Latest / This Film is Lit / Poor Things

Transcript

Poor Things · This Film is Lit

• 0:04
  Speaker A: This film is lit, the podcast where we finally settle the score on one simple question. Is the book really better than the movie? I'm Brian and I have a film degree, so I watch the movie but don't read the book.
• 0:15
  Speaker B: And I'm Katie. I have an english degree, so I do things the right way and read the book before we watch the movie.
• 0:22
  Speaker A: So prepare to be wowed by our expertise and charm as we dissect all, all of your favorite film adaptations and decide if the silver screen or the written word did it better. So turn it up, settle in, and get ready for spoilers. Because this film is lit. My empathy is creeping towards what I would describe a contemptuous rage. It's poor things, and this film is lit. Hello and welcome back to this film is lit, the podcast where we talk about movies that are based on books. We have, I believe, every single one of our segments and quite a bit to talk about. So we're gonna jump right into it with let me sum up, let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up. If you have not read or watched watched poor things, but specifically watched, because this is gonna be a summary of the film, here is a synopsis. Spoilers obviously covers the whole thing, but yes, this is a summary of poor things, the film. So you have some grounding for our conversations. Sourced from Wikipedia in victorian London, the medical student Max McCandless becomes an assistant to the eccentric surgeon Godwin Baxter. Max falls in love with Godwin's ward, Bella, a childlike young woman. Godwin reveals that Bella's body is that of a woman who was pregnant and committed suicide by leaping off a bridge. Godwin then replaced the woman's brain with that of her fetus, giving her an infant's mind, and named her Bella Baxter. With Godwins encouragement, Max asks for Bella's hand in marriage. Bella accepts, but as her intelligence rapidly develops, she becomes curious about the outside world and herself. She soon discovers masturbation and sexual pleasure. She runs off with Duncan Wedderburn. Wedderburn, a debauched lawyer whom Godwin hired to overhaul the nuptial contract. Deciding to let her go, Godwin begins a new experiment with a young woman named Felicity who matures more slowly than Bella. Bella and Duncan embark on a grand journey, beginning in Lisbon, where they have frequent intercourse. Bella is mistakenly addressed as Victoria Blessington by a fellow hotel guest. When Bella becomes difficult for him to control, Duncan smuggles her onto a cruise ship. Bella befriends two passengers who opened her mind to philosophy. Duncan attempts to stunt her growth to no avail. He becomes exasperated and indulges in drinking and gambling. During a stop at Alexandria Bellows, Bella witnesses the suffering of the poor and becomes distraught. Wishing to help them, she entrusts Duncan's winnings to unscrupulous members of the crew who falsely promise to give it to them. Unable to afford the rest of the trip, Bella and Duncan are dropped off at Marseille and make their way to Paris. Seeking money and accommodation, Bella begins working at a brothel. Enraged, Duncan breaks down and Bella abandons him. At the brothel. She comes under the tutelage of Adam Swiney and begins a relationship with a prostitute twinette, who introduces her to socialism, now terminally ill. Godwin asks Max to bring Bella to him. Max finds her after tracking down Duncan, who has been institutionalized. Back in London, Bella reconciles with Godwin and renews her plans to marry Max. The wedding is interrupted by Duncan and General Alfie Blessington. The latter, addressing Bella as Victoria, declares that they were married before her disappearance and that he has come to reclaim her. Bella abandons Max to learn of her past life, but discovers Alphys violent and sadistic nature and realizes Victoria killed herself to escape him. Alphie confines Bella to his mansion, threatens her at gunpoint to submit to gentle mutilation and a subsequent rape. Demanding that she drink a sedative. She tosses the sedative in his face, and after a struggle he accidentally shoots himself in the foot before passing out. Godwin dies peacefully with Bella and Max at his side, and Bella follows Godwin in godwins footsteps, becoming a surgeon with the help of Max and Twynette, and transplants a goats brain into alphys head. The end. The end of that really, really amps up there. That is a brief summary of poor things. We do have a guess who this week, so let's do it. Who are you? No one of consequence. I must get used to disappointment.
