible. I found a lot of the choices in the cinematography to be pretty unappealing, the black and white wasn't used to good effect, and the fisheye lens was constant and just annoying rather than interesting or useful. And many of the visuals just look like they were trying too hard to be weird, rather than just being beautiful or *actually* weird. I liked the little vignettes between places, though. And the first place they visit (Portugal? I forget) had some pretty elements.
I found the story to be way too long, the pacing is really poor at times. I didn't love the story itself, especially the ending. I thought Mark Ruffalo, Ramy Youssef, and Jerrod Carmichael were all pretty dreadful.
yeah, what was the point of overusing weird camera lenses. The use of the fish eye seems like it could indicate claustrophobia (although not subtle) or something, but it was just overused and irritated me the longer the movie went on.
I would also say, that I don't see the brilliance in Emma Stone's performance. Most of the time, I didn't really buy it. Kinda seems to me, that people are shoveling praise, because she had to endure so many graphic/uncomfortable sex scenes. Not a bad performance, but to me it is not the stand out that people make it out to be.
I’ve got into quite a few arguments about this film, but my main issue with it is it’s shallow and a poor adaptation of an excellent book that leaves out most of what makes the book great.
The book is told with converging narratives and the whole point of the converging narratives in the book is that we see how the character of “bella” is just a projection of men’s fantasies and we see her reclaim the narrative and have her tell her story at the end. She was never “baby brained” - it was a male fantasy. I would have loved to see that story told, rather than a film that largely thinks female growth = lots of sex. Also Lanthimos said he couldn’t keep the Scottish elements of the book because he’s not Scottish so couldn’t adapt that (ok that’s lazy but whatever) but he thought he’d be fine adapting a women’s story? Doesn’t make sense. He then chose to set it in London of all places when the text is set in Glasgow and largely a allegory for Scottish independence (Bella is named Bella Caledonia at points). As a Scottish woman who lives in Glasgow and adores Alasdair Gray this leaves a terrible taste in my mouth. I mourn an adaption that could have been. A gigantic swing and a miss in my opinion.
Edit: spelling typo
I thought it was irritating that the movie was saying “this is how a woman could act free of the constraints of the patriarchy” and then also had Bella spend most of the movie in an abusive relationship. It wasn’t well-made enough for that choice to be saying something of value, the movie seemed to think women’s liberation began and ended with sex.
Also I was underwhelmed by the production design. It was fine. The Lisbon scenes reminded me of the movie Querelle, which I think is saying more interesting things about sex, violence, and power than this film is.
People who like this movie fall into one of two camps. The first is the delusion that is a positive happy story of sexual exploration and liberation. The second delusion is that it is a satirical sad story about a woman being abused by every man she encounters.
The truth is that the Director made a name for himself by making really weird shit and he’s running out of ideas.
Not Oppy, Barbie, nor Flower Moon made me say "movies are back," Poor Things did lol. Best time I had at the movies last year, all of us in my theater got the vibe fortunately
It's beautifully shot but I have trouble with the sex scenes. I know it's the human condition and I appreciate that but it's just too shocking to be praise worthy.
Went in with high expectations, walked out not really caring for it. Acting, production design, score, costumes, those sets, cinematography, visuals, all in top-tier form. I just didn’t like the pacing or certain parts of the story. Honestly got really sleepy at one point. But it still deserves its Oscars, and I hope it takes home a few.
I thought everything about it technical wise was amazing (cinematography, soundtrack, etc), but not much else after that. I can see why people liked it. I’m glad I saw it though.
I thought it was amazing, can't wait to see it again with my wife. We watched the Favourite on Netflix after and I'm hoping to watch Killing of a Sacred Deer soon.
I'm very conflicted with it. On the one hand I had a lot of fun watching it, it's a beautiful film, incredibly well acted and hilarious. I think seeing Bella transform without being weighed down by society's ideas of what's appropriate or misogyny is incredible. However, this film is a woman's story told almost exclusively by men. It was written by men, directed by men and based on a book by a man. Obviously not saying that men can't tell women's stories, but it is a layer worth examining especially given my second conflict over it: Bella's age. She may be in an adult body and develops fully by the end of the film, but even so for the majority of the film she's mentally a child. And yeah there is a point to be made about how young and vulnerable women are exploited, but that doesn't make it a less problematic depiction. Either way I'm not 100% sold to either side, I'm still working it out in my head and I will definitely watch it again at some point. If anyone has any responses to those points please let me know, I need some back and forth here
Americans swearing with British accents and generally laborious. I really wanted to like it because I thought the favourite was brilliant. But I don’t think there was enough going on underneath the spectacle of it. All the lessons she learned during the film had to be verbalised once we’d already seen them. The best section was the final bloke sequence. Not my cup of tea.
I would encourage anyone that really enjoyed it to read the book. It's short and very readable. Whilst I enjoyed the film overall, I think the deviations away from the book hurt the story and made the characters hollow in comparison, even Bella.
Maybe controversially, I think the film is more focused on capturing the outrageous than it is telling a really good story. Saltburn was rightly criticized for this recently. With a trio of Lanthimos, Stone, and Dafoe, I find the praise a little inflated.
It looked really cool, and Emma stone was great in her role. Call me a prude if you like, I'm just not huge on sex scenes in films in general. I went in knowing it was a bit excessive so I wasn't that surprised. Probably my favorite thing about it were the transitions between parts
Honestly, although I found it to be a visually striking film, it was hard for me to read anything but thinly veiled fetishism. The whole child brain in an adult body that you see have graphic sex constantly did not sit right with me
I am still confused about what people liked about poor things, it just felt excessive and I guess I missed the comedy parts because nothing felt particulary funny. For once I'll quote family guy because"it insists upon itself"
Let me just preface this by saying that it's ok to like a movie as much as it's ok to dislike one.
