“Poor Things” Is Rich

I saw “Poor Things” over the winter break with my boyfriend in a small independent town north of Boston, Massachusetts. It was such a quaint little theater, and the owners were super proud to highlight lesser-known art films that wouldn’t usually be huge hits. Magnifique! I felt like a true Renaissance patron.  

‘Twas a 3 p.m. matinee on New Year’s Day. We planned on eating Indian food afterward, but I wasn’t too hungry. Plus, the film’s imagery makes you want to fast for the next several days.  

“Poor Things” is a magnum opus (not sure whose) – the year’s second “doll-comes-to-life” story featuring a beautifully bittersweet ending about materialism and the human drive against vanity. I loved it.  

The mise-en-scene is pitch-perfect, but that shouldn’t need to be said: Costumes, hairstyling, Willem Dafoe’s face, production design (the production design!!!!!!!). In line with the themes, every set felt like a dollhouse enclosure, one that the characters can never escape from while never feeling at home. The French brothel alone is enough to make an art designer revel in putrid jealousy.  

Performances, as well, are acutely accurate to the source material. (I still can’t believe this was adapted from a novel!) Emma Stone as Billie Eilish (I’m telling you, they look identically) – mwah! Mark Ruffalo as Tom from Succession (same deal, but just personalities) – mwah! Willem Dafoe as Yoshi (they both spew hot balls from their body) – mwah! The two most underrated and underutilized performances are Jerrod Carmichael and Ramy Youssef. The only two stand-up comedians in this comedy support the main cast properly but never really get to show their worth. Youssef is a perfect second-hand, “Igor-esque” servant to Dafoe’s mad scientist. His lackluster conclusion leaves more stories to be desired, but then again, it is not his story. Same with Carmichael; he’s always been a subtle performer – one of the best. Yet, I always want a bit more angst to his demeanor. A bit more oomph, you know? (Perhaps a spin-off, buddy cop TV show would fit perfectly.)  

The film’s themes are similarly underscored. It must simply be another “society=corrupt” tale, but at least it’s told well. Stone’s slow growth into an intellectual promotes sexually charged positivity about owning your own body and mind, escaping the tramples of social norms and co-dependency. She only wants to see the best in people, allowing them to live freely. But she steadily recognizes that intervention is necessary to foster a “good” world if that even exists. She must use her newfound knowledge to directly change the people around her for the better. It’s odd that a film so centered around Stone’s character still gives her such a humble heart.  

Dafoe’s doctor is at first villainous as this secretive man who kidnapped a corpse, yadda yadda yadda. However, it is his strive to remove any notion of his father’s influence that pushes him to release Bella Baxter (love the name). For decades now, he’s glorified his father’s legacy and let everyone follow suit. But he refuses to let the legacy continue in a proud moment of sacrifice. Although both are labeled the town’s “monster,” he refuses to let Bella fall into the same traumatic upbringing. She is no malformed monster; she has immense capability to grow to become more than Dr. Baxter ever could. He dies with good knowledge that his father’s legacy will die with him.  

There is still so much more to this movie that I have yet to discover. It is easily the best movie of the year. I wholeheartedly recommend watching it this weekend.