A movie that's decorated as something special with glitz and glamour that is meant to convey a deeper meaning but at its root is simply perverted. A mad scientist / doctor finds a woman who committed suicide with a baby inside of her and manages to implant the brain of the child into the dead woman. If that isn't enough to scare you away then the fact that the movie then somewhat tries to convince you that was the ethical thing to do is even more worrisome .

The movie then shows Bella Baxter, the woman with the brain of her child inside of her, become exploited over and over. You watch sex scene after sex scene and the directors main goal with all this is to show that Bella is escaping her imprisonment from the men in her life and going on an adventure to pursue 'happiness'. The huge problem with all of this is that Bella has the brain of a child, and if you re watching some of these sex scenes with that in mind it's not a woman pursuing happiness and liberty but child exploitation.

The fact that Hollywood not only accepts this but encourages and awards this concept is deeply concerning. There are so many other ways to show women's liberation and empowerment than what they have done here.

The acting , camera work, and costumes are good, but the plot is chaotic. The script is extremely pretentious and is used to try to make you believe in some powerful underling message.

Overall, certainly could have gone without seeing this one. Its greatest strength is that it certainly makes you have emotions towards it, but for me none of those feelings were positive.

While I am loathe to criticise a fairly original story and something quite different from the norm, this film was definitely not for me. I'm a big fan of Stone, Ruffalo and Defoe so it pains me even more to be negative but I did not like this at all and feel tricked by the high review scores, to the point where I feel the need to leave a low score to balance it out a bit.

I was left thinking suddenly I no longer understand film for this to have scored so high.

I'm not sure why this is deemed a comedy, it is much more a horror in the conventional sense. Frequently grotesque and music designed to make you want to hit the mute button. I tried to like the style and cinematography but I just found the whole story so unpleasant as to be completely distracting.

The one thing I did find funny was the first frame saying 'CONTAINS TOBACCO REFERENCES', which is then proceeded by the opening shot of a suicide. What a bizarre world we are living in.

Poor Things (2023) is an ostensibly feminist film directed by a man, written by a man, and based on a book written by a man... and it shows. This isn't the feminist masterpiece many people claim it to be, and there are a few deeply problematic elements that make most of it feel downright icky. It's about an extremely sheltered (read: imprisoned) young woman's coming of age (mostly via sexual liberation) and the journey she takes to outgrow the various men who seek to control her in one way or another.

The film takes the 'born sexy yesterday' trope and pushes the sickly male fantasy even further by making Emma Stone's Bella not only naïve but actually, at least to begin with, a literal baby inside an adult's body. The concept is that an experimental surgeon (a make-up-caked Willem Dafoe) finds a recently deceased pregnant woman and decides to put the infant's brain into the mother's skull and reanimate her. The unborn child is birthed directly into an adult body, skipping over the physical development but still going through the mental development. It's mentioned that her motor skills will come slowly, but that her mind will develop at an advanced rate. This doesn't really make sense, as absurdist and impressionistic as it is intended to be, and it seems to be accelerated purely because the piece doesn't want to be scrutinised over the icky insinuations of its own concept.

The narrative can't take place over more than a couple of years, but it's heavily implied that the hero has grown from being a babbling baby at the start to a self-actualised woman at the end. The timeline for all this uncomfortably ambiguous, though. Although Emma Stone and writer Tony McNamara have said Bella is actually about sixteen, mentally speaking, when the sex starts (which is still very young, especially in relation to the men she gets involved with, but is at least more akin to the generally accepted age for media portrayals of sexual coming of ages), her mental age is consistently ambiguous. She still walks with the ungainly gait of a toddler when she's supposedly close to the brain age of twenty and she remains acutely innocent even as her general maturity begins to show. The capacity to learn and grow that comes with getting older is separate to the knowledge you gain from having actual experiences, and there is a point at which it's evident Bella is capable of understanding the world around her like an adult even though there are still plenty of things she has yet to be exposed to and are therefore a mystery to her. Even if she is sixteen when we first see her do the deed, the sequence in question - as well as almost all those that follow it - still boils down to a creepy older man having sex with - at oldest - a teenager who is incredibly naive and unaware that the bloke is taking advantage of her. As others have pointed out, children can't give consent, and misguided consent isn't consent either (you can't consent to something without properly understanding it).

Even if Bella wasn't younger than she appeared, her sheltered sincerity would still craft a dynamic that plays into that odd male power fantasy of engaging with a woman who isn't equally as experienced as them. The men in the movie are totally taken with Bella's childlike demeanor, falling head over heels for her because - not in spite - of her younger mental state, and that's massively unsettling. Of course, that is kind of the point. However, the story frames Bella's experiences with these men as a means of her achieving adulthood and ultimately doesn't decry them as much as it should. The most likeable male character (Ramy Youssef) calls her lovely as soon as he sees her, even though she's acting like a toddler, and then proposes to her with the full knowledge that he's proposing to someone who, again, is in her early teens at the absolute latest (this isn't treated as a problem, and he is positioned as the only 'good' guy left by the film's end). It's all just a gross variation of a bizarre male fantasy that really shouldn't be something anyone fantasises about.

