by Sara Missaghi
1. Introduction
Addressing the topic of female sexuality has long been a challenge for Hollywood, as there is a simultaneous need to convey the political intent of the filmmaker through artistic expression as well as to gain box office attraction. When the portrayal of a woman’s sexuality in film is not for the mere seduction of the male protagonist or catering to a male audience, it is oftentimes censored, criticized, or depicted as debauched, shameful, or even wicked. With the increasing rise of the feminist movement, however, many films over the past decade have become more open to exploring the portrayal of independent sexually liberated female characters – Yorgos Lanthimos’ “Poor Things” standing as one such example.
Based on the 1992 novel, Poor Things centres around a strange and childlike Bella Baxter, who possesses the body of an adult woman but the brain of her unborn fetus as a result of its surgical implantation in her head following her suicide. Set in Victorian London, the film follows Bella’s journey from her black-and-white life under the roof of her surgeon and ‘creator,’ Dr. Godwin Baxter, to a life of colour once her innocent, inexperienced self runs off into the open world. As she travels from city to city with her ego-centric and domineering new lover, Duncan Wedderburn, Bella explores the novel complexities of intimate relationships, the value of money, philosophical thought, as well as bodily autonomy and sexual pleasure. The film depicts the revelations and conflicts that arise when societal norms and expectations of an adult woman clash with Bella’s pure and nonconformist mind.
Bella’s journey depicts various deeply ingrained sociopolitical themes, bringing them to the surface for audiences to see and analyze from a more fundamental, or ‘childlike,’ perspective. This essay argues that Lanthimos utilizes the plot of Bella’s innocent and uncorrupted conscience to ridicule the patriarchal nature of the societally ingrained restriction and repression of female sexual agency and freedom. Firstly, the analysis will explore Lanthimos’ use of Bella’s unique condition, alongside satire and character exaggeration, to paint a picture of the narrow and constricted societal perspective of female sexuality. Secondly, it will go over the film’s focus on two primary patriarchal factors that underlie this societal perspective of female sexuality. Finally, it will take a step back to look at the broader social, political, and moral implications of the film concerning the concept of freedom of choice.
2. Societal Constraints on Women’s Sexual Freedom
Set in the 1880s, Poor Things is based in a world that highlights the historical view of women’s sexual freedom as something to be restrained and governed by men. Duncan Wedderburn’s character, in particular, appears to be the personification of the Victorian ‘polite society’ in which the film exists, embodying the strict moral and social code established and perpetuated by the upper-class men of the time. His costumes, comprising a variation of bold tuxes, coats, bows, and a moustache that he frequently twiddles, paint him as an exaggerated egocentric caricature, serving to satirize and ridicule the men of that period who held strong misogynistic sentiments and superiority complexes.
Wedderburn aims to suppress a curious Bella into the mould he believes polite women should fit in a polite society. While she indulges in all of her natural feelings, instincts, and desires, the worst of her behaviours, according to ‘polite society,’ is her indulgence in the sexual autonomy and freedom she has by nature of being human. Lanthimos takes the audience into a perspective of innocence and societal “virginity” through Bella, offering a glimpse into the point of view of someone free from any established conventions or ingrained expectations about how people “should be.” The film employs a distinctive fisheye lens used all throughout the film, evoking a sense of uneasiness and disorientation that reflects the societal pressures placed on Bella to behave like an adult, but a conflicting mental state that cannot grasp any such phenomena.
For instance, when a simple-minded Bella decides to become a sex worker at a Parisian brothel, she is thrilled to have found a way of using her body for benefits beyond pleasure. Wedderburn’s response to this is an excruciatingly angry “you are a monster, a whore and a monster, a demon sent from hell…you whored yourself, it is the worst thing women can do” (Poor Things 1:29:25-1:30:09). During this exchange, there is a comical contrast in the dynamic between Bella, who has the mind of an infant and is thus inherently uncorrupted by societal norms and pressures, and Wedderburn, who epitomizes societal norms and pressures. Lanthimos utilizes the exaggerated dynamic between the two to satirize conservative societal attitudes regarding female sexuality, particularly the way in which women engaging in sex work have been persistently looked down upon in social and political spheres.
