Honestly 14:46 was the biggest wasted potential. The movie really ALMOST had a moment where a victim of the “born sexy yesterday” trope is now older and is able to see another “infant” unknowingly experiencing the same thing. The main character can then notice all the things she never noticed before. As a “child” she saw all the men as friends or parental figures, but she sees now, when they are interacting with the new “child”, that they are just manipulating her and are only being predatory over her body. I feel that it would’ve been a wonderful, heart-breaking movie about pedophilia, mental/physical disability, grooming, and manipulation.
it couldve been wonderful i think the plot had true potential, like seeing things that happened to you when you were a little girl happen to a girl when youre grown is such a real thing so many afab people experience and wanting to stop that cycle of abuse couldve been wonderful. but no it had to be more about oo sexy lady
This could have been about the infantilization of women and the way abusers go after women that are dependent or easy to manipulate. Like, there is definitely a push for women to look and act cute, pure, innocent and childlike
I haven’t seen anyone talk about the novel “poor things.” The movie leaves out the ending. In the book you find out the whole narrative was a fake story written by her husband to infantilize her. In the book you find out Bella was actually a feminist doctor who who advocated for women, but her husband was jealous and wrote a story about her being a “child monster.” When she found the story she asked to have it burned.
Removing the ending from the original novel, and pretending as if this entire situation had been real? That made zero sense from a storytelling perspective. The best line of the book comes from Bella: "It's a work that positively stinks of all that was morbid in that most morbid of centuries." That got a laugh out of me.
The original Frankenstein was a feminist book when you consider the backstory. It was written by Mary Shelley in 1816 and published 2 years later. Not only was Mary 18 when she wrote it, but it was also her first book, and now it's considered the first science fiction novel.
I also love that she was the reason why one of her friends (the guy that wrote Dracula) to also publish his story because he was scared that nobody would like his story but because she told him it was great he published his own monster story Edit: typo
Not to mention her mother was an influential early feminist and thinker who eschewed social norms of her day and had a fascinating life, where she went to France to witness and be involved with the politics of the French Revolution.
"These film makers aren't afraid to break boundaries when it comes to putting in morally dispicable sex scenes in their movies, but they wouldn't dream of having a quote on quote ugly woman on screen for more than a minute of two." PREACH
I know! It's so common in media nowadays, maybe just as common as it used to be in old movies, (despite what the directors say) and it makes me sick. The number of movies I have been enjoying then shut off as soon as an unnecessary sex/rape scene comes on is too many to count. As someone who has been interested in directing a TV show since I first came about movies/TV shows as a kid, it really needs to change soon.
@@Dustieraccooneven worse is when it’s portrayed as ‘empowering’ like yea sex isn’t something to be ashamed of but writing a movie where a woman gets exploited over and over and over again is shameful!!
I’m still confused as to why they thought to get rid of the bodily scars and “imperfections” that were on the original “Frankenstein” like that’s one of the KEY points in the story??? Edit: I understand that the movie was based on the novel “Poor Things”, but I have one question to all the people telling me that… Do you believe that the director did a good job to show the “greatness”of the novel? (I haven’t read the novel so I don’t have an opinion on it)
first of all, the original novel described Frankenstein as being made in the perfect image. he was flawless except for the uncanny, lifeless look in his eyes. second of all, even if we’re going off of the movie, he’s all scarred because he was out together from dismembered body parts, whereas Bella was found dead and revived with a transplanted brain. she does have a scar on her head from the surgery, and another from her pregnancy. *edited for spelling
@@galibobali we get it, bro, you really wish it was legal to fuck toddlers and women with lobotomies, you don't have to keep pretending this movie was good.
@@galibobali That's not true at all. Frankenstein (the scientist) chose parts of bodies that he thought were beautiful individually but when they all came together in reanimation, the final result was horrendous, which is why he was disgusted and ran from his own "son". That's like the main driver of the plot as almost everyone who encounters him is disturbed by his appearance. Mary Shelley described him as hideous.
"Let's yassify Igor." As a spooky creep that loves Renfield, Golem and other side villain characters, I have waited my whole life to hear these words and have never loved you more.
When my dad and I watched the film, we thought it was a parody of the "born sexy yesterday" trope, and making fun of men who sexualise child like innocence wrapped in sexy clothing, but now I'm not so sure?? The whole child in an adult body having sex was WEIRD and disturbing though...
It is. This movie says a lot about how the society/men around Bella mistreat and take advantage of her while she is "growing up." It turns while they're on the ship when Bella seeks out friends of her choosing, starts reading, and becomes aware that suffering exists. It continues with her choosing to work in a brothel despite what broader society would hoist on her for that decision, choosing a loving relationship with a woman, and attending community events via the socialist club. By the end, Bella recognizes her mistreatment but has to reconcile those feelings with the familial love she still has for Godwin. While not perfect, I think this movie was pretty clear with its use of satire because the audience knows how weird/disturbing all the early scenes are considering Bella's mental/emotional age.
@@beebonious That's really well put, and that's kinda what I got from the movie as well. There were things like how she was always well shaven, and how she decided to marry a guy who wanted to marry her in the past, knowing she was pretty much a toddler, so in that sense I feel like the director could have handled it better.
@@PapaPalina Yeah I agree, her relationship with Max was the only one I had mixed feelings about, because of that. There were good points to it, like flipping the expectation of exclusivity and loyalty. How in media men are portrayed as the adventurers who go off exploring and make their love wait for them at home for years, and usually experiment with other lovers along the way, while the woman is portrayed as waiting faithfully for her man to return and thinking none the less of him when he does, and all this is just fine. But of course for most people the idea of a woman doing that to a man is outrageous and scandalous, and the man respecting that decision is seen as pathetic and/or abused. This is the only example I think I've ever seen in media that flipped those roles, so I appreciate that about their relationship. I do agree that him being framed as the acceptable life partner after his initial predatory interest was questionable. The best way I could look at this is as a statement on women's options, and on the complexity of forgiveness in a system that facilitates and encourages abusive and exploitative behavior. If that was the intention, I don't think they got that across as well as they could have. However art is interpretable and I otherwise enjoyed the movie, so this is how I choose to see the conclusion of that plotline.
The final drawing at 20:13 makes me REALLY want to see an animated film or comic done with the type of storyline Lavender was talking about. She didn't have to go so hard on the scientist's design but I am here for it. Maybe one day we'll get a bombastic lesbian scientist duo like she was mentioning, but until that day; I shall wait.
It’s insane someone managed to turn Frankenstein into: “ What if we had a bunch of men take advantage of a woman, but she’s actually an underage girl/baby on the inside! “
what a way to completely ignore the books background, completely ignore the source material. Anyone that read the book knows that this whole video is just bullshit. ITS NOT BASED ON FRANKENSTEIN. CHECK YOUR FACTS BEFORE YOU SLANDER SOMETHING
When she summarized the movie, I was like "that's just Lolita but even worse somehow" 😭 Edit: by worse I mean the things that happen to Bella are somehow even more revolting than what happens to Dolores in her novel.
From the trailers, I was expecting it to be about a robot girl learning about the world with her creator, but this is so much WORSE 😭 That said, I would pay actual money to see Lav’s ALTERNATIVE idea put on the big screen. That sounds so good!
I didn’t know poor things was “girl Frankenstein” so when I read that title I thought this was gonna be utterly destroying “Lisa Frankenstein” which is a movie that looks like a campy masterpiece but hasn’t come out yet! So I straight up thought you were about to destroy a movie purely from a trailer
The new story you wrote reminds me a bit of a young adult graphic novel I read a bit ago. In this story, called "M is for Monster" it's a brief retelling of Frankenstein. The doctor in this story tried to revive her sister, but the new creature she has created is a different person, whom she gives the name of Frankie. Throughout the story, Frankie sees the ghost of her body's original owner. She struggles as the ghost tells her how to act, and what to do, even though she clearly doesn't like the same things she does. In the ending, she admits to the doctor everything that happened, and they finally make a proper headstone for her sister.
@@claudius3359as far as i could see from the preview is not horror, you can go read it, there's a 50 page preview on google, it's great! I wish i could buy it but I'm broke lol
the point of Bella being shaved and the question about who does it for her and that it doesn't reflect living without shame is a good point that many people may miss to question
Is glass Scientists I think she is an old lady gay scientist, but that's a webcomic, and she's a secondary cast member. Still a great comic and portray of Frankenstein.
I've never heard of this film, but from the sounds of it they completely wasted the potential to create an interesting abstract film about the horrors of grooming and pedophilia,and instead made... a gross film for creeps.
Good golly you're right! The starting premise allows for you to cast an adult actor, meaning you don't have to deal with the whole "how to portray a fictional child being put in these kinds of situations without harming the real child who's cast as them" issue (like that "Cuties" film had).
if people actually watch the film they will realise how the men actually *are* portrayed as controlling creeps and audiences are not encouraged to align with them LOL
Little warning here my tangent does have a few spoilers but I couldn't help myself I just finished reading this in AP Lit. I think most people completely missed a key theme in Frankenstein. The danger of knowledge. Victor created life against warning. The creature learned of the unfair treatment ugly people like him receive. And Walton is warned by Victor against his ventures. The stories original title was "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus" Victor is Prometheus. Warned by others (Zeus) not to pursue knowledge (giving fire to the humans). But he disregards this and puts other's lives in danger. He suffers because of this as well. This movie could've have shown this so well. Almost in a Barbie movie way. Bella could've learned of the terrible treatment women receive and feel so distraught that she wishes not to live on (as Victor feels when the creature basically ruins his life). But instead, she could've overcome her circumstances and fought against the male gaze. And making her as grotesque as the creature in Frankenstein would've been a lot better. It would show that women aren't just their appearance. Mental capacity is more important. That would've been feminist. The feminist aspect of this movie is completely lost. And as someone else in this comment section put it, the movie seems very Lolita esk.
I can't stand how many times gender flipped characters that are supposed to be traditionally unattractive and just completely remove that aspect of the character. It makes it clear that most people only view women as sex objects and not much else. I'm glad to finally hear someone other than me talking about this.
@@Me-vn3gzrly? i just read the original book and he was definitely mutilated, not just yellow eyes. where’d u get that info from? i’m curious edit: okay ig he wasn’t like fully ugly, but he did have thin yellow skin and disproportionate and too big body parts, like victor and all the humans that saw him thought he was ugly
@@imaneclair4836 Yeah it's a bit complicated. He's beautiful, but still looks so obviously unnatural that he ALSO looks hideous. Standard horror trope really. Even the most beautiful person in the world would look scary if they were so obviously a walking corpse.
@@Me-vn3gzno the creature (his name isn’t Adam lol) is descibed as ugly by both frankenstein and walton. He was eight foot tall, disproportionated and had yellowish skin
this is giving me "anime girl who looks like a five year old but is actually a thousand year old god so its totally fine for fanservice" also i love these video essay styles!! i would totally read/watch your take, it sounds so interesting and complex :O
@@novadearest Yeah, but the end point is the same, it's totally cool to sexualise her. Because her mind/body is adult, that means she is adult. And therefor they're allowed to perv on her. Which btw expands to teenage girls who "look older" according to the creeps who want to get away with catcalling and harrassing a 14 year old, or the lies predators tell young children: "you are very mature for your age".
Thank you for not forgetting the second Experiment..the whole movie is icky but her keeping someone with the same fate basically as a pet in her "happy ending" was the final nail in the coffin for me
personally i took the movie to be amoral, and frankly that’s the reason i like it, i prefer movies that make you uncomfortable but are interesting and make you think than boring movies
And I love it even more when critics praise those half ass attempts of "feminism" for being brave and innovative when all it has is women doing stuff meanwhile movies like Nemona get "Wikipedia article on dysphoria" ass reviews
@@bloomypeach6168 (for context I'm saying this as a trans person) I was mostly criticizing how a lot of media critics almost never demand representation that goes beyond "half deep explorations of character" as those are both easily marketable while getting all the brownie points Ex: how a lot of movies are praised for adding more representation when all they did was put/recast a random character as a POC or other minority without actually exploring the character in any meaningful way Movies like Nemona that genuinely grapple with the struggles of queerness, identify and self love get the same surface level analysis and review that are almost insulting to the intentions of the original creators My critic of the "Wikipedia article on dysphoria" ass reviews is that a lot of movies critics genuinely boiled down the story to its most bare bones progressive interpretation without any of the systematic critic(some of them literally spell out what dysphoria means to the audience)
Also the beauty standard of women shaving off body hair only came about in the 1920s when dresses started getting shorter and didn't even exist in the time period it's set in
Yes, because the rest of the movie perfectly follows historical accurate costuming and set designs, and doesn’t at all create its own world merely inspired by the time period. Like come on now. Like I’m obviously not saying body hair is bad, but to specifically critique this movies accuracy like it’s EMMA is outrageous.
@@reddean4712 Seconded. Historical accuracy is obviously not a talking point here. It's a fantasy movie. That said, I understand the knee-jerk aggravation only out of my own sensitivity to it. Nothing tickles my aimless-rage-button quite like women with freshly shaved legs in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, or some such. lol Fucking media.
i know there isnt any accurate time period in the movie but still what was with that one outfit in portugal when she runs off from her hotel room it was just so out of place
your idea for a frankenstein retelling is SO GOOD i would 100% watch it (especially if it was like an animated series with you involved in the creative process or something)
Nitpicky as it is, I would like to note that Victor in the original novel was not a scientist or doctor. He was a college student/dropout who did the original experiment out of boredom and a want to put to use all that he had learned. He shunned his own creation because it wasn't perfect in his eyes, leading to all the tragic events of the book. Again, it's a misconception a lot of people spread, but I thought I would note it here for anyone who hadn't read the original book. You all definitely should, it's amazing. X3
I mean Victor was seeking glory, and scientific advancement above all morals, but yes I see what you mean, he was a college dropout that does not deserve to be called Doctor Frankenstein. He was also motivated by the death of his mother.
@@Shatt3r3d_R3ality ngl trying to argue with the "everyone in Hollywood is pedo" conspiracy theorists feels more like an uphill battle every day and movies like these *do not help*
I haven’t seen the movie yet. But the idea of a what’s basically a baby being sexually abused is disgusting. I can’t even fathom what that has to do with the story of Frankenstein or how that could be feminist in any way. This feels all kinds of creepy
A quick note here: in the original story written by Mary Shelly, the monster is actually incredibly beautiful besides a couple scars and incredibly intelligent, much like the Doctor himself. The reason Frankenstein abandons the monster is because his eyes freaked him out… Victor Frankenstein is a real jerk in the original story. However, since the pop-culture version of Frankenstein is hideous, it makes sense to go that angle.
