My wife and I saw this movie tonight and I’d really appreciate reading some discussion about it!
I loved it. My wife found it more … disturbing.
We agree it is stylistically beautiful. And in this era of remakes and sequels a refreshingly something new.
It was described as a dark sci fi comedy but less comedy than a horror fantasy riff.
Worth seeing. More, including questions in open spoilers if others want to discuss.
I’m wondering when it hits streaming in some capacity. It’s on my list, but the director is very up and down in quality.
I’ll just pop my take on it from the Movies I’ve Seen Recently thread.
Lanthimos is a very quirky, mannered director. If you’ve seen and liked The Lobster, you’ll enjoy it. If your past experience is with something that constrains his ability to reimagine how the world works, like The Favourite, you might be put off.
It’s a strange ride for sure but I thought it was delightful. Mark Ruffalo absolutely stole the show though all the performances were excellent with the exception of Harry (the man she meets on the ship with the older lady). I’ve never heard of or seen that actor (Jerrod Carmichael) so maybe he was just acting as directed but I found him distractingly bad.
There was a discussion in the Movies you’ve seen recently where @JohnT shared that his daughter found it to be misogynistic. I found it to be the exact opposite and I’d love to get others’ take on that aspect.
Also, I want a chicken/dog.
Thank you for the link. I’m not sure if I should just continue there but given that this thread now exists I will do here.
I can see what @JohnT is saying, about the fixation on sexuality as the lens. And if I squint in particular way I can way that sexual awakening the path to growth being the male fantasy bit … but to me that take does require a bunch of squinting?
The male characters had inner thoughts and the female ones did not? Not in the movie I saw. Mostly the male inner thoughts were very cardboard cut out, revolving around controlling what they saw as property in their lives, including the women in their lives, with Max least so and growth allowed for God. Even Harry was trying to control her in his own way. Okay we got a sense of God’s … issues … but inner thoughts? Not compared to the Bella’s constant inner thought growth from infantile to philosophical thinker, scientist and physician, head of a new family of sorts. We had more inner thought from the generally silent Mrs. Prim than we did of most of the males!
I could endorse misanthropic sure, but misogynistic? Definitely not.
.
.
FWIW this is I think a movie to see in a theater. The scenes of sky and other fantasy ‘scapes were stunning.
Not sure what to make out of the use of fisheye lens views? Was it to give a sense of voyeurism?
And the turn from black and white to color seemed a bit trite. Not sure which I preferred though. The black and white gave a good classic horror movie vibe but the colorific world was something to see …
One thing that squicked me out, on reflection:
To the movie audience there is no sense of elapsed time in Bella’s development. When we first encounter her she is (the brain of) a toddler in an adult woman’s body. That body does not age discernibly during the story. Within a short time (screen time) we see her descovering her sexuality, Max makes plans to marry her, and shortly after that Duncan Wedderburn has sex with her and (mere weeks or months later) numerous other men do too.
Unless we imagine more than one and a half decades elapsing between Max first meeting Bella, and Bella’s going to Lisbon, that is deeply disturbing.
Other than that, it’s a fantastic story, well played.
The real horror is in the backstories, touched at but not shown: Godwin’s being his father’ experimental subject, and Alfie driving Bella’s mother to suicide.
Alfie is a well played villain, and Duncan a well played fool. The person I got to identify with was Max.
The sets and cinematography are very good.
As a German moviegoer I was delighted to see Hanna Schygulla once more.
Eh. It’s a fantasy world, it’s not real. Babies don’t speak in full sentences and walk in that fast a time either.
(I haven’t read the other thread so I’m not sure what was said there).
I thought it was pretty clearly set up that her development is fast tracking, and I felt comfortable with the idea that Bella was in control of her actions. The book is more explicit that Bella doesn’t start having sex until her mind is around 17 years old to quell those fears. I also thought the fact that all of these men were so enamored with an idiot child was presented as them being the villains, and the film definitely didn’t support the general idea of what the men were doing.
I really liked this on the big screen for the crazy visuals and costumes, and thought the score was great (the composer’s first score, as far as I know). I appreciate that films are moving to having sets on sound stages again that look so good.
I thought it really started to lag at the end, and the whole “Hanging out with my Before Husband” was pretty rushed and unsatisfying. I understand why they included it, but I was kind of over it by that point. Movies in general are too long these days.
