Poor Things, Explained: Empowering or Exploitative?

Poor Things, the new Yorgos Lanthimos film starring Emma Stone, has been racking up nominations and wins on this year’s award circuit. But it also sparked a bit of controversy thanks to one major feature of its plot… So what is the film actually about, and is it empowering or exploitative? Here’s what you need to know about Poor Things, those scenes, and the message the film is trying to convey!

CHAPTERS
00:00 Poor Things
00:37 How Bella Takes Control
01:37 Poor Things = Weirder Barbie?
03:20 Expanding her mind in more ways than one
04:30 Zocdoc Plug
06:13 Story through cinematography & costume
07:18 The truth about *those* scenes
10:29 Wild, but still relatable

CREDITS
Executive Producers: Debra Minoff & Susannah McCullough
Chief Creative Director: Susannah McCullough
Associate Producer: Jessica Babineaux
Writer: Jessica Babineaux
Narrator: Jessica Babineaux
Video Editor: Jessica Babineaux

[qtasma]

People wouldn’t have had much of an issue with the movie if it hadn’t including so much nudity/sex scenes. She has a child’s brain. And yeah, you can say she grows quickly but the plot is basically her learning about life and experiencing everything as an innocent child/minor. Sometimes I feel like Hollywood makes these type of ‘empowering’ movies just so they can live out their nasty, perverted fantasies and put it on screen. And it’s not like Hollywood isn’t filled with creeps.

[_tawagoto_]

I know that this movie was also a satire in many ways and I do have nothing against people liking the movie, but as a feminist movie it just didn't hit it or doesn't fit at all.

There are so many things that needed to be more experienced by the main character or talked about with (especially the poverty scene and the one with her "fiancé" when she came back to the estate) but just when I thought that they would get to what wrongs had happend it never came to it.

I also don't get how anyone thought that "feminist" and the "born sexy yesterday trope" is a good concept together.
I get what they wanted to depict with a vulnerable woman at the beginning that learns with every step, getting more self-aware, but with almost no deep dive or reflexion of the things and abuse that had happend ... it feels like they made no big deal out of the importance and meaning of grooming and it's impact.


The nitpicky parts I had about the movie:

In the end, as a lot of comments already described, it just doesn't come off as authentic when Bella is seemingly forgiving for everything that had happened to her instead of being enraged.

The other thing I sadly did not like is the fact that Bella fell down a fricking cliff with water that is as hard as concrete from this height and not having any scars or disabilities on her body. I know she is supposed to be this astonishingly pretty woman but it seems so ... off, as if women can't be pretty with scars.

The prostitution of Bella, a child with an adult body, seemed a bit uncalled for. I know I know .. shock value or depicting what some women had to do in that time period for money.. but..
If you got a "toddler in adult body concept" please no.

Bella isn't facing any things like body hair, period, etc..
It's strange that non of these were shown and sex (without problems) was almost the most important topic for Bella and her growth.


I hate to write negatively about someones hard work and the visuals + acting in this movie are beautiful but it was just so confusing how this concept won an award. Also a bit concerning. I am open for other thoughts tho!

[roseprescott]

I was actually looking forward to this movie, but I left the theater feeling extremely angry and uncomfortable (and not in the "artsy" way). I think they attempted to make a feminist movie but ultimately failed in doing so as they missed the point completely.

Exploring female sexuality and the experience women have with discovering their bodies and what they enjoy is great to see and I would've liked this aspect...if it wasn't exploited through several unnecessary sex scenes which lingered on Bella's body constantly, assault that was played for laughs, consistent violation that was dismissed, and the portrayal of this happening to a child without any care or thought placed on it (a part that I see people dismiss a lot or explain away as the point the director was trying to make when it's clear there was no intention but instead a hope that the fantasy element would mask her age).

Apart from Harry, none of the main male characters were ultimately good people. And this would be interesting to explore, if they were properly condemned for their actions but Godwin is redeemed for the violation and murder of a woman and Max for pursuing Bella, who he notes is mentally a child. In fact, they added a rather over the top antagonist late into the film in order to make the other male characters appear "not as bad".