I know this is such a small nitpick compared to the other negative aspects of this movie but I'm really annoyed they made everyone English? The original book was written by a Glaswegian, and set in the Scottish city of Glasgow. Even in the book, the city is a key theme as Alasdair Grey draws lines between Bella's neglect and his critiques about how the city council neglects glasgow's social and cultural history. Also, the author is one of the most important Scottish authors in the 20th - 21st century (like he's pretty much to glasgow what Charles Dickens is to London.) He's been referred to as the "the father figure of the renaissance in Scottish literature and art". The book contains maps and doodles of real glaswegian streets, landmarks and addresses drawn by alasdair himself. Hollywood is terrified of the Scottish accent I swear 💀💀 Such a small nitpick I know. Im throwing a fuss because I'm studying English + Scottish literature 💀💀💀💀💀 I just would have loved if they had at least mentioned the city in the film 😭😭
i didn't know it was originally meant to be set in glasgow, that would have been so cool! id like to see everyone in that cast do their best crack at a scottish accent lol
I think they were trying to draw more parallels between their movie and Frankenstein-hoping to attach themselves to something more well-known, as it were … Which also doesn’t work, ‘cuz the story starts in Sweden (Victor, himself, being Swedish) and, although he does visit England, he *also* travels to/through Germany, France, Scotland, and the Arctic The England-ization of classic literature (especially Gothic literature) is a plague upon the world
@@cyndlehick9777 I do as well, though I would actually call it feminist, both in the way they undermine and expose the "born sexy yesterday" trope, and through the general metaphor of her experience for that of women growing into maturity in a predatory world. Either way, I think people are taking the movie far too literally.
@@La-PetitMort Bro, how are you two going to virtue signal AND shit on someone relating to an abused character in the same breath? The lack of self-reflection is wild.
This video has actually helped me solidify what it was that was bothering me about the movie. I thought it was fantastic from its visuals and overall filmmaking technique, but something was bugging me with each passing minute, and it only got worse and worse as the film went on. I kept trying to rationalize it in my head, assuming that as a man i was just missing the point, but I actually think I can pinpoint the exact thing that made me realize why the movie wasn't working on a narrative level. I'm not particular squeemish or prudeish or made uncomfortable by sex or sex scenes, but as a pansexual person, I noticed that there was a clear dissidence between the framing and the writing. If the movie is supposed to be about liberating female sexuality, why is the female body the only one the camera and framing focus on during the sex scenes? As I said before, I'm pan and as I've gotten older I've really started to notice how male bodies are never quite sexualized the same way female bodies are. And in this case, it struck me as odd that the movie sets up Bella as desiring sexual relationships with men, but never presents men as sexual objects. It's always Bella herself who is the focus of the sexualization. It's always her body and reactions, her nudity that is focused on. The shots are drowning in male gaze which conflicts with the idea that the movie is about female gaze. The film never shoots men as sexually appealing or attractive, its sticks to making sure Bella's attractiveness is prioritized. The movie sets up Bella as viewing Mark Ruffallo's character Duncan as some sexy adventurous man, but he's never shot that way. His body is never highlighted, or shown in a sexual light. he's not given the over the top organismic reactions to sex, Because unlike Emma Stone or any of the other women shown nude on screen, Mark Ruffalo is not a sex symbol, none of the men in the movie are. If the character was played by Channing Tatum or Reyn Gosling and the shots took time to lear on their bodies and nudity during the sex scenes, It may have had a point to make. But it doesn't. The movie can say its all about a woman's story of sexual liberation, but it's still a movie that exists to show a fetishized conventionally attractive woman who has lots of sex and who likes having sex but only in so far as its appealing to a male fantasy. She even perfectly fills the occasionally bisexual quota so they can have a graphic lesbian sex scene thats shot like a p()rno so the idea of her being intimate with women can exist within the confines of male fantasy.
and in all honesty, it makes me sad that people think this movie is about sexual liberation, it seems like everyone just stopped watching after the second act. Sex, there it was. Bella found freedom through sex, that gave meaning to her life and made her an actualized person. The end. Come on guys, let’s think past the shock. Sex was only one of the facets of her hedonistic phase. she delve into it the same way she stuffed herself with pastries. I have seen pg 13 movies sexualize woman’s body with slow motion zooms of random body parts that serve no point to the story. If showing a nude body is sexualizing it, i’m sorry but there are man naked in this too. Bella never wears corsets or make up (apart from the brothel phase), no bodice making her curves more visible. Duncan in the other hand, wears corsets, heals, butt pads, calves and thighs pads in order to make his body more attractive and voluminous. His curves are highlighted and exaggerated in every single scene he appears in the movie like a freaking peacock.
Also calling a literal disabled lobotomized abused fetus inside of a woman a "wierd, freakish character" is SO ODD to me like NOTHING about the response to this movie sits right with me. It really, truly, honestly seems like people trying to normalize exploitation as good art and not a literal tradgedy?? There is art to be made IN tradgedy, but this is literally just full, unadulterated despair, not all art is good, sometimes people just create actual shit but its not good art just because it's different, it is quite literally just creating abuse for people to gawk at like congratulation here is your medallion idk
I dunno, I agree with you, but a baby's mind in a full grown adult's body is inherently "weird" and "freakish" to me. Exploitative? Definitely. Gross? In spades. But also weird and freaky in the most negative of ways
@Twilarose77 I agree but I was referring to the rotten tomatoes comment when Lavendertowne was talking about the second "experiment"... the person in the comment was like praising the movie saying "I like how there's not one character who isn't strange in this film" like it is just very very weird to me to see a film about what is essentially a child's response to being sexually abused and praise her for being "FREAKISH" LIKE??? I'm not saying they're not freakish it just seems like the purpose of this movie is to gawk at the main character's struggle rather than think about the implications of it?? This film does not answer most of the questions that it proposes which makes me think that the main reason why it exists is to show people something horrific and expect them to go "wow how thoughtful" it is so absolutely lame and weird. What are we doing why are we doing this The comment to me kinda makes me feel like my point is valid like we're not here to talk about the events of the movie we're just going to praise it for being different, which does not by itself make it good! It's a beautiful and weird movie but it's substance is quite ugly and hollow and lame
This is slightly off-topic but this is LITERALLY EXACTLY how i feel about ladybird and the response. It's quite precisely abuse for people to gawk at and watching it I was horrified and angry...and people found it FUNNY???? You've put it into words really well, hate when a film does that
The world does not like things that make them uncomfortable. This id especially true with art and especially cinema award institutions. This movie appeals to men with the fact that Bella’s whole story revolves around the men in her life, and of course, the Born Sexy Yesterday trope at full display. This is a movie that comforts the status quo while hiding within a facade of “feminism” so that they can’t be called out for being sexist and exploitative
I don't know if you'll see this, but you are genuinely oine of the main reasons I'm still an artist art block sucks, but certain artists have that power to just pull you straight out with motivation - and you're one of those artists for me so thank you so much for all of your content and thank you for inspiring 2 million artists, including me :)
I’m glad someone is pointing out the problems with Poor Things. It was not the feminist movie, it was literally the opposite of men taking advantage of a child’s brain in a woman’s body. And the fact that it won a lot of Academy Awards is just disgusting. Barbie was the feminist and movie of the year it made a lot of money at the box office than Poor Things.
So, the worst part of this is that this is a literal example of how many women are treated in the media, being innocent, having no agency, infantilizing, However, it was even more extreme, including disgusting scenes to attract creeps. So I just found out that this movie was inspired by a novel where the criticism is exactly that, a guy who wrote a story infantilizing his wife in such a disturbing way, And then she found out about the story and said to him burn it... Basically they just did the story that the husband create and ignore all the message in the original novel, because of courseeeee they did...
The movie shows Bella growing up mentally and yet critiques like this one act like she was still in the baby stage through the whole story. Isn't THAT your example of infantilization?
@@VixxKong2to be clear, i haven’t seen the film. but the critique in this video is that the way her “sexual liberation” is treated doesn’t mix with the “she’s a baby in an adult body! learning to grow up!!” storyline at all. she’s just taken advantage of several times in the beginning and that’s never explored in the depth such a serious topic deserved to be. again idk if it’s fully accurate but at least argue against the real criticism if you’re gonna defend the film
@@daizy7441 That's the problem. She starts as a baby and she grows up. By the time she leaves the house and starts having smexx she was already in the "young adult independence" stage of growing up. They literally say it in the movie. We spend at least 30 minutes with 2 scientists documenting her mental growth. Of course you wouldn't know that because the people who hate the movie are willingly hiding this information from their reviews in order to paint a narrative around the authors. It's not the first time that Lavandertown is calling other authors perverts over their female characters. Also, Bella says to her first lover that she has smexx because she likes it and she sees no reason to be limiting herself to being with only 1 person. And tbh I enjoy that more than the idea that if a woman has smexx then she is by default being exploited because men enjoy that too. It's a real problem to me that smexx is almost always seen as the dominance of men over women. Because I'm pretty sure that even without the scifi premise of a baby's brain in a woman's body, people would still hate the smexx scenes.
I feel like what people don’t understand is that a woman sleeping with multiple different people is only empowering if ITS HER CHOICE. A WOMAN GETTING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF IS NOT FEMINISM 😭
I feel that now, everytime they put a woman as the central focus point of a movie, no matter how gross, bad or mysoginist the plot actually is, they slap a "feminist story" on it to trick the watchers into believing it ISN'T gross, bad or mysoginist because "It can't be sexist if the heroine's a woman! And if you dislike it, it's because you're not feminist! uwu"
@@NearsightedNarhwal Not everything has to be "empowering" to be feminist. Sometimes feminism just means facing up to how ugly the world really is for women.
I heard nothing about this movie before going into it. No trailers, no reviews, nothing. I didn't know it existed until the day of, when my cousin dragged me off to see it in the theater. I concluded on my own that it was feminist, and was disappointed (though perhaps not surprised) to learn afterwards that so many people felt otherwise.
I genuinely don’t know how this movie was so well received- everytime I see an ad for it I feel sick. my dad convinced me to watch it with him, being excited for it, and even hyping me up. we got through maybe 20 mins bc he couldn’t find the remote. hearing ab the rest of the plot is even worse.. I felt physically uncomfortable watching it, and was genuinely on the verge of tears. she shoved a fucking apple up there. within the first 20 minutes or so. gross. this is made even worse by the fact that is an INFANTS BRAIN. it’s like the troupe where they design a small child looking character just to say “oh they’re actually 500+” as an excuse to sexualise or ship them. except the other way around.. putting a child in an adults body and, by the sounds of it, having explicit sex scenes. with a person with a small child’s conscious. it’s disgusting. not to mention everything you mentioned, too
@@iseeyou2211 While the novel Poor Things was written by Alasdair Gray and published in 1992, it absolutely draws from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with intent. However, the novel seems to have the corpse resurrection and infant brain swap of Bella later refuted by Bella (Victoria) herself as something her husband made up out of the prevailing gothic motifs of the Victorian times.
i’m still in kind of the beginning of the video but it’s realllyyy weird that they wrote a bunch of men touching a woman who is actually a literal baby. that’s peak weird ash
Ok yes these things happen, but what lavendertowne is rly refusing to say is these actions are never portrayed in a neutral light. They are supposed to be seen as predatory and evil😭. Plus this was never supposed to be a Mary Shelly retelling, comparing the two characters makes no sense thematically
@@StayCalm_DoArt123 literally what I said man, what abt them being ‘predatory and evil’ sounds like a neutral light to you? I said ‘these actions were never portrayed in a neutral light’ meaning - the light shone upon these men is a bad one -
@bleh329 dude drawing comparisons and being a direct adaptation are two entirely different things. The only similarities are recurring motifs from Frankenstein and elements of the gothic genre. Besides the movie’s and adaptation of an entirely different book so ofc if you’re going into this w the idea ur going to get a feminist retelling of Frankenstein monster you’re going to be disappointed. Thematically these 2 book focus on entirely different things. This movie is morally grey, the characters are all morally grey and the structure is unconventional. The film is not altogether on the male characters side but to view everything as black and white is immature as hell, every irredeemable character gets their comeuppance ie. mark ruffao’s character and the ex husband. Oh and btw, yes there is an excessive about of sex scenes but most of them aren’t depicted romantically but more so gratuitous. If you can’t handle disturbing themes/imagery why tf are you watching a Lanthimos film ??
Girl, at this point, I would really love to see you as the creative mind behind a new movie. Every video that you make is solid, and totally logical, and you seriously outdo a lot of these writers. I hope one day I could see a movie or TV show by you seriously.
"So basically, she looks like an adult but has the brain of a baby, so inside she's still a child!" ...sir did you just make the literal opposite of a loli
@@liamross340 yeah but it does draw enough parallels between itself and the original tale that one could easily interpret it as at least "inspired by Frankenstein"
@@airplanes_aren.t_real from what ive seen, its marketed as a “girl/feminist frankenstein” but it has none of the themes or concepts of the actual frankenstein!!!!!!!! id be completely fine if they didnt keep it the exact same with characters n stuff, but this has nothing to do with frankenstein other than “oooo dead people, mad scientist, child”
Your redesign and retelling is so compelling. I absolutely loved the direction you took it, and it hit a nice little nostalgic ring in my head cause the 2009 Astro Boy has a similar premise of a new soul being born out of an attempted "resurrection." Stories like Frankenstein that feature odd and unusual protagonists really connect with me, and honestly mean the world to me, so I'm really happy with how passionate you are about making characters truly weird and strange.
I was going to go see this movie a few days ago with my sister and our respite worker. But since it had a 15+ rating We decided to check it for my PTSD triggers online. Holy Crap. It had Every Single One of my Triggers, Like the writers had a damn check list or something! We had to tell our respite worker there was NO WAY I could watch this movie. We went to the beach instead (we live in Australia).
Name a more iconic duo than men taking an already feminist story and trying to make it "more feminist" by turning the female characters permanently sexy and always willing to sleep with and show their bodies to men.
you took the words out my mouth. The audacity to proclaim that a man somehow made a more feminist version of a book that was originally written by a woman, during a time when it was a feminist act to simply write a book as a woman.
@@shannarafryer3111It has to do with the fact it was a feminist show and a comedy, men wanted an action show and for the lead girl to have flaws but not flaws that would dare make her seem unlikable, not like humans are inherently flawed creatures The show isn't perfect but it definitely got way too hate for just being a comedy show
This video made me feel so seen omg...I went to see this movie yesterday and your words "It wasn't until I started thinking about the implications and the exact events of the film that a pit started to form in my stomach" deeply represent my experience. I left the theater thinking, OH I guess this was a good movie despite the bizarre stuff going on and the focus on the explicit scenes right?? It's just ARTSY but I guess kinda empowering in a way....right?!! Then, after thinking on it for a while, I got this deep disgust and uneasiness within myself. You did a great job explaining the story, presenting your points and important reflections to make regarding this movie. So thank you sm for this! ALSO your art is super fluid and pleasant to look at, I loved watching your proccess! PS: Your different take at the end of the video was so good omgg, I wish I saw THAT instead of what I got ToT
The beginning was quite cute so I kept forgiving every red flag showing up for a while, but it definitely started to make me uneasy when the father just agreed to marry her like she wasn’t a child at that moment. I left the theater so disappointed :(
It is so infuriating how poor things is being praised as "feminist", while it continues to fit perfectly into the male gaze. I loved the video essay format looking forward if you create more :3
Godwin’s scars are not inexplicable - they’re in fact pretty explicitly addressed in the side plot of the movie - Godwin’s father was also a scientist who experimented on Godwin while Godwin was alive, beginning from childhood. Hence why Godwin only experimented on animals before discovering the dead body that became Bella. Godwin’s monstrosity and cruelty being a byproduct of his own past victimization is a theme of the movie, albeit a secondary one that gets less screen time than Bella’s journey.