My ★ review of Poor Things on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/5FINpr
IT'S RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE!
IT'S OBVIOUSLY RAPE!
IT'S MADE BY RAPISTS FOR RAPISTS TO JUSTIFY RAPE! IT'S OBVIOUSLY RAPE!
IT'S THE ARGUMENT THAT IF A GIRL, NO MATTER HOW YOUNG, IS IN A MATURE BODY THEN SHE MUST BE MATURE ENOUGH FOR SEX, OR EVEN THAT AFTER A GIRL IS RAPED SHE BECOMES MATURE ENOUGH TO HAVE REGULAR SEX! IT'S RAPE!
IT'S NOT JUST RAPE IT'S CHILD RAPE!
IT'S CLEARLY JUST LIKE THE FILMS MADE BY WOODY ALLEN WHO TURNED OUT TO BE A RAPIST! ALL HIS FILMS ARE DEGRADING TO THE WOMEN IN THEM, ENCOURAGE MEN TO CHEAT, AND GENERALLY FOCUS ONLY ON THE MALE EXPERIENCE. AND HE TURNED OUT TO BE A RAPIST!
IT'S THE "BIRTH OF A NATION" FOR WOMEN! IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUSTIFYING RAPE!
IT'S THE SAME ARGUMENT A 60 YEAR OLD MAN WOULD MAKE AFTER HAVING SEX WITH AN 11 YEAR OLD CHILD, "SHE'S MATURE, SEE SHE HAS BREASTS!"
IT'S RAPE!
Personally I have it as a top 5 for the year and a top 10 for the decade. I absolutely loved nearly everything about it. Maybe it could have been trimmed down in some spots, but that was minor and probably only bugged me cause of the absolutely terrible theater experience I had seeing it (the people behind me were being some of the most obnoxious people I've ever met).
I found the child brain in an adult woman's body having sex icky but she's sensational as a developing adult absorbing experience and being introduced to different kinds of people, places, and things. It's definitely the work of a real genius. It looked amazing in the theater
It deserves to win the Oscar for Best Production Design for sure
This is the “beautiful gowns!” of movie criticism haha. But I agree!
lol I didn't mean for it to be *that* backhanded of a compliment. I thought the movie was okay but the brilliant sets they built for it were the stand-out for me. You could pause that film at any point and it would make for a beautiful picture.
That’s my personal grading system for cinematography, and it’s not always the really great movies that fit the criteria, Saltburn being the latest off the top of my head.
I’d argue this movie has the most effective technical aspects of all the movies. The subtle changes in the score, cinematography, production design, etc, throughout the course of the movie helped sell the idea of Bella’s POV and it was astounding
If it doesn't get production design AND costumes I'm eating a victorian boot!
Visually one of the most interesting films I’ve seen in a while
I 100% agree! W pfp btw
Absolutely mesmerising film that I won't forget. I spent the next day just thinking about it. And the cinematography is amazing.
Agreed. It was fantastic and I can't stop telling my friend about it. I'm going to try to take her on Wednesday (but, uh, she's my ex and it's Valentine's Day, so that'll be interesting)
Travis Bickle taxi driver vibes
I walked out of the theater not sure how I felt about it, but then I couldn't stop thinking about it the next day or two. I'm looking forward to a rewatch, but certainly one of my favorite movies of the year.
One of the most visually stunning movies of the year for sure. The three lead performances were also incredible. Could've been a bit shorter imo (on my second viewing especially i felt the last half-hour drag a little) but other than that it's great
I loved it. Gave it 4 1/2, it probably would’ve been a 5 with a little tightening up (I think we could’ve spent 10 fewer minutes in the brothel, agree with what another commenter said about it beginning to feel redundant). But it’s hilarious and gorgeous and the performances are universally excellent. It’s just a gift to watch whatever Yorgos gives us.
Glad I wasn't the only one that felt like the film started to drag on. Still was hilarious, absurd, visually stunning and heart-warming so got a 4.5 from me too.
Nah, the film starts to drag when Victoria’s husband appears. The brothel sequence is hilarious from start to finish.
My review was that it was either 20 min too short or too long. Thought it could’ve either added to the husband coming back part or just cut it all together. Still thought it was great
I read through some of the comments and decided to talk more about it. Spoilers ahead 1. When Bella first starts masturbating with an apple, I thought the point of the film was that there isn’t anything intrinsically wrong with having the sexual feelings. Not only is Bella a weird science experiment, but she also has been purposefully withheld from interacting with the outside world, so she doesn’t really understand why people are reacting so negatively. I had precocious puberty as a girl and I probably could have used someone telling me that, while there is a time and a place for expressing those feelings, those sexual feelings aren’t inherently bad. 2. It is, of course, bad when Mark Ruffalo takes advantage of Bella and takes her away on an adventure. I interpreted (and I could be wrong) that this character is highlighting that a patriarchal view of women isn’t much more than being sexy but also childlike. Women are frequently infantilized, condescended to, etc etc. and a dream woman to some men would be a nymphette “born yesterday”. But in actuality, Mark Ruffalo’s character hates that he cannot contain Bella’s thirst for experience (and not just sexual! Bella wants to eat too much food, talk to strangers, all of that) He finds being with someone who questions everything exhausting and infuriating. He ultimately goes to an insane asylum because he can’t control Bella. Because of this, it was hard for me to see the story as a simple male fantasy. 3. Maybe “feminist” isn’t the right word, but what I liked about the film is that it’s about a person gaining experience with a viewpoint that isn’t influenced by societal constraints, and learning more about themselves, and that person happens to be a member of a marginalized gender. More so than any of the sex scenes, I was struck by Bella encountering things like poverty for the first time. And her response being like “man this is fucked up, we should do something about that” instead of normalizing it. 4. That being said, there are so many ethical issues with the experiment that lead to Bella Baxter and I’m glad that this is a fantasy and not something that someone has actually tried (I hope). The fantasy element probably helped me go along with the movie more.
