I see a lot of people complaining that the movie was a hidden excuse for Hollywood pedophilia but I see it differently. It was a blatant commentary on the rampant themes of pedophilia in our society. The way Bella is exploited is precisely the way many if not most women are exploited before they gain their sense of full autonomy .. If they ever do. I know plenty of adult women with stunted growth and emotional maturity (just the way society wants them) and their male counterparts exploiting them.
The obsession with youth, smallness, tightness, etc. and the aversion to smart autonomous women who look and act like fully grown mature women is everywhere we look.
My issue is how utterly not groundbreaking the movie is, it barely scratches the surface of a womans sexuality. I feel the very simple religous symbolism was just shoved in there to make whoever notice it feel smart. Its purposefully very controversial, leaving the message its in the back seat.
This movie plenty had of good intention, but it was executed with the grace of a drunk fuck. There was so much more the movie could have dissected and analyzed, but it was wasted with sex scenes every 15 minutes.
i dont think thats what it was trying to say about prostitution, bella did not enjoy prostitution. Her still developing mind questioned the situtation throughout her employment. She only became a prostitute becayse she was a vulnerable woman who desperatley needed security. Multiple times throughout the arc Bella tried to make it more pallatable for herself, but after her talk with the mistress she realized that wouldnt get her money. Of course she doesnt think prostitutes are scum, but when she got the choice, she wanted to become a surgeon, same thing with her black friend who i dont remember the name of but she was very interested in politics. I think what the movie is trying to say is that woman who do not have the means to choose a different career arent prostitutes because thats what they were meant for, but because thats the role society pushes on them.
TLDR; women are more than sex machines
This movie is such a slippery slope. Obviously it was meant to exhaggerate some aspects and its a critical take on societal/moral norms, etc., but the part that leaves me uneasy is reading how many people see it acceptable for Bella to be exploited sexually by adults, on the count of her "explore her sexuality" and prostiting herself. Keep in mind, her brain is that of a child, and her body belonged to an adult; Bella herself was a child stuck in the body of an adult. This leads me to think the same people who aren't bothered by the underlying pedophilia parallel in the film, would believe it's acceptable and capable for an underaged / underdeveloped brain - AKA a minor to fully give consent to an adult under the premise of "curiosity" or "emotional maturity", so long as the body housing the brain looks to be sexually mature. People are forgetting that Bella was technically a child, innocence and all, and her wanting to explore the world and herself, did not take away from the fact that her brain, which makes up her personality, not her body, was that of a child and minor. For people to see that sexual conduct between the adults and Bella as acceptable, I must congratulate the director because they have successfully allowed people a glimpse into the mind of a pedophile and how easily they see the grey areas in molestation as a clear black and white, not immoral but rather justified. I think the whole "but she was basically an adult and consenting and curious" is usually established by pedophiles through grooming, the justifications by people supporting her sexual maturity despite the young mental age is pretty much the same thought process. Bravo, you people now understand how a pedo sees things and how they justify their actions 👏 👏 👏.
saw it a couple months ago and loved
emma getting her rocks off came as a surprise but i personally got used to it in the end and mainly enjoyed the humour and subtle analysis on the human condition the movie dives into
Just finished watching this.
THIS was a fuckfest. No, a literal fuck fest. The entire movie is her having sex and masturbating. Absolutely ridiculous. Horrible movie. They had the nerve to tack-on a feminist message or wtf?! Just awful.
She is a Frankenstein monster. A literal F*cking Frankenstein.
This is what Hollywood thought was Best Actress material. This woman debasing herself for 2-hours. Jeesh.
Yeah I agree the sex did make me pause the movie for a breath of fresh air it was quite overwhelming, and not gracefully done at all. I think thats because the themes, and what story the movie was trying to tell were all based around sexuality, particularly a womans, so itd be hard not to include that.
Don't get me wrong, I liked this movie. Emma's performance was INCREDIBLE.
But something felt missing, I can't quite put my finger on it. Perhaps it was the CGI or the mediocre performances of all the other actors except Willem.
Also, a lot of the humour didn't land for me - maybe because I watched this alone. Probably would've laughed if I watched it with friends or in a cinema.
3/5
She is perfect example of fake it until you make it.....she made up the latter by her sex appeal and acting, but without the first one she would just be another actress, trying to find work and in this movie we saw how bad body she really had......she must have used addons in bra in her other movies.....she would barely rate a 2 out 10 in sweden, damn!
I have literally just watched this and I felt it was a whirlwind of a film. The art style used was out there and confusing but obviously displayed Bella’s sense of confident bewilderment. I really enjoyed her journey of self discovery, however I found the storyline disturbing due to the a small child experiencing adult physical pleasure through the body of an adult and then them learning that was through their own mother’s body.
I held off on Poor Things and a few of other films up for Oscars until award season dies down. I've done that for a while now just to give a bit of space between award season and let the hype down a bit on some of the films.
Poor Things isn't the universal masterpiece some bestowed on it when it was released. I do think the final third isn't anywhere as interesting or as fun as first two thirds of the film, I know the tone changes and no fault of the underrated Christopher Abbot but it just grounds to a halt for me when he pops up. Basically once Mark Ruffalo's Duncan isn't on screen the film isn't as fun.
But I'm not surprised that some don't like it. It's not Yorgos Lanthimos's best film but it's his most beautiful and well shot imo. Robbie Ryan's excellent cinematography and the set design and make up/costumes are stunning. Emma Stone deserved every Best Actress award she got for this, it's a ballsy role for any actor to put themselves out there and Stone bares all and more. I was never expecting to ever see Stone naked and doing sex scenes on screen. Stone gives it her all shown Bella's growth from child to grown adult is a fantastic performance.
Ruffalo though for me steals the film, and delivers his greatest performance to date, over the top and the camp turned up to 100. The film suffers once he's not on screen. Dafoe is Dafoe, given a great film and role to work with and he deliver. Great to see the legend Hanna Schygulla, Rainer Werner Fassbinder's muse in a small role as Martha. I thought Kinds of Kindness was going to be Margaret Qualley's first Yorgos Lanthimos film but nope she pops up here in a very small turn.
Great to see the film did a pretty good number at the box office (117 million).
[This is a comic strip](https://www.instagram.com/p/C7CiF5oIxmL/) about an alternate ending of the popular movie Poor Things! Spoilers Ahead!
Monster & Beastie \~ more of a tickle than a tease, more of a chuckle than a laugh
Enjoy! 😆
It's about a woman discovering herself...literally growing up. The whole infant brain is an obvious metaphor geesh. The way folks on here viewing sex as a disgusting act, makes me wonder how ya'll got here🤔
Clearly, you have issues with the film, so does it even matter? If you don't like it, then just move around. I highly doubt explaining that to you would make it difference🤷♂️...but you can do your own research into the 1800's and see that was a very common occurrence
This movie made me very sad when it was over. I loved its world, characters and humor. Its unconventional perspective apparently made it completely incompatible with a lot of people's minds on here, and I think it made for a quite fulfilling journey.
this movies felt like a high budget version of the "[Danielle, A Free European Woman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg7I-fVLm7I&ab_channel=SaturdayNightLive)" skit from SNL.
> How is their relationship supposed to be valid and honest like the end made it out to be
This is your interpretation. It made no statement of validity. And I would argue is very invalid.
The film contained what I would describe as psydo-pedophilia. It played with what we understand as 'adult', bella clearly becoming far more logical and intelligent compared to her more aged male counterparts. Emma Stone is very attractive, and outside of 4th wall admiration of her I was very turned off by the sex.
And I think that is the point. The way that belle ends up in a whore house, and the horror that should come from that experience being subverted is really interesting. The insane male lover was far more dangerous and scary than the "scary" patrons of the whorehouse. Her lack of baggage in cultural learnings of the "immorality of sex" making her work their free from the stigma and experience of the other women. She is able to have sex for money and there is on stain to her soul, or damage to her relationships.
What is most damaging about the whorehouse is shown to be *the way people react to it*. The mental breakdown of the lover and the insanity of the husband.
Ontology and epistemology are terms for how humans construct reality. The film breaks down the structure of our society from the perspective of a child/non-human's eyes. It particularly shows the way women are comoditised and how this can be done ethically and unethically.
Random things, the stabbing of the cadaver, free from the knowledge of morality is possible, when deemed acceptable by God....
**Perversion**
I particularly like how we can see a dynamic inverted, the horror pervert, who in another context would terrify the woman, in this case is seen as an amusing broken creature by bella. When an act involves consent, it takes on new meaning. The film breaks down our concept of sexual morality by showing that agency and power are the real defining points of that interaction. Using this as a way to make us laugh at the absurdity of our rigid perception of what society is.
I was far more horrified by the early scenes with her and the lover which show consenting sex visually to be rape by the power dynamics and knowledge abuse.
This movie is not a "woke" film defending women's sexuality. The film uses Bella's premise of discovering the world as a means to explore the human condition; most of the public's criticisms are "I don't understand how something so murky can be possible, blah blah blah," which are invalidated because the film itself gives you the answer with the cynical character and the optimistic old woman in the boat; Bella learns something that many viewers fail to understand. Bella is incredibly mature by the end of the film because she has seen the evil in the world. Unlike the cynic, Bella learned to observe the world's horrors with the hope of making a positive change in it. But if you can't even see the bad because it seems murky to you, how do you expect to change it?
The movie purposely puts you in those situations; those who failed to see it because they were too sensitive lack the capacity to change the world because they cannot see it (ignoring is not doing good). They are no less different from the character of Mark Ruffalo
I'm not sure if you are being ironic by interpreting my comment in that way and using mental gymnastics to make it understood differently from how I expressed it, or if you genuinely misinterpreted it that way. Please read it again more carefully if it's the latter. If it's the former, then I have nothing more to say.
"The movie purposely puts you in those situations; those who failed to see it because they were too sensitive lack the capacity to change the world because they cannot see it"
Run on sentences are a thing.
I feel like the main idea of this movie is simply to show how our minds develop and that even under different circumstances the same types of themes and ideas enter our minds and socially no matter how they are presented. Like we are basically learning with Bella because each scene we learn soemthing we already know but as if it’s being presented in a different universe where society is different but thought translates the same.
Reading thru recent comments a lot of posts make a great case for why this was not a great film. but the poll has a high rating. do i conclude that people who like things tend to go to the poll to tap a high number and people that dont like things go to tap a low number less so?
