‘Poor Things’: It Deserves the Golden Lion

The 80th Venice Film Festival has just concluded, and Poor Things secured the Golden Lion Award, adding to the legacy of award-winning commercial films like Joker in 2019. Poor Things boasts a diverse blend of genres, including romance, science fiction, comedy, and adventure, among others. As I watched the film, the audience's adoration was evident, with laughter and applause punctuating their enjoyment.

Poor Things is an adaptation of Scottish writer Alasdair Gray's novel of the same name, offering a fresh take on the Frankenstein story by relocating it to the late Victorian era. Bella Baxter, a whimsical and unrestrained woman driven by intense desires, becomes a female Frankenstein in her own right. To escape her abusive husband, she takes her own life by drowning, only to cross paths with the eccentric and brilliant scientist Goodwin. He resurrects her by performing a unique procedure, replacing her brain with that of her unborn child.

The original version of Poor Things is a substantial novel spanning over 300 pages, delving into a plethora of intricate and engaging themes which includes the exploration of self, memory, gender, class, history, colonization, and the dynamic between creators and their creations. All of these complex ideas are intertwined with brisk editing and a humorous narrative style, resulting in a fundamentally amusing and clever political allegory, especially on the interplay between male desire and female independence, offering a highly creative and incisive discourse that, while sharp, never becomes uncomfortable.

Director Yorgos Lanthimos, who has reached the milestone of 50 years this year, is renowned for his distinctive and eccentric filmmaking style. He has earned a place on the Cannes In-Competition shortlist twice and has now achieved this honor for the third time at the Venice In-Competition. His career took off at the age of 36 when Dogtooth (2009) captured the Cannes Un Certain Regard Award, catapulting him to fame. Subsequently, Alps (2011) secured the Best Screenplay Award at the Venice Film Festival, The Lobster (2015) received the Cannes Jury Prize, and The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017) earned the Cannes Best Screenplay Award. The Favorite also clinched the Venice Jury Prize. Lanthimos has consistently enjoyed a fortunate streak at awards ceremonies. This latest triumph for Poor Things at the Venice Film Festival is not only a testament to the film itself but also a recognition of Lanthimos's illustrious 30-year career in the industry.

Emma Stone contributed many explicit sex scenes in the film. Starting from the first half of the film, as Bella explores her body, there are a lot of masturbation and sex scenes in brothels. The high volume of high sex scenes is relatively rare in Venice Film Festival and even in the three major film festivals this year. It will certainly remind people of the 2021 Venice Golden Lion Award-winning film Happening, which is also famous for its shocking footages of women giving birth, and the 2021 Cannes Palme d'Or Award-winning film Titanium, which featured women and cars engaging in sexual intercourse; we can safely say that the openness of European film festivals has become more open in recent years.

Sex plays a central role in the film, and it's integral to the narrative. Director Lanthimos doesn't use it as a gratuitous spectacle; rather, each sex scene in the film contributes to Bella's personal awakening. This journey reflects a woman's development, from her initial innocence to experiencing menarche, tasting forbidden desires, and ultimately embracing bodily liberation. It signifies a shift from "being chosen" to "being the one who chooses" and realizing that mental well-being holds greater importance than physical pleasure. Consequently, it's not accurate to label Poor Things as a pornographic film; it fundamentally differs from traditional pornography.

Following its Golden Lion Award win in 2019, Joker achieved remarkable success by grossing over $1.104 billion worldwide, earning both box office glory and widespread acclaim. The decision to award Joker that year was met with controversy, given the presence of other melodramatic contenders like Marriage Story, Ad Astra, J'accuse, and About Endlessness. However, when considering overall quality and the director's vision, Joker emerged as the deserving winner by providing entertainment while still conveying its intended message. The jury, led by Lucrezia Martel, staunchly championed Joker despite the dissenting voices, a decision that now appears bold in retrospect. In recent years, the line between commercial films and melodramas has increasingly blurred. Many successful commercial films exhibit depth in their storytelling, while melodramas often take commercial considerations into account. For instance, Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer is undoubtedly a commercial film, yet it employs intricate techniques to convey the director's messages, requiring a certain level of audience engagement to fully appreciate. However, Joker appealed to a broad spectrum of viewers, serving as a sharp tool to dissect society's intricacies, making it a deserving recipient of its award. This same principle applies to Poor Things. It is poised for future box office success upon its global release while maintaining a high artistic standard. The recognition of Poor Things represents another triumph for commercial cinema, marking a significant milestone that will continue to influence the creative direction of filmmakers worldwide.

In addition to the film itself, the panel’s preferences are equally important

Following its screening at the Venice Film Festival, Poor Things garnered comparisons to this year's hit film Barbie. While both films share similar themes, Poor Things distinguishes itself with a more compelling visual and emotional impact. Barbie opts for a straightforward approach with potent implications, whereas Poor Things delves deeper into the exploration of female self-awareness, emotional intelligence, and body consciousness. Furthermore, it fearlessly critiques the hypocrisy within male-dominated society.

