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?!

Right… well I’m guessing I need to see it it to ‘understand it’ but not sure I’ll be able to manage that! Especially not with recently having a new baby girl of my own 🤢😭

I genuinely wouldnt bother. Its a few hours of your life you'll never get back.

Great art invokes a reaction, often is very controversial and polarising, so looks like it’s done it’s job!

Well just to go along with the story, I guess? For comedic effect? I mean, you really have to suspend your disbelieve here as she ages at the very fast rate, not like a normal child would.

I actually read reviews about another film by the same director, Lobster, which said something along he lines "I hated this film as its about animal cruelty"....

@UnbelievableLie

Why does everything have to have a agreeable theme such as feminism ect

Why can't a film be artistically visual and thought provoking in a controversial and unausaul ways too in depicting the reality of female experiences such what @localnotail & @ghostyslovesheets posts are about then?

You can decide the film is or isn't for you without being either 'hard of thinking' (and also hard of spelling, given the number of different ways we have 'paedo' and it's variants inserted into the thread by the frothers) or a tedious film snob.

I'm not interested in seeing it for the reason I've already given (I had a free ticket when it was at the LFF and still didn't go), but that doesn't mean I think a mainstream Hollywood film with a sci fi/fantasy theme is a cover for child abuse or any other illegal activity, because I'm not fucking stupid.

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.

Haven't seen the film, don't intend to, but I'm curious about that. How would that realistically be possible given that, presumably, she receives no education and has to learn everything from how to walk, talk, eat, use the toilet etc as if she were a new-born child?

The ‘born (sexy) yesterday’ thing is a very common male fantasy trope. Obviously it can be done very well, but having watched a lot of weird surrealist shit, I’m increasingly finding that it’s not for me. And not necessarily a detail I can get over for the sake of a broader narrative.

It is not realism, it is gothic fantasy and is not meant to be interpreted literally. It is exploring concepts - in this case, Bella’s hasn’t been subject to normal social conditioning & the film plays with what happens to a woman plunked into society without being brought up with expectations of how she should behave.

I thought the visuals, costumes and acting were wonderful. It was a bit long and also squirmy at times (although that was deliberate).

I do despair of posters who have never seen it declaring ‘paedo film’ based on random posters opinions- it shows how pitchfork wielding mobs are formed.

It's pure male porn fantasy dressed up as art. The acting is pretty bad as well, including Emma Stone

I say that having enjoyed some of the director's previous work, especially Killing of a Sacred Deer

This "woman is really a child in adult body" theme is very old and was super popular in Victorian period among the artists and intellectuals of the time. The idea was that the woman should stay in her "natural" state and should not get educated or allowed to participate in society as she, firstly, is incapable intellectually, and secondly, learning just makes her withered, ill and hysterical.

The film, as it portrays a quasi-Victorian period, seem to get it right: I think that's why Bella is so desirable for men, not because she is mentally a child, but because she is so "unburdened" and "natural". I don't think the creator of the film subscribes to this view - he, rather, satirises it. We get disgusted by the way Bella is treated and by the way men are behaving - well, that's the idea.

But yes, no point of wasting time watching the film if you cant get past baby brain transplant (which is, I agree, is a revolting thought, but I would think its deliberate, too).

Indeed. See also the Rocky Horror Show.

@HeadNorth

Hear hear. 👏🏿 well said good insightful thought ful critique post...

Unless the baby girl you've just given birth to has the body and brain of an adult I don't think you need to worry.

It's a marmite kind of film

You either like it aspects of it
or
you are just put off by it too uncomfortable themes ect

It's interesting film

Whether you like it or not

Look how many opinions it's provoked or got people talking about on here mumsnet alone,

even in these times of Cancel culture banning things that are deemed offensive of whatever makes people feel a bit or some or. a lot of discomfort or uncomfortable artistically, topically or whatever that maybe,

Assuming the posters who’ve decided to hate it based on the controversial topics it analyses also feel the same way about Lolita

But the brain is not of an adult in this film. And we all know physical body does make you want to have sex like a prostitute.

Yeah I didn't get she was 17 then

13 or so maybe as she was discovering masterbation.

I found it bobbins. I also watched zone of interest the same week which was arty but not bobbins.

It's the Frankenstein aspect of it. Like other posters have said, the idea is to create someone who has an adult brain in the sense that she is able to understand and process information, but who hasn't got any of the social conditioning - except conditioning to be trapped and caged. She is taught how to eat and slowly how to talk in the first few minutes of the film, and the rest is about her being confronted with various social situations and trying to understand both the world and herself. Bella retains the childlike sense of wonder because everything is new to her, not because she literally has the brain of a child. She only has her experiences to go on, but they are limited and constrained by what her various captors have tried to make her experience.

Someone asked above why Bella still acts like a child (e.g. not understanding social conventions, giving away money) when she's sexually active with Ruffalo. The reason isn't that she's a child at that point, it's that she's a young adult who lacks normal socialisation. The (not so groundbreaking) point is that we would not accept many social conventions if we weren't socialised to them. Some social conventions are there for a reason, and Bella learns the reason, for example, that you will be sick if you eat loads of cake.

Haven’t watched it & wont be based on your synopsis. Absolutely appalling premise for a film, it sounds like a very bad storyline for a porn film.

Deeply troubling about having a child’s mind in an adults body for a sexual awakening/liberation which leads to prostitution.

Who the chuff funded this!?

She grows up really fast. Her brain is only that of a baby for the first few minutes of the film. She is of consenting age, but unsocialised, by the time she has sex. And anyway, the man who is taking advantage of her here is the villain. Just because he doesn't turn to the camera and say "mawahahaha" or fall to his death Disney-style doesn't mean we're supposed to approve of his actions. He throws her books into the sea to stop her to learning! There are loads of signs he's a villain.

The whole point of the brothel sequence is that having sex in a brothel is not good or enjoyable for women. Bella has to learn this, because on the face of it, what's so wrong about having sex for money? She likes sex, she needs money. It's only when she experiences it for herself that she feels the full degradation and exploration of it.

As a parent of a 13 year old girl I would take issue with any ‘art’ that portrays the idea that children are ready for an adult to come along and provide them with a sexual awakening.

That makes it a bit more redeemable. I just hope her enjoying sex is done in a realistic way and not oh look she has a vagina she must enjoy all sex!

I haven't watched the film but reading these comments, it kind of reminds me of Blonde (the new Netflix Marilyn Monroe movie) where a bunch of men get together to try and portray the female experience, and rather than capture or project the intended messages, it just kind of shows how ignorant men are to the female experience and how different their perception of the world is to ours.

I totally get the idea of discussing sex (especially in the past) and postulating about the idea of a woman existing without all of the negative connotations around her own sexuality, but once again in the hands of men it sadly often becomes a projection of their own fantasies, and how that lack of inhibition benefits them.

Kind of like the contraceptive borne sexual revolution which really just allowed men to have even more consequence free sex. Kind of like how since ancient Greek times, women have just been seen as deformed, inferior men and how we are kind of the same really.

It's men's attitude toward us that forces the difference in behaviour and identity. They don't really see it because they don't live it.

(Sorry for the ramble)