A little correction about "Different Take on 'Feminist Frankenstein'". The hunchback assistant in the first film is called Fritz. Igor is a character in one of the sequels who is blackmailing Doctor Frankenstein to use the monster for revenge on some villagers. Igor had his neck broken in an attempt to hang him, which is why audiences blend him and Fritz together in their heads.
this too is one of my biggest qualms with pop-cultures franken-takes™️ Ygor (yeah i don’t know why it’s spelled like that either) doesn’t appear until the third movie (son of frankenstein) and only ~kind of~ is a lab assistant, he’s more like the town crazy guy haha (also fritz, while the character was a really crappy person, was played by dwight frye who’s one of my favorite actors. we need more fritz representation!! lol)
@@oddelf7988) it might be cause of "Young Frankenstein" fusing the two characters into one. So it's really Marty Feldman we're thinking of as "Igor", not Dwight Frye or Bela Lugosi (tho of course both of them had different iconic characters)
"feminist retelling" -- because they made the monster a woman instead of a man, her entire story is just about looks, being compared to other women, and who she's sleeping with. Instead of what the original; story had the monster portray, the burden of giving life and the experience of living. They said feminist retelling because they genderswapped, not because they thought it through. Obviously.
The director’s barely disguised fetish. Literally infantilizing and then sexualizing said woman is not cute. This is such a gross premise. Lavender’s version sounds infinitely better.
@@coffeebean_18the movie quite literally turns the trope on it’s head and pokes a bunch of holes in it. the man that tried to groom her ended up getting screwed over by her immaturity. please watch the film if you’re going to comment on it.
I feel like that was one of the primary aspects of the boom too😭the “changeling” myth and a creature that seems human but “wrong,” yet has a compassionate and intelligent mind
fellow autistic person here, i totally get what you mean. some people treat us like we're whining babies and our problems aren't valid. they say they'll help, but they don't.
“She goes on a walk with this loser.” PREACH!!! I cracked up laughing 😂 I loved this video to pieces and absolutely adored how you articulated every critique I had about the movie in such a clear way ❤ *Just realized, the movie never actually verifies whether or not the money Bella gave away was even GOING to the poor people. I thought the movie was gonna talk more about class wherein Bella was gonna find out that the guards had pocketed the money instead of giving it away, inciting a discussion about corruption or smth. BUT THEY NEVER CIRCLED BACK TO THAT. I had to stifle my laughter cuz I kept thinking, "lol when she sees those guards with some fancy stuff to show off wealth, she's gonna make the surprised Pikachu face."
This has got to be the most literal example of the "born sexy yesterday" trope I have ever seen, and it's even more gross than it usually is. They had a neat set up of potentially exploring how, even in the modern day, women are expected to pump out children, regardless of if that's what they actually want. Especially considering how they prioritized saving the unwanted baby's life over the life of the woman who's been forced to carry it. That the value of women's lives should revolve around children and their ability/desire to have them, but the movie couldn't do it.
I would say this is the opposite of the born sexy yesterday trope, there’s a line in the movie where Mark Ruffalos character admits he liked her better when she was more child like and Bella rejects him for that. In a true born sexy yesterday trope Bella would have fallen in love with the first man she met and let HIM show her the world. Bella is indifferent to most of the men in this film especially at the beginning. And she discovers the world on her own. This is a lot of moral panic that isn’t warranted.
I have not seen it, so bear with me, but is that not the point? That the ideal woman is a literal infant who will go along with whatever a man says and has a sexy body? These men ARE disgusting, you are meant to be disgusted
thats pretty much the point. the whole thesis of the movie is how men view women. so its pretty telling how gross the men are in this movie is when their attracted to what is essentially a child in a woman’s body, and how they get less attracted when she becomes more mature and intelligent. a lot of men in the real world are like this (the movie just depicted it in an extremely on the nose way)
barbie was boring imo though and this movie was experimental and made you think, at least for me, and for the sets and direction alone it deserves awards
I feel so disappointed by this film... men just love to write characters sleeping with multiple people while being either gaslighted/manipulated/under the born yesterday trope while calling it "liberating" and "feminist" I'm so pissed up
can I just say your Bella redesign is so endearing, and we definitely need more actually disturbing, "disgusting" looking women on screen. or literally even just disabled women
I was really interested in this movie when I first heard about it, and then I found out it was literally a BABY walking around in a fully developed adult body having sex with ACTUAL ADULTS WHY DID ANYONE THINK THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA??? WHO GREENLIT THIS????????
THANK YOU! My mom and I saw this movie on Christmas together while I was in town, and left the theater having an hour long rant about how misogynistic and disgusting this film was. I genuinely don't think a single a woman was in the writing room here.
@@VixxKong2 how old are you when you write sex as smex the movie isn't really for me either but i dont think youre old enough to understand the point of poor things if you just cut out all the sex scenes it's literally about a woman's sexual liberation
That movie sounds so gross 🤢. It’s a film about a literal child in a woman’s body being sexually abused repeatedly and it won awards?! Wtf. Both of your ideas sound amazing though and like films I would love to see.
Honestly, your description of the film makes the plot almost sound palatable, because even that can be spun to have some sort of statement made about predatory people and the way the world views young people, girls especially. The actual plot of the movie is much worse, basically just what you described, but taken completely at face value with no critical thinking applied to it at all
@@one-onessadhalf3393 Yeah, the worst part was definitely the fact that they didn’t see it as a problem, it sounds like the repeated sexual abuse of a baby was actually celebrated as being somehow feminist 🤢
It's not supposed to be literal. I felt like you did going into it, and at the start of the film, but by the end it was my favourite film of the past year. It's made very obvious that the film is abstract and surrealist, so it's not supposed to be literal, it's a commentary of what men do to women, and also someone who hasn't had the chance to be stained by patriarchy and misogyny, finding a place and keeping childlike wonder. It's the embodiment of the death of innocence; think of the first time we as women had to learn it wasn't safe to go into certain places without a man or by ourselves, the first time you learned that the world wasn't fair. It's a surrealist metaphor. Please just watch the film instead of gobbling up someone else's opinion wholesale.
17:35 as alternatives to the hot girl Igor, we could pay homage to the original source material by referencing one of Victor Frankenstein’s two childhood best friends named Henry Clerval and Elizabeth. Henry and Elizabeth are characterized as beautiful and strong and I think both of them are blonde. Henry was also very loyal to Victor and took care of him after Victor had his panic attack when his monster ran away. We can either have Elizabeth be a female love interest for the genderswapped doctor or have Henry Clerval be the doctor’s love interest as a sweet feminist pretty boy, making this option still up for beautiful side character points. Also I love love LOVE this video essay-speed paint-rewrite Frankenstein thing
Might I suggest a gender fluid friend who is sometimes Henry and sometimes Elizabeth? Ideally their assigned gender is never revealed because it's not important. Any person who wears both suits and gowns would be an outcast in Victorian society.
@@katelynna10000 as an enby I did a bit of research on sexuality and gender expression in the Victorian era. While female friendships were romanticized, easily masking lesbian relationships, male homosexuality was extremely frowned upon. Oscar Wilde’s relationship with his lover even ended with Wilde’s death due to homophobia. Additionally, the expression of the female gender was also controlled. I couldn’t find much on non-binary or gender queer expression in the Victorian era. However knowing the information based on how sexuality was viewed in that time period, I don’t think the Henry/Elizabeth gender queer character would last long if this were to be a somewhat more historically accurate rewrite. If we were to make the rewrite historically accurate, this Henry/Elizabeth gender queer character could present as their assigned sex but be more open in their home or with the doctor and the monster, creating a sweet family of sorts. Additionally, this can be a parallel to the monster because while the features that make her an outcast are more noticeable (with her scars and disfigures), what makes the gender queer an outcast is more discreet, being ridiculed for not behaving like their assigned sex or being associated with the mad doctor. Besides, just because someone doesn’t dress/present as their chosen gender doesn’t make any less of their chosen gender. However, as the story progresses, maybe Henry/Elizabeth could learn from the monster’s embrace of her differences and present to how they desire to. This is a really fun idea thank you so much
@@catchives Oh yah what happened to My Boy Oscar Wilde was tragic. He was such a cool dude.Somewhat relevant to our discussion- did you know he was a big proponent of women's dress reform? A woman in his household died after her dress caught fire during his childhood so he was all for women being able to wear trousers and such; I'm pretty sure his wife Constance sometime showed up to dinner parties in Fashionable Trousers TM, but I don't have a source for that story anymore. Also gosh, I didn't even think about the angle of this character learning to accept themselves more because of the monster's (someone in the comments suggested her preferred name be Mary, after Mrs. Shelly, and I really like that) influence. Look at us, making a whole ass story with like, themes and shit. I haven't actually read Frankenstein yet (this is a moral failing on my part, lol) but as soon as you said both characters were blond the idea popped into my head and I had to reply.
@@katelynna10000 ooo that fact about wilde is fascinating!! also omg read frankenstein. also also, i just realized the fact that Mary Shelley is bi and henry and elizabeth are both written as beautiful and kind makes a lot of sense.
MORE ESSAY-REDESIGN-RANT-THING PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSEEEE That's the best new video format you experimented with in a long while, and I love all your videos
I still haven't gotten over the part where the men would ask "where the softest spot of her body was" to sexually exploit her. I am actually in disgust. The whole entire video and i keep thinking back on that and "ick-ing" if that even is a word.
I saw someone compare this movie to Barbie and said it’s ‘Barbie for adults’ but the more I hear about this movie the more I think that’s wrong. Barbie actually had something to say about the patriarchy, exploitation of women and motherhood. It feels like this movie is interested in her sex life than her. Overall love your video and rewrite. You’re so right, we deserve a real gender swap Frankenstein movie, and your art is so pretty! Instant subscribe!! 💕💕💕
16:55 this kinda sounds like the plot to Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio, where the sculptor tries to replace his son but learns to love Pinocchio as an individual. (really good video, wish they had you as a writer on this movie)
>_> It was even more controversial in the book that this was based on from what I've seen. They actually downplayed a lot of the stuff from the origonal book "Poor Things" by Alasdair Gray written in 1992. Unreliable narrators of course but it's hard to tell at the end who was in the right and who was in the wrong. But to put into perspective.... The origonal book actually had the main doctor putting the baby into the woman's body to essensually groom her into the perfect bride. Which was taken out of the movie. and Context changed. But then the last letter was in the POV of the woman who said "all that was false and he was just a jealous man because I didn't pick him to marry and wrote this fanfic to try to convince the world otherwise." But somehow it some of the "origonal" part was actually true? I haven't read it but I watched an essay video talking about the comparisons so It would be intresting if you read the book to see the thoughts.
This is my first video here and I love the format so much. It’s beautiful in the way everything is presented. The horror of the movie, the salvaging of the idea, and a total rework of the intent. I would love more videos with a variety of subjects. And a variety of feelings towards the subject material! It doesn’t need to be just things that incite anger.
Your new retelling me reminds me of a graphic novel called 'M for Monster!'. It's about a sister who resurrects her other sister after a terrible accident, but they're an entirely new person. It's a very good read, and absolutely beautiful scenes!
as a greek, i can confirm that the vast majority of ppl in my country don't like Lanthimos as a director in general. I saw the film with my friends and other than the costumes and the general aesthetic we didn't like anything else. The film is overhyped
I love love love video essays, and thos style of video is right up my alley. Most video essay yt channels don't focus on art, so I like the combination of my two favorite kinds of videos!
Her tormenting the lawyer made me think it would be a film exploring how the sexy-born-yesterday problematic male fantasy would be terrible if they actually had to live through it because he gets everything he said he wanted and hated it
I don’t have as negative of a view of the film as LavenderTowne. I think the film is aware of the stuff she’s criticising and that’s part of the point but because the film isn’t explicitly saying it I can see why she doesn’t think it’s worth portraying such things for the sake of art even if I disagree. I think a lot of the people who are commenting are used to realism and explicitly explained morals and taking the directors words as absolute instead of finding their own meaning I also just think the artistic direction of the visuals is excellent and that can’t be discounted even by those who hate the plot I didn’t expect it to be genderbent Frankenstein and I think a lot of people don’t know it’s based of a book so think that’s all it was going for. The other experiment is a contrast to Bella and shows she’s not the typical result and also I don’t think Godwin saying he wouldn’t have Bella without the experiment is pro-life or pro-choice because he’s pretty clearly a character who struggles to admit what his feelings are so looks at everything through the lense of amoral science because of his fathers abusive experiments. Bella not getting to have the catharsis of berating her abuser because he’s on his deathbed and having complicated mixed feelings about him is common in fiction and reality and she clearly missed him but the only reason she returned that soon was his illness. I could go on but my point is while I don’t enjoy everything in the film I don’t agree with people who think it’s a moral failing of critics if they do enjoy it. Sorry this comment is so long, but this is still the condensed version of
@@dragonetafireball i think the point of this film was to get us talking and thinking. i think there are genuine critiques to be made of the movie but anyone who just thinks it’s “gross” because Bella starts mentally as a child missed a heavy chunk of the underlying commentary. How often are literal children taken advantage of by grown men because “they look like adult women.” its so common for young girls to be groomed by grown men with bad intentions, and we at least get to see Bella turn around and ruin his life afterwards. She’s still impacted by his actions, but ultimately she comes out on top, only after she begins to reach mental maturity. Like many women who grow up to realize the things done to them as little girls/teens were NOT okay even if they seemed okay at the time. It explores exactly how these young girls are manipulated too and even blamed by the older man for being a willing participant even though they were clearly not mature enough to make a fully informed decision.
My face the entire time listening to you describe this movie as someone who hasn't seen it: 💀🤢🤮 I can't believe somebody actually wrote an actual movie like that.
SAME 😭 This sounds absolutely terrible and seems fetishy with literal babies brains inside grown women bodies, there is nothing feminist about this movie
if a writer gave me this script i would wack him on the face with the script 10 times before saying "what the fuck is wrong with you?" how the hell was this approved?