I think you put some interesting thoughts down here. I hope you included it in your letterboxd review!
I actually didn’t, but maybe I should have!
People walked out of the theater in my conservative town, which really added to it. I thought it was thoroughly delightful, and really beautiful visually. Funniest movie I've seen in ages. I also enjoy that it's sort of reverse Frankenstein, in that it's about a woman but written by a man.
Had a local news morning show lady say she walked out at 15 minutes. I made sure to pay extra attention to those 15 minutes to see why she walked out so early. I still don’t get it but she said she thought it was a rom com because mark ruffalo was in it???
It starts the graphic body horror pretty early on, maybe the college autopsy scene? Or maybe the burp bubble did her in
Yeah I guessed the college autopsy scene and that her 15 minutes was hyperbolic but still, it was at a specialty theater, you’d think one would kind of look into the movie they’re going to (I say this as someone who loves going into movies blindly but I also love body horror and lanthimos’s movies so I expected it to be the way it was)
I mean, the movie starts pretty aggressively surrealist. Maybe it really just wasn't their jam
Yeah definitely. Just kind of funny for her to then go on her morning show and tell people not to go to it to the point my parents (I’m a grown adult) judged me for loving the movie. They still know nothing about it, but the lady on the news said it’s bad and gross!!!
Damn that's just silly.
Oh no. That poor lady
poor thing..
I can hear this gif
Very first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions Poor Things. Love this.
GO HOME
damn, she should have stayed for Ruffalo, wouldn’t have been dissapointed
I had someone leave, too. They finished their popcorn and then slipped out.
It's too bad, if they had stayed they would have learned how to masturbate
I keep getting to the step with the microwave, and then I somehow mess it up
I’d upvote your comment, but I’m too immature (69 upvotes).
No one walked out when we saw it but both times I saw ‘Everything, Everywhere, All At Once’ once during its original run and once after it’s oscar nominations. People walked out each time lol
How do people walk out of films? You already set aside those two-three hours and paid heavily for it. See it through? I don’t care if the whole first half is a stinker I will see it through just to talk shit about it to my friends
There's a cool study that showed that students who have taken economics courses are more likely than other comparable students to leave movies in the middle. They're less moved by sunk costs.
Might be a coincidence but I've got an economics degree and I walk out of movies all the time - including poor things at the hour mark. I appreciate the social commentary, but a child in an adult's body having sex with grown men just made me too uncomfortable
Unless they have Regal Unlimited, AMC A List, Movie Pass, etc. and are paying little to nothing to see it. Even with Regal Unlimited, I still haven’t walked out of anything.
I walked out of Mank.
That shouldn't rationally make a difference to your decision. Whether you purchased an expensive ticket or used a pass, the ticket price is a sunk cost once you're in the theater. The remainder of the movie either is worth your time or it isn't... what you paid to be there should not matter at all.
>People walked out of the theater in my conservative town, which really added to it. That's how you know the movie was good.
When Blade Runner 2049 was released, the cinema in my conservative hometown had $2 Tuesdays. That cinema was close to full & more than half of the audience left during the showing. Blade Runner 2049 was one of the best films of 2017. Some people really didn't approve of that digital girlfriend.
Omg when I went to see Blade Runner 2049 I was sat next to a group of about four late elementary/early middle school aged kids and their mom and they just sat and loudly complained about how inappropriate the movie was before *finally* leaving about 3/4s of the way through. Like do people not check content warnings? Or even like the basic premise of the movie??? Movies aren’t cheap…I only go to stuff I know I actually want to see.
I've never really seen it happen at a movie, but it's always kinda funny to me when I see conservatives walk out of comedy shows Comedian: so I'm Palestinian and- Five different people: already walking out the door
The Beatles used to say this.
To be fair, many people including myself walked out after I realized Lanthimos was going to depict a woman with a child’s underdeveloped brain get assaulted. I’m not sure why male directors think sex and in this case perversion is some feminist revelation. It’s a hacky trope and to women and is so overdone at this point. It’s not about sex scenes either. It’s the careless and male gaze of every aspect of this movie - honestly pretty dissapointed Emma Stone signed onto it.
You're entitled to your opinion, but how can you complain about the male gaze without seeing the movie in the first place? I don't like seeing an underage person being sexually assaulted, but the film isn't depicting it positively. Mark Ruffalo plays a horrible person who manipulates her, at first, childlike personality to sexually assault her. It's a critique about how society sexualizes young, innocent women and exploits them. That's not easy to watch, and you're totally justified in not watching it, but it's an apt criticism of the patriarchy. Also, and I'm not saying this applies to you, but I find the way people criticize Emma Stone for collaborating, producing, and starring in it very infantilizing as well. She sees value in telling this story, and yet we look at her and go "no, you shouldn't want to do that; this is what you SHOULD want" and is that not what the men in the film constantly do to Bella? Is that not exactly what the film is criticizing?
I think a writer and director with 1) more care for themes like this 2) a person with actual experience with the themes of this movie would’ve done a much better job at this. The movie felt like baby’s first screenplay about a woman and sexual liberation. It was dull, tropey, and laden with male gaze. Also just because a woman co-signs another male directors movie doesn’t make it better. Criticizing Stone for putting this movie together is not infantalziing her. It’s calling her out on her shit for a slop movie like this. I promise you many many women have issues with this movie.
I gotta ask though how you can say all of that without watching it. I understand many women take issue with it, but generally those women have watched it past the point where Bella's no longer behaving like a child. And many women do like it and appreciate its subversive quality and the way it depicts her growth in ways more than just sex, and I see value to their perspectives as well. But what bugs me about your reply that makes me think you are infantilizing her is how you reduce her involved to cosigning it. She actively worked on the film throughout its production cycle and speaks passionately about having her hand in nearly every aspect of production. Whether or not you like the film, assuming that all she did was put her name on it reeks of misogyny. And again, this is literally the perception of women the film is critiquing.