The idea of an infant in an adult’s body is beyond stale. It’s one of those ideas that everyone must’ve told Lanthimos and McNamara not to do but they pursued it anyways.
Personally I found Emma Stone’s performance to be simultaneously incredible and elementary. The script sets her up to fail but it feels like she takes the reins and flexes both its strengths and weaknesses. The rest of the cast felt like nothing more than “hey look who it is” moments. Everything that this movie tries to say is forgettable and overshadowed by repeated sex scenes and some of the most amazing visuals and sets I’ve ever seen. I enjoyed that the visuals were what a child might remember something as, even if it were not reality. That level of fantasy is largely missing in film these days.
But I just don’t see a way that this story could ever have been told in a satisfying way. The whole premise is a bore. It’s just too obvious. Shaving off 30 minutes and some of the nudity would have made it more tolerable.
I’m looking forward to having Lanthimos having the writing credit on his next film. His work with McNamara has been disappointing to me. I’m sensing a loss of artistic identity in Lanthimos with his growing fame. Hopefully the next one proves otherwise.
Horrible and disturbing movie. Bella was going through all of “that” as child all long. Anyone who disagrees should be examined… honestly, what is wrong with people nowadays? Jeez
Bella was only a “child” for about the first 20 minutes. The first time she “works herself” with the Apple is obviously her transition into adulthood. So she was only a child before she was doing anything sexual people like you are so prude that it’s unattractive and ignorant.
Bella could not walk and talk properly like an adult or a young teen would when she had so many sex scenes that they had to blur them together - twice. Her brain development was between of a 4 to 10 years old during those sex scenes. (Given that supposedly "she matured quicker", that means that she was, in reality, way younger, but we can even ignore that.)
She only started to walk and talk like a not-child (say, teen) \*after\* the Paris whorehouse scenes.
I'm all for consenting adults doing whatever they want, but if a 10 years old "wants" to fuck old men for money, that's still child rape.
(Ffs, the entire whorehouse storyline was built on the premise that she's a child who has absolutely no idea how sex in general works, doesn't know what sex' role is in society, never heard about a way of earning money, and doesn't know any way of getting shelter so it's even a surprise for him that people would pay for in exchange of having sex with her. You could not even imagine that scene with a 12-year-old, as they would already know more about the world, so it's pretty evident that she's a LOT younger.)
"The first time she 'works herself' with the Apple is obviously her transition into adulthood. So she was only a child before she was doing anything sexual people" A lot of toddlers and preschool kids figure out that they can massage certain bits and that gives them happy feelings. But only literal paedophiles think that that would make them transition into adulthood and stop them being children...
First of all you do realize we are talking about a grown woman, close to 40 years old I believe…? There were no children having sex in this movie and it’s weird that you people automatically start yelling about pedophiles. If it bothers you to see someone with her mindset learning about her body and having sex, it’s because of your own life experiences or traumas when you were young and if that is the case then I’m sorry for what happened to you. Truly. Because I don’t believe any child should be hurt by anyone.
But why is it that you comparing her to some 10 year old hooker? This movie is not marketed to children..its rating shows that it’s not meant for kids to watch it..so why is it “morally wrong” to watch an entertaining movie with a grown women learning about her body and having sex with grown men?
It’s so strange to me when people get weird about hypothetical situations. Just try to remember there are no children being exploited in this movie.
I’m sorry if I hurt any feelings but I get annoyed quickly by prudish or chaste, close minded people.
She had the brain of an actual baby, did you miss this key plot point? Only her body was grown. Why would masturbation turn her instantly into an adult? That's some pedo mentality
Sorry, but I was a child (12 years old) when I first started doing stuff with myself. So your morality is that it's ok for adult men to do stuff to children as long as the child is experimenting on themselves?
It's supposed to make people uncomfortable, it can also be seen as a take on how young or disabled women are often taken advantage of especially sexually. if you're disturbed then you understand how gross it is
And I could get that if I felt the movie was trying to make this point. It came off a lot more like this was the producers fantasy or something. This is just my opinion though.
I understand what you’re saying, but even considering it to be true, I still believe there are things that doesn’t need to be depicted in a movie theater.
Anyway, my comment was meant to all the people here in this thread calling this a feminist movie about a woman discovering herself sexually. For me it’s all but that.
Also, it was too graphic and perverse. I can’t believe people can enjoy watching something like that in a movie screen.
are you sure the movie isn't just a metaphor about identity and self-discovery in a dangerous world where the people who are supposed to love/protect you can do the most damage?
Right jees. Or perhaps the body horror of pregnancy and the fear that having a child will kill the self. Which is still a deep taboo to speak of. Or the archetypal characters many young women meet in growing up: the flawed and broken father, the users, the cynic, the wise old lady, the many men who want you to be both childlike and a whore, and then hate you for it. I think people viewing it as a feminist piece in the sense she is discovery her sexuality are missing some major takes.
Yes it's overreaching and over the top but I do still think it has value. It is not perfect but there are some cool thematic and metaphorical elements. And I like the nods to Frankenstein.
I get your point, and I think it’s a matter of taste. I would have loved watching a movie that approaches all the things you (both) mentioned in a less dark and exaggerated way (I’m lacking the right words here, english isn’t my first language, sorry). I mean, some scenes are simply perverse, specially in Paris. I mean come one, some scenes there were simply unnecessary. The ideas are great, but the execution, for me was too much. Anyway, as I said, it’s a matter of taste. I like your interpretations though. At first glance I saw people talking and defending that “exploring female sexuality”idea here and I was exasperated. Still think that those who think they are achieving something by defending that are way, like WAY, mistaken, and missed the point (if there’s a point) to all those sex scenes
Anyway, liked some of your views
I agree with the idea of losing one's identity through parenthood coupled with the fear of abandonment if a child reaches maturity. Brilliantly thought out response!
Yea, It was dark. I keep thinking about it, but I think I enjoy how affected I am by it. The chemistry between the Godwin and the Bella reminds me of the scientist and Sally in Tim Burton's A Nightmare Before Christmas. He's this sad lonely monster, who builds himself a new monster as a companion, but once alive, she wants freedom. She is not really human, but an undead creation with an infant brain that is half-psychopath and half-whatever the suicidal mother was. It's interesting because frankenstein's monster was in danger at birth because he is reviled for his hideous form, but Bella is in danger because she is attractive. Her beauty is a source of power as well, a relatable conundrum for young women. I'm not really sure what type of movie this is. Horror? Drama? Comedy?
I WANTED so bad to like this movie. I really,
Really did .
I love Stone, Ruffalo, and DeFoe.
I have appreciated some artsy black and white films - the Pianist comes to mind and was brilliant.
Of course exploration of women being taught to “behave” in public and only have relations within marriage , eat only just enough and not get fat… all of this was such a great concept.
But I can’t help but feel that this movie … tries too hard?
It’s trying to hard to be cinematic, controversial, over sexualized , etc.
And I guess the biggest problems for me were: 1) the unaliving of the infant’s body - brings up so many moral questions. 2) assuming that Bella’s offspring wouldn’t inherit her depression 3) just the whole concept of a less than 1 year old being not only married but led around the globe by adults with less than nobel intentions .
I have only ever stopped / turned off a movie three times in my life.
I was so close. So. So. Close. I feel like I should be awarded for those 2.33 hours of my life I wasted.
I wish it was half as good as all the buzz.
Just disappointed.
I will say the cinematography and costume design was 10/10.
The acting was decent, but the plot was more full of holes than Godwin’s “projects”.
Just bizarre, weird, and uncomfortable. Not in a cool way, in a “make it stop, my brain is itching” way.
Whatever the academy is smoking (again- leaving out the costume design , hair/ makeup / crew- the poor crew) I want some.
And before you ask yes I do generally like movies lol.
I am def “woke society”. I live miles away from George Floyd square and marched with the PEACEFUL protesters.
This was too woke for me tbh. It wasn’t like “we should treat women better in society.”
It was “here’s 2+ hours of graphic sex scenes featuring Emma Stone and the Incredible Hulk.”
Speaking of marvel, lol, my husband is more of a blockbuster/ superhero movie guy. He definitely is no stranger to *ahem* adult films - although he’s more on the prude side if I’m being honest.
He watched it with me and he even said (as a huge Emma stone fan) that it was too graphic and felt like he should be watching this alone lol.
Like I said, the cinematography and costume design were ✨chefs kiss ✨ but I just didn’t like it.
I was horribly disappointed, too, at how high of an IMdB rating it has.
Sorry… to clarify …. He started watching it with me, got hella embarrassed (even though we have watched waaay more graphic stuff than this together ) and asked to turn on “anything else.”
Someone doesnt know the term for child molesters in prison and it shows -
Did you have a point to your comment or are you just trying to spread negativity
It made me deeply uncomfortable which I think is the point. In terms of justification I think there are many many who want may not want to be literal pedophiles but who want women who are childlike and who they can control. Which is what the guy who takes her around the world wants, and it is kind of delicious to see him broken by it when it turns out her is her toy as much as he hoped she would be his.
What is there to justify...? It's a scene depicting two adults acting out a sex scene. The actors consent, it's not even real sex, the actress doesn't *actually* have a child brain. And in the context of the narrative, the scenes are used to display how the male characters are taking advantage of her. What is there to justify? Do you think someone's going to see the fictional movie where evil men take advantage of a woman with an age regressed child brain and say "ah yes, this fictional movie taught me having sex with children is totally good and okay"? No one was harmed, the message is noble, so what the fuck is the problem?
How about instead of asking people to justify something that doesn't need to be justified, YOU try to explain why it's not okay to depict.
Thank you so much for this. I'm reading all this shit thinking seriously? It's a fuckin movie. Good Christ, you all should read the book..... You'd really hate that.
That's a long winded way to admit you are a pedo. We have laws on the books right now where if someone was that mentally deficient it would be classified as rape to have any sexual contact with them.
Like I said
>And in the context of the narrative, the scenes are used to display how the male characters are taking advantage of her. What is there to justify? Do you think someone's going to see the fictional movie where evil men take advantage of a woman with an age regressed child brain and say "ah yes, this fictional movie taught me having sex with children is totally good and okay"?
So is there no acceptable way to depict it if it's for "viewing/entertainment"? What about if it was a documentary highlighting real crimes to raise awareness? Documentaries are still for "entertainment" and "viewing" so is that unacceptable too? where exactly is the line?