• 4:39
  Speaker B: Despite the ogre ish body, he had the wide, hopeful eyes, snub nose, and mournful mouth of an anxious infant with a brow corrugated by three deep, permanent wrinkles. In the morning, his coarse brown hair was oiled and combed flat on each side of the center parting, but as the day wore on, spiky tufts of it rose behind his ears, and by mid afternoon his scalp was as shaggy as a bear's pelt. His clothes were of expensive gray cloth, quietly fashionable and beautifully tailored to make his odd figure appear as conventional as possible. Yet I felt he would look more natural in the baggy pants and turban of a pantomime turk.
• 5:23
  Speaker A: Okay. I mean, this doesn't really, so the first person that jumped in my mind as you were describing that, because I believe his hair is kind of parted like that. And so I think this is just going to be, my guess, is that this is Duncan Wedderburn.
• 5:39
  Speaker B: No.
• 5:40
  Speaker A: Okay. I don't know who else it would be. I mean, McCandless, maybe.
• 5:46
  Speaker B: That's Godwin.
• 5:47
  Speaker A: Okay. Because that's nothing like Godwin. I mean, it's missing the most, you know, important descriptor that I would include for Godwin in the film, which is that he is severely, like, scarred and.
• 5:59
  Speaker B: Looks kind of stitched together.
• 6:01
  Speaker A: He has a Frankenstein like appearance, and that is not mentioned at all. So I just like, it could have been him, but it didn't particularly strike me as anything like him in the film, so. Sure.
• 6:17
  Speaker B: Okay, well, this one's gonna be easy. Her back was toward us. Curling black hair hid her body to the waist. Her legs pumped the treadles, turning the cylinder with a vigor that showed she enjoyed exercise as much as music. She flapped her arms sideways like a seagulls wings, regardless of the beat.
• 6:39
  Speaker A: Okay. Yeah, that's, uh, that would be Bella.
• 6:42
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 6:42
  Speaker A: Yeah. It was pretty straightforward. That one was easy.
• 6:46
  Speaker B: The words had been spoken by the very tall, thin man who stood erect, glaring steadily at us like a neatly carved, life sized wooden puppet. He looked wooden because his thick, steel gray mustache, which covered his mouth and sharply pointed beard, were nearly the same tone as his pinkish brown skin. A swarthy, thick built, wild looking old man was struggling to his feet beside him. Okay, ignore that last sentence.
• 7:14
  Speaker A: Oh, so just that part.
• 7:15
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 7:15
  Speaker A: Okay, I'm gonna assume, and I'm gonna use some context clues here, but also, I think this fairly accurately fits that. This is Alfie Blessington.
• 7:26
  Speaker B: Yes.
• 7:27
  Speaker A: Yeah, the, the part where, like, the voice, like, where whatever the start of that was about the person, the voice or the person of the words had come from or something like that implies to me that it's, you know, it's like some, somebody from the back of the church yells, and they turn and look, or something like that. So that, that tracks with Alfie blessing. And I think the mustache and beard are a pretty echo, too. I did want to put a pin in maybe the change to Godwin's appearance later when I have a quite, I have a question about Godwin's backstory, I believe a little bit later, and I think it might be relevant there and to what the movie does overall with Godwin. Maybe with what they did with his appearance in the film. So we'll get to that. All right, that was it for guess who. Two out of three could be worse. But, you know, whatever. I have quite a few questions. Let's get into them. In. Was that in the book?
• 8:26
  Speaker B: Gaston, may I have my book, please?
• 8:28
  Speaker A: How can you read this? There's no pictures.
• 8:31
  Speaker B: Well, some people use their imagination.
• 8:33
  Speaker A: So the film opens on a shot of a person, a woman in a blue dress, falling off a balcony. It's hard to tell what it is at this point. Into some water. I don't even know if we see that. I don't know how much we see.
• 8:49
  Speaker B: I think initially, we just see her, like, standing on it.