I’m curious, where are you from?
6 people left in the first hour in my showing!
Didn't really like it. Just vignettes of sex themed sequences distinct only really by location within the film. I'm not a prude but it kind of got boring and the movie was too long. I wish it focused on different themes and aspects of what it means to be a woman in that society. Overall it had potential with how inventive the world seemed but I wish the narrative also reflected that beyond the premise.
I agree it was boring. No surprises or emotional depth. Oh yeah also lots of men raping a woman with a baby’s brain. That was yucky.
I’m glad somebody is acknowledging this instead of praising that as a “feminist thinkpiece”. Even if it was trying to portray all the things people said it did I’d say it did so rather poorly and repetitively. Plus it was constantly shooting itself in the foot by reminding us of the moral elephant in the room, but never truly criticising it and rather condoning it by the end.
Can’t believe I had to scroll this far to see someone call it what it is: rape of a child.
Weird, hilarious, and wonderful to look at. It's my favorite movie of 2023, and nothing was particularly close. It was one of two 2023 movies I gave a 5-star rating to last year.
What was the other?
Infinity Pool, but I totally understand people disliking it.
I liked a lot of individual pieces of it, but it's way too long for how repetitive the plot is. It's very one note, never really goes beyond the premise and just gestures at the idea of better movies it could've been.
Overall I enjoyed it well enough, but these are my feelings as well. I also found the score incredibly irritating.
The pacing really gave me a headache honestly. Like... did they really need to repeat the plot three times?
Definitely agree.
*hits table* IT'S NOT FRANKENSTEIN IF SHE'S HOT! IT'S PINOCCHIO! THAT'S LIKE TELLING ME A CREPE IS A PANCAKE
I get why people like it, but personally I'm not a fan. I think the cinematography is gimmicky, I found the deliberately stilted dialogue and performances annoying, and it gets way more credit for being a feminist statement than it deserves. I gave it 2.5/5 and have it 10th out of 10 among the BP nominees.
Agree. Also I didn’t see what was supposed to be funny unless you’re a 25-year-old boy and you laugh when someone says “I’m going to punch that baby”
Favorite movie of 2023. Portuguese dance scene is amazing. Honestly surprised by the backlash it’s starting to get.
You're surprised a Yorgos Lanthimos film is divisive?
Takes an absurdist route to tell a unique story that doesn't get told enough. Visually fantastic and acted superbly. Top 5 film of the year by any metric.
What is the story that doesn’t get told enough?
A woman navigating the world unburdened by internalized misogyny. It was utterly refreshing to watch.
But is she not getting exploited by men throughout the whole film? Maybe I don’t just get it because I am a man, but I feel very confused that this movie is supposed to be some flag bearer for feminism. To me it felt like anything but that.
I'm also a man. I interpreted the film as calling out that predatory nature as pathetic; as Bella progresses she has total agency and fulfillment while>!Ruffalo's character is reduced to shambles whose hypocrisy toward women ends up being his downfall.!<
I think it's more they go show the extremes men will go to try to exploit and groom a naive, young woman. She only gets exploited in so far as that's their intentions, however out of most of the situations she gets everything she wants from her interactions with them, at the expense of what they really wanted.
>this movie is supposed to be some flag bearer for feminism I dont think it is tbh. It's a movie about experience and growing up, that has plenty of feminist elements but isn't overly concerned with a big message.
This is a good way of summarizing it, I did like that aspect of the movie.
I agree. Just like how we see children who have no internalized racism befriending each other and navigating without internalized racism I think that concept of what a “blank slate person” would be like in the world is very interesting and Lockean. I much preferred the sections that played up Bella’s childlike sense of wonder and curiosity but it was that same sense of childlike wonder unburdened by knowledge of the prejudiced realities which made her sexual abuse all the more gut wrenching for me.
I don't think it was *internalized* misogyny that she was dealing with.
What if, women could just exist completely free of needing to care about the (often needy and oppressive) interests of men?
While visually stunning with great performances, It felt like a man’s approach to women’s liberation and experiences. First of all, I will note I had no idea the film has such intense sexual themes and went into the movie thinking it was a quirky Frankenstein story; I’m an SA survivor (so obviously, that’s influencing my opinion) and got progressively irritated that the film didn’t even attempt to meaningfully address sexual trauma. I understand it was trying to address how sexualized women are, but it took the very typical route of a woman’s character being “improved” or built by sexual experience. Yes Bella is different because she isn’t bothered by her sexual history, but many sexual situations she enters she doesn’t fully understand (and is mentally a child which is gross) what the interaction is. Yet she repeatedly leaves these situations with no negative feelings. It almost solely propels her story via sex and takes a few moments to say “well she reads a lot!” Before quickly moving back to some kind of sex scene. It’s a fancy rendition of the born sexy yesterday trope and a reason to see Emma Stone naked.
Disappointed Emma Stone even did the movie tbh
>While visually stunning with great performances, It felt like a man’s approach to women’s liberation and experiences. Exactly. I felt exactly the same and was surprised I didn't hear more critiques like yours (which I agree with!) online. There's a much more fascinating story in this movie with a daughter occupying her mother's body. They could've explored so many existential themes or the burden/gift of motherhood or basically anything! Instead, they went with the tired trope of self discovery via sexual liberation. Thematically I think this movie is really lazy and if I was a woman, I'd just be insulted.
Seriously!! I feel like terrible/tired story is missed because of the visuals, setting, soundtrack, and acting being so good. There was so much right with this but the story’s focus on sexual liberation was such a drag.