I'm not sure if it's to the film's credit or to my own that none of the sex scenes ever feel sexy, primarily because it always feels downright wrong to be seeing Bella participate in them. Despite the fact that she's played by an attractive adult actress, you can't separate what you're seeing from the context in which you're seeing it. You never forget that the character herself isn't as old as the person portraying her, even when her mental age might have caught up to her physical age, but it's difficult to say whether that's due to the filmmaking itself or due to the way in which the viewer reacts to what they're seeing. To be fair, the sexual scenarios are all filmed with a kind of detachment that massively reduces their in-the-moment male gaze, even though it's still apparent and runs throughout the actual narrative (despite the female protagonist and themes of female liberation).

All of this begs the question: what about the concept of a baby's brain being put into an adult's body indicates it should be used to kickstart a story that's primarily about sexual liberation? Why is Bella's development viewed almost entirely through the lens of sexual discovery? It's a very weird place to take the concept; there are many potent elements that comprise someone's journey into adulthood. It's a massive missed opportunity to explore some of these aspects. Perhaps the picture's second most prominent aspect is its depiction of the patriarchy and its protagonist's almost accidental breaking of it (at least when it comes to her specific experience). It gets really close to making a point about this, but it settles for making most of the men in the movie look like total idiots and, as great as that is, it feels like more could have been done. Others have pointed out there's no mention of menstruation, which is a key milestone on the path to womanhood, which indicates that the piece isn't as concerned with the female experience of growing up as it thinks it is. By focusing so much on its sexual aspects and going out of its way to make them as inappropriate as possible (one-upping the 'born sexy yesterday' trope by throwing a literal infant into the fray), it's just very yucky overall and it isn't even done in a way designed to challenge the audience (it almost feels like it wants you to forget about the specifics of its underlying concept after a short while).

It may sound like I hate the feature, but I don't. From a technical standpoint, it's well-made in pretty much every area and it has an unconventional approach to its aesthetic that makes it distinct from its peers. Its performances are also all really good, with Stone impressing the most. It isn't especially boring, even if it isn't particularly compelling for long stretches, and it also inspires a fair bit of thought if you're willing to engage with it critically. You can call it a lot of things, but bland isn't exactly one of them.

The feature isn't the laugh riot many people are claiming it to be, but it is mildly amusing (I don't think I actually laughed once, but I did smile a few times and did one of those sharp nose inhales on one occasion). The first movement is rather difficult to get through; I didn't particularly enjoy any of it. When the piece pops into colour and starts its second act, it slowly gets more interesting and enjoyable. It also becomes even more visually appealing, with fantastic steampunk-esque sets and elaborate frilly costuming captured with delightfully vivid cinematography. The best parts of the picture aren't when it's indulging in its infamous sex scenes (which, despite their frequency, aren't actually as explicit or gratuitous as their reputation would suggest), but instead when Bella is on her journey of self-discovery. This segment leans into the increasing frustration of her insecure companion (an accent-chewing Mark Ruffalo), providing space for the picture to begin to critique the caveman male ego, alongside her exposure to things like philosophy and suffering, which paves the way for her to develop her intellectual and emotional aspects independently of her sexuality (which, for large portions of the affair, is the only way she gets to express and explore herself, cementing the flick's somewhat misguided concept that sexual liberation is the highest form of female empowerment - an idea which flattens feminism, as well as the female experience itself, to only one of its many elements). Though it doesn't fully explore its potentially powerful themes and arcs, it's intriguing to see the protagonist grow as a character and drive the men around her to insanity simply by being entirely unconcerned with their notions of what she should be. The feature slowly but surely becomes more enjoyable as it goes along. Unfortunately, it then takes a hard turn into a sort of epilogue that's incredibly on-the-nose and feels unnecessary. It also introduces an outright villain (Christopher Abbott) whose inclusion only really serves to dilute the misconduct of every other male character (including the 'good'-coded Fiancée, who - let's not forget - decided to marry a child in an adult's body). This segment tanks the pacing and highlights the fact that it's just way too long overall. This goes hand in hand with the other narrative issues to create an experience that's ultimately rather disappointing. It's not just that its narrative is misguided at best, it's also that it isn't that entertaining. It isn't terrible, and there is a stretch where it's even rather good, but I don't find myself particularly moved by any of it and it isn't something I'd actively recommend. Despite its surface-level yet undeniable visual wonder and its genuinely strong performances, it's a bit of a slog to get through and it often makes you feel uncomfortable in the worst kind of way (it's not challenging, it's just creepy).