• 8:52
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 8:53
  Speaker B: Maybe water below.
• 8:56
  Speaker A: Yeah. I'm mixing ideas with the trick, like what I remember from the trailer and from later in the film, but I don't remember exactly what we see. I know we see her on the railing in the opening shot, but we only see her from behind. We don't even see that it's Emma Stone. Like, we just see the back of her. And then we cut right from that, we get the opening title card, and then we cut immediately to Bella, our introduction to Bella. And we're watching her adolescence, essentially, as she kind of learns to move and speak in her new body, which we don't. Again, at this point, we know none of this. If you were watching this film cold, you would not know that these characters have any relation. The woman on the balcony. And now, again, most people will have seen the trailer or whatever, have some familiarity with what's going on here. But I want to know if the book does something similar, because I wasn't expecting the movie. The movie almost sets up a little bit of, like, a misdirect. Not even a misdirect, but, like, a mystery of, like, what is Bella's actual background and doesn't really give us any information until quite a bit into the film, where I was expecting, we would more immediately know in the film, okay, this is. We would, like, see Emma Stone's character jump off the bridge, and then maybe have a more traditional kind of linear narrative. But the film doesn't do that. And I wanted to know if the book did the same thing because I thought that was interesting, because it doesn't really explain anything. So you kind of piece things together as it goes, and then there's, like, a reveal eventually. But does the book do it that way?
• 10:26
  Speaker B: Kind of. But no, also. So in the book, we are in McAndell's point of view. Yeah, for, like, the main part of the text. Okay, so if you skip the introduction, as many people are want to do, okay, if you skip the introduction, then you don't know what Bella's deal is when we first meet her, and then we get her backstory a lot quicker after meeting her within the book. But if you skipped the introduction and you only read the memoir, quote unquote, fake memoir part of it, then yes, kind of, although it doesn't set up a nonlinear narrative the same way that the movie does. But if you read the entire text, then the answer is no. You know what the deal is before you.
• 11:25
  Speaker A: The introduction explains.
• 11:29
  Speaker B: Yes.
• 11:30
  Speaker A: Okay. I don't know. You're being cagey, and I'm unsure why.
• 11:35
  Speaker B: Because it's not that the introduction tells you everything before you get to the main text, but it tells you enough.
• 11:46
  Speaker A: Okay, I'll take your word for it. I don't know what it tells you, so it's not that important. So I don't want to interrogate it forever, but I feel like you're being nebulous here, so I'll just move on.
• 11:59
  Speaker B: It's also been, like, two weeks since I read the introduction part.
• 12:03
  Speaker A: Okay, that's fair. That's totally fair. So. And then we start to. As we get introduced to Godwin Baxter and his estate is where the film starts, and Bella. And then we're introduced to Mister McCandless, or whatever is Max McCandless. And I was wondering if. Cause one of the things we see throughout the film, but it's very noticeable immediately, is that along with Bella, there are these pets around the house that are animals sewn together, different pieces of animals. There's, like a duck that's also, like, part pig or something. I can't remember. And then there's a chicken with a pig head, and then there's, like, something with a duck head. I don't even remember.
• 12:47
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 12:48
  Speaker A: Anyways, there's all these animal or handful of animals that are pieced together, and I wanted to know if that very weird element came from the book.
• 12:58
  Speaker B: So that is something that the film expands on. In the book, Godwin does own two rabbits, and at one point he mixes and matches. At least it's a purely black rabbit and a purely white rabbit. And he makes two half and half rabbits and then later undoes this and puts them back together the way that they originally were. It's also implied that he slash his father may or may not have done similar experiments on their dogs, but that is not definitively confirmed by the text. Godwin's kind of cagey about it. Yeah, I honestly thought that was kind of fun in the movie. I thought it was, like, fun background world building. The animals don't seem to be suffering in the universe. They seem fine.
• 13:46
  Speaker A: And it is this weird alternate universe where. Yeah, it's like, kind of like there's like, an extra level of, like, scientific magicalism or something. I don't know what the word is.
