Poor Things (film)

[TinselAngel]

Has anybody here seem Poor Things yet?

I went to see it this afternoon and sat slightly horrified in a cinema full of chortling people, about Emma Stone's character being relentlessly exploited by men but this being portrayed as not being altogether a bad thing.

I think the first time she showed any real consent was when she kissed Max after she’d returned from Paris. Even then I think her view of the world was horribly skewed by her narrowed experiences.

The DM reference was because I don’t believe that people who haven’t seen the film should be judging it based on other’s experience of it.

The DM reference was because I don’t believe that people who haven’t seen the film should be judging it based on other’s experience of it

Isn't that the entire purpose of film reviews though? To give people some insight as to whether they might like to see the film? There are some film reviewers who I tend to agree with, and some that I usually don't, which tends to give me a good steer as to whether I'd enjoy a film or not.

Has a DM review been posted? The one I posted was from the Times.

No, bestwishes is referring to her own comment down thread:

"I thought this thread was going to be a good discussion but the amount of knee jerk reactions from people who haven’t seen the film is what I’d expect from Daily Mail readers."

Thanks for the explanation. Bit of a non sequitur then.

I see the purpose of a review to inform me on whether I want to see the film or not. Some of the posters are making judgements on whether the film is about pedophilia, and saying that people are having sex with people with baby’s brains when they’re just misinterpreting reviews or comments by posters here. That’s terribly frustrating if they haven’t seen the film.

Please don't feel inadequate, you are normal. We've all been fed the porn (male) view of sex

The argument that people can't discuss something without watching it is always frustrating. I assume there is a line where the people making it would feel they are able to make a judgement about a film from a trailer, reviews, and wider discussion - maybe the human centipede, or if they're fans of that then I'll bet there's something that they would find unconscionable, but I'm not going to google for anything worse. Maybe they would then say, fine, decide it isn't for you, but you aren't allowed to talk publicly about it, because that's not fair on the creators. But when something is popular, or touches on issues that directly concern us, or issues which don't concern us but that we care about, then we are allowed to talk about it without subjecting ourselves to an unpleasant experience and enriching people who we may not want to fund.

It's fine to talk about anything you want, regardless of your relative knowledge or ignorance. However, if you want to be taken seriously by those who have seen the film, you probably need to see it as well.

If you don't want to see it, that's fine. But I'm not going to give your opinion anywhere near as much weight as someone's who has seen it.

@beastlyslumber I don't particularly want to be 'taken seriously' by anyone in particular, especially if what they are interested in is evaluating the film on its artistic merits. The conversation on this thread is not just that though, it is people with a variety of opinions and experiences talking about the premise of the film which we are aware of because of the trailer and other promotions that we can't help seeing around us, and what its popularity says about culture and society. And, for many of us, how it relates to things that we do have a lot of knowledge or first hand experience of, such as the sexual abuse of young people with brain injuries, paedophilia and prostitution.

Look, I am fully prepared to find myself walking out of the film if it deals with those issues in a way I find offensive.

What I'm not going to do is take offence before I've looked for myself. It's the same principle as people burning books they don't like and haven't read.

Watch it or not. If you think the subject matter is not for you, fine. There's loads of stuff I don't watch or read. I don't mind saying it might be amazing, just not for me.

'I don't mind saying it might be amazing, just not for me'

You're still demanding that people agree with you, though: they have to agree with your estimation of the film & then they're allowed to say it's not for them.🙄

@beastlyslumber I don't think anyone is asking you to take offense. Just giving their own opinions about why they find the premise disturbing or otherwise worth of discussion.

@beastlyslumber

It has been said previously that the reason it’s useful for people to get a good overview of the film is so they don’t feel uncomfortable or waste their money. As a carer, I don’t get out much but when I do I want to have a nice time.

The following is not meant for offence, just to point out where I am coming from after spending months on open neurological wards either with babies and children (brain tumours, injuries such as epilepsy etc) or with elderly dementia patients. I have witnessed many very challenging situations (SEEG surgery and experiments such as inducing seizures by electrical currents in children with electrodes implanted inside their heads) by doctors trying to save and improve children’s lives. Lots of these experiments where the children are awake to give feedback.

What is clear is that from the trailer, it was obvious that this wasn’t a film for me. It wasn’t clear from the trailer about (lots of) sexual situations that maybe so upsetting for people they walk out. In the spirit of trying to get you to understand, I am going to reword your post:

‘It's fine to talk about anything you want, regardless of your relative knowledge or ignorance. However, if you want to be taken seriously by those who have experienced trauma, you probably need to understand by listening as well.

If you don't want to understand that's fine. But I'm not going to give your opinion anywhere near as much weight as someone's who does.’

The irony is it works both ways. You mentioned book burning. I don’t believe in that either. But this film cost millions and years to make and, as I said before, I think the actors don’t have the understanding or experiences because I doubt they would have made it. Lucky them. Lucky you.

' It wasn’t clear from the trailer about (lots of) sexual situations that maybe so upsetting for people they walk out.'

That's what I thought when I finally saw the trailer today. It also didn't include other things mentioned in reviews which people might find upsetting for various reasons.

And the trailer itself didn't make me want to see the film. The only thing that engaged my enthusiasm was the whirling dance bit.

Maybe we could have a new thread on trailers which don't tell you everything you need to know about a film. I went to the cinema to see one on the strength of its trailer, only for it to alter course partway through & become something else entirely.

And then sometimes I sit through a film trailer thinking that they've shown all the good bits, so I don't need to see the film!

There’s a site called commonsensemedia which I have used before. Thats fairly good. It’s annoying not being able to have the element of surprise but useful.

It's the same principle as people burning books they don't like and haven't read.

Bollocks.

Has one single person here said they want to stop you seeing the film, or get it banned?

Declining to personally watch something, or to give money to its makers, is nothing like burning books. Criticism is not censorship.

Eh?! Not going to see a film is not fucking book burning, Jesus wept.

Watch it or not. If you think the subject matter is not for you, fine.

Oh, good, thanks for permission not to watch a film. I had thought for a minute we were in some kind of Clockwork Orange scenario.

It would have been great if she’d just been like “fuck this” and went to be a witch in a bog somewhere.

I really, really feel like watching more films where women say 'fuck this' and go to be witches in bogs.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/emma-stone-reaction-backlash-sex-scenes-poor-thingsnn_65a969e6e4b041f1ce653188

Interview with Emma Stone, which completely ignores the sorts of points made by some of us and also made in the tweets quoted below the articles itself!

"The two guests loved the film ('the main character is just exploring her sexuality' etc)"

This. I highly doubt people watch the film and see it as a commentary on the male objectification of women. The right views women as wrong for doing it, the left views them as living freely, ignoring any issue around objectification and consent.

I can't see that this has been linked to before but here's Samira Ahmed on X linking to her radio interview with Emma Stone and Yorgos Lanthimos: https://x.com/SamiraAhmedUK/status/1747310922828222924?s=20

I read this

“[Sex] is obviously a huge part of her experience and her growth, as it is, I think, for most people in life. But I see it as just one aspect of many: her discovery of food, philosophy, travel and dance. Sex is another aspect,” the Oscar winner said of her character.

there's a <shudder> graphic scene of her <ick> philosophising! 🤢

But funnily enough, many more scenes of her having sex...

I think you're right, sadly.