Ultimately it was a movie that attempted to be feminist but failed through a lack of female perspective and proper nuance. It was crafted for the male gaze and did little to discuss the ways sexism exists apart from the obvious (which it still mishandles). It's not always a man trying to mutilate you, sometimes it's the kind family friend who knew you as a child and tries to take advantage of you, or an older man who feels entitled to your body because he wanted to "see what happens".

[marvelousmrsnunya]

My frustration with this idea of Bella experiencing life via sex and finding her pleasure is that it never goes beyond that. She never makes meaningful connections. It's all about her and her curiosity, but she doesn't develop empathy. She's stuck in interest in people, things, knowledge, and at no point, other than the moment where she has a bird's eye view of human suffering (which has a distance in it), does she make intimate emotional relationships.
And before you say something about males not being portrayed forming relationships - That's just more aboutism and we're left with more individualistic storylines that only cater to self centered concepts.

[jennyainley]

Your videos are usually very intelligent and nuanced, but the argument that this movie is automatically empowering just because Bella the fictional character likes and initiates sex reminds me too much of when people respond to the criticism of female characters being constantly sexualized through their outfits by saying “But that’s how the character LIKES to dress! Are you saying women shouldn’t dress how they want? THAT’S not very feminist of you.”

[amyadams]

My issue on this film is that, if this and barbie are nearly the same I both plotline and cinematography, why was was barbie put do down but this was raised up? And I can't help but to think that since Emma character was a sexual being and Barbie wasn't is what made the male Oscar pickers like this movie more than Barbie
But that's my opinion

[Queen_Beelz]

As a victim of sexual abuse as a kid, this movie wasn’t empowering at all. Just weird and creepy.

[heatherpoffenberger]

The way I saw it, aspects of Bella were developing at different rates. Within the body of an adult, her brain was developing at breakneck speed. The mind-body connection, however, was taking longer, which in a weird alternate-reality-way makes sense--You can learn the idea of how to execute a handstand instantly, but it takes much longer to actually train your body to do it--Hence why her coordination and speech were more infantile in comparison to her brain. As she first engages with Wedderburn, she seems more like a preteen than a baby. That doesn't make it any less creepy, it still is, but it makes us question the morality of it all, which is the point. Bella having the body of an adult and the mind of a girl is basically what a teenager is, and although Bella continues on from Wedderburn with the same joie de vivre as before, it becomes very clear that he was exploiting her youthfulness just as men feel entitled to do in real life. Sometimes, the twisting and reimaging of reality in a story can help us perceive real life from a different angle, and that's what Poor Things does with underage consent. It's a thought experiment.

[VivianStorm]

It is the most mysogynistc bullcrap movie portrayed as "feminist" by men who take advantage of rebranding the same old mysogyny as empowering.

[benlorimer]

I think everything in this video is true in theory, but in practice it felt like the scriptwriter and director were too busy hurrying of to wank after writing/filming a scene to really dig into the ideas. I think the actors did a good job saving bits and pieces of the themes, but it ends up pretty shallow because of the men conceiving the story.

[emmeoliver]

While I do understand the argument that it's a little icky having Bella engage in intimacy with a juvenile brain I think these scenes illustrate an important point about the fetishization of young female sexuality as well as normalizing how young people experiment with their bodies and sex. I didn't find these scenes to be exploitative, a lot of them (especially in the brothel) to be messy and unerotic. How Bella seeks to take control in a setting where woman are customarily degraded (the brothel) is another testament to her character growth and her understanding of applying the autonomy she has always possessed.

[fabricaHumanoide]

Some interesting vision about the PARIS (spoiler) segment, is that Bella reaching adulthood needs to find a way to support herself. She finds Prostitution as a way of living, doing something that she actually enjoys and is good at. She also discovers politics and how economics works. Some people feels this part slow, but I think it is important to show as the maturity procees of Bella: not everything is new and exiting anymore, but she gets the time to learn valuable lessons and see the reality as it is. Eventually, she gets bored and lost interest in this job and this life (much people can releate with this, even at enjoying and being good at a job), then she doesn't need to explore anymore, but to move forward.
I think that if concentrating on the journy and evolution of the character, it is possible to find so many layers on this movie and feel related. Loved it.