• 13:58
  Speaker B: For it, but, like, it's kind of a. Kind of a steampunk universe, but then there's this extra layer of, like. Like, victorian weird science.
• 14:08
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yes, exactly. It's the same thing as, like, Frankenstein or whatever, where. Yeah, there's. There's this element of it's all, quote unquote scientific. These people are doing science, but it's things that are fantastical, like, well, being.
• 14:22
  Speaker B: Not actually scientifically possible.
• 14:24
  Speaker A: Yes, exactly. And I think, yeah, it's a good way to establish, you know, that he's been doing this kind of thing for a long time and that sort of thing. And, yeah, it just adds weird quirkiness that works because I have. We'll get to it later. But I actually had a very kind of a similar takeaway to this film that I did with Barbie in very different, like, in a different capacity in terms of, like, what I expected the movie to be versus what I ended up thinking it kind of really actually was, which is that both of them were built up in a way where I thought they were going to be these epic treaties on feminism, which they aren't. Not that. Yes, but more importantly, they're just like comedies. Like, I think is like, the most important thing that the filmmakers were interested in doing was making weird, funny movies is kind of, and I felt similarly about Barbie. And also the, quote, unquote, treatise on feminism that it is, I think, is similar to Barbie in the sense that it was not nearly as interesting as I was expecting. Maybe not interesting, but not as, like, gritty or, like, not even elevated. What's the word? It was more like kind of surface level, like, introduction to feminism than I was expecting.
• 15:52
  Speaker B: And obviously, we'll get into it. We have this whole movie to go through. But as I was going through our notes and writing, putting all of my stuff in, I messaged you and I said I thought my main takeaway was poor things. I'm not really sure what everyone is fussing so much about.
• 16:12
  Speaker A: And that was kind of similar to how I felt about Barbie, where it's like. It was like, yeah, like, it's, you know, like, it's to me, it was kind of funny where I was like, all these people are arguing about this. Like, it's. I think Barbie's mostly interested in just being, like, funny. Like, I think that's mostly what it's interested in doing. It's not mostly interested in being, like, this big treatise on feminism. It is that also to some extent, but that's not, like, its main focus. And I felt similarly here.
• 16:36
  Speaker B: Yeah, similarly. I will say I think this one is maybe more interested in that than Barbie, but I would agree. I would agree.
• 16:43
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 16:44
  Speaker B: Yeah. Similar vibe, and especially in the reaction.
• 16:47
  Speaker A: And in a different way, because Barbie is much more of, like, a four quadrant or whatever, five, whatever that is. Like the tentpole. Like, blockbuster comedy. Everybody can go see it. It's very broad, generally speaking. Whereas this is, like, the weird art house version of that. Like, the weird, but, like, that also just wants to be weird. Like, I don't know. Like. Again, I was just expecting, like, a much more. Much more of the focus to be on thematically, like, what it was saying about women's place in the world and all sorts of stuff, whereas what it ended up being. I was like, oh, yeah. I mean, that stuff's all there, but, like, it's mostly just about, like, this interesting character going on this journey and, like. And, like, weird scenarios and the funny, like, lines and, like, the kind of quippy, like, allusions to philosophy and politics and stuff. Like, it's. I don't know. It was not nearly as dramatically focused on what I thought it was going.
• 17:51
  Speaker B: To be, I guess I would agree.