Overall the movie was more light-hearted than I was expecting, and I don’t think it was trying to be a giant Tome on Feminism. The movie itself seemed to mimic Bella’s philosophy of life being kind instead of cruel. I kept waiting for something terrible to happen to Bella to crush her spirits, and I was so nervous in the brothel scenes that I was about to watch someone get brutally raped. But I ended up really liking that act (the Madam!! what a character), even if I do think it was glossing over the realities of sex work.
I do agree that all of the men characters were way more interesting than the lead, which is a problem I had with Barbie also. Overall, I thought it was a fun ride. I am a huge Lanthimos fan though.
Would you agree that if someone liked The Favourite but didn’t like The Lobster, they won’t like this one?
And, for this thread- the 96th Oscar Award nominations are out and Poor Things received 11 nominations, including Best Picture, Director, and Actress.
More interesting I can see but not more inner thoughts.
Kinda odd that the very odd Bella was by the matter portion of the story, maybe even more than Max, the “straight man” to the comedic level dysfunctionality of the so called normal men she interacted with.
I’m… unsure. I think I liked The Favourite more than the Lobster due to structure and aesthetics, even though I liked the ideas behind the Lobster more than the power struggles in The Favourite. But I think The Favourite is a better film even if it’s ideas aren’t as interesting. I think Poor Things has more philosophical oopmh behind it than The Favourite does, but shares the maximalist cinematic feel; but Poor Things is a much less mean-spirited fluff film than both of those others.
Watched this yesterday.
The intended message of Poor Things – as @DSeid convincingly explains – is one of female empowerment. But @JohnT has a point in that the film’s actual message is problematic at best.
I was captivated by the fantastical approach, the taboo-breaking, and the steampunk sets and enjoyed the film for those reasons. But a woman finding her authentic self by working in a brothel? That’s a cliched, retrograde male fantasy.
With some thought, this movie is worse than my daughter and I allowed.
Remember, we’re talking about a person who has a 4yo’s (estimated, but could be 4 years higher or 2 years lower) brain inside a grown woman’s body. So we’re watching the sexual journey of a child.
Already brought up above and geez. No. The fantasy premise includes that she cognitively matures at a very rapid rate. She becomes sexually aware and later active at young adult horny stages. There is the squickiness of Max attracted to her when still cognitively very young.
When your fiction premise requires that much hand-waving as to not be an excuse for pedophilia, the prudent person would (a) rework the script (for example, a woman kills herself and her 18yo daughter, the womans body can be saved and the daughter’s brain can be saved), or, (b) find another project to work on.
But when the audience is reduced to “no, the brain just aged 5x as fast as everything else in this movie”, then one just didn’t do a good job.
And, yes, I did miss this being discussed above. My bad.
You do realize that the main premise of the film is literally that you can transplant the brain of a baby taken by caesarian section from the dead body of it’s mother and transplant it into anther human being, and you think people will have trouble with her then cognitively aging quickly? This is a sci-fi film. This is Frankenstein. They literally put a dog’s head on a chicken! This is not a realistic film in any way and it is very weird that you are hung up on this point and think it means it’s excusing pedophilia!
Having the brain be from an already living adult would go against the entire idea of the film as Bella being a completely blank slate. And uh, I think the idea that this film didn’t do a good job in enacting it’s premise has been shown to be completely incorrect by it being nominated for every major guild award and most of the audience response being very positive. 94% positive critics Rotten Tomatoes score, 81% audience score.
It’s what’s on the screen.
The fact that other elements exist does not mean that this element does not. Who cares if it is a fantasy, it’s a fantasy about a violated woman (and baby) who turn themselves/herself into the sexual playthings of men in an effort to “find themselves”.
Yup. And what is shown on the screen is Bella conversing and reading novels and learning scientific concepts. Totally what babies do.
Yes. What is on the screen is explaining that she is cognitively maturing at a very rapid rate, heck her hair even grows an inch every two days, and showing her emotional and cognitive rapid development.
Arguing against the hypothetical of a fantasy film is silly.
Makes more sense to be upset that she has learned to read so well with no instruction.
Yeah, it’s clearly a compressed bildungsroman story for the sake of literary metaphor. She sets off to find self-realization, first through sex, then travel/sensory experiences such as food/music, then philosophy, class awareness, working, political awareness, then ending up with a career in medicine to help people after taking all of that in. She is only of a “baby” mind for a very small part of the beginning. No part of this movie is advocating for pedophilia.