Poor things is made after the book of the same title, it's about how men like to take advantage of women. When main character starts gaining autonomy and learns about the world, men in her life are displeased.
the book tells that the story is her husband's fantasy because he was jealous of her the movie does none of that, and you don't need countless nude scenes focusing on female nudity to hammer the point of men taking advantage of her, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo did the same point and did it better
boy oh boy I sure do love when a man takes a story a woman wrote based on her own life experiences, twists it into the opposite of everything it was meant to represent and calls his version the "more feminist" one
Bro it’s not a retelling of Frankenstein goofy. You probably haven’t even watched the film you’re just reiterating everything this UA-camr says because you’re not ready to get your own opinion
@@helixxia9320 so the movie that took inspiration from a book which took inspiration from another book is taking things from the original book??? Go after the author not the director lmao
@helixxia9320 Yeah just like most vampire stories are inspired by Bram Stocker's Dracula. That doesn't mean that Twilight is a female retelling of a man's story
I come back to this video so often because your thoughts and insight on film and art is so inspiring and respectful both to the original media and the characters it intended to represent
@@iliasbeeDepends, if you would also be ok if the 50 Shades of Gray movie back then would constantly be compared to twilight instead of the 50SoG book just because it is inspired by twilight.
@@Oiami-.- i get what youre trying to say but the 2nd and 3rd movies in the 50sog franchise were based on the second and third twilight movies pretty heavily.
So how is your film feminist? "Uh, it features a hot lady who doesn't like things happening to her and she wins at the end, sorta" ... ALL THE AWARDS!!
This made me think through some of my books, especially my favourite/s. Hyde by Antje Wagner (I've never gotten around to reading the original), the main character of this story is a young woman, which we don't know too much about at the start of the story. This author likes to play with the timeline of her stories and character perspectives. In Hyde she jumps between the present and the past, and as our protagonist, Katrina, continues on her path in the present, we get glimpses of her past, from her childhood up until to almost the beginning of the book in the present. I still remember how clueless I was, when I first read the book. I understood that she had a weak left leg and it was therefore a pain for her to walk around in those heels. I understood that she was a carpenter and had a certain love for everything wood and the beauty of buildings. I also understood that she covered the lower half of her face and had difficulties speaking, found it straining. But I didn't know the reasons for any of it. In the present we always just see her in a panic at the prospect of someone seeing her face, going to some odd measures, such as drinking a normal hot coffee with a straw. It's not the main focus of the story, but she does get portraied as a monster by many around her. She is a strong character, who is so grounded in the beliefes she grew up with that she has a hard time finding a new place in the world after losing her home, Hyde. She is no perfect being, she did commit some crimes, she has a good package of trauma. She knows love, knows what it means to lose those she loves. It's a story I hold close to my heart. I apologize, if this got anyone interested, as far as I know this book is only available in german..
@@desonyli That’s a surprise for me! I hope I didn't spoil too much.. the facts I mentioned can all be found within the first to second chapter. The general things are more of a final observation. What may be good to know is that it is a novel, it plays in a world close to ours (no fantasy world), however it does include some fantastic elements. Also, something that is rather important for me is how the book ends. Good ending or bad one? Open or closed? This book would have a good closed ending.
Yeah, that's always the first huge red flag when I hear about these kinds of stories/films. It never goes well. And Frankenstein is already a phenomenal story.
There have been a couple that become cult classics for feminism, like Alien (which portrays the horror of SA and Forced Birth but towards cis men, and it legitimately caused that reaction of horror & forced empathy in many cis men) -but it is *very* interesting to note that the ones that are actually rather good are almost always horror movies and tragedies… and oftentimes *still* have issues of their own that probably would have been caught if women (especially those with the specific experiences being addressed) were more highly involved in the productions
Bro it was written by a man… this was not a Frankenstein retelling. I love lavendertown but this is just not an educated rant. Bella is exploited by the men around her, thematically it’s supposed to be extremely dark.
@@iseeyou2211 I understand what your saying, but the way it was shown, to me, seemed like it was almost glorifying it. But that's just a personal opinion.
@@who7506 idk I understand where lavendertown is coming from (kind of) but I don’t believe she was able to get past the initial shock value. Every man in this film is a constraint to Bella’s freedom/exploration which later becomes symbolically grander in a patriarchal sense. Sex is the ultimate rebellion against feminine standards of the 17th century yet the men around her (even the ones she’s not romantically involved with) exploit her naivety for their own gain, not one of them is supposed to be viewed in a positive light🙄 Also ‘shown to you’ you basically spouted bs in the original comment
@@iseeyou2211 Poor Things the novel is a retelling of Frankenstein though, Mary Shelley and her book is in this film's DNA. And yeah, it is disrespectful for this to be marketed as "the feminist version" considering both the subject matter of the film itself and the origins of it being Frankenstein specifically.
@@mia-saraking5479 honestly I didn’t interpret the book as so much a ‘retelling’ of Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, but it’s own piece of media and themes with recurring motifs from Frankenstein , in no way are the ideologies similar
this is my third watch of this video and i love this style. its refreshing to see a new opinion on some of these popular films, especially coming from a creative person who has ideas on how they could make it better. i would love to see more video essays from you
I am so excited about this concept of video. I would watch a million "half video essay + half script doctor + half character redesign" videos from you.
Didn’t Del Toro basically create that “rewrite” with his recent retelling of Pinocchio? (Reanimated boy to replace a dead son, who lives in that shadow but wants to be his own person, and in the end his puppet-form is accepted as who he is instead of transforming into a “real boy”)
As a nice reference to the original the name the daughter wanted could be Mary after Mary Shelley. Also the mother could be Victoria after Victor. Also Vienna’s death could also be why Victoria doesn’t have a husband, he divorced her after Vienna’s death because he blamed her.
19:22 That scene could also be a discussion about a parent having a trans child with the whole “wanting to be called a new name” and how the mother had to come with terms that the “monster” wasn’t her daughter anymore
Yeah thats in the film. With Willem Dafoe’s character coming in terms that bella found her freedom. It seems that this video is takkng an issue with an entire storyline without engaging with the film
@@kidwithaphonecamera no babe, the film is about grown adult men perving over a child, a toddler, but it's totally okay, because this baby, who can't even dress or feed herself yet, is in an adult body!
This is this first video I’ve seen from you. Watched the whole thing, and subscribed before it ended. I love your art, and narrative redesign of Frankenstein.
A man telling a story about a woman being treated badly to say "this is no good, I heard this happens to some women" does absolutely nothing other than glorify himself. It reminds me of a review I had in art school where an international student (white ENL man) explained the inspiration behind one of his works being our country's gendered violence statistics. The work was a bit "I'm 14 and this is deep", referencing media consumption and the home if I recall. He seemed almost taken aback when no one gave him a gold star. I gave a brief clarification in the notes as his scribe. He added nothing to the conversation other than essentially saying in the review "I just found out loads of you get wacked every week." Yes, we do. Every week, one of us is killed by our partners. Thank you for your contribution. ALSO: How do you not get that after sharing a vague number that you're talking to the statistics right now. Say there's 10 women in the room and you just used the classic 1 in 3 (a misleading stat because I don't think I've ever met the other 2 women), how do you not realise that at least three of us HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED?
People can absolutely tell stories even if they’re not in the same social group BUT that is a HUGE responsibility and must be done responsibly. That’s what cultural consultants are for, they aren’t just part of the community but also experts in these topics, and you have to always keep in mind that the criticism from people who ARE part of those groups must be heard. Something similar happened to me, I am an international film student from Mexico and I am trying to become a cultural consultant, one of my classmates was obsessed with Mexican Gold Cinema and wanted to make her own film in Spanish “inspired” by it. She didn’t know Spanish, she gave the main character a job that existed ONLY on England, gave the characters terrible names and when I gave her notes about how that didn’t reflected Mexican society at that time and some tips on how to adapt them she ignored them and said “well I guess we’re bringing new jobs to Mexico” 💀
You put so many of my problems with the movie into words perfectly. I actually thought there was almost no way to save this movie, but honestly your re-write of the ending, with the movie ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGING the horrible exploitation and manipulation of it's main character, and her realizing it herself and reacting accordingly would actually have made the rest of plot feel earned (I think, I'd have to rewatch the movie considering the new ending and I am not going to do that to myself lol)
Except any random youtuber shouldn't have to do it because this bit is pretty much already in the book. The director just, y'know, didn't choose to include it for some reason.
@@hawkins347 oh I can think of why by watching the rest of the movie. So there WAS supposed to be a scene where the movie acknowledge how predatory and disgusting almost every character was?
Sometimes it really feels like hollywood will slap the 'feminist' gold star on literally anything just because "well we said so" when something is clearly not even close to that.
![NETFLIX MISSED THE WHOLE POINT?? // [book versus movie: Uglies]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/83OwGCkvUv0/mqdefault.jpg)
![NETFLIX MISSED THE WHOLE POINT?? // [book versus movie: Uglies]](/img/tr.png)
Honestly 14:46 was the biggest wasted potential.
The movie really ALMOST had a moment where a victim of the “born sexy yesterday” trope is now older and is able to see another “infant” unknowingly experiencing the same thing.
The main character can then notice all the things she never noticed before. As a “child” she saw all the men as friends or parental figures, but she sees now, when they are interacting with the new “child”, that they are just manipulating her and are only being predatory over her body.
I feel that it would’ve been a wonderful, heart-breaking movie about pedophilia, mental/physical disability, grooming, and manipulation.
Honestly, yes.
it couldve been wonderful i think the plot had true potential, like seeing things that happened to you when you were a little girl happen to a girl when youre grown is such a real thing so many afab people experience and wanting to stop that cycle of abuse couldve been wonderful. but no it had to be more about oo sexy lady
They were THIS CLOSE to making a cute movie, but we can't have nice things.
@@reganraffield8113 EXACTLY!!!!
This could have been about the infantilization of women and the way abusers go after women that are dependent or easy to manipulate. Like, there is definitely a push for women to look and act cute, pure, innocent and childlike
I haven’t seen anyone talk about the novel “poor things.” The movie leaves out the ending. In the book you find out the whole narrative was a fake story written by her husband to infantilize her. In the book you find out Bella was actually a feminist doctor who who advocated for women, but her husband was jealous and wrote a story about her being a “child monster.” When she found the story she asked to have it burned.
Excuse me what. THATS LIKE THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLOT.
this comment needs more likes lol
That's like adapting Lolita and not realizing the protagonist is supposed to be the bad guy!
@@sarahbogaert6017 I know right, and they just left out. I was practically screaming in the theater when it ended
@@ninjabluefyre3815 ugh another book I really like that’s been ruined in adaptations
Removing the ending from the original novel, and pretending as if this entire situation had been real? That made zero sense from a storytelling perspective. The best line of the book comes from Bella: "It's a work that positively stinks of all that was morbid in that most morbid of centuries." That got a laugh out of me.
The original Frankenstein was a feminist book when you consider the backstory. It was written by Mary Shelley in 1816 and published 2 years later. Not only was Mary 18 when she wrote it, but it was also her first book, and now it's considered the first science fiction novel.
Thats insane to think she was 18. Ive read it and it was amazing. Heard she finished most during one night with a bottle x)
And she wrote it from a dare to write a horror story!
I also love that she was the reason why one of her friends (the guy that wrote Dracula) to also publish his story because he was scared that nobody would like his story but because she told him it was great he published his own monster story
Edit: typo
Not to mention her mother was an influential early feminist and thinker who eschewed social norms of her day and had a fascinating life, where she went to France to witness and be involved with the politics of the French Revolution.
She also had to publish it anonymously because if a woman wrote a murder mystery, she could have faced severe backlash.
"These film makers aren't afraid to break boundaries when it comes to putting in morally dispicable sex scenes in their movies, but they wouldn't dream of having a quote on quote ugly woman on screen for more than a minute of two." PREACH
I know! It's so common in media nowadays, maybe just as common as it used to be in old movies, (despite what the directors say) and it makes me sick. The number of movies I have been enjoying then shut off as soon as an unnecessary sex/rape scene comes on is too many to count. As someone who has been interested in directing a TV show since I first came about movies/TV shows as a kid, it really needs to change soon.
@@Dustieraccooneven worse is when it’s portrayed as ‘empowering’ like yea sex isn’t something to be ashamed of but writing a movie where a woman gets exploited over and over and over again is shameful!!
unrelated, love the pfp :)
And when the "ugly" woman is there for too long, she's made fun of for her appearance
@@bob_marlee03 Same, it's nice to see some Higurashi fans
I’m still confused as to why they thought to get rid of the bodily scars and “imperfections” that were on the original “Frankenstein” like that’s one of the KEY points in the story???
Edit: I understand that the movie was based on the novel “Poor Things”, but I have one question to all the people telling me that…
Do you believe that the director did a good job to show the “greatness”of the novel? (I haven’t read the novel so I don’t have an opinion on it)
first of all, the original novel described Frankenstein as being made in the perfect image. he was flawless except for the uncanny, lifeless look in his eyes. second of all, even if we’re going off of the movie, he’s all scarred because he was out together from dismembered body parts, whereas Bella was found dead and revived with a transplanted brain. she does have a scar on her head from the surgery, and another from her pregnancy.
*edited for spelling
@@galibobali we get it, bro, you really wish it was legal to fuck toddlers and women with lobotomies, you don't have to keep pretending this movie was good.
@@galibobali That's not true at all. Frankenstein (the scientist) chose parts of bodies that he thought were beautiful individually but when they all came together in reanimation, the final result was horrendous, which is why he was disgusted and ran from his own "son". That's like the main driver of the plot as almost everyone who encounters him is disturbed by his appearance. Mary Shelley described him as hideous.
@galibobali ......I think you need to reread the book girl
@@1Xpandi EXACTLY!!
"Let's yassify Igor."
As a spooky creep that loves Renfield, Golem and other side villain characters, I have waited my whole life to hear these words and have never loved you more.
I fully agree with you
Yesss absolutely
bro Renfield is awsome. I love how crazy he acts
we love Renfield here!
Imagine a dark comedy that's just a side villain support group. Reinfield and Igor just complaining about their bosses
this is the angriest I’ve ever seen Lavendertowne be, and I love it
IKR? My jaw dropped when I saw "disgusting" in the title 😭 that's harsh language for her
As an og fan FR
she’s so angry she isn’t whispering , she’s softy talking 😱😱
FR
That or the time she talked about EDs in her men writing women video.
When my dad and I watched the film, we thought it was a parody of the "born sexy yesterday" trope, and making fun of men who sexualise child like innocence wrapped in sexy clothing, but now I'm not so sure?? The whole child in an adult body having sex was WEIRD and disturbing though...
It’s based on a book that was intended as satire. But from lavender towns description it sounds like it was handled poorly
It is. This movie says a lot about how the society/men around Bella mistreat and take advantage of her while she is "growing up."
It turns while they're on the ship when Bella seeks out friends of her choosing, starts reading, and becomes aware that suffering exists. It continues with her choosing to work in a brothel despite what broader society would hoist on her for that decision, choosing a loving relationship with a woman, and attending community events via the socialist club. By the end, Bella recognizes her mistreatment but has to reconcile those feelings with the familial love she still has for Godwin.
While not perfect, I think this movie was pretty clear with its use of satire because the audience knows how weird/disturbing all the early scenes are considering Bella's mental/emotional age.