Haas et al. discuss the recurring pattern in film where a female character’s identity is defined by her sexuality. The authors argue that “distilling a woman’s character into a question of her sexual experience is the key code to understanding Republican shorthand. Hollywood, too, relies on that code…” (Haas et al. 334). Women’s agency over their bodies and sexuality has thus long been a controversial topic in film because it has long been sociopolitically controversial in real life. Lanthimos, however, uses his creative freedom to expose the deep-rooted stigma towards female sexual liberty in society as irrational and baseless, driven by male egocentrism and pride rather than any inherent truth. According to the authors, sexually independent and liberated female characters, like Bella, are “not the living embodiments of abstract, patriotic femininity that some viewers-as-voters presumably think—or Hollywood imagines they think—they want” (Haas et al. 341).
3. The Patriarchal Roots of Control Over the Female Body
The deeper question arising from this discussion is why? Why is it the case that women’s sexuality is so often governed, criticized, or constrained, both in real life and in film? Throughout the film, Bella is primarily connected to three men, all of whom exhibit varying degrees of two things in their relationship with her: possession and control. The main man and ‘polite society’ of the film, Duncan Wedderburn, accompanies his egocentrism with blatant and constant attempts at gaining possession of and control over Bella. One prominent aspect of his character arc involves his intense rage whenever he learns of Bella having sexual relations with other people, reacting by screaming, crying, storming off to the nearest bar, or banging his head against an object, demonstrating that one of the things that infuriates him most is his inability to fully possess and have control over Bella’s sexual autonomy. While it is evident that Wedderburn’s expressions of jealousy are exaggerated for satirical purposes, they are especially effective at highlighting the ridiculousness and strangeness of male possessiveness over the female body from an outsider’s perspective – mirroring Bella’s point of view.
Later in the film, Bella makes two new friends on a cruise ship, Martha and Harry, with whom she discusses philosophy and society. When Bella refuses to leave her new friends to go with Wedderburn, he rips the book she is reading from her hands and angrily throws it overboard, later calling Martha “the problem” and attempting to throw her overboard as well. While this sequence of events seems like just another childish Wedderburn outburst, it reflects a darker form of his desire to possess and control Bella. Wedderburn hates the idea of Bella gaining knowledge, as he fears that it will make her develop independent thought and thus pose a great threat to his control over her. In other words, he wants to shield Bella from intellectual growth to ensure her continued obedience and submissiveness to him. The dark patriarchal history of the restriction of women’s education, rights, and in the context of the film, bodily autonomy, all reflect the same thing: men’s desire to maintain control and power over women.
While such sociopolitical depictions are highly exaggerated and playful, they resonate with audiences due to the film’s verisimilitude. A film’s verisimilitude is not concerned with how realistically it depicts events in terms of their probability or likelihood to occur in real life, but rather how likely they are to occur in the world of the film relative to its genre and sociocultural context (Neale 28). “Poor Things” has both generic verisimilitude, as people would expect exaggerated displays of emotion in a film that combines dark comedy, drama, and romance genre conventions, as well as sociocultural verisimilitude, given the films release during a period of societal progressiveness and the inherent expectation of films to touch on progressive sociopolitical themes.
Unlike Wedderburn’s more satirical portrayal, Alfie Blessington’s character embodies absolute possession and control over women. After Bella visits him to get a better understanding of his relationship with her mother, he physically confines her in his home using gates and covertly consults with a surgeon with plans to sedate her and have her undergo surgery to have her clitoris removed. “My life is dedicated to the taking of territory. You are mine, and that is the long and short of it…the root of the problem is between your legs, I will have it off,” he explains to Bella (Poor Things 2:09:24-2:09:37). Blessington’s character illustrates the more extreme patriarchal view of women as property, governing everything from their sexuality to the most basic components of their human agency for the “greater good of society.”