• 17:53
  Speaker A: Which was interesting. And I still enjoyed it, like, a lot. Like, I liked this movie a lot without spoiling any of my. You know. But, like, yeah, it just wasn't quite as. I don't know, like, edgy as, like, it just wasn't as much of what I thought it was going to be. Anyways, we'll get. We'll talk more about it. So we're very early on here. As I was editing, I had some more time to think about this. And I think kind of what it boils down to is that the film was not nearly as challenging on the topic of feminism as I kind of expected it to be. Based on some of the discourse I saw and stuff like that. I was expecting the take on feminism and women's role in the world and their place in society and how they fit into a patriarchal system and all of that stuff to be a lot more challenging. And I felt like it ended up being a fairly elementary first day kind of treatise on feminism. And again, that's fine. I think it works. I think it actually works really well for the movie and makes it a kind of more universally applicable, acceptable, understandable for more audiences, but based, again, on how much people were talking about it, I expected to be challenged more by the film than I think I was, which was interesting. So one of the things I would have thought was kind of funny is that Bella early on, decides she wants to go out into the world. She wants to go outside, and they agree to take her outside. And they're driving through the city and out to, like, a park, and they're in this carriage. And I wanted to know, but it's a carriage that has, like. It's like a car. It's like an early, like, primitive carriage, a horseless carriage, literally. But it has, like, a fake horse head on the front.
• 19:42
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 19:42
  Speaker A: And I wanted to know if that came from the book because I thought that was fun.
• 19:45
  Speaker B: It does not. But I also thought that was a really fun detail.
• 19:49
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yeah. So then we, to this point, Godwin. So as we said, McCandless is one of Godwin's students who he. McCandless. Who he brings on to kind of, like, observe Bella's progression.
• 20:02
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 20:02
  Speaker A: And, like, take notes basically, on everything she does and everything she learns and, like, how everything's trans. Like, he does. He has to do other stuff. So he gets McCandless to basically, like, be the, like, caretaker and, like, keep up and do all the recording of information about Bella's experiment, the experiment of Bella Baxter. And he has, to this point, told McCandless that Bella suffered, like, a brain injury and that he basically did some sort of brain surgery to, like, quote unquote, fix her brain.
• 20:33
  Speaker B: But she lost all her memories.
• 20:34
  Speaker A: But she lost all her memories and, like, regressed. Regressed entirely. But that. Yeah. And then eventually, throughout the beginning of the film, McKandles has suspicions that maybe that is not actually what's going on here, based on a handful of things. But then eventually, he confronts him about it, and Godwin just, like, explains and just comes clean and lays out exactly what transpired. And this is where we, as the audience, also find out where Bella came from. And it turns out, as I said, this woman, Victoria Blessington, jumped off a bridge, killed herself. She was pregnant at the time, and Godwin found her, but she was, like, very freshly dead. And so she was perfect for his experiment. And so what he decided to do was to take the brain of her child, of her unborn infant, and put it in her head and then raise her as, like, a new person. And my favorite. I didn't know if this exchange was in the. Was in the book because it cracked me up in the film. And he's like, well, at that point, because he's talking about how he's doing kind of observations and trying to figure out what to do. And he realizes that he can't do anything with her, with Victoria, but he sees that she's pregnant and that the baby is, like, alive still. And he says, and at that point, it was obvious. And McCandless says it was. And he goes, yeah, take out the infant's brain and put it in the full grown body. And McCandless is like, what the f. Are you talking about? And I loved every one of those interactions where Godwin is just like, oh. And then I did the very obvious thing, and McCandless is like, what is wrong with you? And I wanted to know if that exchange came from the book. Cause it cracked me up.
• 22:23
  Speaker B: That specific line is not from the book.
• 22:25
  Speaker A: No, but one of the other aspects that I loved of that, and this is where I thought the movie was at its best in terms of the kind of the criticism, the commentary on women's autonomy and that sort of thing was moments like this, where the whole conversation is framed around the fact that, well, oh, that's what it was. He says, like, I could obviously, I couldn't bring her back to life because she, like, he's like, she was. She was. I could have kept her alive. He says, like, she was, you know, there was still electrical energy and stuff. I could have, like, kept her alive and maybe even brought her back to life. But he's like, that would have been immoral. That wouldn't have been right, because she killed herself. And I wanted to respect her autonomy, essentially. And so this whole conversation is framed through this weird, perverted lens of Godwin respecting her autonomy. So he doesn't bring her back to life because she chose to kill herself, but instead, it just cuts the brain out of the baby and puts it in her head, and it's like, you know, violates her autonomy and, like, it's just an insane, like, situation, you know, thought to even have. But I love that it's framed through the idea of respecting autonomy, because I love that about Godwin, and particularly McCandless, is that they both, I think, view themselves as, like, very moral people, kind of in contrast to Duncan, who knows. He's, like, a shithead. Like, Duncan is aware that he's a piece of stuff.