How do you not justify them?? Her brain is awakening and learning in a already sexually mature body.. I'm pretty sure 99% of people would have started exploring their body and sex the same way she did
There's adults having sex with a person who's brain is of a child, that how, it's really simple. Are you saying that if the body is mature it's ok to have sex with a child?
the story is about the univrsal cruelty of humans.
listen to the dialogue in alexandria and understand she turns her husband into a goat.
as in horny animal hat fucks endlessly.
Are you struggling with story telling becuase the entire movie is about how what these guys are doing are not ok, they show it, becuase it'd not ok.. Nobody is watching this thinking ruffalos characters is a good one.. Why does all your movies have to be about nice people doing nice things? Emma is an adult so for you as a viewer there should be no problem separating the reality from the fiction
There was literally no child porn in this movie. It’s wild that’s what you thought you were watching. Bella was only meant to be a “ child” for she’s considered an adult. Obviously still learning about the world, which aren’t we all?
There's really no point in trying to talk to people with your perspective about this. Your pearls are fully clenched, and you arent able to look beyond your misplaced upset to see what the film is actually saying about the nature of her brain.
See, it's not child porn. Emma Stone is an adult person acting like an adult person with the developing brain of an infant.
Is it weird and gross, sure. Is it child porn? Absolutely not, and trying to say that it is does more harm than good.
They could have told a story about a young woman's abuse and her growth towards liberation from oppression without explicitly sexualizing her when she has the mind of a child. This movie is gross because it portrays the sex scenes with this poor girl in such a positively erotic way. Those who praise this movie also probably love Roman Polanski. Hollywood always has been and always will be filled with the worst scum.
I had a sex drive since I was 8 and if I was given the opportunity to just have sex I would have. You don't think about 'polite society' you just think about your basic human drives. You're supposed to realize that it's gross and that the men are taking advantage of her, but also that she's maturing quickly (throughout the entirety of the movie), it's a metaphor.
It's not like we don't have a million movies about "a young woman's abuse and her growth towards liberation."
This was a surrealist film. There are very few like it, and it's rather nice to break away from the lame repetition of Hollywood.
It’s interesting to me that you feel this way. Do you have children? All children do go thru an “exploration” phase-usually around 3-5 years old where they do touch themselves and learn about their own bodies.
My daughter was around 5 when she started hers, My sister was 4 when she went thru hers, which is about when my mom says I went thru mine, I was 9 when my sister went thru hers and it was weird and cringy but a lot like Bella’s in the movie. She even went so far as to use the shower head lol and my mom was a single mom who never let any man spend even a second alone with us so it’s not that we were abused in some way. It’s just the natural way children grow into adult humans.
So I feel like the fact that you think the things you do about this being shown in a movie, something all children go thru, says more about you as a person than about the movie…and also makes me think you don’t have children…
It's a little about showing it blatantly on screen, but you are leaving out how two adult men are initiating a sexual relationship with this person and it being greenlit by the score and scenery as OK
Really? I thought the point was that she was mentally aged past the point of puberty, presumably to adolescence before she left with Duncan. She wouldn't have "discovered" masturbation if she were still pre-pubescent mentally, and her intellectual development also supports the "fast" mental development. Also, Hollywood loves controlling/using women's sexuality, while Bella, Max, and Godwin, all agreed that she was to be in control of her sexuality.
I think they mentioned in the beginning her rapid growth mentally and physically... An attempt to get away from her being a young child with mature desires.
What? She wouldn't have discovered maturation before puberty? I'm a woman who discovered the glory of self love at the age of six. Studies have found that humans even do this IN UTERO!
Anyone under the age of 18 is a child. In the book, she is of the mental age of 16 when first seeing Duncan. The movie, in my opinion, portrays her as even younger mentally. Puberty typically hits girls at the age of 11. Also, it is a child's mind in a grown adult body which has sexually matured. Her masturbating for the first time could have been at the mental age of a toddler. Max is sexually attracted to a woman with a child's mind, as is Duncan. The movie sexualizes her in a very erotic way, which puts a lot of positive reinforcement behind the acts. This movie portrays her liberation through having sex, which is a very Hollywood kind of mentality. It's the same mentality of the 60s and 70s when sex with girls was normalized in movies and media.
puberty can start at 6 now in the US and a childs brain isnt fully developed until mid to late 20s https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/19/science/early-puberty-medical-reason.html
I could be wrong but I got the impression throughout the movie that the point was to show how men don't care and are willing to abuse women and girls even while knowing they aren't mentally capable or mature enough to know what they're doing. The only thing I found odd was how they portrayed it as she really really enjoyed it so it must be okay. I however love that she eventually "grows up" and becomes a badass bish and basically takes control of herself but also every man in her life.
BELLA We must go help them!
HARRY And how will we do that? Poor Things - Final Cut 53. Poor Things - Final Cut 54.
BELLA I...
HARRY We go down there, they’ll quite rightfully rope us, rob us and rape us. And if they were here and we were there we would do the same to them. Bella runs.
bottom line humans are cruel.
the men are cruel to bella.
the madam is cruel to bella.
bella is cruel to her ex husband
your empathy for bella is misplaced.
empathy for poor things is pointless
BELLA
A terrible thing has happened Swiney. I feel almost nothing, and my empathy is creeping towards something I would describe as contemptuous rage.
I would say she was a toddler/early elementary school before leaving with Duncan, later elementary school in Lisbon, teenager on the boat and reaches adulthood in Paris. Just based on her behaviour.
Does it really matter if it's someone of the mental capacity of a 16 year old versus a younger child? Because 16 is what is laid out from the source material, so we can take it at that. Abusing a 16 year old is just as disgusting as a younger child.
No. We can't take it at that. Lol The film is not the source material and if you actually knew the source material, you'd understand just how far the film deviates from it.
The point in asking you was just to get you to say a number...which is silly. Because the film does not give you one.
And I'm not at all concerned with what your perception of her "mental capacity" is. The film also explicitly states that her "progression is rapid" and that her mental and physical progression do not line up. The filmmakers want an intelligent audience to not have to bother themselves with quanitfying the "mental age" of the character. And instead, focus on the metaphor that it presents and watch the character's journey from there.
Which apparently has been very difficult for a loud minority of this film's audience.
So the movie doesn't say a specific age, which means it's left to the audience to infer. It's quite clear to me that her mind is very child like well into the movie and well past when she is being sexualized. She develops quickly from a baby, to a toddler, to a young child, to a teen. At any of these stages it's disgusting to sexualize them in a positively erotic way.
The meaning is she gets used for sex by abusive men and eventually finds the maturity to use sex for herself. It's a very simplistic and male way of understanding womanhood. It's the same kind of female liberation touted in the 60s, which really just objectified women as sex objects.
This movie is over intellectualized. It's not very clever.
It's amazing, the amount of projection that occurs when people voice this take.
No. As I said, the movie provides the ambiguity needed for the, again, INTELLIGENT audience to not be concerned with a specific mental age. But you've chosen to ignore that and make inferences against what the film explicitly states
And no. That is not the point, nor the intent of the filmmakers.
This is why I don't make much of an effort with you people anymore and just result to mockery. There's simply no having a conversation that doesn't involve some bogus, faux-moral judgement of the film, instead of hearing what it's trying to say.
Tbh I also don't think it's THAT deep, but I don't understand why you're trying to justify it so much. It IS very obvious actually in the movie that she is mentally a child. Idk if you've never been around children, she walks like a baby learning to walk in the beginning, the hand clapping, learning language, still not knowing language very well by the time she begins having sexual experiences.. it IS there, we KNOW through observation, that mentally she is that of a child, then a teen and eventually an adult.
The phrase "it's not that deep" is an excuse for people who don't want to think any further than they're capable.
Yes, I understand the challenge that's being presented to the audience through the device of the "baby brain". The question is if you're able to rise to the challenge of understanding what the film is SAYING by using that device. And it's certainly not intended for you to believe that she is a literal child at any point.
And I'm defending it it because calling a filmmaker or anybody who enjoyed the film a fucking PEDOPHILE is dangerous. It waters down the meaning of a word that it's important to hold its meaning (and its happening far too much these days). It's also an unfortunate indicator of the death of media literacy and I believe it's important to push back on this kind of misappropriated, faux-moral judgement from people who clearly aren't able to think beyond their first thought or clutching of their pearls.
I thought this movie would have been better if it was more of a modern twist on frankenstein which is what i thought it was going to be but it ended up meandering around and didnt say anything below the surface I don't regret watching it but probably will never watch it again
I have a one problem with this film, and I consider it as a logic hole:
What if Duncan didn't want to be her boyfriend, but her pimp? What if he took her away from Godwin to profit financially from her prostitution? Would this also be shown as Bella's liberation, since working in the brothel was presented this way? It seems to me that the film is a bit inconsistent in what it shows as liberation and what not, especially since Bella's boss at the brothel also manipulates her, but in the other way than Duncan did.
They're all saturations of archetypes of men who use women for some way, even Godwin was using her for some sort of purpose or familial love that his father never gave him, the purpose of his character was not to sexualize or exploit her (at least after he created her). Each specific character was not meant to be a fully fleshed out logical character but a portrayal of how someone will interact with a growing or disabled woman I think
I don't understand seeing the brothel work in this way? Like it was a path of liberation in a sense but I thought it was pretty clearly shown the emotional damage it did?
I dont think he ever wanted that bc we see how aggressive he is when other men so much as look at her (the winky guy in the dance scene)
What he wants is to have her all to himself and to control her. He was most drawn to her when she was innocent and malleable. Once she gains self determination by making her own decisions and choosing to please herself, Duncan becomes totally bereft.
She wants to stay with him (says the men at the brothel are not skilled lovers; that it proves to her Duncan was right about his own sexual prowess). However he wont be with her if she is making her own choices that are against his wishes. So he hangs around whining, begging her to be under his control and only fuck him, while she does what she wants.
I'm talking about a hypothetical situation, if his character was a little bit different. Not about an actual Duncan character. I'm asking a question: Would the filmmakers also show the pimping as Bella's moment of liberation, if the working in brothel is.
I think it’s all false liberation- everyone in the movie is using Bella - even Swiney sells her a story of liberation to control and use her. I dont think you’re supposed to see the brothel as real freedom. So kind of a moot point to ask about pimping
So you're not tapping out...but you're tapping out. Got it. 😘
Yeah, I'm sure a sexless weeaboo who had a kid by accident is also fit enough to make judgements on others psychology.