@@beebonious That's really well put, and that's kinda what I got from the movie as well. There were things like how she was always well shaven, and how she decided to marry a guy who wanted to marry her in the past, knowing she was pretty much a toddler, so in that sense I feel like the director could have handled it better.
its supposed to be weird and disturbing!! It is commentary!!
@@PapaPalina Yeah I agree, her relationship with Max was the only one I had mixed feelings about, because of that. There were good points to it, like flipping the expectation of exclusivity and loyalty. How in media men are portrayed as the adventurers who go off exploring and make their love wait for them at home for years, and usually experiment with other lovers along the way, while the woman is portrayed as waiting faithfully for her man to return and thinking none the less of him when he does, and all this is just fine. But of course for most people the idea of a woman doing that to a man is outrageous and scandalous, and the man respecting that decision is seen as pathetic and/or abused. This is the only example I think I've ever seen in media that flipped those roles, so I appreciate that about their relationship.
I do agree that him being framed as the acceptable life partner after his initial predatory interest was questionable. The best way I could look at this is as a statement on women's options, and on the complexity of forgiveness in a system that facilitates and encourages abusive and exploitative behavior. If that was the intention, I don't think they got that across as well as they could have. However art is interpretable and I otherwise enjoyed the movie, so this is how I choose to see the conclusion of that plotline.
The final drawing at 20:13 makes me REALLY want to see an animated film or comic done with the type of storyline Lavender was talking about. She didn't have to go so hard on the scientist's design but I am here for it. Maybe one day we'll get a bombastic lesbian scientist duo like she was mentioning, but until that day; I shall wait.
Me listening to lavender talk about two hot science lesbians doing crimes against humanity: *LET HER COOK* 🗣🏳️🌈🗣🏳️🌈🗣🏳️🌈🗣
Literally would die for this film
I honestly love the new film concept at the end of the video. I’d love to see a full story made of it someday
Honestly same
Lik they would be this odd family, I would love a montage of their happy lives at the end of the movie or smth
It’s insane someone managed to turn Frankenstein into: “ What if we had a bunch of men take advantage of a woman, but she’s actually an underage girl/baby on the inside! “
You know what they say, it's the inside that counts
what a way to completely ignore the books background, completely ignore the source material. Anyone that read the book knows that this whole video is just bullshit. ITS NOT BASED ON FRANKENSTEIN. CHECK YOUR FACTS BEFORE YOU SLANDER SOMETHING
And Hollywood wonders why everyone thinks they're all creeps
When she summarized the movie, I was like "that's just Lolita but even worse somehow" 😭
Edit: by worse I mean the things that happen to Bella are somehow even more revolting than what happens to Dolores in her novel.
Just a fantasy too many people have 🤮
From the trailers, I was expecting it to be about a robot girl learning about the world with her creator, but this is so much WORSE 😭
That said, I would pay actual money to see Lav’s ALTERNATIVE idea put on the big screen. That sounds so good!
I didn’t know poor things was “girl Frankenstein” so when I read that title I thought this was gonna be utterly destroying “Lisa Frankenstein” which is a movie that looks like a campy masterpiece but hasn’t come out yet! So I straight up thought you were about to destroy a movie purely from a trailer
tbh it’s not ‘girl frankenstein’ it has elements similar to frankenstein but it’s not based on it at all it’s its own story
@@liamross340yeah I can tell that now as I watch the video, but from the title it really threw me off lmao
I like a lot of Diablo Cody movies so I’m actually pretty excited for Lisa Frankenstein!!!
Same, to be honest XD.
It’s been an hour how are there 342 likes omg
The new story you wrote reminds me a bit of a young adult graphic novel I read a bit ago. In this story, called "M is for Monster" it's a brief retelling of Frankenstein. The doctor in this story tried to revive her sister, but the new creature she has created is a different person, whom she gives the name of Frankie. Throughout the story, Frankie sees the ghost of her body's original owner. She struggles as the ghost tells her how to act, and what to do, even though she clearly doesn't like the same things she does. In the ending, she admits to the doctor everything that happened, and they finally make a proper headstone for her sister.
New book to add to my collection!
read this recently too! hah bald
Is this just horror or is there other things?
@@claudius3359as far as i could see from the preview is not horror, you can go read it, there's a 50 page preview on google, it's great! I wish i could buy it but I'm broke lol
Wasn't frankie the nickname of the sister doctor? Full name Frances ai if i recall correctly
the point of Bella being shaved and the question about who does it for her and that it doesn't reflect living without shame is a good point that many people may miss to question
i am a big fan of “what if frankenstein was a distraught lesbian” actually, i would read/watch that in a heartbeat it sounds so interesting
Is glass Scientists I think she is an old lady gay scientist, but that's a webcomic, and she's a secondary cast member. Still a great comic and portray of Frankenstein.
i second this
I know right??? I would read that sapphic novel in a heartbeat, if there was a possibility that it could be made I would beg on my knees.
Pls watch the film birth/rebirth it is Exactly what you’re looking for, just in another setting.
GIRL KISSERS FTW WITH THIS ONE 🔥🔥
I've never heard of this film, but from the sounds of it they completely wasted the potential to create an interesting abstract film about the horrors of grooming and pedophilia,and instead made... a gross film for creeps.
And praised for being a "feminist retelling"
This was my overall feeling!!! Like it had so much potential. :
@@LavenderTowne potential is as indicative of how high something can fly as it is to how low it can sink
Good golly you're right! The starting premise allows for you to cast an adult actor, meaning you don't have to deal with the whole "how to portray a fictional child being put in these kinds of situations without harming the real child who's cast as them" issue (like that "Cuties" film had).
if people actually watch the film they will realise how the men actually *are* portrayed as controlling creeps and audiences are not encouraged to align with them LOL
Little warning here my tangent does have a few spoilers but I couldn't help myself I just finished reading this in AP Lit.
I think most people completely missed a key theme in Frankenstein. The danger of knowledge. Victor created life against warning. The creature learned of the unfair treatment ugly people like him receive. And Walton is warned by Victor against his ventures. The stories original title was "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus" Victor is Prometheus. Warned by others (Zeus) not to pursue knowledge (giving fire to the humans). But he disregards this and puts other's lives in danger. He suffers because of this as well.
This movie could've have shown this so well. Almost in a Barbie movie way. Bella could've learned of the terrible treatment women receive and feel so distraught that she wishes not to live on (as Victor feels when the creature basically ruins his life). But instead, she could've overcome her circumstances and fought against the male gaze. And making her as grotesque as the creature in Frankenstein would've been a lot better. It would show that women aren't just their appearance. Mental capacity is more important.
That would've been feminist. The feminist aspect of this movie is completely lost. And as someone else in this comment section put it, the movie seems very Lolita esk.
I literally have no idea why this film was called feminist. Like you said, the feminist theme was off.
I can't stand how many times gender flipped characters that are supposed to be traditionally unattractive and just completely remove that aspect of the character. It makes it clear that most people only view women as sex objects and not much else. I'm glad to finally hear someone other than me talking about this.
actually adam, frankenstein’s “monster” is supposed to be beautiful, it’s just his yellow eyes that are disturbing. but i get your point.
@@Me-vn3gzrly? i just read the original book and he was definitely mutilated, not just yellow eyes. where’d u get that info from? i’m curious
edit: okay ig he wasn’t like fully ugly, but he did have thin yellow skin and disproportionate and too big body parts, like victor and all the humans that saw him thought he was ugly
@@imaneclair4836 Yeah it's a bit complicated. He's beautiful, but still looks so obviously unnatural that he ALSO looks hideous. Standard horror trope really. Even the most beautiful person in the world would look scary if they were so obviously a walking corpse.
@@Me-vn3gzno the creature (his name isn’t Adam lol) is descibed as ugly by both frankenstein and walton. He was eight foot tall, disproportionated and had yellowish skin
Reminds me of women's fantasy armor
this is giving me "anime girl who looks like a five year old but is actually a thousand year old god so its totally fine for fanservice"
also i love these video essay styles!! i would totally read/watch your take, it sounds so interesting and complex :O
Except it's actually the opposite, lmao - woman who looks like an adult but is actually a child, which imo, is so, so much worse
Yeah, it's literally the opposite of that, and for me highlights how ridiculous the moralizing about young looking old characters is.
When it comes down to it though isn't it just different ways for people to be pedos?@@micheal2458
This movie also shows that people will justify it when its the other way around, so the whole reasoning is flawed and people just sexualize everything
@@novadearest Yeah, but the end point is the same, it's totally cool to sexualise her. Because her mind/body is adult, that means she is adult. And therefor they're allowed to perv on her.
Which btw expands to teenage girls who "look older" according to the creeps who want to get away with catcalling and harrassing a 14 year old, or the lies predators tell young children: "you are very mature for your age".
Thank you for not forgetting the second Experiment..the whole movie is icky but her keeping someone with the same fate basically as a pet in her "happy ending" was the final nail in the coffin for me
omg i love ur pfp
personally i took the movie to be amoral, and frankly that’s the reason i like it, i prefer movies that make you uncomfortable but are interesting and make you think than boring movies
Ah, we love it when men repackage things that are a net negative for women as being "feminist."
And I love it even more when critics praise those half ass attempts of "feminism" for being brave and innovative when all it has is women doing stuff meanwhile movies like Nemona get "Wikipedia article on dysphoria" ass reviews
Wait, what's wrong with the wikipedia article on dysphoria?
@@bloomypeach6168 (for context I'm saying this as a trans person) I was mostly criticizing how a lot of media critics almost never demand representation that goes beyond "half deep explorations of character" as those are both easily marketable while getting all the brownie points
Ex: how a lot of movies are praised for adding more representation when all they did was put/recast a random character as a POC or other minority without actually exploring the character in any meaningful way
Movies like Nemona that genuinely grapple with the struggles of queerness, identify and self love get the same surface level analysis and review that are almost insulting to the intentions of the original creators
My critic of the "Wikipedia article on dysphoria" ass reviews is that a lot of movies critics genuinely boiled down the story to its most bare bones progressive interpretation without any of the systematic critic(some of them literally spell out what dysphoria means to the audience)
@airplanes_aren.t_real I am 1000% using that description of surface level critiques going forward, that is BRILLIANT (also, I’m trans too. High five)
except its not repackaged, its not based on frankenstein, its based on a great book of the same name, stop spreading false hate over made up facts
Also the beauty standard of women shaving off body hair only came about in the 1920s when dresses started getting shorter and didn't even exist in the time period it's set in
Yes, because the rest of the movie perfectly follows historical accurate costuming and set designs, and doesn’t at all create its own world merely inspired by the time period. Like come on now. Like I’m obviously not saying body hair is bad, but to specifically critique this movies accuracy like it’s EMMA is outrageous.
@@reddean4712 Seconded. Historical accuracy is obviously not a talking point here. It's a fantasy movie.
That said, I understand the knee-jerk aggravation only out of my own sensitivity to it. Nothing tickles my aimless-rage-button quite like women with freshly shaved legs in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, or some such. lol Fucking media.
@@reddean4712 ) why did they have to do it?
i know there isnt any accurate time period in the movie but still what was with that one outfit in portugal when she runs off from her hotel room it was just so out of place
your idea for a frankenstein retelling is SO GOOD i would 100% watch it (especially if it was like an animated series with you involved in the creative process or something)
Nitpicky as it is, I would like to note that Victor in the original novel was not a scientist or doctor. He was a college student/dropout who did the original experiment out of boredom and a want to put to use all that he had learned. He shunned his own creation because it wasn't perfect in his eyes, leading to all the tragic events of the book. Again, it's a misconception a lot of people spread, but I thought I would note it here for anyone who hadn't read the original book. You all definitely should, it's amazing. X3
I mean Victor was seeking glory, and scientific advancement above all morals, but yes I see what you mean, he was a college dropout that does not deserve to be called Doctor Frankenstein.
He was also motivated by the death of his mother.
He wasn't exactly bored, more like pretentious. And when he saw what he had done he got scared and backed away, neglecting the responsibility
from the description of it, it doesn’t sound like a “feminist movie”, it just sounds like the director put all his disgusting fantasies into it.
As per usual
Sometimes the answer is usually very simple. I think both the director and writer are creeps lol
@@Shatt3r3d_R3ality ngl trying to argue with the "everyone in Hollywood is pedo" conspiracy theorists feels more like an uphill battle every day and movies like these *do not help*
I just hope that's not the case...
I haven’t seen the movie yet. But the idea of a what’s basically a baby being sexually abused is disgusting. I can’t even fathom what that has to do with the story of Frankenstein or how that could be feminist in any way. This feels all kinds of creepy
A quick note here: in the original story written by Mary Shelly, the monster is actually incredibly beautiful besides a couple scars and incredibly intelligent, much like the Doctor himself. The reason Frankenstein abandons the monster is because his eyes freaked him out… Victor Frankenstein is a real jerk in the original story. However, since the pop-culture version of Frankenstein is hideous, it makes sense to go that angle.
I know this is such a small nitpick compared to the other negative aspects of this movie but I'm really annoyed they made everyone English? The original book was written by a Glaswegian, and set in the Scottish city of Glasgow.
Even in the book, the city is a key theme as Alasdair Grey draws lines between Bella's neglect and his critiques about how the city council neglects glasgow's social and cultural history.
Also, the author is one of the most important Scottish authors in the 20th - 21st century (like he's pretty much to glasgow what Charles Dickens is to London.) He's been referred to as the "the father figure of the renaissance in Scottish literature and art". The book contains maps and doodles of real glaswegian streets, landmarks and addresses drawn by alasdair himself.
Hollywood is terrified of the Scottish accent I swear 💀💀
Such a small nitpick I know. Im throwing a fuss because I'm studying English + Scottish literature 💀💀💀💀💀 I just would have loved if they had at least mentioned the city in the film 😭😭
i didn't know it was originally meant to be set in glasgow, that would have been so cool! id like to see everyone in that cast do their best crack at a scottish accent lol
I think they were trying to draw more parallels between their movie and Frankenstein-hoping to attach themselves to something more well-known, as it were
… Which also doesn’t work, ‘cuz the story starts in Sweden (Victor, himself, being Swedish) and, although he does visit England, he *also* travels to/through Germany, France, Scotland, and the Arctic
The England-ization of classic literature (especially Gothic literature) is a plague upon the world
Hollywood is like the voice recognition elevator 💀
Wait, Mary Shelley was Glaswegian?
@@sobekmania No, they're talking about Alasdair Gray, the man who wrote the original "Poor Things" book.
The moment i heard a baby s brain in a women’s body i knew it wasn’t going to be about feminism….
It’s a surrealist movie it’s not supposed to be taken as “feminist”. As a woman I relate heavily to Bella’s character in the movie.
@@cyndlehick9777You okay?