• 23:53
  Speaker B: Duncan knows what he's about.
• 23:54
  Speaker A: Yes. Whereas these two both fancy themselves very moral, like, reasonable people.
• 24:02
  Speaker B: They're men of science.
• 24:02
  Speaker A: Yes, men of science. But, and so everything about this conversation I absolutely adored and thought was fantastic. But, yeah, I loved the framing it through the lens of respecting her autonomy while you're removing her brain and putting her baby's brain in her. Yeah.
• 24:21
  Speaker B: No. And it is framed the exact same way in the book where he's like, oh, who would I be to bring her back against her wishes? That would be disrespectful. I wouldn't be respecting her choices, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I think it was at that point when I was reading, when I, like, started laughing and said to you that I thought I understood what people misunderstood about the movie, because that is very, very clearly meant to shine a light on the fact that he's, in fact, not respecting her autonomy. We're pointing at it with big red arrows.
• 24:58
  Speaker A: Yes. Yeah. And we'll get to it later. Cause, yeah, we have more about that discussion in the lost adaptation section. We're gonna talk specifically about what we've kind of previewed in the, in the prequel episode about, like, you know, is this is poor things, misogynistic or whatever, and we'll get to it. I mean, spoilers. I don't think it is, really, ultimately, but it, you know, there's, there's some nuances to that. But anyways, we'll get to that later. One of the other little details that I thought was interesting is that we find out that, um, Godwin, every time they have a meal, Godwin has to hook himself up to this machine that basically does his digesting for him because he doesn't have any gastric juices, because his father, who was also a scientist, removed them all as an experiment for some reason. And he's like, it turns out you actually need those. So he has to hook himself up to a machine to eat, and then the machine makes him burp up these giant bubbles of digested food or something. I don't know. Whatever. It's very interesting. But this is the beginning. As we slowly, over the course of the film, it's revealed more and more. And this is also a very funny comedy recurring beat of Godwin, revealing the horrifying things that his dad did to him, like, very matter of factly, and not realizing that they were horrifying things. He's like, very, you know, he's like, oh, yeah. And then he did this to me because, you know, he was a scientist, and that's just what you do.
• 26:23
  Speaker B: Yeah. And then McCandless is like, jesus Christ.
• 26:27
  Speaker A: Because that's another thing. Big thing that this film obviously is about is kind of the cycle of trauma and the way, quote unquote, her people. Her people or whatever. Because. Yeah, that's ultimately what is the reason that Godwin does the things he does without even really realizing it, is because he was deeply abused and traumatized by his father. But I wanted to know if the specifically the food machine thing, but also just generally, Godwin being experimented on by his dad came from the book.
• 26:56
  Speaker B: So it is mentioned in the book that Godwin has to create his gastric juices outside of his body because he has little to no pancreas is what the book says. And there's like a small, like, laboratory type setup behind the dining room table at which he does this. However, there's no machine, and he doesn't burp bubbles. He, like, creates the juices and mixes them with his food.
• 27:23
  Speaker A: Yeah. So now this feels probably more like, quote unquote realistic. Yeah, that were to be.
• 27:29
  Speaker B: Again, it's all probably. I don't know.
• 27:31
  Speaker A: That feels more like real in my head.
• 27:34
  Speaker B: Yeah. The senior doctor baxter's medical experimentation on his son is brought up at different points throughout the book. So that does come from the book. I don't recall if the food issue was specifically brought about by that, but I think we're supposed to assume that it was. Regardless. The vibe that I got, whenever there's something strange going on with Godwin in the book, I think we're meant to assume that it's a result of his father. As far as the food machine and the burping goes, though, in general, I thought the movie's take on that was more fun and whimsical. Again with the world building.