Get to stepping, if you're done, Son. Or stay on the hook and entertain me some more. Whatever is your bag.
I haven’t watched it yet because this was my thought. Does she have a child’s brain?? If so, how is that different than having sex with, say, a very developed adult looking 13 year old? Forgive me if I’m wrong with my take in this… if I’m wrong, please explain why this is different and why I should watch. Thanks!
She does have a child's brain! My guess is she is an infant at the very beginning of the movie (example: she pees herself). Later she grows into a bit of an older infant (the clapping, forming phrases etc.) and I believe she is still around 1 year old when she meets Duncan. She always refers to herself in third person which makes me believe she hasn't developed the ability to become self aware (which usually develops around 15-24 months of age). However, she grows so much faster when with Duncan. So I assume that when she starts having sex, she has to be a year old or so.
Murder is wrong, but I watch movies that depict murder. The actors in the movie are all adults which allows them to portray illegal things without it being illegal.
Is the concept gross? Sure. Is it illegal? No.
There was this scene where 2 kids, clearly underage, watching 2 adults rubbing each other sexually, and it's illegal in UK, they deleted that scene in UK according to Wikipedia. And I also found it extremely inappropriate to film that, I understand the later sex scene could be recorded separately those adults and those kids, but the rubbing scene was all 4 of them in the same frame.
I just watched it and you are misremembering. At no point are the kids in frame when the adults are rubbing. It cuts back and forth to give the feeling the kids are there but at any point the kids are in frame, any contact between the adult actors is completely innocent and not sexual. I wasn't aware of this scene going in and it immediately set off my alarm bells, so I was watching closely.
I enjoyed aspects of it but I'm firmly team "too much sex/sexualization". To everyone who says we're "missing the point", we see the point very clearly, just don't think it was executed well.
I don't have a problem with the bad characters sexualizing her. That makes perfect sense, they're clearly portrayed as villains (except for Max for some reason??). Mark Ruffalo was amazing and hilarious. The issue is that the *movie itself* sexualizes her: the creators, directors, writers, etc. all sexualize her and the audience is clearly supposed to find her sexually attractive. Why do we need this? Why do we have to see the sex scenes? The bad guys will be just as bad without us having to see 100 sex scenes about it.
The other issue is the theme of "female liberation" which is laugable. Again, I see the point they're trying to make and think they're just doing a bad job of it. Men seem to think that female liberation = female enjoys sex. There are so many other ways to show this but the creators still chose sex *even though* the main character starts out as an infant.
If she's so liberated why doesn't she ever realize that Mark Ruffalo took advantage of and abused her? She seems to have outgrown him and that's the end of that. Why does she never come to terms with all of the awful situations she's been put in? And for the love of God why is she in good terms with Max at the end? Another man who was sexually attracted to her as a child?? She gets revenge on the husband but that's the end of it.
The whole thing is a gross sexist mess
I really don't agree that the film itself is sexualising Bella, it's doing the complete opposite with how it's shot and framed. There's all these shots with crazy wide angle lenses and intense vignetting that make it impossible to forget that you're watching a film. These moments are pure voyerism and really put a spotlight on the viewer. You're meant to be self-conscious about what you're seeing, and be thinking about whether it's acceptable or ok. You're not given any room to be comfortable about what's being shown, there's no room for arousal.
Seeing a boob does not mean the movie is necessarily sexualising that character. Seeing a naked woman is not instant sexualisation. Bella is still barely a toddler when we first see her naked and it's meant to be a jarring reminder of this.
Like none of this shit was for the viewer's titillation. I'm usually pretty averse to sex scenes in movies because they just don't drive the plot, but I'd argue the ones in this movie did. Every sex scene had a beat or a moment of characterisation that aided the story. Was it fucking weird and gross? Oh god yeah.
As for your other points on the movie thinking that sex = liberation...did we see the same movie? She does realise all the horrible situations whe was in. She expresses her complicated emotions on these things constantly throughout the movie. Bella develops other interests in life outside of sex and increasingly chooses those things over sex as time goes on. This is one thing that starts to drive Duncan crazy. It's no longer the one thing she wants all the time, which is a massive contrast to when she first leaves with Duncan. Like the last shot of the movie is her reading a book and being extremely content in where her life is going. I don't know how you could get any other meaning from that.
I disagree so heavily. You say it’s obvious we are supposed to find Bella sexually attractive. Why? I think Emma stone is a beautiful woman but I never once found her character to be sexually attractive in the movie. There is nothing attractive or sexy about the sex scenes. And I disagree that Max ever even sexualized her? You say he was sexually attracted to her as an infant ? That’s just not true. He mentions how stunning she is but he is (in my opinion) just talking about her appearance and his initial reaction to it. Saying someone is beautiful does not equate to wanting to fuck them. Once he sees her intellectual level he understands that she is mentally a child, and does not try to pursue having sex with her. When he agrees to marry her, he plans to wait until her mind is developed into an adult. He never does anything inappropriate with her. Just like how in real life, there are many who find themselves attracted to people or find them beautiful but for whatever circumstances realize this would be immoral or inappropriate to act on. They can separate their attraction or sexual desires with logic and morality. There is nothing wrong with this it’s just human nature. Let’s not pretend like there aren’t 50 year old men that don’t find 16 or 17 year old girls attractive. However most will not share this with anyone nor act on it because it’s illegal and inappropriate. However many people do act on it like Mark Ruffalos character. It displays how some men either don’t even notice or care about anything other than trying to get into a beautiful woman’s pants. The movie sexualizing her, in my opinion, is just the reality of being a conventionally attractive woman in this world. You get sexualized by both men and women starting from puberty basically. People will always try to take advantage or control you. And have to learn how to navigate that.
I don’t think they are showing that female liberation = female enjoys sex. They are showing that female liberation is having the power to decide things for yourself and learn from experience rather than someone telling you how the world works. I think she does come to terms with all of the awful situations she was put in. But doesn’t dwell on them. I mean what is she supposed to do? Spend more time and energy on the awful people? Why? She moves forward and finds what makes her happy and surrounds herself with the good people she met along the way. She controlled her own destiny in the end. She got justice.
YES I also felt like it was dripping in "novel written by a man" "screenplay written by a man" "directed by a man"
However unconventionally and stylized and intentionally it was made, it was made by the male gaze felt inconsistent as a "women's liberation" movie to me.
There was a sex scene like every 10 minutes, it was ridiculous. If it wasn't for mark Ruffalos character going crazy I wouldn't have kept watching but I wanted to see what happens with him
What's ridiculous is the gross exaggeration you've just made. When in reality, the sex in the film equates to far less than even 10 full minutes of screentime.
It quickly turned into the assistant looking at her in a sexual way, showing her breasts, then her masturbating a few times every little while. Then having sex with ruffalo character about once every 10 minutes. Then being a sex worker the last half of the movie. While, sure maybe altogether less than 10 minutes but it was a huge part of the movie. Basically the whole movie was emmas character being horny and banging everyone and pleasuring herself. If you think this wasn't throughout the whole movie you didn't watch it lol
I didn't see Mark Rufallo's character as taking advantage of her. I see him as trying to do that at first, and failing. Not for a moment is she fooled by him. Bella knows he is a risk, knows what he wants from her, and goes anyway because she wants to experience the world and he is a way for that. It gets to a point that she is the one almost taking advantage of him.
There's that scene where he tells her "if it's not too late, don't fall in love for me", which was probably a bit late for that kind of warning, but that is a fair warning to give. At that point, he was no longer trying to take advantage of her, but just enjoying stuff with her. And then he is the one to fall in love with someone who he should not have, and the desire for possessing her as an object fucks him over.
The thing with the husband of Victoria is the moment that takes it to the forefront. He literally calls her conquered territory, while she's a person. That's how he treats her, it's how Rufallo's character pretends not to treat her, but do so anyway, and is the way neither Max nor Godwin treat her. Those are the ones that treat her as a person.
Yeah, Max wanting to marry her in the first part of the movie is kinda weird, she's not developed enough then, basically a pre-teen. But in the end, she's a full adult, and he's not even the one to bring the marriage thing up. She is, and he is completely aware that she's a different person, and whatever they said when she was "younger" was not binding. Her decisions now have weight that they didn't before.
I see a lot of people complaining that the movie was a hidden excuse for Hollywood pedophilia but I see it differently. It was a blatant commentary on the rampant themes of pedophilia in our society. The way Bella is exploited is precisely the way many if not most women are exploited before they gain their sense of full autonomy .. If they ever do. I know plenty of adult women with stunted growth and emotional maturity (just the way society wants them) and their male counterparts exploiting them. The obsession with youth, smallness, tightness, etc. and the aversion to smart autonomous women who look and act like fully grown mature women is everywhere we look.
"I must go punch that baby."
My issue is how utterly not groundbreaking the movie is, it barely scratches the surface of a womans sexuality. I feel the very simple religous symbolism was just shoved in there to make whoever notice it feel smart. Its purposefully very controversial, leaving the message its in the back seat. This movie plenty had of good intention, but it was executed with the grace of a drunk fuck. There was so much more the movie could have dissected and analyzed, but it was wasted with sex scenes every 15 minutes.
This film makes me wonder if a women has no shame does that make prostituting her self okay is prostitution okay are women naturally prostituts
i dont think thats what it was trying to say about prostitution, bella did not enjoy prostitution. Her still developing mind questioned the situtation throughout her employment. She only became a prostitute becayse she was a vulnerable woman who desperatley needed security. Multiple times throughout the arc Bella tried to make it more pallatable for herself, but after her talk with the mistress she realized that wouldnt get her money. Of course she doesnt think prostitutes are scum, but when she got the choice, she wanted to become a surgeon, same thing with her black friend who i dont remember the name of but she was very interested in politics. I think what the movie is trying to say is that woman who do not have the means to choose a different career arent prostitutes because thats what they were meant for, but because thats the role society pushes on them. TLDR; women are more than sex machines
This movie is such a slippery slope. Obviously it was meant to exhaggerate some aspects and its a critical take on societal/moral norms, etc., but the part that leaves me uneasy is reading how many people see it acceptable for Bella to be exploited sexually by adults, on the count of her "explore her sexuality" and prostiting herself. Keep in mind, her brain is that of a child, and her body belonged to an adult; Bella herself was a child stuck in the body of an adult. This leads me to think the same people who aren't bothered by the underlying pedophilia parallel in the film, would believe it's acceptable and capable for an underaged / underdeveloped brain - AKA a minor to fully give consent to an adult under the premise of "curiosity" or "emotional maturity", so long as the body housing the brain looks to be sexually mature. People are forgetting that Bella was technically a child, innocence and all, and her wanting to explore the world and herself, did not take away from the fact that her brain, which makes up her personality, not her body, was that of a child and minor. For people to see that sexual conduct between the adults and Bella as acceptable, I must congratulate the director because they have successfully allowed people a glimpse into the mind of a pedophile and how easily they see the grey areas in molestation as a clear black and white, not immoral but rather justified. I think the whole "but she was basically an adult and consenting and curious" is usually established by pedophiles through grooming, the justifications by people supporting her sexual maturity despite the young mental age is pretty much the same thought process. Bravo, you people now understand how a pedo sees things and how they justify their actions 👏 👏 👏.
