Poor Things
- Release Date: 27/02/2024
- Platform: Disney Plus Hotstar
- Cast: Emma Stone, Willem Dafoe, Mark Ruffalo,
- Director: Yorgos Lanthimos
A Monumental Cinematic Triumph with A Sinister Agenda at Its Core
For me, films have always been about entertainment, intrigue, drama, and everything else that we can attribute to cinematic qualities. There have been very few occasions when a film’s politics and underlying themes have leapt out and made me feel repulsed over and above its wonderful cinematic qualities. “Poor Things” is one such unique film. This will be more of a rant on the despicable politics and the toxic thought process that this film sets out to glorify, rather than a traditional review. I will underline everything that is good about the film in a single paragraph and then move to highlight everything about the film that frustrated me. The problem with a film like this is also the fact that it not only glorifies some of the most horrifying societal evils but is unapologetic, proud, and unsubtle about it. Yorgos Lanthimos in all his previous films can be attributed to having made his viewers uncomfortable, but this time, he has crossed a line that cannot be just taken as a man’s unbridled vision and creations. He creates a film and a gamut of characters through which he justifies, glorifies, and ultimately hero worships a toxic thought process and modus operandi that might in the future drive a wedge between the beautiful and delicate balance between the relationships between men and women and its impact on the survival and well-being of the world as we know it.
The Story:
In a tale wrought with eerie experimentation and ethical ambiguity, “Poor Things” unfolds the story of a gifted and heavily experimented-upon surgeon, Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe), who dares to defy the boundaries of life and death. Baxter reanimates a dead woman who was on the brink of giving birth, by ingeniously implanting the unborn child’s brain into the deceased woman’s body, breathing life back into her. Emerging from the shadows of death, the woman, now christened Bella (Emma Stone), displays an extraordinary capacity for learning, self-discovery, and defiance against societal norms. Enlisting the assistance of his student, Max (Ramy Youssef), Baxter embarks on a scientific exploration of Bella’s development.
However, as Bella begins to learn about the existence of a mysterious world outside the confines of Baxter’s opulent home, she becomes increasingly difficult to control and coexist with. Max, who finds himself ensnared by Bella’s captivating allure proposes marriage to her on the advice of Baxter. Bella agrees but then her newfound independence takes a perilous turn when she encounters Duncan, a lascivious attorney portrayed by Mark Ruffalo, whose intentions cast a shadow over her innocent curiosity. Against the warnings and pleas of Baxter and Max, Bella ventures into the unknown realms of society, her fate intertwined with Duncan’s dubious influence. What unfolds next is a gripping tale of moral ambiguity, uncontrolled lust, and the consequences of tampering with the delicate balance of life and death.
Everything Good About the Film:
One must concede that Yorgos Lanthimos possesses a remarkable knack for ensnaring his audiences’ attention. “Poor Things” stands out as one of the most enthralling and captivating films I have encountered this year, owing to a multitude of reasons. The screenplay holds you spellbound. Despite any disdain for the unfolding events, curiosity compels you to witness the direction the narrative takes and the ultimate fate of Bella and her cohorts. The raw and at times vulgar dialogue among the characters feels jarringly out of place within the film’s setting, adding another layer of intrigue and humour. The performances in the film are nothing short of brilliant. It comes as no surprise that Emma Stone earned an Oscar for her portrayal of Bella. Her mannerisms, dialogue delivery, wide-eyed wonder, and awkwardness infuse the character with depth and authenticity, contributing significantly to the screenplay’s enthralling nature. Every supporting cast member shines equally bright. Any falter in their performances would have undoubtedly detracted from the film’s enjoyment, yet such lapses are nowhere to be found. Willem Dafoe and Mark Ruffalo, in particular, deliver standout performances, embodying their characters with remarkable conviction and bringing out some of the most raw human emotions that make life interesting to document and study. Even minor characters leave a lasting impression.
The cinematography of the film is simply breathtaking. The seamless integration of CGI elements and real-world assets is both imaginative and visually stunning, captivating the viewer’s attention throughout. Every frame of the film sparks the imagination, with the extensive use of wide-angle lenses adding a unique perspective. The makeup and creature effects are exceptionally well-executed, particularly in the visual representation of Baxter’s character. The costume design is imaginative, vibrant, and attention-grabbing. In a film teeming with quality, the fact that the costumes stand out speaks volumes about their craftsmanship. The film rightfully won an Oscar for costume design.
One Dimensional and Despicable Depiction of Men:
The men in the film embody traits of control, manipulation, selfishness, and weakness, contrasted sharply by Bella’s emancipated character who challenges the unjust world forged by male dominance. Bella effortlessly manipulates and dismantles the structured norms of society, leaving the men around her vulnerable and powerless. As she rejects conventional standards of decency and relationship boundaries, the male characters succumb to her influence, experiencing mental breakdowns in the face of her autonomy. Witnessing this onslaught of unjust and unnecessary criticism and depravity directed solely at male characters, even someone like myself, who typically doesn’t seek political undertones in a screenplay, found it difficult to endure.