Finally, there is Max McCandles, Bella’s fiancé who remains in England with Dr. Baxter for the entirety of the film. Near the end, he and Bella take a stroll together and discuss her novel experiences, and Max does nothing but listen to, support, and reassure her. Interestingly, this is the only time in the film that Bella walks directly alongside a man, depicting that their relationship is one that involves no possession or control, but that they are instead each other’s equals. Throughout the film, Lanthimos demonstrates that societal constraints and criticisms of women’s sexual freedom stem from some men’s desire to control and possess. Their pursuit of power, dominance, and ownership extends into various aspects of the sociopolitical sphere, including power over women’s bodies.
4. Freedom of Choice and Sexual Agency
While Bella was fascinated by the concept of sex work, she found it difficult to accept the fact that she had no say in which men she accepts as clients and struggled with the absence of emotional connection with clients before their engagement. Because sex work and its portrayal in the film is far from perfect, Lanthimos’ focus appears to have not been on promoting sex work as a flawless system, but rather on emphasizing the importance of freedom of choice. All things considered, Bella ultimately makes the active choice to continue engaging in safe and consensual sex work, and thus it is society’s logical and moral imperative to let her do so. The use of colour further visualizes the theme of agency throughout the film. Before Bella ever leaves Dr. Baxter’s home, the film is entirely black and white. It is only after she steps into the outside world, where she is able to explore her innate capacity for agency and make decisions independently, does the film (and Bella’s world) become colourful and vibrant.
In Sexuality, Human Rights, and Health, Miller and Vance discuss the concept of a ‘sexual hierarchy’ as proposed by anthropologist Gayle Rubin, noting that “different sexual practices, expressions, identities, and communities are ranked, from the most normative and socially approved to the most stigmatized and despised” in society (6-7). Since the standards and ranking factors of sexual legitimacy include aspects such as procreation, heteronormativity, and religion, sexual acts that occur under the umbrella of ‘sex work’ most likely occupy one of the lowest tiers of the sexual hierarchy in many societies. Lanthimos ridicules such hierarchical standards by showing them being imposed on a woman woven with only the most basic and fundamental notions of living.
Bella is not an activist against the patriarchy or someone purposely rebelling against society out of resentment towards men, but rather someone who simply acts based on how she feels rather than how anyone else tells her she should act. Her character is unique in that she lacks the experience and years of social “training” that most everyone else has in order to appropriately filter herself and her behaviours. When viewers witness the standards of sexual legitimacy being imposed on such a person, their artificial, patriarchal, and absurd nature seems to come to the surface. In other words, restricting or disdaining a woman’s agency over her own body appears silly when isolated, and Lanthimos found an effective way to isolate it in his film.
5. Conclusion
The creative and imaginative plot provided “Poor Things” with a unique and effective platform to address the socially relevant topic of women’s sexual autonomy and freedom. Lanthimos employed satire, dark comedy, and character exaggeration to critique the restrictive and narrow view of female sexuality in a polite and normative society, as well as the patriarchal origins that underpin such views. Following Lanthimos’ approach, the portrayal of the sociopolitical aspect of female sexuality in film should not be about simulating a flawless system, but rather about highlighting the most basic moral imperative of granting women freedom of choice when it comes to their sexuality.
Works Cited
Haas, Elizabeth. et al. Projecting Politics: Political Messages in American Films. ProQuest Ebook Central, 2nd ed., Routledge, 2015. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/torontomu/reader.action?docID=2011203
Miller, Alice M., and Vance, Carole S. “Sexuality, Human Rights, and Health.” Health and Human Rights, vol. 7, no. 2, 2004, pp. 5–15. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/4065346
Neale, Steve. Genre and Hollywood, Routledge, 2000.
Poor Things. Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, Searchlight Pictures, 2023.