‘Poor Things’ Review
For all its lavish production, Lanthimos eccentricities, and stellar performances, Poor Things often feels like it can’t see the forest for the trees. When it reflects on general concepts like the cruelty of humans and how class, power, and gender dynamics only reinforce that cruelty, it’s marvelous thanks to its heavy-handed approach to the subject matter. However, Poor Things is not about that. It’s about a woman navigating a man’s world and finding freedom through being a woman - which in the case of this film, means almost exclusively being defined by your sexual freedom. For every critique of society’s “etiquette” that Yorgos Lanthimos’ latest film skewers, it finds itself unable to overcome the fact that it is, in itself, evidence of a man’s view on how a woman should behave even in the most ideal circumstances.
It’s not without compelling food for thought though, and its opening scenes hint towards a potentially rewarding journey through the backwaters of upper-class society. When Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe) finds a fresh corpse, he sees an opportunity to advance science by placing a child’s brain into the body of an adult woman. His experiment is successful and now Bella Baxter (Emma Stone) is free to roam the confines of Godwin’s - or “God” as she refers to him - house and be monitored as her cognitive abilities progress. However, with further mental stimulation comes questions, and the one at the forefront of the screenplay’s mind is: “What happens if I touch my body?”
It’s somewhat reductive, but so are the men in Poor Things. Godwin’s desire for a pure experiment results in a figurative leash put on Bella as she is forbidden from going outside and broadening her horizons beyond the scope of the experiment. Meanwhile, Godwin’s assistant, Max McCandles (Ramy Youssef), falls in love with Bella right away and is adorably innocent and unbearably chivalrous - to the point where it makes sense that Bella finds him boring and is more than willing to be whisked away by the selfish, wealthy, and horny Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo). Their sexcapades - and I will stress here that Bella is technically bearing a child’s brain so your rules on consent will dictate how irksome this is - take them to Lisbon, but the fairytale quickly dissipates as Bella becomes restless from the “sugar and violence” at every corner. Soon, Poor Things is forced to confront the idea that the world itself is cruel and there is no escape from its cruelty - only a way of maintaining order within the chaos.
There is nothing subtle about Poor Things, which is not an inherently negative trait to possess, especially when many of the critiques Tony McNamara’s screenplay (based on the novel of the same name, written by Alasdair Gray) posits are uncomfortably relevant today. In fact, even the hyperfocus on Bella’s sexuality is reflective of today’s society consisting of disgust towards anything remotely sexual in art. The contradictions in how men parade their virility while condemning the same actions done by women are exactly what’s on blast throughout Poor Things. However, its belaboring of the point comes with an expectation that it will feel empowering and not like a circus show played for the amusement of every audience. It’s a generalized approach to female empowerment through sexuality and does not take itself seriously enough when it makes pointed critiques about the differences between men and women in society. It undercuts every point with a joke or absurd situation, accentuated by the fact that Bella is mentally a child in a woman’s body.
Emma Stone is given a role that requires so much from her as a performer in order to convey the underlying sadness of Bella’s character. She is the butt of every joke, and yet, also the arbiter of whether it is a joke. It is entertaining to watch Stone inhabit a character that emits honest and blunt reactions to every new situation faced, and somehow she is capable of carrying a sorrowful note throughout it all. The sincere conversations Bella has with other women she meets throughout the film provide Stone with a character capable of speaking her mind while also constantly reflecting and learning. Surrounded by men who are all reduced to basic character traits, Bella is by far the most fleshed-out character. She never meets a man capable of more than a single characteristic: scientific intrigue, hopeful optimism, selfish desire, hopeless cynicism, or unending cruelty. As such, every actor is given a very clear direction and runs with it, though Willem Dafoe’s performance imbues Godwin with more humanity than many of the other characters. And no one out-delivers Ruffalo throughout Poor Things in reading a line of dialogue in exactly the most pompous and deliciously over-the-top manner. Everyone understands the assignment, which results in a humorous film filled with emotion, even if it ultimately stumbles with its intent.
It’s reasons like the performances and the care that went into realizing the vision of Poor Things that still make it an entertaining watch - just one that falls short of being the powerful story it believes itself to be. The gorgeous production design - especially within the colorful and candy-coated Lisbon setting, and how the color palette begins to darken as Bella realizes the depravity of the world around her - is almost too incredible to fault. It’s a fantastical journey that Bella goes on until it closely mirrors the real world, so for a long stretch it feels like a carnival of delights washing over Bella and the audience. It’s when the shadows that are hidden from Bella start dimming her view that the film’s central thesis takes on a seriousness that the film itself does not feel equipped to approach, and is undercut by an oversimplified ending.
There’s a very clear idea and direct execution of what Poor Things is about and because of that, Lanthimos still feels like one of the few directors capable of weaponizing the absurd to make a commentary on reality. However, it is that commitment to the absurdity in his satire that ultimately stunts any salient points being made. Poor Things is certainly not a bad film, but through its comedy of manners approach to women and the patriarchy, it ends up being reductive in its empowerment. With a dedicated ensemble cast, led by Stone’s delightfully nuanced performance, Poor Things may not fully deliver in the ways that matter but it’s still an entertaining breakdown of gender and class politics.
