Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

The point was made early in Poor Things and yet the scenes continued throughout. That's gratuitous.

To you.

Most people got the point pretty quickly...guess you didn't.

Guess we’re back in middle school again?

It doesn’t matter if a point was received or not. We both have opinions, unaligned; and that’s ok!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was definitely not for everybody; simple minds or just people who don’t have a lot of emotional stamina won’t understand or like.
For me, what hit home were the words of the old madame about how you get to know and own the world once you get to know not just the pretty side but also the dark and the ugly.
This is what this movie is about for me - how easily light becomes darkness and love becomes cruelty and beauty becomes ugliness and how fascinating it makes the world look.

Whereas I felt those themes were fairly obvious.

I just didn't like Emma Stone's portrayal. It was very mannered and I felt like I was constantly being hit over the head with it -- "her body is mature but her brain is not, see? SEE?!?!?!?!" Yes, I see. It raises some interesting issues. But I think there are more interesting and nuanced way to explore those issues.

The movie felt kind of simple to me, and it's trying to trick you into thinking it's deep by being very weird and having some avant garden visuals.

^This! Was not deep at all.

Having read some of the source material, I can say that the book was also not very deep. It was an adaptation of a very dry novel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

The point was made early in Poor Things and yet the scenes continued throughout. That's gratuitous.

To you.

Most people got the point pretty quickly...guess you didn't.

I got the point. I just also happen to enjoy all the sex scene. I also thought it was really interesting as her brain developed how her reflexes improved and she became more fluid, not necessarily related to the sex scene, but in her walking mannerisms and vocalizations. It was really interesting. I didn’t need a point I was enjoying the entertainment.

But also, there was a richness to it visually that I enjoyed. Let’s be honest you’re clearly not strictly watching the criterion collection either if you’re posting here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was definitely not for everybody; simple minds or just people who don’t have a lot of emotional stamina won’t understand or like.
For me, what hit home were the words of the old madame about how you get to know and own the world once you get to know not just the pretty side but also the dark and the ugly.
This is what this movie is about for me - how easily light becomes darkness and love becomes cruelty and beauty becomes ugliness and how fascinating it makes the world look.

Whereas I felt those themes were fairly obvious.

I just didn't like Emma Stone's portrayal. It was very mannered and I felt like I was constantly being hit over the head with it -- "her body is mature but her brain is not, see? SEE?!?!?!?!" Yes, I see. It raises some interesting issues. But I think there are more interesting and nuanced way to explore those issues.

The movie felt kind of simple to me, and it's trying to trick you into thinking it's deep by being very weird and having some avant garden visuals.

^This! Was not deep at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

The point was made early in Poor Things and yet the scenes continued throughout. That's gratuitous.

To you.

Most people got the point pretty quickly...guess you didn't.

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was definitely not for everybody; simple minds or just people who don’t have a lot of emotional stamina won’t understand or like.
For me, what hit home were the words of the old madame about how you get to know and own the world once you get to know not just the pretty side but also the dark and the ugly.
This is what this movie is about for me - how easily light becomes darkness and love becomes cruelty and beauty becomes ugliness and how fascinating it makes the world look.

Whereas I felt those themes were fairly obvious.

I just didn't like Emma Stone's portrayal. It was very mannered and I felt like I was constantly being hit over the head with it -- "her body is mature but her brain is not, see? SEE?!?!?!?!" Yes, I see. It raises some interesting issues. But I think there are more interesting and nuanced way to explore those issues.

The movie felt kind of simple to me, and it's trying to trick you into thinking it's deep by being very weird and having some avant garden visuals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

The point was made early in Poor Things and yet the scenes continued throughout. That's gratuitous.

To you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

The point was made early in Poor Things and yet the scenes continued throughout. That's gratuitous.

Anonymous wrote:To the people who could not stand the idea of someone with disabilities having sex - good luck growing older. Disability is a stage of life.

Nobody said that.

To the people who could not stand the idea of someone with disabilities having sex - good luck growing older. Disability is a stage of life.

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was definitely not for everybody; simple minds or just people who don’t have a lot of emotional stamina won’t understand or like.
For me, what hit home were the words of the old madame about how you get to know and own the world once you get to know not just the pretty side but also the dark and the ugly.
This is what this movie is about for me - how easily light becomes darkness and love becomes cruelty and beauty becomes ugliness and how fascinating it makes the world look.

Yes! I loved that part where Harry told Bella he showed her the ugliness in the world to spoil her (can’t remember the quote)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.

Tend to agree with that. There were sexual themes for sure, but everything was in the realm of "conversation" for me and my kid." Maybe this would be a "no" for others?.

I thought it was definitely not for everybody; simple minds or just people who don’t have a lot of emotional stamina won’t understand or like.
For me, what hit home were the words of the old madame about how you get to know and own the world once you get to know not just the pretty side but also the dark and the ugly.
This is what this movie is about for me - how easily light becomes darkness and love becomes cruelty and beauty becomes ugliness and how fascinating it makes the world look.

Anonymous wrote:I watched the first third or so. I didn’t like that Emma Stone’s character started having sex when her speech and body movements seemed like that of a child or someone with significant developmental disabilities.

Well not all but many people with DDs are quite loose

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved it. It’s beautiful and quirky. Definitely raunchy - did not mind. It made sine good points about identity, free will, misogyny, self awareness/actualization. Some of it was silly. Worth a watch for sure.

Sorry PP but "raunchy" is not the right word for this movie. It was gratuitous after a point and anyone with two eyes would realize that.

Nope, not even close to gratuitous. She has her tits out quite a bit, and a lot of simulated sex, but nothing gratuitous. I bet you’re the same type of person that was frothing at the mouth over Saltburn.
To be frank, it’s a very weird movie, but Emma Stone puts in a phenomenal performance here and should win the Oscar.