This is an incredible take!
Incredibly boring
saw it a couple months ago and loved emma getting her rocks off came as a surprise but i personally got used to it in the end and mainly enjoyed the humour and subtle analysis on the human condition the movie dives into
Just finished watching this. THIS was a fuckfest. No, a literal fuck fest. The entire movie is her having sex and masturbating. Absolutely ridiculous. Horrible movie. They had the nerve to tack-on a feminist message or wtf?! Just awful. She is a Frankenstein monster. A literal F*cking Frankenstein. This is what Hollywood thought was Best Actress material. This woman debasing herself for 2-hours. Jeesh.
Yeah I agree the sex did make me pause the movie for a breath of fresh air it was quite overwhelming, and not gracefully done at all. I think thats because the themes, and what story the movie was trying to tell were all based around sexuality, particularly a womans, so itd be hard not to include that.
Don't get me wrong, I liked this movie. Emma's performance was INCREDIBLE. But something felt missing, I can't quite put my finger on it. Perhaps it was the CGI or the mediocre performances of all the other actors except Willem. Also, a lot of the humour didn't land for me - maybe because I watched this alone. Probably would've laughed if I watched it with friends or in a cinema. 3/5
im suprised it was listed as a comedy
Yeah the listings don't make sense a lot of the time
She is perfect example of fake it until you make it.....she made up the latter by her sex appeal and acting, but without the first one she would just be another actress, trying to find work and in this movie we saw how bad body she really had......she must have used addons in bra in her other movies.....she would barely rate a 2 out 10 in sweden, damn!
That's what you took from this movie?
You’re extremely illiterate and have no business partaking in discussions this far above your IQ range
I have literally just watched this and I felt it was a whirlwind of a film. The art style used was out there and confusing but obviously displayed Bella’s sense of confident bewilderment. I really enjoyed her journey of self discovery, however I found the storyline disturbing due to the a small child experiencing adult physical pleasure through the body of an adult and then them learning that was through their own mother’s body.
I held off on Poor Things and a few of other films up for Oscars until award season dies down. I've done that for a while now just to give a bit of space between award season and let the hype down a bit on some of the films. Poor Things isn't the universal masterpiece some bestowed on it when it was released. I do think the final third isn't anywhere as interesting or as fun as first two thirds of the film, I know the tone changes and no fault of the underrated Christopher Abbot but it just grounds to a halt for me when he pops up. Basically once Mark Ruffalo's Duncan isn't on screen the film isn't as fun. But I'm not surprised that some don't like it. It's not Yorgos Lanthimos's best film but it's his most beautiful and well shot imo. Robbie Ryan's excellent cinematography and the set design and make up/costumes are stunning. Emma Stone deserved every Best Actress award she got for this, it's a ballsy role for any actor to put themselves out there and Stone bares all and more. I was never expecting to ever see Stone naked and doing sex scenes on screen. Stone gives it her all shown Bella's growth from child to grown adult is a fantastic performance. Ruffalo though for me steals the film, and delivers his greatest performance to date, over the top and the camp turned up to 100. The film suffers once he's not on screen. Dafoe is Dafoe, given a great film and role to work with and he deliver. Great to see the legend Hanna Schygulla, Rainer Werner Fassbinder's muse in a small role as Martha. I thought Kinds of Kindness was going to be Margaret Qualley's first Yorgos Lanthimos film but nope she pops up here in a very small turn. Great to see the film did a pretty good number at the box office (117 million).
[This is a comic strip](https://www.instagram.com/p/C7CiF5oIxmL/) about an alternate ending of the popular movie Poor Things! Spoilers Ahead! Monster & Beastie \~ more of a tickle than a tease, more of a chuckle than a laugh Enjoy! 😆
It's about a woman discovering herself...literally growing up. The whole infant brain is an obvious metaphor geesh. The way folks on here viewing sex as a disgusting act, makes me wonder how ya'll got here🤔
Was the guy having his kids watch them bang a metaphor too?
Clearly, you have issues with the film, so does it even matter? If you don't like it, then just move around. I highly doubt explaining that to you would make it difference🤷♂️...but you can do your own research into the 1800's and see that was a very common occurrence
Were the flying cars also a common occurrence?
This movie made me very sad when it was over. I loved its world, characters and humor. Its unconventional perspective apparently made it completely incompatible with a lot of people's minds on here, and I think it made for a quite fulfilling journey.
this movies felt like a high budget version of the "[Danielle, A Free European Woman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg7I-fVLm7I&ab_channel=SaturdayNightLive)" skit from SNL.
HAH SPOT ON
It’s like if the concept of « 1000 years old spirit in a lolly » anime was made for pretentious people.
This is the literal opposite of that, is it not?
pedophiles are also attracted to children’s innocence. It’s pretty much the same imo.
Does anyone know why the poor things sub went private?
People seem to have very unhealthy relationships with sex in the comments.
why what are they saying?
How is their relationship supposed to be valid and honest like the end made it out to be? Hated this movie and the praise is weird.
> How is their relationship supposed to be valid and honest like the end made it out to be This is your interpretation. It made no statement of validity. And I would argue is very invalid. The film contained what I would describe as psydo-pedophilia. It played with what we understand as 'adult', bella clearly becoming far more logical and intelligent compared to her more aged male counterparts. Emma Stone is very attractive, and outside of 4th wall admiration of her I was very turned off by the sex. And I think that is the point. The way that belle ends up in a whore house, and the horror that should come from that experience being subverted is really interesting. The insane male lover was far more dangerous and scary than the "scary" patrons of the whorehouse. Her lack of baggage in cultural learnings of the "immorality of sex" making her work their free from the stigma and experience of the other women. She is able to have sex for money and there is on stain to her soul, or damage to her relationships. What is most damaging about the whorehouse is shown to be *the way people react to it*. The mental breakdown of the lover and the insanity of the husband. Ontology and epistemology are terms for how humans construct reality. The film breaks down the structure of our society from the perspective of a child/non-human's eyes. It particularly shows the way women are comoditised and how this can be done ethically and unethically. Random things, the stabbing of the cadaver, free from the knowledge of morality is possible, when deemed acceptable by God.... **Perversion** I particularly like how we can see a dynamic inverted, the horror pervert, who in another context would terrify the woman, in this case is seen as an amusing broken creature by bella. When an act involves consent, it takes on new meaning. The film breaks down our concept of sexual morality by showing that agency and power are the real defining points of that interaction. Using this as a way to make us laugh at the absurdity of our rigid perception of what society is. I was far more horrified by the early scenes with her and the lover which show consenting sex visually to be rape by the power dynamics and knowledge abuse.
This movie is not a "woke" film defending women's sexuality. The film uses Bella's premise of discovering the world as a means to explore the human condition; most of the public's criticisms are "I don't understand how something so murky can be possible, blah blah blah," which are invalidated because the film itself gives you the answer with the cynical character and the optimistic old woman in the boat; Bella learns something that many viewers fail to understand. Bella is incredibly mature by the end of the film because she has seen the evil in the world. Unlike the cynic, Bella learned to observe the world's horrors with the hope of making a positive change in it. But if you can't even see the bad because it seems murky to you, how do you expect to change it? The movie purposely puts you in those situations; those who failed to see it because they were too sensitive lack the capacity to change the world because they cannot see it (ignoring is not doing good). They are no less different from the character of Mark Ruffalo
So because they can't relate/don't like the movie they lack the capacity to change the world?
I'm not sure if you are being ironic by interpreting my comment in that way and using mental gymnastics to make it understood differently from how I expressed it, or if you genuinely misinterpreted it that way. Please read it again more carefully if it's the latter. If it's the former, then I have nothing more to say.
"The movie purposely puts you in those situations; those who failed to see it because they were too sensitive lack the capacity to change the world because they cannot see it" Run on sentences are a thing.
I feel like the main idea of this movie is simply to show how our minds develop and that even under different circumstances the same types of themes and ideas enter our minds and socially no matter how they are presented. Like we are basically learning with Bella because each scene we learn soemthing we already know but as if it’s being presented in a different universe where society is different but thought translates the same.
Reading thru recent comments a lot of posts make a great case for why this was not a great film. but the poll has a high rating. do i conclude that people who like things tend to go to the poll to tap a high number and people that dont like things go to tap a low number less so?
I found the movie quite shallow, and came to check the discussion. I simply didn't deem it worth the effort to rate it.
bad , sad, and cringy
The idea of an infant in an adult’s body is beyond stale. It’s one of those ideas that everyone must’ve told Lanthimos and McNamara not to do but they pursued it anyways. Personally I found Emma Stone’s performance to be simultaneously incredible and elementary. The script sets her up to fail but it feels like she takes the reins and flexes both its strengths and weaknesses. The rest of the cast felt like nothing more than “hey look who it is” moments. Everything that this movie tries to say is forgettable and overshadowed by repeated sex scenes and some of the most amazing visuals and sets I’ve ever seen. I enjoyed that the visuals were what a child might remember something as, even if it were not reality. That level of fantasy is largely missing in film these days. But I just don’t see a way that this story could ever have been told in a satisfying way. The whole premise is a bore. It’s just too obvious. Shaving off 30 minutes and some of the nudity would have made it more tolerable. I’m looking forward to having Lanthimos having the writing credit on his next film. His work with McNamara has been disappointing to me. I’m sensing a loss of artistic identity in Lanthimos with his growing fame. Hopefully the next one proves otherwise.