Godwin Baxter, a control freak moulded by his father’s influence and experiments, subjects those around him to experiments involving animal cruelty and the reanimation of the dead, perpetuating a cycle of control and manipulation. Max, enamoured with Bella yet lacking the strength to demand reciprocated love or set boundaries, becomes a pitiful figure, dedicating himself entirely to her eccentricities. I wonder if the genders of the characters were reversed what would be the reaction of the modern-day audiences to it. Duncan, driven by lust and later by a desire for complete dominance over Bella, suffers a mental breakdown as he fails to assert control over her. As he tries every trick in the book to get Bella to do his bidding, her cuts a sorry figure.
The pinnacle of male degradation occurs when Bella’s husband from the past is humiliated, tortured, and ultimately transformed into a goat, symbolizing the emasculation of men. In the film’s final scene, Bella gleefully remarks that he is now a “better man”, highlighting the director’s and author’s apparent agenda of emasculating men and glorifying female autonomy. This narrative serves as a fantasy for modern pseudo-feminists who advocate for the elimination of male authority and autonomy, reducing men to mere objects devoid of decision-making abilities or conscious existence.
Dangerous Glorification of Prostitution:
Bella embarks on a world tour with Duncan, where she begins to explore humanity through interactions with various people and through literature. However, their journey takes a precarious turn when they find themselves stranded and penniless after being ejected from their ship. In desperation, Bella turns to prostitution to make ends meet. Eventually, she breaks away from Duncan and chooses to reside permanently at the cheap Brothel, indulging in a range of physical encounters for a fee, while spending the remainder of her time immersed in books.
This creative direction for Bella’s character and her method of exploration is deeply flawed and deserving of ridicule. For a woman as free-spirited as Bella, there were undoubtedly alternative avenues for self-discovery, such as continuing her world tour independently. Instead, she opts to commodify herself, engaging in transactions with numerous men, a choice that likely contradicts her own values and beliefs. Her insistence on advocating for the autonomy of prostitutes feels hollow and absurd, serving only to further undermine her character’s integrity.
The film’s portrayal of the brothel’s clientele as representatives of societal moral bankruptcy is both simplistic and harmful. While there may be some truth to the idea that individuals from various backgrounds seek pleasure in such establishments, using this as a blanket condemnation of society’s fabric is unjustifiable. Moreover, depicting Bella’s time at the brothel as a period of enlightenment is deeply concerning, as it may inadvertently glamorize a dangerous lifestyle, potentially influencing impressionable viewers. Ultimately, this aspect of the film is not only distasteful but also poses a significant risk, particularly to young audiences who may be susceptible to its glorification of harmful behaviours.
Questioning And Undermining the Natural Order of Things:
The film ventures into controversial territory by portraying two women reaching unprecedented levels of passion in each other’s company after having their share of men and never experiencing this level of pleasure. This was a narrative choice that aligned with a pseudo-feminist agenda. Bella expresses no desire for motherhood and views physical intimacy solely as a means of pleasure, the culmination of the film sees her content in the presence of a submissive man and a strong black woman. Their dismissive attitude towards a man they have transformed into a sheep further underscores their disregard for nature and its order.
Motherhood, often revered as a sacred and divine aspect of womanhood, holds profound significance in defining a woman’s life. The sacrificial nature of motherhood, uniquely bestowed upon women by their creator, elevates them to a pedestal akin to the embodiment of godliness in human form. To witness this fundamental aspect of womanhood marginalized and, in many ways, denigrated is deeply troubling. If this distorted portrayal of feminism is representative of its true essence, then it is indeed a force of evil.
By questioning and undermining the natural order of nature, particularly the revered institution of motherhood, the film perpetuates a dangerous narrative that threatens to erode the foundational values upon which society is built. Such disregard for the inherent dignity and significance of motherhood not only diminishes the worth of women but also undermines the divine design of creation itself.
Final Words:
“Poor Things” presents a complex and controversial narrative that challenges traditional gender roles and societal norms. While the film’s exploration of themes such as autonomy and empowerment may resonate with some viewers, its portrayal of motherhood and the sanctity of womanhood is deeply troubling. By glorifying questionable behaviours and undermining the natural order of nature, the film veers into dangerous territory, potentially influencing impressionable audiences with its distorted depiction of feminism. Despite its captivating performances and stunning cinematography, the film’s troubling messaging ultimately leaves a bitter taste, serving as a cautionary tale against the unchecked propagation of pseudo-feminist ideologies.
Rating: 4/5 (4 out of 5 Stars) – for its cinematic qualities only!
Also Read | ‘The Holdovers’: A disarming story about love, life, emotions