In addition to Bella, the film features three main male characters: Duncan Wedderburn, portrayed by Mark Ruffalo, Dr. Godwin Baxter, played by Willem Dafoe, and Max McCandles, portrayed by Ramy Youssef. Interestingly, these three men mirror Bella's journey and play significant supporting roles throughout the film. Dr. Godwin, often referred to as "God" by Bella, has complex emotions towards her, encompassing both a paternal affection and a romantic attraction. Importantly, Bella is also his experiment, making her escape a catalyst for him to initiate new experiments and seek a replacement.

Duncan and Bella shared the most extensive period together. Initially, he appeared as a romantic figure but eventually revealed himself as a money-driven individual who believed that wealth and persuasive talk could resolve any issue. Bella was initially captivated by him, coinciding with a phase in her life when she yearned for adventure and exploration. Thus, she made the bold decision to run away with him, embarking on journeys to vibrant places like Lisbon, sunsets aboard ships, and snowy Paris. However, as time passed, Duncan's irritable, calculating, and resolute nature began to surface, leading Bella to the realization that she had placed her trust in the wrong person. She ultimately chose to enter a brothel and become a prostitute rather than continue to stay by his side. His character bears a striking resemblance to Ken in Barbie.

Max serves as the perspective character throughout the film, portraying the most compassionate and generous persona toward Bella. His willingness to give and, most importantly, his respect for Bella's choices stands out prominently. Despite not possessing Bella's level of capability, Max demonstrates a remarkable ability to navigate the complexities of their emotional relationship. Together, they mutually support and grow alongside each other, which ultimately leaves a lasting impression on Bella. All three male actors deliver exceptional comedic performances, with Mark Ruffalo, known for his predominantly serious roles in previous big-screen endeavors, particularly shining in this comedic role. His transition into comedy is noteworthy and adds a delightful element to the film.

Poor Things is far from being solely centered on the examination of gender dynamics between men and women. At its core, it offers a unique perspective on the intricacies of the human world through the lens of childhood innocence. When comparing it to films of a similar genre, last year's Cannes main competition entry EO comes to mind. Both films employ a highly ironic and subversive perspective to critique the issues of our time. In terms of entertainment value, Poor Things outshines EO by a considerable margin.

Setting aside the previously discussed themes, Poor Things remains an aesthetically pleasing commercial film. The film boasts stunning landscapes and showcases whimsical creatures like pig-bodied animals with duck tails, akin to flipping through the pages of a children's picture book. While Lanthimos' previous works leaned towards a more serious style, this transition to a lighter and more playful tone may require some adjustment for his fans. However, in the competitive landscape of 2023, where established masters and emerging talents vie for recognition, Poor Things, with its distinctiveness, is likely to secure a place on many people's list of the year's best films.

Poor Things stands out as the most commercially inclined among the films that received awards at this year's three major European film festivals. On the Adamant (2023), a documentary exploring humanity, secured the Golden Bear at the Berlin Film Festival, while Anatomy of a Fall, a female-centered narrative, earned the Palme d'Or at Cannes. The recognition of Poor Things not only underscores the Venice Film Festival's reputation as a precursor to the Oscars, but it also affirms that, for festival judges, a film's appeal remains a crucial criterion for selection. Purposefully complex films find less favor among the judges.

This year's jury president, Damien Chazelle, is a quintessential creator of commercial films. He has several notable works under his belt, including Whiplash, La La Land, and First Man. Notably, his recent film, Babylon, from last year, shares a stylistic resemblance with Poor Things, emphasizing the film's formal elements. The preference of the jury president holds significant sway in determining the final awards. Of course, among the films shortlisted this year, aside from Poor Things, entries like The Killer, Dogman, Ferrari, and Maestro also offer high entertainment value. However, some of them suffer from subpar quality and outdated storylines. Perhaps for the youthful Damien, they may not be his top choices.

During my interview with judge Shu Qi, she shared a personal criterion that holds importance for her as a juror. She expressed a fondness for films that incorporate a substantial amount of "white space," citing examples like Hamaguchi Ryusuke's Evil Does Not Exist and Holland's Zielona granica. Interestingly, both films received recognition, with one winning the Jury Grand Prize and the other receiving the Special Jury Award, underscoring the diversity of styles in comparison to Poor Things. The overall award list reflects a well-balanced jury's considerations. While the Golden Lion awards cater to popular appeal, the secondary awards prioritize films that effectively convey a director's artistic intent. Every year's awards take both aspects into account, ultimately determining which aspect prevails in the final selection process.

Certainly, film festivals, to some extent, are a "people's game". Various factors come into play, including team public relations and personal connections with the judges, which can introduce an element of bias. However, as mentioned in the preceding article, Poor Things possesses numerous compelling attributes, including its subject matter, performances, thematic depth, and alignment with the judges' inclinations. Taken together, these factors are substantial enough to set it apart from this year's somewhat lackluster list of films and secure the top prize.