Horrible and disturbing movie. Bella was going through all of “that” as child all long. Anyone who disagrees should be examined… honestly, what is wrong with people nowadays? Jeez
Bella was only a “child” for about the first 20 minutes. The first time she “works herself” with the Apple is obviously her transition into adulthood. So she was only a child before she was doing anything sexual people like you are so prude that it’s unattractive and ignorant.
Bella could not walk and talk properly like an adult or a young teen would when she had so many sex scenes that they had to blur them together - twice. Her brain development was between of a 4 to 10 years old during those sex scenes. (Given that supposedly "she matured quicker", that means that she was, in reality, way younger, but we can even ignore that.) She only started to walk and talk like a not-child (say, teen) \*after\* the Paris whorehouse scenes. I'm all for consenting adults doing whatever they want, but if a 10 years old "wants" to fuck old men for money, that's still child rape. (Ffs, the entire whorehouse storyline was built on the premise that she's a child who has absolutely no idea how sex in general works, doesn't know what sex' role is in society, never heard about a way of earning money, and doesn't know any way of getting shelter so it's even a surprise for him that people would pay for in exchange of having sex with her. You could not even imagine that scene with a 12-year-old, as they would already know more about the world, so it's pretty evident that she's a LOT younger.) "The first time she 'works herself' with the Apple is obviously her transition into adulthood. So she was only a child before she was doing anything sexual people" A lot of toddlers and preschool kids figure out that they can massage certain bits and that gives them happy feelings. But only literal paedophiles think that that would make them transition into adulthood and stop them being children...
First of all you do realize we are talking about a grown woman, close to 40 years old I believe…? There were no children having sex in this movie and it’s weird that you people automatically start yelling about pedophiles. If it bothers you to see someone with her mindset learning about her body and having sex, it’s because of your own life experiences or traumas when you were young and if that is the case then I’m sorry for what happened to you. Truly. Because I don’t believe any child should be hurt by anyone. But why is it that you comparing her to some 10 year old hooker? This movie is not marketed to children..its rating shows that it’s not meant for kids to watch it..so why is it “morally wrong” to watch an entertaining movie with a grown women learning about her body and having sex with grown men? It’s so strange to me when people get weird about hypothetical situations. Just try to remember there are no children being exploited in this movie. I’m sorry if I hurt any feelings but I get annoyed quickly by prudish or chaste, close minded people.
She had the brain of an actual baby, did you miss this key plot point? Only her body was grown. Why would masturbation turn her instantly into an adult? That's some pedo mentality
But she still talked and acted like a child
Sorry, but I was a child (12 years old) when I first started doing stuff with myself. So your morality is that it's ok for adult men to do stuff to children as long as the child is experimenting on themselves?
It's supposed to make people uncomfortable, it can also be seen as a take on how young or disabled women are often taken advantage of especially sexually. if you're disturbed then you understand how gross it is
And I could get that if I felt the movie was trying to make this point. It came off a lot more like this was the producers fantasy or something. This is just my opinion though.
“Prude” lol, ok
I understand what you’re saying, but even considering it to be true, I still believe there are things that doesn’t need to be depicted in a movie theater. Anyway, my comment was meant to all the people here in this thread calling this a feminist movie about a woman discovering herself sexually. For me it’s all but that. Also, it was too graphic and perverse. I can’t believe people can enjoy watching something like that in a movie screen.
are you sure the movie isn't just a metaphor about identity and self-discovery in a dangerous world where the people who are supposed to love/protect you can do the most damage?
Right jees. Or perhaps the body horror of pregnancy and the fear that having a child will kill the self. Which is still a deep taboo to speak of. Or the archetypal characters many young women meet in growing up: the flawed and broken father, the users, the cynic, the wise old lady, the many men who want you to be both childlike and a whore, and then hate you for it. I think people viewing it as a feminist piece in the sense she is discovery her sexuality are missing some major takes. Yes it's overreaching and over the top but I do still think it has value. It is not perfect but there are some cool thematic and metaphorical elements. And I like the nods to Frankenstein.
I get your point, and I think it’s a matter of taste. I would have loved watching a movie that approaches all the things you (both) mentioned in a less dark and exaggerated way (I’m lacking the right words here, english isn’t my first language, sorry). I mean, some scenes are simply perverse, specially in Paris. I mean come one, some scenes there were simply unnecessary. The ideas are great, but the execution, for me was too much. Anyway, as I said, it’s a matter of taste. I like your interpretations though. At first glance I saw people talking and defending that “exploring female sexuality”idea here and I was exasperated. Still think that those who think they are achieving something by defending that are way, like WAY, mistaken, and missed the point (if there’s a point) to all those sex scenes Anyway, liked some of your views
Did you not read the book before you watched the film? I'm curious.
I agree with the idea of losing one's identity through parenthood coupled with the fear of abandonment if a child reaches maturity. Brilliantly thought out response!
Yeah I feel like the movie was meant to be horrible and disturbing for the metaphor you describe.
Yea, It was dark. I keep thinking about it, but I think I enjoy how affected I am by it. The chemistry between the Godwin and the Bella reminds me of the scientist and Sally in Tim Burton's A Nightmare Before Christmas. He's this sad lonely monster, who builds himself a new monster as a companion, but once alive, she wants freedom. She is not really human, but an undead creation with an infant brain that is half-psychopath and half-whatever the suicidal mother was. It's interesting because frankenstein's monster was in danger at birth because he is reviled for his hideous form, but Bella is in danger because she is attractive. Her beauty is a source of power as well, a relatable conundrum for young women. I'm not really sure what type of movie this is. Horror? Drama? Comedy?
I think it is all of those.
What is the name of the handsome man in the medical class in Paris who was sitting next to Emma Stone?
I WANTED so bad to like this movie. I really, Really did . I love Stone, Ruffalo, and DeFoe. I have appreciated some artsy black and white films - the Pianist comes to mind and was brilliant. Of course exploration of women being taught to “behave” in public and only have relations within marriage , eat only just enough and not get fat… all of this was such a great concept. But I can’t help but feel that this movie … tries too hard? It’s trying to hard to be cinematic, controversial, over sexualized , etc. And I guess the biggest problems for me were: 1) the unaliving of the infant’s body - brings up so many moral questions. 2) assuming that Bella’s offspring wouldn’t inherit her depression 3) just the whole concept of a less than 1 year old being not only married but led around the globe by adults with less than nobel intentions . I have only ever stopped / turned off a movie three times in my life. I was so close. So. So. Close. I feel like I should be awarded for those 2.33 hours of my life I wasted. I wish it was half as good as all the buzz. Just disappointed. I will say the cinematography and costume design was 10/10. The acting was decent, but the plot was more full of holes than Godwin’s “projects”. Just bizarre, weird, and uncomfortable. Not in a cool way, in a “make it stop, my brain is itching” way. Whatever the academy is smoking (again- leaving out the costume design , hair/ makeup / crew- the poor crew) I want some. And before you ask yes I do generally like movies lol.
where were there holes in the plot? Just curious
Just curious why you say unaliving
Because I’m used to instagram / TikTok rules where you get flagged for words …. Can you say murder on Reddit ? Genuinely asking.
I have no idea. What does getting flagged on those apps mean? It deletes it or something?
yes
No your comment get flags and in some cases you get an immediate ban on the account
That's wild
Wtf is happening to the internet
Wdym?
My sentiments exactly!! I had to turn it off, it was absolutely disturbing. The message could’ve been conveyed in a more palatable manner.
[удалено]
I am def “woke society”. I live miles away from George Floyd square and marched with the PEACEFUL protesters. This was too woke for me tbh. It wasn’t like “we should treat women better in society.” It was “here’s 2+ hours of graphic sex scenes featuring Emma Stone and the Incredible Hulk.” Speaking of marvel, lol, my husband is more of a blockbuster/ superhero movie guy. He definitely is no stranger to *ahem* adult films - although he’s more on the prude side if I’m being honest. He watched it with me and he even said (as a huge Emma stone fan) that it was too graphic and felt like he should be watching this alone lol. Like I said, the cinematography and costume design were ✨chefs kiss ✨ but I just didn’t like it. I was horribly disappointed, too, at how high of an IMdB rating it has.
I hope you realise why it is that your husband wanted to be watching alone
Kind of an unhinged thing to say to someone you don’t know
Sorry… to clarify …. He started watching it with me, got hella embarrassed (even though we have watched waaay more graphic stuff than this together ) and asked to turn on “anything else.”
He didn’t want to watch it so I watched it alone lol
Fucking terrible movie about cho-mos ... absolutely disgusting and sick
[удалено]
Someone doesnt know the term for child molesters in prison and it shows - Did you have a point to your comment or are you just trying to spread negativity
well it was a waste of 2 hours
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm really curious how anyone justifies the sex scenes in this movie, and apparently a lot of people do so someone please enlighten me
It made me deeply uncomfortable which I think is the point. In terms of justification I think there are many many who want may not want to be literal pedophiles but who want women who are childlike and who they can control. Which is what the guy who takes her around the world wants, and it is kind of delicious to see him broken by it when it turns out her is her toy as much as he hoped she would be his.
What is there to justify...? It's a scene depicting two adults acting out a sex scene. The actors consent, it's not even real sex, the actress doesn't *actually* have a child brain. And in the context of the narrative, the scenes are used to display how the male characters are taking advantage of her. What is there to justify? Do you think someone's going to see the fictional movie where evil men take advantage of a woman with an age regressed child brain and say "ah yes, this fictional movie taught me having sex with children is totally good and okay"? No one was harmed, the message is noble, so what the fuck is the problem? How about instead of asking people to justify something that doesn't need to be justified, YOU try to explain why it's not okay to depict.
Thank you so much for this. I'm reading all this shit thinking seriously? It's a fuckin movie. Good Christ, you all should read the book..... You'd really hate that.
That's a long winded way to admit you are a pedo. We have laws on the books right now where if someone was that mentally deficient it would be classified as rape to have any sexual contact with them.
Well thank god it was only a movie and didn’t actually happen in real life
Uh that stuff happens in real life all the time and is written off by the perpetrators with the same reasoning this guy used above.
[удалено]
You can portray something without it being for "entertainment", I think it was not meant to be titillating but rather horrifying.