@@genericname2747 Probably not
@@cyndlehick9777 I do as well, though I would actually call it feminist, both in the way they undermine and expose the "born sexy yesterday" trope, and through the general metaphor of her experience for that of women growing into maturity in a predatory world. Either way, I think people are taking the movie far too literally.
@@La-PetitMort Bro, how are you two going to virtue signal AND shit on someone relating to an abused character in the same breath? The lack of self-reflection is wild.
This video has actually helped me solidify what it was that was bothering me about the movie. I thought it was fantastic from its visuals and overall filmmaking technique, but something was bugging me with each passing minute, and it only got worse and worse as the film went on. I kept trying to rationalize it in my head, assuming that as a man i was just missing the point, but I actually think I can pinpoint the exact thing that made me realize why the movie wasn't working on a narrative level. I'm not particular squeemish or prudeish or made uncomfortable by sex or sex scenes, but as a pansexual person, I noticed that there was a clear dissidence between the framing and the writing.
If the movie is supposed to be about liberating female sexuality, why is the female body the only one the camera and framing focus on during the sex scenes? As I said before, I'm pan and as I've gotten older I've really started to notice how male bodies are never quite sexualized the same way female bodies are. And in this case, it struck me as odd that the movie sets up Bella as desiring sexual relationships with men, but never presents men as sexual objects. It's always Bella herself who is the focus of the sexualization. It's always her body and reactions, her nudity that is focused on. The shots are drowning in male gaze which conflicts with the idea that the movie is about female gaze. The film never shoots men as sexually appealing or attractive, its sticks to making sure Bella's attractiveness is prioritized. The movie sets up Bella as viewing Mark Ruffallo's character Duncan as some sexy adventurous man, but he's never shot that way. His body is never highlighted, or shown in a sexual light. he's not given the over the top organismic reactions to sex, Because unlike Emma Stone or any of the other women shown nude on screen, Mark Ruffalo is not a sex symbol, none of the men in the movie are. If the character was played by Channing Tatum or Reyn Gosling and the shots took time to lear on their bodies and nudity during the sex scenes, It may have had a point to make. But it doesn't. The movie can say its all about a woman's story of sexual liberation, but it's still a movie that exists to show a fetishized conventionally attractive woman who has lots of sex and who likes having sex but only in so far as its appealing to a male fantasy. She even perfectly fills the occasionally bisexual quota so they can have a graphic lesbian sex scene thats shot like a p()rno so the idea of her being intimate with women can exist within the confines of male fantasy.
and in all honesty, it makes me sad that people think this movie is about sexual liberation, it seems like everyone just stopped watching after the second act. Sex, there it was. Bella found freedom through sex, that gave meaning to her life and made her an actualized person. The end. Come on guys, let’s think past the shock. Sex was only one of the facets of her hedonistic phase. she delve into it the same way she stuffed herself with pastries. I have seen pg 13 movies sexualize woman’s body with slow motion zooms of random body parts that serve no point to the story. If showing a nude body is sexualizing it, i’m sorry but there are man naked in this too. Bella never wears corsets or make up (apart from the brothel phase), no bodice making her curves more visible. Duncan in the other hand, wears corsets, heals, butt pads, calves and thighs pads in order to make his body more attractive and voluminous. His curves are highlighted and exaggerated in every single scene he appears in the movie like a freaking peacock.
@@soniachristine9450 do you not know how to read or are you just plain dumb?😂
Also calling a literal disabled lobotomized abused fetus inside of a woman a "wierd, freakish character" is SO ODD to me like NOTHING about the response to this movie sits right with me. It really, truly, honestly seems like people trying to normalize exploitation as good art and not a literal tradgedy?? There is art to be made IN tradgedy, but this is literally just full, unadulterated despair, not all art is good, sometimes people just create actual shit but its not good art just because it's different, it is quite literally just creating abuse for people to gawk at like congratulation here is your medallion idk
I dunno, I agree with you, but a baby's mind in a full grown adult's body is inherently "weird" and "freakish" to me. Exploitative? Definitely. Gross? In spades. But also weird and freaky in the most negative of ways
@Twilarose77 I agree but I was referring to the rotten tomatoes comment when Lavendertowne was talking about the second "experiment"... the person in the comment was like praising the movie saying "I like how there's not one character who isn't strange in this film" like it is just very very weird to me to see a film about what is essentially a child's response to being sexually abused and praise her for being "FREAKISH" LIKE??? I'm not saying they're not freakish it just seems like the purpose of this movie is to gawk at the main character's struggle rather than think about the implications of it?? This film does not answer most of the questions that it proposes which makes me think that the main reason why it exists is to show people something horrific and expect them to go "wow how thoughtful" it is so absolutely lame and weird. What are we doing why are we doing this
The comment to me kinda makes me feel like my point is valid like we're not here to talk about the events of the movie we're just going to praise it for being different, which does not by itself make it good! It's a beautiful and weird movie but it's substance is quite ugly and hollow and lame
@@smokugoku Ah I see, my bad
This is slightly off-topic but this is LITERALLY EXACTLY how i feel about ladybird and the response. It's quite precisely abuse for people to gawk at and watching it I was horrified and angry...and people found it FUNNY???? You've put it into words really well, hate when a film does that
The world does not like things that make them uncomfortable. This id especially true with art and especially cinema award institutions. This movie appeals to men with the fact that Bella’s whole story revolves around the men in her life, and of course, the Born Sexy Yesterday trope at full display. This is a movie that comforts the status quo while hiding within a facade of “feminism” so that they can’t be called out for being sexist and exploitative
I don't know if you'll see this, but you are genuinely oine of the main reasons I'm still an artist
art block sucks, but certain artists have that power to just pull you straight out with motivation - and you're one of those artists for me
so thank you so much for all of your content and thank you for inspiring 2 million artists, including me :)
I’m glad someone is pointing out the problems with Poor Things. It was not the feminist movie, it was literally the opposite of men taking advantage of a child’s brain in a woman’s body. And the fact that it won a lot of Academy Awards is just disgusting. Barbie was the feminist and movie of the year it made a lot of money at the box office than Poor Things.
So, the worst part of this is that this is a literal example of how many women are treated in the media, being innocent, having no agency, infantilizing, However, it was even more extreme, including disgusting scenes to attract creeps.
So I just found out that this movie was inspired by a novel where the criticism is exactly that, a guy who wrote a story infantilizing his wife in such a disturbing way, And then she found out about the story and said to him burn it... Basically they just did the story that the husband create and ignore all the message in the original novel, because of courseeeee they did...
The movie shows Bella growing up mentally and yet critiques like this one act like she was still in the baby stage through the whole story.
Isn't THAT your example of infantilization?
@@VixxKong2to be clear, i haven’t seen the film.
but the critique in this video is that the way her “sexual liberation” is treated doesn’t mix with the “she’s a baby in an adult body! learning to grow up!!” storyline at all. she’s just taken advantage of several times in the beginning and that’s never explored in the depth such a serious topic deserved to be.
again idk if it’s fully accurate but at least argue against the real criticism if you’re gonna defend the film
@@daizy7441
That's the problem. She starts as a baby and she grows up. By the time she leaves the house and starts having smexx she was already in the "young adult independence" stage of growing up. They literally say it in the movie. We spend at least 30 minutes with 2 scientists documenting her mental growth.
Of course you wouldn't know that because the people who hate the movie are willingly hiding this information from their reviews in order to paint a narrative around the authors. It's not the first time that Lavandertown is calling other authors perverts over their female characters.
Also, Bella says to her first lover that she has smexx because she likes it and she sees no reason to be limiting herself to being with only 1 person. And tbh I enjoy that more than the idea that if a woman has smexx then she is by default being exploited because men enjoy that too.
It's a real problem to me that smexx is almost always seen as the dominance of men over women. Because I'm pretty sure that even without the scifi premise of a baby's brain in a woman's body, people would still hate the smexx scenes.
@@VixxKong2 ) - where has she done that?
- that's a weak excuse.
@@steamboatwill3.367
Where did who done what?
i genuinely cant believe that he said this movie was feminist and everyone was just like 'ok' like what ITS LIKE THE OPPOSITE
Sometimes people think “feminist” means “has a woman lead”
I feel like what people don’t understand is that a woman sleeping with multiple different people is only empowering if ITS HER CHOICE. A WOMAN GETTING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF IS NOT FEMINISM 😭
I feel that now, everytime they put a woman as the central focus point of a movie, no matter how gross, bad or mysoginist the plot actually is, they slap a "feminist story" on it to trick the watchers into believing it ISN'T gross, bad or mysoginist because "It can't be sexist if the heroine's a woman! And if you dislike it, it's because you're not feminist! uwu"
@@NearsightedNarhwal Not everything has to be "empowering" to be feminist. Sometimes feminism just means facing up to how ugly the world really is for women.
I heard nothing about this movie before going into it. No trailers, no reviews, nothing. I didn't know it existed until the day of, when my cousin dragged me off to see it in the theater. I concluded on my own that it was feminist, and was disappointed (though perhaps not surprised) to learn afterwards that so many people felt otherwise.
I genuinely don’t know how this movie was so well received- everytime I see an ad for it I feel sick. my dad convinced me to watch it with him, being excited for it, and even hyping me up.
we got through maybe 20 mins bc he couldn’t find the remote.
hearing ab the rest of the plot is even worse.. I felt physically uncomfortable watching it, and was genuinely on the verge of tears.
she shoved a fucking apple up there. within the first 20 minutes or so. gross.
this is made even worse by the fact that is an INFANTS BRAIN.
it’s like the troupe where they design a small child looking character just to say “oh they’re actually 500+” as an excuse to sexualise or ship them.
except the other way around.. putting a child in an adults body and, by the sounds of it, having explicit sex scenes.
with a person with a small child’s conscious.
it’s disgusting. not to mention everything you mentioned, too
Can we just acknowledge how obnoxious it is that this is supposed to be a 'feminist remaster' of a story WRITTEN BY A WOMAN that is MADE BY A MAN?
YO THIS IS NOT A MARY SHELLY RETELLING🗣️🗣️🔊🔊🔊🔊🔥🔥🔥🔥STOP SPEWING NONSENSE
@@iseeyou2211 calm down
@@iseeyou2211 While the novel Poor Things was written by Alasdair Gray and published in 1992, it absolutely draws from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein with intent. However, the novel seems to have the corpse resurrection and infant brain swap of Bella later refuted by Bella (Victoria) herself as something her husband made up out of the prevailing gothic motifs of the Victorian times.
yeahhhh. that put me off instantly.
fr I couldn't stop thinking about that
i’m still in kind of the beginning of the video but it’s realllyyy weird that they wrote a bunch of men touching a woman who is actually a literal baby. that’s peak weird ash
Fr! Like, she’s mentally a child. A minor mentally but not physically. It makes me uncomfortable..
Ok yes these things happen, but what lavendertowne is rly refusing to say is these actions are never portrayed in a neutral light. They are supposed to be seen as predatory and evil😭. Plus this was never supposed to be a Mary Shelly retelling, comparing the two characters makes no sense thematically
@@StayCalm_DoArt123 literally what I said man, what abt them being ‘predatory and evil’ sounds like a neutral light to you? I said ‘these actions were never portrayed in a neutral light’ meaning - the light shone upon these men is a bad one -
@@iseeyou2211 oh sorry dude I misread, we on the same page then
@bleh329 dude drawing comparisons and being a direct adaptation are two entirely different things. The only similarities are recurring motifs from Frankenstein and elements of the gothic genre. Besides the movie’s and adaptation of an entirely different book so ofc if you’re going into this w the idea ur going to get a feminist retelling of Frankenstein monster you’re going to be disappointed. Thematically these 2 book focus on entirely different things.
This movie is morally grey, the characters are all morally grey and the structure is unconventional. The film is not altogether on the male characters side but to view everything as black and white is immature as hell, every irredeemable character gets their comeuppance ie. mark ruffao’s character and the ex husband.
Oh and btw, yes there is an excessive about of sex scenes but most of them aren’t depicted romantically but more so gratuitous. If you can’t handle disturbing themes/imagery why tf are you watching a Lanthimos film ??
Girl, at this point, I would really love to see you as the creative mind behind a new movie. Every video that you make is solid, and totally logical, and you seriously outdo a lot of these writers. I hope one day I could see a movie or TV show by you seriously.
"So basically, she looks like an adult but has the brain of a baby, so inside she's still a child!"
...sir did you just make the literal opposite of a loli
Like in Xavier renegade angel there's a 14 year old who looks like a 80 year old, so poor things didn't made it first
I'd say, a reverse loli. The concepts are swapped, but, functionally, it's still loli.
It’s objectively worse. For a loli could demonstrate a level of maturity where a reverse loli could not.
@@jaredgreen2363 real
Probbably like the original creature of Frankeinsten's experiment, they looked like an adult but were just born.
im autistic and my special interest is frankenstein and yeah this movie made me so fucking ANGERY
I’m so glad someone else’s special interest is Frankenstein! I love the story so much 😭
Why? /gen
but it’s not based on frankenstein it’s its own thing 😭
@@liamross340 yeah but it does draw enough parallels between itself and the original tale that one could easily interpret it as at least "inspired by Frankenstein"
@@airplanes_aren.t_real from what ive seen, its marketed as a “girl/feminist frankenstein” but it has none of the themes or concepts of the actual frankenstein!!!!!!!! id be completely fine if they didnt keep it the exact same with characters n stuff, but this has nothing to do with frankenstein other than “oooo dead people, mad scientist, child”
Your redesign and retelling is so compelling. I absolutely loved the direction you took it, and it hit a nice little nostalgic ring in my head cause the 2009 Astro Boy has a similar premise of a new soul being born out of an attempted "resurrection." Stories like Frankenstein that feature odd and unusual protagonists really connect with me, and honestly mean the world to me, so I'm really happy with how passionate you are about making characters truly weird and strange.
I was going to go see this movie a few days ago with my sister and our respite worker. But since it had a 15+ rating We decided to check it for my PTSD triggers online. Holy Crap. It had Every Single One of my Triggers, Like the writers had a damn check list or something! We had to tell our respite worker there was NO WAY I could watch this movie. We went to the beach instead (we live in Australia).
Possibly the best decision of your life
Good for you! I'm glad I didn't end up seeing this movie either. I hope you had fun at the beach!
good decision as im hearing, i hope the beach was fun!
Name a more iconic duo than men taking an already feminist story and trying to make it "more feminist" by turning the female characters permanently sexy and always willing to sleep with and show their bodies to men.
That's why they hated She-Hulk so much. It's made through a distinctly feminist lens, and they won't tolerate that.
@@WobblesandBeanso that’s why she hulk got so much hate. I never got to watch it so I couldn’t find out for myself why it was bad
you took the words out my mouth. The audacity to proclaim that a man somehow made a more feminist version of a book that was originally written by a woman, during a time when it was a feminist act to simply write a book as a woman.