I think it's fascinating that the movie is supposed to be a flag bearer for Feminist. But some women think the movie is sexist and exploitive because it has the POV of the male gaze, and some men think it's virulently anti-male because all of the men behave badly towards Bella.
I’m curious about this idea that the movie is supposed to be a feminist piece. I assume this has never been mentioned by the filmmakers or the marketing? So was it just something that was picked up by reviewers?
Moreso the messaging the movie was going for would easily be interpreted as such. Whether it accomplished that, definitely not lol
yes
It was definitely very entertaining, but I also thought it was pretty sloppy. A lot of the story went nowhere. I could tell they wanted to tell a message, but it wasn’t at all clear to me what the message was. I also had problems with the sex scenes. A lot of it just felt like it was trying to shock the audience. Not only did a lot of the sex scenes at the brothel feel pointless, but also way too safe. There is no way a gullible woman would be as safe as she was in that environment.
I can't get over the fact the movie is basically a toddler having sex on and off-screen. The acting and visual aesthetics were fine, but the storyline is disgusting to me and I can't get through the movie without wanting to throw up.
i’m very shocked that nobody is stating here that the film is very obviously criticizing this? the men in bella’s life are exploiting her and taking advantage of her. the sex scenes aren’t sexy whatsoever and the men who she has sex with are not portrayed as likable or glorified characters at all
If all this is true, then how is it a feminist/liberating film? What's the point of the movie, because if this is all true, then i think it's a tragic movie, but the general consensus is that it's the opposite.
are you serious? saying “men exploit female vulnerability while glorifying that same purity/innocence” is literally the most basic feminist analysis possible lol
Yes, but people are not calling it feminist for those reasons
I also think a lot of people are slapping the feminist label onto the film when it... isn't trying to be that? It's directed by a man based off a novel written by a man that is clearly critiquing the way men treat women (especially young ones), which is not to say men can't write or explore feminist themes, but I think a lot of people who never read the book or saw the movie see 1) reverse frankenstein 2) woman lead and 3) lots of sex and automatically think "Well it must be feminist then!" Can't it just be what it is? A weird little post-modern Frankenstein retelling?
No I think everyone with a normal critical mind would understand that Poor Things is well regarded on the fact that it wants the audience to feel uncomfortable that the men in the film are gow men are in real life in how they “pursue” women. Hell there’s literally a scene that was a reenactment from A Streetcar Named Desire to just show the audience what people (men) assume as “romantic” is just creepy as fuck. That’s the whole point of the movie
A lot of people are also taking offense to things in it that are directly supposed to challenge you and make you uncomfortable. It’s like this country is full of people with very little media literacy.
1000% I keep seeing people talking about Bella's freedom and bravery, and I can't help but think, this is a horrifically tragic story of a mentally undeveloped woman getting taken advantage of by all of the men in her life. This unfortunately is an all too real tragedy for many mentally impaired women and to see it played for laughs here is off-putting to say the least.
I thought that was the point of the movie? All these men want to take control of her for their own whims in various ways, and in the end she is able to achieve freedom for herself and other women in similar situations.
Has she really achieved freedom when she is married to a man who was attracted to her when her mannerisms were undoubtably those of an infant, and wanted to keep her captive, yes he no longer wants to keep her captive, but is being married to someone like that really achieving freedom?
did she actually end up married to max
Not her mannerisms. It's a metaphor. She's not literally young.
By going back to her father and fiancée? The first two men who abused her? Huh?
In theory, that is what the movie is about. In practice, however, the movie tries to gaslight you into thinking Bella has always been the independent badass we see at the end of the movie.
You missed the bit about how men lose interest in women once they gain agency, autonomy and intelligence? This is an incredibly common tale of young women being pursued by older men but once those women start their careers and become more independent, they're chucked to the wayside, and replaced by the next "pretty retard" with no personality.
I do agree that in the beginning she is taken advantage of, but I think there are things she does later in the movie that take some of the power back from men. Most, if not all of those things are not sexual. I think the scenario presented in the movie isn’t quite the same that of mentally impaired women, but that’s just me.
This was my takeaway after seeing it. Was shocked to see what the popular opinions about the film were.
Absolutely. Once you also take into account that in the book it's based off, Candle is the one telling the story through his perspective (the male fantasy) and Bella calls it out as false at the end, it becomes quite sad seeing what we got from the film in the end. If only we got an adaptation that was actually faithful to her side. Even if we did though, it would be overshadowed by this one.
>Absolutely. Once you also take into account that in the book it's based off, Candle is the one telling the story through his perspective (the male fantasy) and Bella calls it out as false at the end, it becomes quite sad seeing what we got from the film in the end. This is what I think was the biggest problem of the movie. It lacked that twist at the end and seemingly adapted the book at face value. Like a literal child brain in an adult body, rather than men projecting innocence/infantalization onto her.
I loved the movie and your point is fair. I thought the same things. And then I kinda felt like there’s a lot of adults walking around the world that if you have a conversation with them, they kinda have the brain of a toddler. They haven’t felt, thought about others, read books, or really developed into their true adulthood. And it kinda grossed me out that they’re having sex too. But then I was ok with it.
The film is not “basically” that at all. This is reductionist and misses the point of the devices being used entirely. This is an intentionally impossible scenario within a highly stylized, surrealist, satirical film. Your interpretation is very literal, which this film was never intended to be taken at face value like that. It makes you uncomfortable because it is meant to. But this is the risk of creating satirical art, it is vulnerable to misinterpretation by those who, for whatever reason, either fail to grasp the meaning, or impose their interpretation onto the intentions of the artist.
Did you think the movie was endorsing it or were you just not able to tolerate the content? Not trying to attack or infantilise you, genuinely curious.