[sofiia]

I used to love your essays for how insightful and analytical they were, but they’ve now become another “movie podcast” that just re-tells the plot of the film and adds zero value.

[MsInescruz]

I'm sorry, are you kidding me??? You are actually brushing through the "she can't consent having the mind of a baby", but coming up with the idiotic excuse that "well, she began sexual exploration by herself!"? What??? Do you realise that it is perfectly normative to have 4 to 5 year-old children discover and explore their own genitals, but that in NO WAY makes it acceptable for adults to participate on that exploration. It's horrifying that people are actually thinking this is to be okay. It's not. She was not an adult woman, she only had an adult body, but in no way that makes her journey one of "sexual liberation". All I saw in the movie was a child being abused by adults and being in a "stockholm-syndrome"-like state throughout the film.

[strongereveryday]

I am just disgusted by this idea. I mean, the fact that people are saying she is a toddler but having sex is sickening.

[lizziebirch]

I think some people have got stuck on the "mind of a baby" thing without taking into account that she grows throughout the film. By the time she meets Wedderburn she definitely doesn't have the mind of a baby anymore - she can walk, speak, is starting to question those around her and think about what she want, has had her own sexual awakening - she's definitely still too young, and Wedderburn is a creep and does exploit her - but she isn't a baby anymore.

[etnalorenao]

There is something that still feels wrong with this movie. The fact that it is a guy who decides to use a women body to experiment sems awful to me. Like this idea of men still doing what they want with women. Then, the idea of assuming that a child mind would developpe like that is awful. Childs need tons of time to developpe critical thinking and a sens of self. Its a very vulnerable age that makes them vulnerable to exploitation. This looks like a women not having enough understanding to make enligthen choices. Finally, the fact that the movie assumes that giving a child brain to a women is the only way to make her free is litteraly WTF. We dont need to be a child to understand and go against social repression. In the same way we dont need to be a child to be curious. This movie feels weird and disgusting to me.

[jackiemcadams]

Wish there was more female representation behind the camera - on the surface this appears to be another case of men telling a woman's story with he exception of Emma Stone in production. I admit, I am just going on what I saw in this clip - I may be wrong.

[MLGDuckk]

Wish this film was set in Scotland - as the book originally intended

[crowboggs]

I think this is a strong movie and I enjoyed it overall. Through its fantastical nature and often absurd humor, it confronts questions of an ethical nature in our reality, the majority of which are related to sex, gender and socio-economic status through the lens of agency. Bella and the film itself take a cavalier approach to all of this in the far more consequence free environment of art relative to our lived reality. As funny and enjoyable as this film often is, I think the viewer should ask ethical questions of the film as they relate it to "the real world" and I think the film actively invites these questions. Bella, well along in her rapid maturation in the film, decides/resorts to sex work as an activity to make an income and to engage with the world within terms that she largely finds satisfactory on a number of levels. Within the fantastical world of the film and between she and the film's overall cavalier nature, she finds this mode of employment empowering and a way to further learn about her world without being socio-economically above it. While I would not say that sex work is inherently wrong (or right, for that matter), it is inherently more dangerous and frequently comes with a social stigma that the world of this film sets aside other than by indirect and secondary references to unscripted violence and transmittable diseases (and birth control is a non-factor altogether). I think this episode/aspect of the film is meant to draw questions of comparison between reality and the world provided here. Bella suffers no violence beyond her limits and is seemingly free of disease. She, eventually, returns to her family (as hybrid as it is, yet family in all that matters nonetheless) and suffers no indignity from their perspective nor her own. Why should she? Why do people engaged in sex work in our reality suffer from indignity amongst a variety of ills? I don't presume to have the answers for everyone, but I have my own perspectives as the questions are brought before me by this film in a de-familiarized and fantastical manner, which undoubtedly affect my perspective on the questions within reality. The film's strength is that it isn't dictating how I should think, but is directing me to look again from a different perspective. Maybe my point of view has changed, perhaps not, but I like this film's attempt at re-vision in the broadest and myriad senses.