@@shannarafryer3111It has to do with the fact it was a feminist show and a comedy, men wanted an action show and for the lead girl to have flaws but not flaws that would dare make her seem unlikable, not like humans are inherently flawed creatures
The show isn't perfect but it definitely got way too hate for just being a comedy show
@shannarafryer3111 It's not like, the best show ever but for what it is its pretty good actually.
This video made me feel so seen omg...I went to see this movie yesterday and your words "It wasn't until I started thinking about the implications and the exact events of the film that a pit started to form in my stomach" deeply represent my experience. I left the theater thinking, OH I guess this was a good movie despite the bizarre stuff going on and the focus on the explicit scenes right?? It's just ARTSY but I guess kinda empowering in a way....right?!!
Then, after thinking on it for a while, I got this deep disgust and uneasiness within myself. You did a great job explaining the story, presenting your points and important reflections to make regarding this movie. So thank you sm for this! ALSO your art is super fluid and pleasant to look at, I loved watching your proccess! PS: Your different take at the end of the video was so good omgg, I wish I saw THAT instead of what I got ToT
The beginning was quite cute so I kept forgiving every red flag showing up for a while, but it definitely started to make me uneasy when the father just agreed to marry her like she wasn’t a child at that moment. I left the theater so disappointed :(
It is so infuriating how poor things is being praised as "feminist", while it continues to fit perfectly into the male gaze. I loved the video essay format looking forward if you create more :3
the idea of Bella making a grave marker for her mother should absolutely have been in the film 💔
Godwin’s scars are not inexplicable - they’re in fact pretty explicitly addressed in the side plot of the movie - Godwin’s father was also a scientist who experimented on Godwin while Godwin was alive, beginning from childhood. Hence why Godwin only experimented on animals before discovering the dead body that became Bella. Godwin’s monstrosity and cruelty being a byproduct of his own past victimization is a theme of the movie, albeit a secondary one that gets less screen time than Bella’s journey.
I'm so glad I'm finally seeing a comment of someone that actually watched the movie and listened
We need more Lavendertowne video essays 😤
Amen
Yes to that !
Absolutely
Agreed
Agreed
A little correction about "Different Take on 'Feminist Frankenstein'".
The hunchback assistant in the first film is called Fritz. Igor is a character in one of the sequels who is blackmailing Doctor Frankenstein to use the monster for revenge on some villagers. Igor had his neck broken in an attempt to hang him, which is why audiences blend him and Fritz together in their heads.
this too is one of my biggest qualms with pop-cultures franken-takes™️
Ygor (yeah i don’t know why it’s spelled like that either) doesn’t appear until the third movie (son of frankenstein) and only ~kind of~ is a lab assistant, he’s more like the town crazy guy haha
(also fritz, while the character was a really crappy person, was played by dwight frye who’s one of my favorite actors. we need more fritz representation!! lol)
@@oddelf7988) it might be cause of "Young Frankenstein" fusing the two characters into one.
So it's really Marty Feldman we're thinking of as "Igor", not Dwight Frye or Bela Lugosi (tho of course both of them had different iconic characters)
@@steamboatwill3.367 yeah that’s very possible actually- young frankenstein is just Too Iconic lol
Thanks for the correction!!! I’m more familiar with the book than the movie so I made a mistake 🥲
@@LavenderTowne Interesting enough, Igor character doesn't exist in the book. The first 'hunchbacked' assistant appeared in a play of the book.
"feminist retelling" -- because they made the monster a woman instead of a man, her entire story is just about looks, being compared to other women, and who she's sleeping with. Instead of what the original; story had the monster portray, the burden of giving life and the experience of living. They said feminist retelling because they genderswapped, not because they thought it through. Obviously.
The director’s barely disguised fetish.
Literally infantilizing and then sexualizing said woman is not cute. This is such a gross premise.
Lavender’s version sounds infinitely better.
Ikr, it’s like the “born sexy yesterday” trope on a whole new level, I’m so disturbed.
fr... 🤮
@coffeebean_18 that's the point, it's supposed to slap you in the face with how uncomfortable that trope should make people
@@coffeebean_18the movie quite literally turns the trope on it’s head and pokes a bunch of holes in it. the man that tried to groom her ended up getting screwed over by her immaturity. please watch the film if you’re going to comment on it.
@@coffeebean_18 that's the point...
This hurts even more as an autistic person it reminds me so much about how people treat us as children no matter what we do or how old we get
Same
I feel like that was one of the primary aspects of the boom too😭the “changeling” myth and a creature that seems human but “wrong,” yet has a compassionate and intelligent mind
@@montymints yea I swear most neurotypicals see us as like, an alien with no intelligence or emotion
fellow autistic person here, i totally get what you mean. some people treat us like we're whining babies and our problems aren't valid. they say they'll help, but they don't.
Oh gosh, I never thought of that. I'm autistic too. This made me even more angry now.
“She goes on a walk with this loser.” PREACH!!! I cracked up laughing 😂 I loved this video to pieces and absolutely adored how you articulated every critique I had about the movie in such a clear way ❤
*Just realized, the movie never actually verifies whether or not the money Bella gave away was even GOING to the poor people. I thought the movie was gonna talk more about class wherein Bella was gonna find out that the guards had pocketed the money instead of giving it away, inciting a discussion about corruption or smth. BUT THEY NEVER CIRCLED BACK TO THAT. I had to stifle my laughter cuz I kept thinking, "lol when she sees those guards with some fancy stuff to show off wealth, she's gonna make the surprised Pikachu face."
This has got to be the most literal example of the "born sexy yesterday" trope I have ever seen, and it's even more gross than it usually is. They had a neat set up of potentially exploring how, even in the modern day, women are expected to pump out children, regardless of if that's what they actually want. Especially considering how they prioritized saving the unwanted baby's life over the life of the woman who's been forced to carry it. That the value of women's lives should revolve around children and their ability/desire to have them, but the movie couldn't do it.
I would say this is the opposite of the born sexy yesterday trope, there’s a line in the movie where Mark Ruffalos character admits he liked her better when she was more child like and Bella rejects him for that. In a true born sexy yesterday trope Bella would have fallen in love with the first man she met and let HIM show her the world. Bella is indifferent to most of the men in this film especially at the beginning. And she discovers the world on her own. This is a lot of moral panic that isn’t warranted.
@@kkat42069) if you want talk about unwarranted moral panic, try asking republicans about LGBTQ+ people
I watched it and I hated it. I was thinking the whole time “THATS A CHILD!!!”
"i don't understand how to eat food but men sure like it when i bounce up & down on their genitals so i'm just going to do that. feminism!"
Not even a child … A.WHOLE.ASS.BABY 😭😭😭
I have not seen it, so bear with me, but is that not the point? That the ideal woman is a literal infant who will go along with whatever a man says and has a sexy body?
These men ARE disgusting, you are meant to be disgusted
thats pretty much the point. the whole thesis of the movie is how men view women. so its pretty telling how gross the men are in this movie is when their attracted to what is essentially a child in a woman’s body, and how they get less attracted when she becomes more mature and intelligent. a lot of men in the real world are like this (the movie just depicted it in an extremely on the nose way)
@@FF-ch9nr ) then where are the incels boycotting the film?
The fact that this film won eight awards and Barbie didn't even win one! Seriously, it explains a lot about these events ( sorry for the bad English )
barbie was boring imo though and this movie was experimental and made you think, at least for me, and for the sets and direction alone it deserves awards
@@julius-ceasarpedo
I feel so disappointed by this film... men just love to write characters sleeping with multiple people while being either gaslighted/manipulated/under the born yesterday trope while calling it "liberating" and "feminist"
I'm so pissed up
can I just say your Bella redesign is so endearing, and we definitely need more actually disturbing, "disgusting" looking women on screen. or literally even just disabled women
Ahhhh I would love to hear your take on more stories! Either your own version of classics or rewriting those that fell flat
I was really interested in this movie when I first heard about it, and then I found out it was literally a BABY walking around in a fully developed adult body having sex with ACTUAL ADULTS WHY DID ANYONE THINK THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA??? WHO GREENLIT THIS????????
THANK YOU! My mom and I saw this movie on Christmas together while I was in town, and left the theater having an hour long rant about how misogynistic and disgusting this film was. I genuinely don't think a single a woman was in the writing room here.
Internalized mysoginy exists too
It's not the film that was misogynistic, but the men in the film.
Maybe the director should put out a version where he cuts off all the smexx scenes, like that people would actually pay attention to the whole movie
@@VixxKong2 how old are you when you write sex as smex the movie isn't really for me either but i dont think youre old enough to understand the point of poor things if you just cut out all the sex scenes it's literally about a woman's sexual liberation
@@skmt-lm8vk
I write it like that because I sometimes get my comments deleted by UA-cam without it.
I love the comparison to Inara from Firefly!! Such a great point, I never would’ve thought of this :)
That movie sounds so gross 🤢. It’s a film about a literal child in a woman’s body being sexually abused repeatedly and it won awards?! Wtf.
Both of your ideas sound amazing though and like films I would love to see.
Honestly, your description of the film makes the plot almost sound palatable, because even that can be spun to have some sort of statement made about predatory people and the way the world views young people, girls especially. The actual plot of the movie is much worse, basically just what you described, but taken completely at face value with no critical thinking applied to it at all
@@one-onessadhalf3393 Yeah, the worst part was definitely the fact that they didn’t see it as a problem, it sounds like the repeated sexual abuse of a baby was actually celebrated as being somehow feminist 🤢
It's not supposed to be literal. I felt like you did going into it, and at the start of the film, but by the end it was my favourite film of the past year.
It's made very obvious that the film is abstract and surrealist, so it's not supposed to be literal, it's a commentary of what men do to women, and also someone who hasn't had the chance to be stained by patriarchy and misogyny, finding a place and keeping childlike wonder. It's the embodiment of the death of innocence; think of the first time we as women had to learn it wasn't safe to go into certain places without a man or by ourselves, the first time you learned that the world wasn't fair.
It's a surrealist metaphor. Please just watch the film instead of gobbling up someone else's opinion wholesale.
@@obara7366 THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS COMMENT! i feel like im going insane on this comment section lol
You would NOT survive on the dead dove tag on ao3
17:35 as alternatives to the hot girl Igor, we could pay homage to the original source material by referencing one of Victor Frankenstein’s two childhood best friends named Henry Clerval and Elizabeth. Henry and Elizabeth are characterized as beautiful and strong and I think both of them are blonde. Henry was also very loyal to Victor and took care of him after Victor had his panic attack when his monster ran away.
We can either have Elizabeth be a female love interest for the genderswapped doctor or have Henry Clerval be the doctor’s love interest as a sweet feminist pretty boy, making this option still up for beautiful side character points.
Also I love love LOVE this video essay-speed paint-rewrite Frankenstein thing
Might I suggest a gender fluid friend who is sometimes Henry and sometimes Elizabeth? Ideally their assigned gender is never revealed because it's not important. Any person who wears both suits and gowns would be an outcast in Victorian society.
@@katelynna10000 as an enby I did a bit of research on sexuality and gender expression in the Victorian era. While female friendships were romanticized, easily masking lesbian relationships, male homosexuality was extremely frowned upon. Oscar Wilde’s relationship with his lover even ended with Wilde’s death due to homophobia. Additionally, the expression of the female gender was also controlled. I couldn’t find much on non-binary or gender queer expression in the Victorian era. However knowing the information based on how sexuality was viewed in that time period, I don’t think the Henry/Elizabeth gender queer character would last long if this were to be a somewhat more historically accurate rewrite. If we were to make the rewrite historically accurate, this Henry/Elizabeth gender queer character could present as their assigned sex but be more open in their home or with the doctor and the monster, creating a sweet family of sorts. Additionally, this can be a parallel to the monster because while the features that make her an outcast are more noticeable (with her scars and disfigures), what makes the gender queer an outcast is more discreet, being ridiculed for not behaving like their assigned sex or being associated with the mad doctor. Besides, just because someone doesn’t dress/present as their chosen gender doesn’t make any less of their chosen gender.
However, as the story progresses, maybe Henry/Elizabeth could learn from the monster’s embrace of her differences and present to how they desire to.
This is a really fun idea thank you so much
@@catchives Oh yah what happened to My Boy Oscar Wilde was tragic. He was such a cool dude.Somewhat relevant to our discussion- did you know he was a big proponent of women's dress reform? A woman in his household died after her dress caught fire during his childhood so he was all for women being able to wear trousers and such; I'm pretty sure his wife Constance sometime showed up to dinner parties in Fashionable Trousers TM, but I don't have a source for that story anymore.
Also gosh, I didn't even think about the angle of this character learning to accept themselves more because of the monster's (someone in the comments suggested her preferred name be Mary, after Mrs. Shelly, and I really like that) influence. Look at us, making a whole ass story with like, themes and shit. I haven't actually read Frankenstein yet (this is a moral failing on my part, lol) but as soon as you said both characters were blond the idea popped into my head and I had to reply.
@@katelynna10000 ooo that fact about wilde is fascinating!! also omg read frankenstein.
also also, i just realized the fact that Mary Shelley is bi and henry and elizabeth are both written as beautiful and kind makes a lot of sense.
or : hip polyamory between victor, henry and elizabeth , one could even throw in igor in . everyone wants that autistic women in stem that is victor !
MORE ESSAY-REDESIGN-RANT-THING PLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSEEEE
That's the best new video format you experimented with in a long while, and I love all your videos
I still haven't gotten over the part where the men would ask "where the softest spot of her body was" to sexually exploit her. I am actually in disgust. The whole entire video and i keep thinking back on that and "ick-ing" if that even is a word.
This movie is the peak example of “the writer’s barely disguised fetish”
If You Google yorgos filmography You Will SEE that his firts work, was a 10 minute film that is based on the r4pe of a woman ... Sooooooooooooo ...
That's not the only one of his films that does that...
baby's first Lanthimos movie
Please I'ma throw up 😭
That's not even a fetish. That is borderline pedophilia 💀
I saw someone compare this movie to Barbie and said it’s ‘Barbie for adults’ but the more I hear about this movie the more I think that’s wrong. Barbie actually had something to say about the patriarchy, exploitation of women and motherhood. It feels like this movie is interested in her sex life than her.
Overall love your video and rewrite. You’re so right, we deserve a real gender swap Frankenstein movie, and your art is so pretty! Instant subscribe!! 💕💕💕
16:55 this kinda sounds like the plot to Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio, where the sculptor tries to replace his son but learns to love Pinocchio as an individual. (really good video, wish they had you as a writer on this movie)
+
Amazing movie!
I was looking for this comment. Totally agree
This is why I’m really hopeful for Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation of Frankenstein that he’s working on!! I can’t wait to see his take on the story
See that's probably a more fitting comparison cuz the whole time my brain was comparing her pitch to Astro Boy haha!