• 28:16
  Speaker A: Yes. So this is what I want to touch on from the guess who segment, but it sounds like maybe not. What I was thinking is that when you read the description of him and without the disfigurement or whatever on his face, the scarring and that sort of thing, I was thinking, well, maybe Godwin doesn't have the backstory of his father having experimented on him. And I was wondering if maybe this was a change the movie made to make Godwin a quote, like a slightly more sympathetic character than he would have been otherwise. So, like, you know, if Godwin was just some mad scientist performing these experiments and we don't really know anything about his past or anything, he's kind of just a villain. Yeah. Even if he's nice about it. He's kind of just a villain unless they give us some other explanation or something. But in the film, and it sounds like also in the book, to some extent, we're meant to sympathize, at least to somewhat with him, because he has also been the victim of all of these horrible things. And it's warped his worldview so deeply that he doesn't even realize that what he's doing is deeply fucked up. Like, he doesn't even realize. And again, I don't think it's the movie. And this is, I think, one of the areas where people could be critical of the film. And especially. Cause at the end, like, he's very much kind of, in the film's language, of the film, he's kind of like. I don't want to say redeemed. He's not redeemed, but he gets kind of a happy ending. Like, relatively speaking. Like, he dies with the people he loves around him, and it's a really sweet scene, so he gets essentially a happy ending. And so I'm sure I can understand the criticism of, you know, somebody watching it and being like, well, he's, you know, the movie treats him like, you know, oh, poor him. This. All these things happen to him, but just doesn't really care that he did these, that he also did these horrible things. And I think it's just, you know, it's one of those things that I think mileage is going to vary for people on, like, how much that works or doesn't work for them. And I think that has a lot to do with, like, personal experience and stuff like that. But to me, I, you know, I found it as just kind of one of the interesting kind of other thematic things the film is doing, which is exploring the idea of the way trauma begets trauma and that, you know, how somebody growing up in this horrible, fucked up situation can have their life fucked up without even realizing it, which I think is one of the kind of important, interesting distinctions about Godwin is that it's not like the things he's doing he, like, knows are bad. I don't know. It's interesting that he's. Yeah, he has this warped worldview because he was raised in this horrible situation.
• 30:59
  Speaker B: Yeah, well, and I don't even. At least in the movie, I don't even know that he realizes what was done to him was horrible.
• 31:06
  Speaker A: That's what I'm saying. Yes, that's what I'm saying.
• 31:08
  Speaker B: And I do think that it's an interesting and worthy exploration of the cycle of abuse? Because I think people do have a tendency to think of. Of that cycle as more, like, purposeful.
• 31:20
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 31:21
  Speaker B: Than it often is.
• 31:22
  Speaker A: That's what I mean. Yeah. And I think that's what I thought was interesting about it. But I also understand that for some people, they're gonna look at that and go, well, the movie just says, oh, well, I guess if you've been abused ever in your life, it's fine if you abuse other people. And I don't. That's not what the movie is saying. No, that is not at all what the movie is saying. What the movie is saying, though, is that those kind of relationships can be complicated. And the fact that Bella then goes on this journey and comes to kind of accept and care about Godwin after her whole journey, she comes back to him and has this tender moment with him at the end, I think, is less about validating Godwin and more about validating the journey that Bella went on and the fact that she can get past. She is no longer the victim of his. Of his. She has her own thing going on, and I think there's something meaningful to that. It just may not land for every single person who watches it.
• 32:19
  Speaker B: No, I agree.
• 32:21
  Speaker A: As we move forward through the story, McCandless spending more and more time with Bella, and he's kind of falling for her. And this is a very interesting depiction, too. I'm just going to ask my question, and then we'll get into it. Is that McCandless wants to marry Bella, and Godwin actually suggests that he marry her, because he's like, oh, I've seen you two, and I can tell that you guys have feelings for each other or whatever. And so Godwin kind of encourages it. But I wanted to know if McCandless falling in love with her and wanting to marry her and Godwin encouraging that came from the book.
