Helga without the H

Every year* I attempt (with varying degrees of success and effort) to watch as many of that year’s Oscar nominees as possible. For the past few years* I’ve posted reviews of these movies here on this blog. At some point before the awards ceremony, I usually write up some sort of over-analysis and maybe some predictions, but we’ll see if I run out of steam before then. In the meantime, today we cover…

*Except 2022, when I was too burned out from 2021’s binge to give a crap.

Poor Things

[10 nominations for best picture, actress (Emma Stone), supporting actor (Mark Ruffalo), cinematography, adapted screenplay, editing, production design, hair/makeup, costume, and score]

IS IT SALTBURN? Yes! YES! A THOUSAND TIMES YES!!!!!!!

There is exactly and only one thing about Poor Things that I did not like: the title. For whatever reason, I just constantly forget the title. Pretty Things? Past Things? Something with a P a think…

And that’s it. Otherwise, this film was absolutely incredible. It is easily the best film of the year. Easily. The fact that other nominees even exist (let alone are considered frontrunners over this) is mind boggling. When I came up with my “Is It Saltburn?” juding criteria, I had not yet see Poor Things. If I had, then Saltburn wouldn’t have even entered into the equation.

Poor Things is great for all of the same reasons that Saltburn is great, except that it does every single one of the great things in Saltburn even better. Like ten times better. The script is absurdly hilarious like in Saltburn, but Poor Things is even more absurd, even more hilarious, and, crucially, has WAY more to say. A few people have spoken to me about Saltburn after my review came out; they’ve taken me quite literally about my love for the film (having perhaps not realize that my previous years’ snubs include Bullet Train and A Love Tale of Taylors). Now, I did actually love Saltburn for real, but I completely understand people who expected more from it after rave reviews such as mine. They thought it was kinda pointless, has been done before, and didn’t have anything new to say.

The same accusations CANNOT be made about Poor Things. Poor Things is so smart. So very, very smart. And so original. I’m struggling with myself about whether I should explain the basic premise, or whether it would be a spoiler (as we don’t get the reveal about WTF is actually going on until we’re pretty far into the story, and part of the magic is trying to decipher why the hell Emma Stone is so weird.) I think I’ll leave the details obscure, but I’ll at least give the general idea. Stone plays a total weirdo who lives with a mad scientist, and we guess pretty early on that she’s probably some sort of Frankenstein’s monster type of creature (there’s a clue early on that the mad scientist might actually be Dr. Frankenstein in an alternate reality where he manages to grow old. That’s a Frankenstein spoiler but come on that novel’s a couple hundred years old by now). We don’t know initially why she is such a weirdo, but we do get to watch her learning about the world around her. She enters with the clean slate of a being who has just been created, but the cold scientific analysis of a brilliant scientist and doctor. From this unique standpoint, we as the audience get to learn about the absurdities of the world and its odd societal norms anew.

The film is directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, the same guy who did The Favourite. Here’s what I had to say about The Favourite in 2019:

With so much in its favor, why is The Favourite not My Favourite? In short: it’s weird. Like for real, this film is so weird. I heard that other films by this director (none of which I have seen) are even weirder, and the narrative script here is what brings him down to earth from Wackytown to Oscartown. That might be, but still, geeeez this thing is weird. I’m confused by many directing and editing decisions (and thus am confused to see nominations in both of these categories), with deliberate awkward cuts for no discernible reason. People just do weird shit. Scenes last several seconds too long. I straight up do not understand why. Maybe it’s just over my head. Who knows.

Poor Things is much, much weirder than The Favourite. However, it totally works here. Lanthimos has found his vessel; a plot and story that actually matches his weird filmmaking style appropriately. A perfect union. It is similar to Oppenheimer, where Chris Nolan’s pretention is finally matched with appropriate fare. Of course, Poor Things is way better than Oppenheimer. The trick here is that while the visual world Stone’s character inhabits is absolutely bonkers, it’s weirdness pales in comparison to the commentary she makes on real-world scenarios. The most obvious is her confusion as to why women are supposed to feel shamed by sex. But there’s plenty more; why should we not dance as the music moves us? Why should some thrive in riches while others starve? Why can’t we just punch babies when they cry?

The performances in this film are superb, especially from Stone herself. She is my hands-down favorite for the Best Actress statue. Nobody else comes even remotely close. She had to grow up before our eyes, which is no easy feat. The trailers feature some early scenes when she is learning how to move her own body (so clutch), but we also watch her become more articulate, more thoughtful, and more complex over time. She absolutely nailed it. Bravo, bravo, bravo! Everyone else in the cast was great. Mark Ruffalo is up for best supporting actor, which is fine I think. But he’s nowhere being the shoe-in that Stone is with her brilliance here.

I will say, though, that this film is certainly not for everybody. Remember how I said it does everything that Saltburn does? Yeah, that includes a LOT of nudity and crazy sex stuff. You will be intimately familiar with Emma Stone’s body by the end of this film. The very first time we saw one of her nipples, it seemed totally unnecessary to me, and is in a scene where Stone is still very innocent and virginal. I thought “Ugh, a pervy male director like in Oppenheimer.” But it turns out the nudity is 100% deliberate and necessary here (unlike in Oppenheimer). At the first nipple we, as the audience, react with “Whoa, there’s a booby!” What we quickly learn is that bodies are natural, and the fact that we react when we see them is more a commentary on us as programmed society. Half the film here is Stone not just discovering the joys of sex, but also exposing the transactional or possessive nature of sex, the hypocritical way in which we treat it, and the lack of female agency we’ve normalized. So does that means lots of graphic sex scenes? Yes. So if that’s something you’re just not that into, then you won’t enjoy this. On the other hand, you might be exactly the person who needs to see it.

Also, like I said, the movie is weird. If you don’t like weird (for example, if you couldn’t appreciate the hot dog fingers in last year’s winner Everything Everywhere All At Once), then you won’t like this, either.

I, on the other hand, freaking LOVED IT!!!!!! Don’t even do the ceremony. Just give this movie all the awards and call it a night already.