Poor Things — Film Review

A 2-hour and 21-minute film mistake that left me with nothing but a poor experience. Nevertheless, Emma Stone’s performance was great.

Despite Poor Things racking up 11 Oscar nominations, I couldn’t help but feel it missed the mark. Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, Poor Things, is a dark comedy-drama based on the 1992 novel of the same name written by Alasdair Gray. For me, it turned out to be a 2-hour, 21-minute mistake, resulting in discomfort and a growing urge to ask for a refund.

In a plot reminiscent of Frankenstein, Doctor Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe) discovers a woman who tragically ended her own life while pregnant. He performs a radical procedure on her, exchanging her brain with that of her unborn child.

This daring experiment results in a profound fusion of her identity with that of her unborn offspring, generating the central figure of this intricate tale: Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), an enigmatic character.

As the narrative unfolds, this fascinating premise propels Bella into a series of unconventional adventures. She navigates a journey where she must not only grapple with her newfound physical form but also embark on a quest to synchronize her mind with her adult body, gradually refining her motor skills and intellectual faculties.

However, the film quickly transitions into uncomfortable territory without providing any meaningful insights. Let’s clarify that nudity in a film or TV show isn’t an issue for me, as long as it serves a purpose and is done tastefully — when it’s integral to the storytelling.

But in this case, the expectation walking into the theater was a tale of female empowerment and self-discovery, only to find oneself in the midst of what feels like a low-budget attempt to attract male viewers with gratuitous skin.

It’s almost as though the filmmakers collectively shrugged and declared, “Who needs plot and character development? Let’s just flood the screen with bare bodies and call it a day!”

From the moment Bella decides to leave her guardian’s house for a rendezvous with a stranger, Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), the alarm bells start ringing. If the film’s intention truly revolved around Bella’s exploration of freedom and the world, why did she choose to follow a male stranger instead of embarking on her own journey?

Then, we find ourselves in the magnificent Lisbon Portugal, where Bella ventures into a brothel, diving headfirst into sexual-centric activities without a second thought for potential consequences like pregnancy, diseases, or managing menstrual cycles.

That scenario seems highly unrealistic when it comes to depicting feminine sexuality. It’s almost as if the film depicts what some might expect men to do if they were granted similar freedom, however, a portrayal from a female perspective could have added much-needed depth and nuance to the narrative.

Bella’s experience with sex seems too straightforward, like perhaps a male perspective. It feels unrealistic. In reality, many women know that the first time can be quite uncomfortable, and it could take time to learn how to feel pleased.

Instead of exploring this, Bella just goes through the motions from one male character to another, who doesn’t care about her satisfaction. The film could have explored introspective moments as well, like discovering feelings, understanding the female body, career paths, and more.

Why focus solely on sex when transitioning from girlhood to womanhood offers many avenues for exploration? Even if the film aimed to explore the theme of sex, it falls short of truly delving into it.

Female characters are relegated to minor, voiceless roles, leaving Bella to be portrayed as little more than a sexual object, blurring the lines between roles.

Now prepare yourself for what may be the most unsettling and peculiar aspect of this situation. The film’s excessive portrayal of sexual content also plunged my thoughts into a disorienting spiral.

Consider this unsettling possibility: What was Bella’s mental age during those explicit scenes? Perhaps no more than 12 years old?

I hesitate to explore the disturbing notion that this could be indicative of a troubling situation of a kind of pedoph… No, it’s better not to entertain that thought!

Nevertheless, the sheer peculiarity of the situation cannot be denied… It was truly an uncomfortable viewing experience.

While Emma Stone’s performance was commendable, it couldn’t salvage the film’s flawed depiction of feminism and empowerment. Despite attempting to be cutting-edge and thought-provoking, the film came across as overly self-assured, almost as if it expected us to like it without offering much substance.

‘Poor Things’ was undeniably a poor experience, resembling a pretentious cinematic endeavor that fell short of expectations. It fails to captivate, leaving a feeling of being a mere bystander at a questionable bachelor party rather than an engaged audience member.

In my book, it earns a modest 5 out of 10, mainly thanks to Emma Stone’s amazing performance. Her fearless talent shone through once again, elevating the film despite its flaws.

And let’s not forget about the wardrobe team and the photography; their work was nothing short of spectacular and certainly added to the movie’s visual appeal.

However, that’s my opinion, I encourage you to watch it yourself if you dare and share your thoughts with me, please. Just don’t make the same mistake I did by dragging my brother-in-law along with me and my husband for what I thought would be a family-friendly movie night. Boy, was I wrong! Trust me, this one’s not fit for viewing with your in-laws, parents, co-workers, and so on.

If you want to read more content about Film and TV, here are some of my articles.

Thanks for your support!!