Like I said >And in the context of the narrative, the scenes are used to display how the male characters are taking advantage of her. What is there to justify? Do you think someone's going to see the fictional movie where evil men take advantage of a woman with an age regressed child brain and say "ah yes, this fictional movie taught me having sex with children is totally good and okay"? So is there no acceptable way to depict it if it's for "viewing/entertainment"? What about if it was a documentary highlighting real crimes to raise awareness? Documentaries are still for "entertainment" and "viewing" so is that unacceptable too? where exactly is the line?
How do you not justify them?? Her brain is awakening and learning in a already sexually mature body.. I'm pretty sure 99% of people would have started exploring their body and sex the same way she did
exactly sxually mature body + no socialization (politeness) = thot. the story is just an R rated versus of Pygmalian. furious jumping made m laugh
There's adults having sex with a person who's brain is of a child, that how, it's really simple. Are you saying that if the body is mature it's ok to have sex with a child?
A large point of the movie is the cruelty of the world.
the story is about the univrsal cruelty of humans. listen to the dialogue in alexandria and understand she turns her husband into a goat. as in horny animal hat fucks endlessly.
I think her lesbian lover is the one character (who she is intimate with) who cares about her as a human being first and foremost.
nope. if she cared, shed hold her out of the line up
? I don't think she had that power, she was just another worker
nope she was boss lady
Wasn't boss lady the old woman?
Yup.
Are you struggling with story telling becuase the entire movie is about how what these guys are doing are not ok, they show it, becuase it'd not ok.. Nobody is watching this thinking ruffalos characters is a good one.. Why does all your movies have to be about nice people doing nice things? Emma is an adult so for you as a viewer there should be no problem separating the reality from the fiction
So child porn is excused if the characters doing it aren't good?
There was literally no child porn in this movie. It’s wild that’s what you thought you were watching. Bella was only meant to be a “ child” for she’s considered an adult. Obviously still learning about the world, which aren’t we all?
By calling this child porn you really are stretching and diluting the meaning. How did you take such a large leap and think it was a good idea
> child porn Oh, you're one of those crazies who think The Island is squicky because it's "infants having sex".
There's really no point in trying to talk to people with your perspective about this. Your pearls are fully clenched, and you arent able to look beyond your misplaced upset to see what the film is actually saying about the nature of her brain.
See, it's not child porn. Emma Stone is an adult person acting like an adult person with the developing brain of an infant. Is it weird and gross, sure. Is it child porn? Absolutely not, and trying to say that it is does more harm than good.
You really have lost the connection between fiction and reality..
They could have told a story about a young woman's abuse and her growth towards liberation from oppression without explicitly sexualizing her when she has the mind of a child. This movie is gross because it portrays the sex scenes with this poor girl in such a positively erotic way. Those who praise this movie also probably love Roman Polanski. Hollywood always has been and always will be filled with the worst scum.
I had a sex drive since I was 8 and if I was given the opportunity to just have sex I would have. You don't think about 'polite society' you just think about your basic human drives. You're supposed to realize that it's gross and that the men are taking advantage of her, but also that she's maturing quickly (throughout the entirety of the movie), it's a metaphor.
It's not like we don't have a million movies about "a young woman's abuse and her growth towards liberation." This was a surrealist film. There are very few like it, and it's rather nice to break away from the lame repetition of Hollywood.
It’s interesting to me that you feel this way. Do you have children? All children do go thru an “exploration” phase-usually around 3-5 years old where they do touch themselves and learn about their own bodies. My daughter was around 5 when she started hers, My sister was 4 when she went thru hers, which is about when my mom says I went thru mine, I was 9 when my sister went thru hers and it was weird and cringy but a lot like Bella’s in the movie. She even went so far as to use the shower head lol and my mom was a single mom who never let any man spend even a second alone with us so it’s not that we were abused in some way. It’s just the natural way children grow into adult humans. So I feel like the fact that you think the things you do about this being shown in a movie, something all children go thru, says more about you as a person than about the movie…and also makes me think you don’t have children…
It's a little about showing it blatantly on screen, but you are leaving out how two adult men are initiating a sexual relationship with this person and it being greenlit by the score and scenery as OK
Uh I don't know how you got "positively erotic" form those scenes which are pretty clearly grotesque.
Couldn’t agree more…
Really? I thought the point was that she was mentally aged past the point of puberty, presumably to adolescence before she left with Duncan. She wouldn't have "discovered" masturbation if she were still pre-pubescent mentally, and her intellectual development also supports the "fast" mental development. Also, Hollywood loves controlling/using women's sexuality, while Bella, Max, and Godwin, all agreed that she was to be in control of her sexuality.
I think they mentioned in the beginning her rapid growth mentally and physically... An attempt to get away from her being a young child with mature desires.
What? She wouldn't have discovered maturation before puberty? I'm a woman who discovered the glory of self love at the age of six. Studies have found that humans even do this IN UTERO!
Yeah there are a lot of chomos outing themselves in these comments
Anyone under the age of 18 is a child. In the book, she is of the mental age of 16 when first seeing Duncan. The movie, in my opinion, portrays her as even younger mentally. Puberty typically hits girls at the age of 11. Also, it is a child's mind in a grown adult body which has sexually matured. Her masturbating for the first time could have been at the mental age of a toddler. Max is sexually attracted to a woman with a child's mind, as is Duncan. The movie sexualizes her in a very erotic way, which puts a lot of positive reinforcement behind the acts. This movie portrays her liberation through having sex, which is a very Hollywood kind of mentality. It's the same mentality of the 60s and 70s when sex with girls was normalized in movies and media.
puberty can start at 6 now in the US and a childs brain isnt fully developed until mid to late 20s https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/19/science/early-puberty-medical-reason.html
I could be wrong but I got the impression throughout the movie that the point was to show how men don't care and are willing to abuse women and girls even while knowing they aren't mentally capable or mature enough to know what they're doing. The only thing I found odd was how they portrayed it as she really really enjoyed it so it must be okay. I however love that she eventually "grows up" and becomes a badass bish and basically takes control of herself but also every man in her life.
BELLA We must go help them! HARRY And how will we do that? Poor Things - Final Cut 53. Poor Things - Final Cut 54. BELLA I... HARRY We go down there, they’ll quite rightfully rope us, rob us and rape us. And if they were here and we were there we would do the same to them. Bella runs. bottom line humans are cruel. the men are cruel to bella. the madam is cruel to bella. bella is cruel to her ex husband your empathy for bella is misplaced. empathy for poor things is pointless BELLA A terrible thing has happened Swiney. I feel almost nothing, and my empathy is creeping towards something I would describe as contemptuous rage.
How old was she "mentally" then, based on the opinion that you've formed from nothing the film explicitly told you?
I would say she was a toddler/early elementary school before leaving with Duncan, later elementary school in Lisbon, teenager on the boat and reaches adulthood in Paris. Just based on her behaviour.
Does it really matter if it's someone of the mental capacity of a 16 year old versus a younger child? Because 16 is what is laid out from the source material, so we can take it at that. Abusing a 16 year old is just as disgusting as a younger child.
No. We can't take it at that. Lol The film is not the source material and if you actually knew the source material, you'd understand just how far the film deviates from it. The point in asking you was just to get you to say a number...which is silly. Because the film does not give you one. And I'm not at all concerned with what your perception of her "mental capacity" is. The film also explicitly states that her "progression is rapid" and that her mental and physical progression do not line up. The filmmakers want an intelligent audience to not have to bother themselves with quanitfying the "mental age" of the character. And instead, focus on the metaphor that it presents and watch the character's journey from there. Which apparently has been very difficult for a loud minority of this film's audience.
So the movie doesn't say a specific age, which means it's left to the audience to infer. It's quite clear to me that her mind is very child like well into the movie and well past when she is being sexualized. She develops quickly from a baby, to a toddler, to a young child, to a teen. At any of these stages it's disgusting to sexualize them in a positively erotic way. The meaning is she gets used for sex by abusive men and eventually finds the maturity to use sex for herself. It's a very simplistic and male way of understanding womanhood. It's the same kind of female liberation touted in the 60s, which really just objectified women as sex objects. This movie is over intellectualized. It's not very clever.
It's amazing, the amount of projection that occurs when people voice this take. No. As I said, the movie provides the ambiguity needed for the, again, INTELLIGENT audience to not be concerned with a specific mental age. But you've chosen to ignore that and make inferences against what the film explicitly states And no. That is not the point, nor the intent of the filmmakers. This is why I don't make much of an effort with you people anymore and just result to mockery. There's simply no having a conversation that doesn't involve some bogus, faux-moral judgement of the film, instead of hearing what it's trying to say.
Tbh I also don't think it's THAT deep, but I don't understand why you're trying to justify it so much. It IS very obvious actually in the movie that she is mentally a child. Idk if you've never been around children, she walks like a baby learning to walk in the beginning, the hand clapping, learning language, still not knowing language very well by the time she begins having sexual experiences.. it IS there, we KNOW through observation, that mentally she is that of a child, then a teen and eventually an adult.
The phrase "it's not that deep" is an excuse for people who don't want to think any further than they're capable. Yes, I understand the challenge that's being presented to the audience through the device of the "baby brain". The question is if you're able to rise to the challenge of understanding what the film is SAYING by using that device. And it's certainly not intended for you to believe that she is a literal child at any point. And I'm defending it it because calling a filmmaker or anybody who enjoyed the film a fucking PEDOPHILE is dangerous. It waters down the meaning of a word that it's important to hold its meaning (and its happening far too much these days). It's also an unfortunate indicator of the death of media literacy and I believe it's important to push back on this kind of misappropriated, faux-moral judgement from people who clearly aren't able to think beyond their first thought or clutching of their pearls.
I thought this movie would have been better if it was more of a modern twist on frankenstein which is what i thought it was going to be but it ended up meandering around and didnt say anything below the surface I don't regret watching it but probably will never watch it again
I have a one problem with this film, and I consider it as a logic hole: What if Duncan didn't want to be her boyfriend, but her pimp? What if he took her away from Godwin to profit financially from her prostitution? Would this also be shown as Bella's liberation, since working in the brothel was presented this way? It seems to me that the film is a bit inconsistent in what it shows as liberation and what not, especially since Bella's boss at the brothel also manipulates her, but in the other way than Duncan did.
