Poor Things
If you have watched some of Yorgos Lanthimos’ films – The Favourite, Killing of a Sacred Deer – then this film won’t change your opinion of his work. You’ll either be intensely baffled and a bit irritated by the studied quirkiness of the worlds he creates, or you’ll marvel at his ability to create a distinctive vision peopled by unusual and complex characters as a way into an exploration of universal themes. I tend to the latter view. I was continually gripped by the story of Bella Baxter (Emma Stone) and also a little discombobulated by her breathless experiences. I did, however, laugh at regular intervals during this two hours twenty minutes’ film and that kept me engaged with the narrative.
The action is initially set in a stylised version of Victorian London. We are introduced, straightaway, to Bella who lives in a grand house filled with scientific gadgets and a Dr Frankenstein style laboratory. Despite her severe look, Stone gives Bella a physical luminosity at odds with her child-like behaviour – she eats with her hands, cries and shouts as a response to the world around her and seems unembarrassed when she urinates on the floor.
Her hideously disfigured guardian, Dr. Godwin Baxter played by Willem Dafoe, is a renowned scientist specialising in the medical field. Our initial impression that Bella is a child in a woman’s body is explained by a flashback to when Godwin reanimated a suicide’s body but replaced the dead woman’s brain with that of the child she was carrying. This scene is the most direct reference to the iconic Frankenstein movies of the past: the obsessive God (Bella’s nickname for Godwin) - you see what Lanthimos is doing - creates life where there was none. However, the rest of Lanthimos’ film has more in common with the book. Shelley’s concern is with the way the world responds to Frankenstein’s monster, which of course is no monster at all except in appearance; and this, of course, impacts on how the monster’s sensitive and loving innocence is disillusioned by the world it discovers.
Bella goes on a similar journey of discovery in this film. The conceit is that her brain absorbs information and experiences quickly and she develops her communication skills, knowledge and understanding not over a period of years but days and weeks. To God she is, initially, an experiment to be monitored and studied. He brings in his most promising student from medical school, Max McCandles played by Ramy Youssef, to record these developments.
At this point God appears to be the Enlightenment turned into human form. His disfigured face and other physical abnormalities are the result of experiments by his scientist father. Yet they are not the cause of trauma but accepted by the son as legitimate attempts to understand the world better. What stops him from becoming a monster himself is that we see a paternal, caring love for Bella beginning to develop. He sees a different kind of love evolving in Max and decides that his apprentice should marry Bella and live under his protection. Now here is one of the contradictions Lanthimos wants to explore. There is no doubt of the depth and sincerity of both men’s feelings for Bella. They are not only attracted to her physical beauty but the beautiful way she responds to the world; she is perceptive, sensitive and open. Yet they also want to constrain her as a by-product of their fear that the world will crush someone who is so different. Despite their love for her, there is the suggestion that Bella is a poor thing in their eyes.
Up until this point the film creates a weird, slightly gothic ambience punctuated by funny moments often caused by Bella’s growing awareness of her body. She masturbates furiously, often with food and anything else she can lay her hands on. Unashamed to talk about the pleasure her body gives to her, she fails to fully comprehend why a shocked Max asks her to be more discreet.
It’s at this point that Mark Ruffalo’s character, Duncan Wedderburn, enters the story. Thanks to Ruffalo’s wonderful comic performance, the jokes come as thick and fast as the furious bouts of sex that Bella experiences.
God is reluctantly persuaded to allow Bella to accompany Wedderburn on a trip to Portugal. He consents because he knows that Bella’s growing independence will not be constrained and like any loving parent he understands that eventually every child needs to find their own way.
The film then becomes a different sort of film as they set off on a picaresque adventure that is at turns, bawdy, farcical, thought-provoking and dark. Bella enjoys the sex with Wedderburn but quickly grasps his moral and intellectual weaknesses. Her encounters with other characters and their ideas, as well as her changing fortunes, that take her from a luxury cruise ship to a Parisian brothel, are assimilated and processed by her rapidly expanding mind and soul. We also find out the poor things of the title may have a different significance. I’ll say no more, but I was reminded of Coleridge’s Ancient Mariner when he blesses the hideous sea monsters.
Bella’s journey of discovery eventually brings her back to God and Max. The secrets of the reborn Bella are revealed to her and the secrets of her previous life are revealed to us all. Whilst the end of the story brings a conclusion that is aligned to the positive message that Lanthimos is exploring in this film, I must admit that I felt a certain unease. There were some scenes in the brothel that left me uneasy. It was nothing to do with Bella’s sexual curiosity and frankness – I get it that we were being asked to see women as sexual beings unshackled from the male gaze and patriarchal morality. However, the brothel seemed very much a male creation; and the scene where a father brings his sons for a visit was played for laughs when it was extremely icky.
I was also disturbed by what, I thought, was an easy ride for scientists who push the ethical boundaries to breaking point. Bella’s creation, despite God’s rationalisation, is a morally repugnant decision. I don’t think that and his other experiments are ethically scrutinised. That is, however, something that the audience has to consider for themselves.
I can, however, forgive any film that, consistently, made me laugh and created some brilliant images of a skewed world. And, yes, Emma Stone gives a bravura performance. She lacks a star’s vanity, and gives a full-on portrayal of someone bounding through life’s experiences and being transformed by them physically, emotionally and intellectually.