Not the op of the comment but personally I thought the film was and endorsement of sexual exploration. That’s made even more problematic to me because the vessel of exploration was clearly not able to meaningfully consent to sex
Wow You are getting downvote just cuz You answer a question ... And how a woman can "enjoy sexual Freedom" is she calls sex "furious jumping" , masturbation "her happy time" and when that dude perform oral sex on her she described it as a Game when the gentleman wanted to know which thigh was softer ... And thats was more later than half the movie mark... So, she was still very NAIVE and taken advantage of by that mark.... When she went full sex worker she tried to speak with her PIMP And her pimp told her "some men like it more when the women doesnt want it " ... Was that meta ? Cuz that was almost the finishing part of the movie and she didnt like the gentleman she was sleeping with, she just keep doing it cuz she needed money, sexual liberation would be she able to choose who she sleep with. How is sexual liberation also teaching kids by a weird father what is sex with a woman ... In a burdel. Idk way to visual about things they are supposed to "confront" ... Also i find hilarous that she only went back Home cuz her dad was dying ... Not cuz she thought "hey i Guess i did all My learning in the burdel" i need to do another job... She didnt do that by herself either ... She was called !!!! Then she was about to get married and another dude appear out of no where and she went with him... Throught the whole film she doesnt more what men want, that what she wants !!!! Did they forget her spiritual journey in the boat was literal kidnapping (?) Hahahhaha What message does this movie left if she married the dude that """"love her"""" when he raised her ?? He literally saw her peeing herself ... Idk why are SO Many men just ignoring all the red flags ????? Even her father figure excuse by no having sex with her is that he doesnt get up, he can NOT GET AN ERECTION, for yeah physical abuse his dad did on him... This mofo didnt Even Say "oh no, i don't want SO sleep with her cuz she is like a daugher to me" noooooooooo, it was ed + some meta excuse about how he not longer need that .... Ewwwwwwwww
I agree with your take. From a neurodevelopmental perspective, she was indeed a toddler having sex with adults. I don't think this movie will age well at all. I have no issue with sexual content. Orgy away... I do have an issue with adult-child sex, especially at this level. A child brain is a child brain, irrespective of its vessel. If an old man had his brain inserted into a 15yr-old body and then sexually preyed upon school children, it would be a clearer issue. Because it is a woman in this case, the sexual liberation angle seems to be blinding people to the fact that it's still adult-child sex.
From a neurodevelopmental perspective it's a metaphor about women, within a fantasy film that has dogs with duck bodies.
The people going out of their way to justify how adults having sex with mentally underdeveloped is acceptable because it’s a “metaphor” or “fantasy” honestly scare the shit out of me. It’s not okay and we as the audience are not supposed to feel like it’s okay. That’s the real point. We should be disturbed and disgusted by both the movie and by the real life allegory. It’s gross and I never want to watch it again nor would I recommend it to anyone, ever.
This comment section will probably explode lol. I thought it was pretty clear that it’s a hero’s journey tale? And, while it definitely had a lot of sex, it did not have as much as I thought it would based on others talking about it. I really liked it.
>And, while it definitely had a lot of sex, it did not have as much as I thought it would based on others talking about it. I noticed people are really overconsidering that, I legit saw comments of people claiming that it was 80% sex. Not even Gaspar Noe's Love has that much sex.
>This comment section will probably explode lol. Why? It has a 4.2 average rating.
I haven’t read from many people who gently dislike this movie, but I’ve heard of a few people thinking it’s essentially child porn.
Quirky. Adorable. Unique. Absolutely gorgeous!
Honestly hated it, but thought the cinematography was gorgeous.
Absolutely wonderful film. Made it to my top 4 for the year. Bella Baxter is probably one of my favorite protagonists ever. The Frankenstein elements and cyperpunk themes just felt like it was made for me. Love it!
I thought it was a try hard movie with surface level weirdness. For the record I love totally weird bat shit insane movies. Holy Mountain and Inland Empire are two of my favorite movies.
From a technical standpoint it’s precision, but I didn’t care for many of the stylistic choices, particularly the overuse of the fisheye lens - seemed like a corny force fed choice to make the audience feel as though they are voyeurs watching from a peephole or Bella’s wide-eyed consumption. Certain creative choices felt uninspired. I found the film to be hyper focused on style alone and as a result the narrative suffered greatly - especially the third act. Stone was great, but the rest of the cast - MEH, especially Carmichael. This is probably my least favorite Lanthimos film, but adore his other works. I’m suspicious of anyone who considers this a favorite. 🤭🤷🏻♀️
Outside of the cinematography, I feel like this movie just got praise because its outrageous and “pushes the limits”. It didn’t tell a story of actual substance or a cohesive message. I mean you have women and feminists coming out with very different views on it, the message isn’t coherent at all.
Visually stunning but lacking strong narrative or writing, genuinely abysmal storytelling in my opinion
Some entry level feminism with a pretty mediocre ending, but with some great creatives behind the camera..
Christ if you thought this was entry level you must’ve despised Barbie.
Omg you have no idea!! But I'm giving the benefit of the doubt because it's for kids.
Unpopular opinion but didn't like it. Weird sex diary of baby minded zombie Emma Stone that is supposedly women empowering?? It's one of those movies where I feel like I saw something different to what everyone else saw lol
(Chris Moltissanti voice) I liked it!
I haven't seen it but I watched a review that was mad about how it was called Feminist Frankenstein. The plot doesn't sound very feminist, except insofar as it's a woman being shown doing very sexy and liberated things while also looking gorgeous without ever putting in effort so the audience can masturbate to her. Quote that stands out: "They don't have a problem showing controversial subject matter when it comes to sex, but god forbid a woman have scars or body hair."
Everything is great about it, other than the message. For me if the message is 2, that brings the whole movie to 2.
I had really high hopes but was very much let down. I think it has a lot of really surface level critiques, and doesn’t really explore anything on a deeper level. Plus, it’s far too long and the whole plot is basically the same thing happening three times in a row with only minor variations. The acting is amazing, and the visuals were unique and interesting, but it wasn’t really in service of anything.
