To think that Poor Things is actually a seriously fucked up film?

[AngeloMysterioso]

Spoilers obvs

Basic plot summary- pregnant woman trapped in an abusive marriage attempts suicide by jumping from a bridge. Frankenstein-type scientist retrieves her body, transplants the unborn baby’s brain into her head and brings her back to life. This child-woman is then basically abducted by a dodgy bloke who teaches her all about the joys of fucking, she very naively gives all their money away and because they are now broke and she enjoys sex so very much, she becomes a prostitute, whilst still having the mental age of a young child.

There’s no denying Emma Stone is brilliant in the role, but AIBU to think that it is otherwise one completely messed up Freudian nightmare of a movie?!

might have held my interest for an hour - but nearly two and a half?
self indulgent crap

@LovelyTheresa of course @Bazinga007 doesn’t have to agree with others. I’m not sure why you think that I meant that. I’d be really interested to hear about the reasons why she has that opinion. Definitely don’t think she has to agree with everyone.
It’s just that she wasn’t responding to the other posts and didn’t explain why she thought it was great.

Personally I found it tedious, but fucked up is a stretch and all the over analysis out there about promotion of sex work and paedophilia is clutching. It’s a somewhat surreal movie based on a somewhat surreal book. I can think of any number of movies in many genres which would be pretty nightmarish if they were meant to be real, but they’re not (including some aimed at young adults: The Hunger Games - children selected via lottery to participate in a compulsory televised battle royale death match, anyone?)

I didn't like it at all, I think the audience is being conditioned to accept the behaviour, that is pretty deviant as the norm.

@ghostyslovesheets my take was exactly the same as yours. Great summary by the way!

I thought it was fab, really interesting and witty with some stunning costumes and settings.

I haven’t seen it yet but reserving judgement til I have. I loved the Favourite (same Director) and that was also very marmite.

Agreed! 👏

Yes! Seriously fucked up film with shit acting. I left.

Why would I want to watch a girl who has the mental age of a child get groomed and fucked?

Why, if you were going to explore the thought experiment of a child’s brain in a woman’s body, would you take it down the road of sexual exploitation under the banner of liberation? Euch.

This will not age well. No idea why Stone didn’t run a million miles.

I agree with this. The men don't come out of it well at all. The baby brain thing is about creating an adult not influenced by social norms. It's a bit fucked up if you think about it literally but you're not supposed to.

It's very weird and surreal, but it's not the first weird and surreal film he's made.

I would say I liked the film rather than loved it, but the production design is so distinct and different that it's impressive.

Sick. It’s basically about having sex with a child. Only a paedo could have come up with that plot.

Should be banned, right?

^This! It's all about men really! No intention of watching it as I know it will give me the 🤬

Frankly, I’m over pornified movies. There is nothing original about that, however you dress (undress?) it. I agree with Herzog on this topic - ‘boundaries of humanness are transgressed.’

The book was just written as a long paedophilic misogynist fantasy of Gray’s imo. Really weird man and massively overrated.

Frankenstein written by Jimmy Savile.

she becomes a prostitute, whilst still having the mental age of a young child.

This isn't right, at that point has the mind of an adult. She grows up very quickly, she's a baby for the first few minutes, a young teenager when she runs off with Mark Ruffalo, and she grows up into an adult from there. When the sex happens she has a sexually consenting aged mind, in a fully adult body.

I don't think this idea is groundbreaking (perhaps it's even the same theme as the Barbie movie), but the point of the film is something like "wouldn't patriarchy seem fucked if we really saw it fresh out the oven, with little to no social acclimitisation?". To answer @RubaiyatOfAnyone 's question, the protagonoist Bella needs to grow up so quickly because the point of the film is her own experiences form her understanding of the world. She doesn't slowly get exposed and inculcated to patriarchy (and society's expectations in general) by growing up into it and accepting its norms, she finds out about it all from experiencing it directly from an almost adult perspective.

Men take advantage of Bella throughout the film, and she spends the whole film escaping one form of control only to end up under another. The men initially want to have sex with her even though she has the mind of a child (because they only see women as bodies to fuck, I guess). Then Mark Ruffalo's character only wants her if he can control her, he's convinced she will fall in love with him and he can discard her. When she doesn't he goes to increasingly absurd lenghts to keep her trapped. The prostitute episode isn't supposed to be liberatory, it's an example of how under capitalism and patriarchy women are never truly free. Bella doesn't have shame about having sex for money and she does not accept that her body is a man's to control, but the brothel is not an enjoyable experience for her, it's degrading and she doesn't have enjoyable sex there.

She settles for a man who accepts her for who she is, but even he doesn't bring her real wholeness. The only thing that gives her genuine freedom and satisfaction in the end is working as a surgeon and frankenstein scientist herself.

Yep.

It's about awful men, and some awful women actually. I think it's bizarre to cast judgment in a film you haven't seen.

Sounds paedo to me, I won’t be watching.

Sounds fucked up indeed.

Can all the people saying "it's peado" explain what is peado about someone who is around 17 (in the body of someone who is 35) having sex?

Do you all think that every single high school film in which 17 year olds have sex is peado too? Or is it just the out of syncness you don't like - in that case, is Twilight and the Lord of The Rings peado too, because the it features characters of mismathces ages having sex?

YANBU I’m perhaps being unfair because I haven’t watched it but I read what it was about, and decided it was on my no go list. I’m not really understanding how it will end up being empowering.

I found it boring slow and not remotely amusing.

Mind you I hated the favourite too same director.

I think I'll give his stuff a swerve from now on.

Even 17yo having sex with adult men is paedo and grooming.

‘Is paedo’… is this how people talk? Genuinely. I’ve not heard anyone say it irl but it’s come up a few times here.