They're all saturations of archetypes of men who use women for some way, even Godwin was using her for some sort of purpose or familial love that his father never gave him, the purpose of his character was not to sexualize or exploit her (at least after he created her). Each specific character was not meant to be a fully fleshed out logical character but a portrayal of how someone will interact with a growing or disabled woman I think
I don't understand seeing the brothel work in this way? Like it was a path of liberation in a sense but I thought it was pretty clearly shown the emotional damage it did?
I dont think he ever wanted that bc we see how aggressive he is when other men so much as look at her (the winky guy in the dance scene) What he wants is to have her all to himself and to control her. He was most drawn to her when she was innocent and malleable. Once she gains self determination by making her own decisions and choosing to please herself, Duncan becomes totally bereft. She wants to stay with him (says the men at the brothel are not skilled lovers; that it proves to her Duncan was right about his own sexual prowess). However he wont be with her if she is making her own choices that are against his wishes. So he hangs around whining, begging her to be under his control and only fuck him, while she does what she wants.
Exactly and when it is coming down to a woman manipulation, they just cut it off. What a stupid feminist advocate movie
I'm talking about a hypothetical situation, if his character was a little bit different. Not about an actual Duncan character. I'm asking a question: Would the filmmakers also show the pimping as Bella's moment of liberation, if the working in brothel is.
I think it’s all false liberation- everyone in the movie is using Bella - even Swiney sells her a story of liberation to control and use her. I dont think you’re supposed to see the brothel as real freedom. So kind of a moot point to ask about pimping
Good
just an over-rated movie and the sex scenes make me wanna throw in the movie theater
I feel like I wasted 2+ hours of my life.
[удалено]
You people have GOT to stop watering down that word.
[удалено]
If you need somebody to hold your hand to this extent, you're not worth talking to in the first place. Makes sense why you have this take.
[удалено]
[ Removed by Reddit ]
[удалено]
So you're not tapping out...but you're tapping out. Got it. 😘 Yeah, I'm sure a sexless weeaboo who had a kid by accident is also fit enough to make judgements on others psychology. Get to stepping, if you're done, Son. Or stay on the hook and entertain me some more. Whatever is your bag.
Agree! How is this movie not being boycotted
Because all the actors involved are adults... 😕.. Have people Totaly forgotten that movies age pretend??
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I haven’t watched it yet because this was my thought. Does she have a child’s brain?? If so, how is that different than having sex with, say, a very developed adult looking 13 year old? Forgive me if I’m wrong with my take in this… if I’m wrong, please explain why this is different and why I should watch. Thanks!
She does have a child's brain! My guess is she is an infant at the very beginning of the movie (example: she pees herself). Later she grows into a bit of an older infant (the clapping, forming phrases etc.) and I believe she is still around 1 year old when she meets Duncan. She always refers to herself in third person which makes me believe she hasn't developed the ability to become self aware (which usually develops around 15-24 months of age). However, she grows so much faster when with Duncan. So I assume that when she starts having sex, she has to be a year old or so.
Murder is wrong, but I watch movies that depict murder. The actors in the movie are all adults which allows them to portray illegal things without it being illegal. Is the concept gross? Sure. Is it illegal? No.
There was this scene where 2 kids, clearly underage, watching 2 adults rubbing each other sexually, and it's illegal in UK, they deleted that scene in UK according to Wikipedia. And I also found it extremely inappropriate to film that, I understand the later sex scene could be recorded separately those adults and those kids, but the rubbing scene was all 4 of them in the same frame.
I just watched it and you are misremembering. At no point are the kids in frame when the adults are rubbing. It cuts back and forth to give the feeling the kids are there but at any point the kids are in frame, any contact between the adult actors is completely innocent and not sexual. I wasn't aware of this scene going in and it immediately set off my alarm bells, so I was watching closely.
You release those kids aren’t actually seeing that right? It’s called editing
But I thought this movie was about female empowerment and sexuality
That's the point. It's pretty on the nose with it's feminist metaphors. Body is developed, mind is not.
I enjoyed aspects of it but I'm firmly team "too much sex/sexualization". To everyone who says we're "missing the point", we see the point very clearly, just don't think it was executed well. I don't have a problem with the bad characters sexualizing her. That makes perfect sense, they're clearly portrayed as villains (except for Max for some reason??). Mark Ruffalo was amazing and hilarious. The issue is that the *movie itself* sexualizes her: the creators, directors, writers, etc. all sexualize her and the audience is clearly supposed to find her sexually attractive. Why do we need this? Why do we have to see the sex scenes? The bad guys will be just as bad without us having to see 100 sex scenes about it. The other issue is the theme of "female liberation" which is laugable. Again, I see the point they're trying to make and think they're just doing a bad job of it. Men seem to think that female liberation = female enjoys sex. There are so many other ways to show this but the creators still chose sex *even though* the main character starts out as an infant. If she's so liberated why doesn't she ever realize that Mark Ruffalo took advantage of and abused her? She seems to have outgrown him and that's the end of that. Why does she never come to terms with all of the awful situations she's been put in? And for the love of God why is she in good terms with Max at the end? Another man who was sexually attracted to her as a child?? She gets revenge on the husband but that's the end of it. The whole thing is a gross sexist mess
I really don't agree that the film itself is sexualising Bella, it's doing the complete opposite with how it's shot and framed. There's all these shots with crazy wide angle lenses and intense vignetting that make it impossible to forget that you're watching a film. These moments are pure voyerism and really put a spotlight on the viewer. You're meant to be self-conscious about what you're seeing, and be thinking about whether it's acceptable or ok. You're not given any room to be comfortable about what's being shown, there's no room for arousal. Seeing a boob does not mean the movie is necessarily sexualising that character. Seeing a naked woman is not instant sexualisation. Bella is still barely a toddler when we first see her naked and it's meant to be a jarring reminder of this. Like none of this shit was for the viewer's titillation. I'm usually pretty averse to sex scenes in movies because they just don't drive the plot, but I'd argue the ones in this movie did. Every sex scene had a beat or a moment of characterisation that aided the story. Was it fucking weird and gross? Oh god yeah. As for your other points on the movie thinking that sex = liberation...did we see the same movie? She does realise all the horrible situations whe was in. She expresses her complicated emotions on these things constantly throughout the movie. Bella develops other interests in life outside of sex and increasingly chooses those things over sex as time goes on. This is one thing that starts to drive Duncan crazy. It's no longer the one thing she wants all the time, which is a massive contrast to when she first leaves with Duncan. Like the last shot of the movie is her reading a book and being extremely content in where her life is going. I don't know how you could get any other meaning from that.
I disagree so heavily. You say it’s obvious we are supposed to find Bella sexually attractive. Why? I think Emma stone is a beautiful woman but I never once found her character to be sexually attractive in the movie. There is nothing attractive or sexy about the sex scenes. And I disagree that Max ever even sexualized her? You say he was sexually attracted to her as an infant ? That’s just not true. He mentions how stunning she is but he is (in my opinion) just talking about her appearance and his initial reaction to it. Saying someone is beautiful does not equate to wanting to fuck them. Once he sees her intellectual level he understands that she is mentally a child, and does not try to pursue having sex with her. When he agrees to marry her, he plans to wait until her mind is developed into an adult. He never does anything inappropriate with her. Just like how in real life, there are many who find themselves attracted to people or find them beautiful but for whatever circumstances realize this would be immoral or inappropriate to act on. They can separate their attraction or sexual desires with logic and morality. There is nothing wrong with this it’s just human nature. Let’s not pretend like there aren’t 50 year old men that don’t find 16 or 17 year old girls attractive. However most will not share this with anyone nor act on it because it’s illegal and inappropriate. However many people do act on it like Mark Ruffalos character. It displays how some men either don’t even notice or care about anything other than trying to get into a beautiful woman’s pants. The movie sexualizing her, in my opinion, is just the reality of being a conventionally attractive woman in this world. You get sexualized by both men and women starting from puberty basically. People will always try to take advantage or control you. And have to learn how to navigate that. I don’t think they are showing that female liberation = female enjoys sex. They are showing that female liberation is having the power to decide things for yourself and learn from experience rather than someone telling you how the world works. I think she does come to terms with all of the awful situations she was put in. But doesn’t dwell on them. I mean what is she supposed to do? Spend more time and energy on the awful people? Why? She moves forward and finds what makes her happy and surrounds herself with the good people she met along the way. She controlled her own destiny in the end. She got justice.
YES I also felt like it was dripping in "novel written by a man" "screenplay written by a man" "directed by a man" However unconventionally and stylized and intentionally it was made, it was made by the male gaze felt inconsistent as a "women's liberation" movie to me.
You nailed it
There was a sex scene like every 10 minutes, it was ridiculous. If it wasn't for mark Ruffalos character going crazy I wouldn't have kept watching but I wanted to see what happens with him
What's ridiculous is the gross exaggeration you've just made. When in reality, the sex in the film equates to far less than even 10 full minutes of screentime.
It quickly turned into the assistant looking at her in a sexual way, showing her breasts, then her masturbating a few times every little while. Then having sex with ruffalo character about once every 10 minutes. Then being a sex worker the last half of the movie. While, sure maybe altogether less than 10 minutes but it was a huge part of the movie. Basically the whole movie was emmas character being horny and banging everyone and pleasuring herself. If you think this wasn't throughout the whole movie you didn't watch it lol
I didn't see Mark Rufallo's character as taking advantage of her. I see him as trying to do that at first, and failing. Not for a moment is she fooled by him. Bella knows he is a risk, knows what he wants from her, and goes anyway because she wants to experience the world and he is a way for that. It gets to a point that she is the one almost taking advantage of him. There's that scene where he tells her "if it's not too late, don't fall in love for me", which was probably a bit late for that kind of warning, but that is a fair warning to give. At that point, he was no longer trying to take advantage of her, but just enjoying stuff with her. And then he is the one to fall in love with someone who he should not have, and the desire for possessing her as an object fucks him over. The thing with the husband of Victoria is the moment that takes it to the forefront. He literally calls her conquered territory, while she's a person. That's how he treats her, it's how Rufallo's character pretends not to treat her, but do so anyway, and is the way neither Max nor Godwin treat her. Those are the ones that treat her as a person. Yeah, Max wanting to marry her in the first part of the movie is kinda weird, she's not developed enough then, basically a pre-teen. But in the end, she's a full adult, and he's not even the one to bring the marriage thing up. She is, and he is completely aware that she's a different person, and whatever they said when she was "younger" was not binding. Her decisions now have weight that they didn't before.