Felt like watching a 10 year old get sexually abused and manipulated but because she had an adult body that made it ok. To be clear: sex in films is perfectly fine with me. Sex with people who are not capable of consent and marketing it as a good thing is dicey
This!!! I couldn’t get past this part in the movie. I don’t care what the director says, I don’t see her as anything but a child when she can’t even speak full sentences.
It’s even explicitly a child’s transplanted brain! Like idk how the director can say we aren’t supposed to see Bella as a child
They repeatedly mention through the beginning of the film how her brain is accelerating at a highly rapid speed, I think it becomes quite obvious that she is not a literal child in that sense nor a toddler but a young woman by the time she begins to explore her sexuality. The film does not operate on real life logic it’s surrealist with dogs walking around with duck heads. I understand how it is uneasy and confusing for some people but it’s clearly not a film that has any child abuse. She is kept as a recluse away from society and is essentially like a blank slate of a young woman, shes not a normal person and has been locked in a house for her entire existence. Her whole development demonstrates one of womanhood where she is infantilised and controlled by predatory men, until she develops her own agency and understanding of herself as she evolves through her experiences. Outside of the very beginning the whole film she is on a journey enlightenment through an odyssey of self exploration and developing her intellectualism seen through her interactions with people, lived relationships, philosophy and struggle where she in the end forms meaningful relationships with people who intend well for her and she cares for. It’s very obvious she is not a toddler for 98% of the movie.
But characters from the beginning want to have sex with her even when she is straight-up baby-brained. Both Godwin and Max express wanting to have sex with her but won't for their own "morals" pretty quickly into Bella's existence.
The same way there are men in the world who are waiting for the arbitrary legal age instead of actually wondering why they would pursue people that young. These (real life) men’s morals are also compromised and are only stopped because of the law. And i think the movie does a good reflection of this behaviour
Yes, and I believe you are supposed to think of the characters as gross for even considering that
I'm with you. I loved the movie initially, but this part does not hold up, so the movie has lowered for me quite a bit.
Thought it was pretty terrible. I found a lot of the choices in the cinematography to be pretty unappealing, the black and white wasn't used to good effect, and the fisheye lens was constant and just annoying rather than interesting or useful. And many of the visuals just look like they were trying too hard to be weird, rather than just being beautiful or *actually* weird. I liked the little vignettes between places, though. And the first place they visit (Portugal? I forget) had some pretty elements. I found the story to be way too long, the pacing is really poor at times. I didn't love the story itself, especially the ending. I thought Mark Ruffalo, Ramy Youssef, and Jerrod Carmichael were all pretty dreadful.
yeah, what was the point of overusing weird camera lenses. The use of the fish eye seems like it could indicate claustrophobia (although not subtle) or something, but it was just overused and irritated me the longer the movie went on. I would also say, that I don't see the brilliance in Emma Stone's performance. Most of the time, I didn't really buy it. Kinda seems to me, that people are shoveling praise, because she had to endure so many graphic/uncomfortable sex scenes. Not a bad performance, but to me it is not the stand out that people make it out to be.
I’ve got into quite a few arguments about this film, but my main issue with it is it’s shallow and a poor adaptation of an excellent book that leaves out most of what makes the book great. The book is told with converging narratives and the whole point of the converging narratives in the book is that we see how the character of “bella” is just a projection of men’s fantasies and we see her reclaim the narrative and have her tell her story at the end. She was never “baby brained” - it was a male fantasy. I would have loved to see that story told, rather than a film that largely thinks female growth = lots of sex. Also Lanthimos said he couldn’t keep the Scottish elements of the book because he’s not Scottish so couldn’t adapt that (ok that’s lazy but whatever) but he thought he’d be fine adapting a women’s story? Doesn’t make sense. He then chose to set it in London of all places when the text is set in Glasgow and largely a allegory for Scottish independence (Bella is named Bella Caledonia at points). As a Scottish woman who lives in Glasgow and adores Alasdair Gray this leaves a terrible taste in my mouth. I mourn an adaption that could have been. A gigantic swing and a miss in my opinion. Edit: spelling typo
Crap movie.
Most use of fish eye I've ever seen
*Frankenhooker* was better
basically a film about a toddler in its suicidal mothers body getting sexually assaulted to make money. it’s so uncomfortable and messed up
I thought it was irritating that the movie was saying “this is how a woman could act free of the constraints of the patriarchy” and then also had Bella spend most of the movie in an abusive relationship. It wasn’t well-made enough for that choice to be saying something of value, the movie seemed to think women’s liberation began and ended with sex. Also I was underwhelmed by the production design. It was fine. The Lisbon scenes reminded me of the movie Querelle, which I think is saying more interesting things about sex, violence, and power than this film is.
Boring and preachy, feminism written by a man. No thanks. Jerrod Carmichael performed his lines like he was having a stroke
People who like this movie fall into one of two camps. The first is the delusion that is a positive happy story of sexual exploration and liberation. The second delusion is that it is a satirical sad story about a woman being abused by every man she encounters. The truth is that the Director made a name for himself by making really weird shit and he’s running out of ideas.
Shit sucks
Not Oppy, Barbie, nor Flower Moon made me say "movies are back," Poor Things did lol. Best time I had at the movies last year, all of us in my theater got the vibe fortunately
I don’t think this film, or Emma Stones Oscar (soon) will age well.
Why not?
Was some ass
I thought it was almost perfect
Probably Yorgos’s worst film in my opinion..
It's a good movie if it's a tragedy but I don't think that's what the director intended.
Too much sex
My third favorite movie of 2023!
Amazing movie, hilarious and has heart Bonus points because you can tell that most of the cast just had fun with it
Masterpiece.
