SummaryBella Baxter (Emma Stone) is brought back to life by the brilliant and unorthodox scientist Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe). Under Baxter’s protection, Bella is eager to learn. Hungry for the worldliness she is lacking, Bella runs off with Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), a slick and debauched lawyer, on a whirlwind adventure across th...
SummaryBella Baxter (Emma Stone) is brought back to life by the brilliant and unorthodox scientist Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe). Under Baxter’s protection, Bella is eager to learn. Hungry for the worldliness she is lacking, Bella runs off with Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), a slick and debauched lawyer, on a whirlwind adventure across th...
Poor Things never gets dogmatically bogged down — it prefers a swifter, Swiftian attack on bygone mores regarding sex that still don’t feel bygone enough — but whether you dig the manner in which this pilgrim’s progress is presented may be a matter of taste.
Just perfection as far as films go.
Stone and Ruffalo are just superb in this.
Yes its a bit weird and at times uncomfortable however this is so well put together you cant help appreciate the craft of putting a film of this stature together
So far, Poor Things is the director's best film and the best film in which Emma Stone has ever acted. With cinematography and a soundtrack that is in harmony with the story, Poor Things is the best movie of 2023 by far.
Yeah, this movie wasn't made for me or my tastes, that's for sure lol. After I finished watching this movie I immediately fired up Tropic Thunder, and it made me realize there was nothing "fun" about Poor Things, at least to my taste, I was watching the movie like I would a natural disaster on live television, with awe, respect, and abject horror. I would love to get some of whatever drugs the director is on, or maybe I wouldn't actually...
Technically this is a stunning movie, the cinematography is arguably the best I've seen, it was absolutely brilliantly shot, hats off. The strange steampunk dystopian world is also very intriguing, it's bizarre and it's certainly original, it's very tim burton-esque in a way. I didn't personally care for the costume design, I'll die happily if I never see another one of those hideous puffy shouldered dresses again... I think the concepts are a little, eh, gross as well? Like I GET what the writer/director were going for, I think I get what they were trying to say but damn it was gross seeing a woman with the mental age of a 12 year old and the speech pattern of a disabled person "discovering" sex. Felt like I needed to take a shower after the movie switched to color, and I'm not talking about the sex itself, sex is fine, sex is great, sex is grand, sex is beautiful, but it really toed the line with the concepts of infantilizing women, taking advantage of women, and borderline pedophilia despite Emma Stone being 35. Also again, I'm not a prude, but ****' hell that scene in the brothel with that crack-head lookin' dude was CREEPY, did not need that image of that naked dude put in my head.
The acting is amazing, Emma Stone of course was great but I think people aren't giving Mark Ruffalo due praise, he brought that slime ball Wedderberg to life in the worst best way possible. Genuinely one of the slimiest characters I've witnessed on the silver screen. However it is all so INCREDIBLY discordant, thematically, musically, artistically, this movie is like nails on a chalk board. Again I get the intent, but it makes for a hard to watch movie imo. There are just a lot of scenes and images from this movie I would have sooner never put into my brain (cough freaky naked crack head looking dude cough), lemme tell ya.
I would safely say if you start this movie, and can't make it through the first 10-15 minutes you can rest assured it never gets "better" it just keeps clobbering you over the head with discordant themes.
I just... Idk what to do with this movie. I can praise the individual pieces of it but it's not a movie I would EVER watch a second time.
A wacky, offbeat and impeccably designed showcase of one of the year's most well-thought-out performances, Yorgos Lanthimos's follow-up to "The Favourite" may not be my favorite work of his that I've seen, but it has a bunch of thought-provoking things to say and some striking visuals scattered all throughout its runtime. On the subject of Emma Stone's work here, it's hard to miss how much she put into this. In every mannerism and line, you feel the effort poured into making this character actually feel like they're developing in front of your eyes. Special attention should also be given to the sets, costumes and visual effects, all of which evokes this sort of alternate Victorian era that's intoxicating to take in. As far as the weirdness quotient is concerned, this one may wander off the proverbial rails a little bit too often for my tastes, but it's a continuing sign of this director's growing imprint on the current filmic landscape. There's definitely not too many people out there making things like Yorgos. I'd say we're all the better for it.
I appreciate what the movie was trying to do, it just took far too long to get to that point. Similar issues also affected the director's other films like Killing of a Sacred Deer and The Lobster.
first have of the movie I was waiting for the story to start, and the second half I was wishing it to finish. Boring. soulless characters, there is no way you can feel anything for them. Another movie that receives magnificent critics because the director, same thing that happens with Nolan this days...