>_> It was even more controversial in the book that this was based on from what I've seen. They actually downplayed a lot of the stuff from the origonal book "Poor Things" by Alasdair Gray written in 1992. Unreliable narrators of course but it's hard to tell at the end who was in the right and who was in the wrong. But to put into perspective.... The origonal book actually had the main doctor putting the baby into the woman's body to essensually groom her into the perfect bride. Which was taken out of the movie. and Context changed. But then the last letter was in the POV of the woman who said "all that was false and he was just a jealous man because I didn't pick him to marry and wrote this fanfic to try to convince the world otherwise." But somehow it some of the "origonal" part was actually true? I haven't read it but I watched an essay video talking about the comparisons so It would be intresting if you read the book to see the thoughts.
This is my first video here and I love the format so much. It’s beautiful in the way everything is presented. The horror of the movie, the salvaging of the idea, and a total rework of the intent. I would love more videos with a variety of subjects. And a variety of feelings towards the subject material! It doesn’t need to be just things that incite anger.
Your new retelling me reminds me of a graphic novel called 'M for Monster!'. It's about a sister who resurrects her other sister after a terrible accident, but they're an entirely new person. It's a very good read, and absolutely beautiful scenes!
Omg i love that book! Super fun read ❤️
@@ThatGalWithTheRawMeat yeah!!
oh nice! maybe ill check it out. seems like a good read
as a greek, i can confirm that the vast majority of ppl in my country don't like Lanthimos as a director in general. I saw the film with my friends and other than the costumes and the general aesthetic we didn't like anything else. The film is overhyped
I love love love video essays, and thos style of video is right up my alley. Most video essay yt channels don't focus on art, so I like the combination of my two favorite kinds of videos!
ah, so there’s a reason none of the trailers actually told us anything about the plot 😬
Her tormenting the lawyer made me think it would be a film exploring how the sexy-born-yesterday problematic male fantasy would be terrible if they actually had to live through it because he gets everything he said he wanted and hated it
It literally did that. It drove him insane and he lost all of his fortune
@@VixxKong2 I know, I worded it poorly. I meant that’s what I do think of it and that’s why they had that plotline.
I don’t have as negative of a view of the film as LavenderTowne.
I think the film is aware of the stuff she’s criticising and that’s part of the point but because the film isn’t explicitly saying it I can see why she doesn’t think it’s worth portraying such things for the sake of art even if I disagree.
I think a lot of the people who are commenting are used to realism and explicitly explained morals and taking the directors words as absolute instead of finding their own meaning
I also just think the artistic direction of the visuals is excellent and that can’t be discounted even by those who hate the plot
I didn’t expect it to be genderbent Frankenstein and I think a lot of people don’t know it’s based of a book so think that’s all it was going for.
The other experiment is a contrast to Bella and shows she’s not the typical result and also I don’t think Godwin saying he wouldn’t have Bella without the experiment is pro-life or pro-choice because he’s pretty clearly a character who struggles to admit what his feelings are so looks at everything through the lense of amoral science because of his fathers abusive experiments.
Bella not getting to have the catharsis of berating her abuser because he’s on his deathbed and having complicated mixed feelings about him is common in fiction and reality and she clearly missed him but the only reason she returned that soon was his illness.
I could go on but my point is while I don’t enjoy everything in the film I don’t agree with people who think it’s a moral failing of critics if they do enjoy it.
Sorry this comment is so long, but this is still the condensed version of
@@dragonetafireball
Thank you for your comment actually. It's very enlightening to see people actually give an honest review of it
@@dragonetafireball i think the point of this film was to get us talking and thinking. i think there are genuine critiques to be made of the movie but anyone who just thinks it’s “gross” because Bella starts mentally as a child missed a heavy chunk of the underlying commentary. How often are literal children taken advantage of by grown men because “they look like adult women.” its so common for young girls to be groomed by grown men with bad intentions, and we at least get to see Bella turn around and ruin his life afterwards. She’s still impacted by his actions, but ultimately she comes out on top, only after she begins to reach mental maturity. Like many women who grow up to realize the things done to them as little girls/teens were NOT okay even if they seemed okay at the time. It explores exactly how these young girls are manipulated too and even blamed by the older man for being a willing participant even though they were clearly not mature enough to make a fully informed decision.
I keep coming back to this video. Your summary of what the film's plot could have been brought tears to my eyes. Well done
My face the entire time listening to you describe this movie as someone who hasn't seen it: 💀🤢🤮
I can't believe somebody actually wrote an actual movie like that.
I can't believe that it got nominated for so many awards 💀
SAME 😭 This sounds absolutely terrible and seems fetishy with literal babies brains inside grown women bodies, there is nothing feminist about this movie
Yes. I think I would have walked out too. Incredibly disturbing.
if a writer gave me this script i would wack him on the face with the script 10 times before saying "what the fuck is wrong with you?" how the hell was this approved?
DAZAI PFP?!1?11!!1
Poor things is made after the book of the same title, it's about how men like to take advantage of women. When main character starts gaining autonomy and learns about the world, men in her life are displeased.
So why does she have to be an experiment?
the book tells that the story is her husband's fantasy because he was jealous of her
the movie does none of that, and you don't need countless nude scenes focusing on female nudity to hammer the point of men taking advantage of her, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo did the same point and did it better
Yeah, it's telling when every version of Monster High is more willing to show damage that takes place after someone is reanimated than this movie.
Also, every version of Monster High has done more for feminism than this movie 😭
boy oh boy I sure do love when a man takes a story a woman wrote based on her own life experiences, twists it into the opposite of everything it was meant to represent and calls his version the "more feminist" one
Bro it’s not a retelling of Frankenstein goofy. You probably haven’t even watched the film you’re just reiterating everything this UA-camr says because you’re not ready to get your own opinion
@@joemama8595 The novel Poor Things does indeed take inspiration from Frankenstein
@@helixxia9320 so the movie that took inspiration from a book which took inspiration from another book is taking things from the original book??? Go after the author not the director lmao
@helixxia9320
Yeah just like most vampire stories are inspired by Bram Stocker's Dracula.
That doesn't mean that Twilight is a female retelling of a man's story
I come back to this video so often because your thoughts and insight on film and art is so inspiring and respectful both to the original media and the characters it intended to represent
Note: It isn’t based on Frankenstein. The media found that the easiest comparison to make, so they ran with it.
It’s based off a book that was based off of Frankenstein though
if the original book has inspiration and enough parallels to Frankenstein, the comparison is fair and warranted.
@@iliasbeeDepends, if you would also be ok if the 50 Shades of Gray movie back then would constantly be compared to twilight instead of the 50SoG book just because it is inspired by twilight.
@@Oiami-.-if it proclaimed to be a feminist retelling I don’t see why it couldn’t
@@Oiami-.- i get what youre trying to say but the 2nd and 3rd movies in the 50sog franchise were based on the second and third twilight movies pretty heavily.
So how is your film feminist?
"Uh, it features a hot lady who doesn't like things happening to her and she wins at the end, sorta"
...
ALL THE AWARDS!!
This made me think through some of my books, especially my favourite/s.
Hyde by Antje Wagner (I've never gotten around to reading the original), the main character of this story is a young woman, which we don't know too much about at the start of the story. This author likes to play with the timeline of her stories and character perspectives. In Hyde she jumps between the present and the past, and as our protagonist, Katrina, continues on her path in the present, we get glimpses of her past, from her childhood up until to almost the beginning of the book in the present.
I still remember how clueless I was, when I first read the book. I understood that she had a weak left leg and it was therefore a pain for her to walk around in those heels. I understood that she was a carpenter and had a certain love for everything wood and the beauty of buildings. I also understood that she covered the lower half of her face and had difficulties speaking, found it straining.
But I didn't know the reasons for any of it. In the present we always just see her in a panic at the prospect of someone seeing her face, going to some odd measures, such as drinking a normal hot coffee with a straw. It's not the main focus of the story, but she does get portraied as a monster by many around her.
She is a strong character, who is so grounded in the beliefes she grew up with that she has a hard time finding a new place in the world after losing her home, Hyde. She is no perfect being, she did commit some crimes, she has a good package of trauma. She knows love, knows what it means to lose those she loves.
It's a story I hold close to my heart.
I apologize, if this got anyone interested, as far as I know this book is only available in german..
Ahh I'm glad to be German then! I'm more than interested, thanks
@@desonyli That’s a surprise for me!
I hope I didn't spoil too much.. the facts I mentioned can all be found within the first to second chapter. The general things are more of a final observation.
What may be good to know is that it is a novel, it plays in a world close to ours (no fantasy world), however it does include some fantastic elements.
Also, something that is rather important for me is how the book ends. Good ending or bad one? Open or closed? This book would have a good closed ending.
When a man makes a feminist movie, you just know it’s going to be bad😭
Yeah, that's always the first huge red flag when I hear about these kinds of stories/films.
It never goes well.
And Frankenstein is already a phenomenal story.
Especially if there's no female consultant at the very least. It's the whole, "How does a woman feel? We asked a man!" xP
@@MadAliceInWonderland exactly
There have been a couple that become cult classics for feminism, like Alien (which portrays the horror of SA and Forced Birth but towards cis men, and it legitimately caused that reaction of horror & forced empathy in many cis men) -but it is *very* interesting to note that the ones that are actually rather good are almost always horror movies and tragedies… and oftentimes *still* have issues of their own that probably would have been caught if women (especially those with the specific experiences being addressed) were more highly involved in the productions
I believe men can make feminist art, take the band nirvana as an example. But my god is it rare
A man, making a feminist retelling of a book a women wrote? That just feels so wierd and almost disrespectful tbh.
Bro it was written by a man… this was not a Frankenstein retelling. I love lavendertown but this is just not an educated rant. Bella is exploited by the men around her, thematically it’s supposed to be extremely dark.
@@iseeyou2211 I understand what your saying, but the way it was shown, to me, seemed like it was almost glorifying it. But that's just a personal opinion.
@@who7506 idk I understand where lavendertown is coming from (kind of) but I don’t believe she was able to get past the initial shock value. Every man in this film is a constraint to Bella’s freedom/exploration which later becomes symbolically grander in a patriarchal sense. Sex is the ultimate rebellion against feminine standards of the 17th century yet the men around her (even the ones she’s not romantically involved with) exploit her naivety for their own gain, not one of them is supposed to be viewed in a positive light🙄
Also ‘shown to you’ you basically spouted bs in the original comment
@@iseeyou2211 Poor Things the novel is a retelling of Frankenstein though, Mary Shelley and her book is in this film's DNA. And yeah, it is disrespectful for this to be marketed as "the feminist version" considering both the subject matter of the film itself and the origins of it being Frankenstein specifically.
@@mia-saraking5479 honestly I didn’t interpret the book as so much a ‘retelling’ of Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, but it’s own piece of media and themes with recurring motifs from Frankenstein , in no way are the ideologies similar
this is my third watch of this video and i love this style. its refreshing to see a new opinion on some of these popular films, especially coming from a creative person who has ideas on how they could make it better. i would love to see more video essays from you
I am so excited about this concept of video. I would watch a million "half video essay + half script doctor + half character redesign" videos from you.
Didn’t Del Toro basically create that “rewrite” with his recent retelling of Pinocchio? (Reanimated boy to replace a dead son, who lives in that shadow but wants to be his own person, and in the end his puppet-form is accepted as who he is instead of transforming into a “real boy”)
Your redesign ideas are SO fucking brilliant
As a nice reference to the original the name the daughter wanted could be Mary after Mary Shelley. Also the mother could be Victoria after Victor. Also Vienna’s death could also be why Victoria doesn’t have a husband, he divorced her after Vienna’s death because he blamed her.
Bella Baxter’s name before she died was Victoria
19:22
That scene could also be a discussion about a parent having a trans child with the whole “wanting to be called a new name” and how the mother had to come with terms that the “monster” wasn’t her daughter anymore
I wonder how lgbt problems have intertwined with feminist problems nowadays
Yeah thats in the film. With Willem Dafoe’s character coming in terms that bella found her freedom.
It seems that this video is takkng an issue with an entire storyline without engaging with the film
@@kidwithaphonecamera no babe, the film is about grown adult men perving over a child, a toddler, but it's totally okay, because this baby, who can't even dress or feed herself yet, is in an adult body!
@@AnnekeOosterinkand also it was so wrong how basically, Just because she was okay with it, it wasnt considered abuse
it feels like a film portrayed through the eyes of the abuser
This is this first video I’ve seen from you. Watched the whole thing, and subscribed before it ended. I love your art, and narrative redesign of Frankenstein.
A man telling a story about a woman being treated badly to say "this is no good, I heard this happens to some women" does absolutely nothing other than glorify himself. It reminds me of a review I had in art school where an international student (white ENL man) explained the inspiration behind one of his works being our country's gendered violence statistics. The work was a bit "I'm 14 and this is deep", referencing media consumption and the home if I recall. He seemed almost taken aback when no one gave him a gold star. I gave a brief clarification in the notes as his scribe. He added nothing to the conversation other than essentially saying in the review "I just found out loads of you get wacked every week." Yes, we do. Every week, one of us is killed by our partners. Thank you for your contribution.
ALSO: How do you not get that after sharing a vague number that you're talking to the statistics right now. Say there's 10 women in the room and you just used the classic 1 in 3 (a misleading stat because I don't think I've ever met the other 2 women), how do you not realise that at least three of us HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED?
People can absolutely tell stories even if they’re not in the same social group BUT that is a HUGE responsibility and must be done responsibly. That’s what cultural consultants are for, they aren’t just part of the community but also experts in these topics, and you have to always keep in mind that the criticism from people who ARE part of those groups must be heard.
Something similar happened to me, I am an international film student from Mexico and I am trying to become a cultural consultant, one of my classmates was obsessed with Mexican Gold Cinema and wanted to make her own film in Spanish “inspired” by it. She didn’t know Spanish, she gave the main character a job that existed ONLY on England, gave the characters terrible names and when I gave her notes about how that didn’t reflected Mexican society at that time and some tips on how to adapt them she ignored them and said “well I guess we’re bringing new jobs to Mexico” 💀
When I saw the title, I thought "Wait, Lisa Frankenstein is out already? And it's BAD?! Oh no!".
I nearly thought that too, oopsies.
You put so many of my problems with the movie into words perfectly. I actually thought there was almost no way to save this movie, but honestly your re-write of the ending, with the movie ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGING the horrible exploitation and manipulation of it's main character, and her realizing it herself and reacting accordingly would actually have made the rest of plot feel earned (I think, I'd have to rewatch the movie considering the new ending and I am not going to do that to myself lol)
Except any random youtuber shouldn't have to do it because this bit is pretty much already in the book. The director just, y'know, didn't choose to include it for some reason.
@@hawkins347 oh I can think of why by watching the rest of the movie.
So there WAS supposed to be a scene where the movie acknowledge how predatory and disgusting almost every character was?
Sometimes it really feels like hollywood will slap the 'feminist' gold star on literally anything just because "well we said so" when something is clearly not even close to that.
Like the "organic/vegan/natural" label on literally anything
@@Aphelia. like the "cage-free/free-range/pasture raised/farm fresh" labels
Your voice is actually so perfect for video essay styled things it's so pretty