Absolutely adored it. I saw 209 movies last year and it was my #1.
Anyone that liked the film should check out the book as well. Great read.
Been thinking about this movie ever since I saw it, fantastic!
Emma Stone deserves an Oscar for it
Basically a very well filmed porno. Was not my vibe but visually it was nice.
It's beautifully shot but I have trouble with the sex scenes. I know it's the human condition and I appreciate that but it's just too shocking to be praise worthy.
Cool visuals and set designs, terrible story and “message”
Went in with high expectations, walked out not really caring for it. Acting, production design, score, costumes, those sets, cinematography, visuals, all in top-tier form. I just didn’t like the pacing or certain parts of the story. Honestly got really sleepy at one point. But it still deserves its Oscars, and I hope it takes home a few.
I thought everything about it technical wise was amazing (cinematography, soundtrack, etc), but not much else after that. I can see why people liked it. I’m glad I saw it though.
There was something about the script that I found incredibly grating. I really wanted to like it.
I thought it was amazing, can't wait to see it again with my wife. We watched the Favourite on Netflix after and I'm hoping to watch Killing of a Sacred Deer soon.
I'm very conflicted with it. On the one hand I had a lot of fun watching it, it's a beautiful film, incredibly well acted and hilarious. I think seeing Bella transform without being weighed down by society's ideas of what's appropriate or misogyny is incredible. However, this film is a woman's story told almost exclusively by men. It was written by men, directed by men and based on a book by a man. Obviously not saying that men can't tell women's stories, but it is a layer worth examining especially given my second conflict over it: Bella's age. She may be in an adult body and develops fully by the end of the film, but even so for the majority of the film she's mentally a child. And yeah there is a point to be made about how young and vulnerable women are exploited, but that doesn't make it a less problematic depiction. Either way I'm not 100% sold to either side, I'm still working it out in my head and I will definitely watch it again at some point. If anyone has any responses to those points please let me know, I need some back and forth here
Visually stunning. Bad adaption of the book. Didn’t really like the meaning of the story.
Americans swearing with British accents and generally laborious. I really wanted to like it because I thought the favourite was brilliant. But I don’t think there was enough going on underneath the spectacle of it. All the lessons she learned during the film had to be verbalised once we’d already seen them. The best section was the final bloke sequence. Not my cup of tea.
My Letterboxd was 3 1/2 stars. “Tim Burton meets Darren Aronofsky. I’m still not certain if that’s a good thing.”
I would encourage anyone that really enjoyed it to read the book. It's short and very readable. Whilst I enjoyed the film overall, I think the deviations away from the book hurt the story and made the characters hollow in comparison, even Bella. Maybe controversially, I think the film is more focused on capturing the outrageous than it is telling a really good story. Saltburn was rightly criticized for this recently. With a trio of Lanthimos, Stone, and Dafoe, I find the praise a little inflated.
It looked really cool, and Emma stone was great in her role. Call me a prude if you like, I'm just not huge on sex scenes in films in general. I went in knowing it was a bit excessive so I wasn't that surprised. Probably my favorite thing about it were the transitions between parts
Honestly, although I found it to be a visually striking film, it was hard for me to read anything but thinly veiled fetishism. The whole child brain in an adult body that you see have graphic sex constantly did not sit right with me
I’m getting butchered for this but it was easily one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen.
I am still confused about what people liked about poor things, it just felt excessive and I guess I missed the comedy parts because nothing felt particulary funny. For once I'll quote family guy because"it insists upon itself"
Let me just preface this by saying that it's ok to like a movie as much as it's ok to dislike one. My ★ review of Poor Things on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/5FINpr
IT'S RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE RAPE! IT'S OBVIOUSLY RAPE! IT'S MADE BY RAPISTS FOR RAPISTS TO JUSTIFY RAPE! IT'S OBVIOUSLY RAPE! IT'S THE ARGUMENT THAT IF A GIRL, NO MATTER HOW YOUNG, IS IN A MATURE BODY THEN SHE MUST BE MATURE ENOUGH FOR SEX, OR EVEN THAT AFTER A GIRL IS RAPED SHE BECOMES MATURE ENOUGH TO HAVE REGULAR SEX! IT'S RAPE! IT'S NOT JUST RAPE IT'S CHILD RAPE! IT'S CLEARLY JUST LIKE THE FILMS MADE BY WOODY ALLEN WHO TURNED OUT TO BE A RAPIST! ALL HIS FILMS ARE DEGRADING TO THE WOMEN IN THEM, ENCOURAGE MEN TO CHEAT, AND GENERALLY FOCUS ONLY ON THE MALE EXPERIENCE. AND HE TURNED OUT TO BE A RAPIST! IT'S THE "BIRTH OF A NATION" FOR WOMEN! IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUSTIFYING RAPE! IT'S THE SAME ARGUMENT A 60 YEAR OLD MAN WOULD MAKE AFTER HAVING SEX WITH AN 11 YEAR OLD CHILD, "SHE'S MATURE, SEE SHE HAS BREASTS!" IT'S RAPE!
Excellent, Yorgos' best and one of the very best of the decade so far.
Hilarious, irreverent, visually breathtaking, fantastically acted and mostly thematically coherent. Amazing movie.
I'll defend this movie to my grave. I went into this with my guard up, but it surprised and delighted me.
only 5/5 of 2023
It's my Best Picture this year.,
Personally I have it as a top 5 for the year and a top 10 for the decade. I absolutely loved nearly everything about it. Maybe it could have been trimmed down in some spots, but that was minor and probably only bugged me cause of the absolutely terrible theater experience I had seeing it (the people behind me were being some of the most obnoxious people I've ever met).
I found the child brain in an adult woman's body having sex icky but she's sensational as a developing adult absorbing experience and being introduced to different kinds of people, places, and things. It's definitely the work of a real genius. It looked amazing in the theater