• 32:58
  Speaker B: McCandless does desire to marry Bella. He is smitten with her at first sight in the book, as far as Godwin encouraging that, my notes are scattered all over the place. So, in the book, it is not Godwin's idea for McCandless to marry Bella.
• 33:27
  Speaker A: Okay.
• 33:28
  Speaker B: And the book leans a little more into the idea that it was Godwin's original intention that, like, oh, maybe she'll fall in love with me.
• 33:39
  Speaker A: Oh.
• 33:39
  Speaker B: But he pretty quickly abandons that idea, which I think the movie does, like, bring up.
• 33:46
  Speaker A: Yeah, it does, because McCandl says, like, oh, I didn't know if you were planning for her to be your mistress or something. And he said, godwin says something along the lines of, like, oh, I thought about it, but something about his paternal instead of being too strong or, I don't know, something.
• 34:03
  Speaker B: Yeah. My thoughts on some of the changes from book to movie here are kind of six of one. They spend a lot more time together in the movie. So, like, their relationship develops more, I guess.
• 34:22
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 34:23
  Speaker B: Trying to scroll to where my other notice, because in the book, he meets her one time where he initially sees her, and she's very, very childlike. And then the next time that McCandless interacts with her is months later and she's more in the realm of manic pixie dream girl and less acting like a literal toddler. We spend significantly, very little time with Bella while she's, like, extremely childlike.
• 35:00
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 35:00
  Speaker B: In the book, whereas, so, like, you know, like I said, it's kind of six of one for me because they do arguably get more, like, relationship development in the movie, but also, most of it is taking place, like, while she's a baby.
• 35:17
  Speaker A: Yes. So I will say that I do think that, and I think that's intentional, I think, because I don't think were supposed to even like McCandless that much ultimately, in the film. I think. I think he's, like, the best of the men in the film, but I still don't think he's a good guy. Like, like. Well, sorry. In relation, in his relationship to women, I think he's, like, an okay guy generally. Like, I think the film presents him as, like, a fairly moral person overall, and certainly more moral, more whatever. Like, a better person than Godwin or Duncan. But I also think the film is. I think. I think we're supposed to feel grossed out by the fact that McCandless.
• 36:02
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 36:03
  Speaker A: Is into her so quickly because, yes, at the point where he is, like, falling for her, she is still essentially, like, you know, she's not. She's not an adult. Like, she or her mental capacity is not that of an adult. And the movie is. Plays with this tension because it is like the movie plays with the fact that we never know exactly how, quote unquote old she is. Like, you know, because there hits a point where she is clearly forming thoughts and. And stuff at a level, even though she speaks, like, in a very unique way, she's clearly operating mentally at a level that is not a child. Like, she is operating, you know, like, the way she. She interacts with the world is. Is more of that, an adult. So. But the movie, I think, intentionally leaves it nebulous so that we don't have, like, an easy like, cutoff line of, like, now she's an adult.
• 36:55
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 36:55
  Speaker A: Because I do think it's it's pointing a lens at the fact. Because I think what it's criticizing here, or at least to some extent, is because I think we're kind of supposed to view McCandless and Duncan. As essentially two sides of the same person. Like two sides of the same coin. In the sense that they're both attracted to her for the exact same reasons that she is this sheltered. She is like, the perfect ideal of a virgin, naive bride. That is what both of them like about her. McCandless is less crass and less forward about it. And slightly more. He's like, oh, obviously we'll wait to have sex until we're married. And that sort of thing. He's more prudish and victorian about it. But I think the thing that he finds attractive about her. Are the same things that Duncan finds attractive about her. And I don't think we're supposed to like that about either of them.
• 37:59
  Speaker B: Yeah. No, is my point.
• 38:00
  Speaker A: You get what I'm saying?
• 38:01
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 38:02
  Speaker A: And so I think that's one way. And I could be wrong about that. But I don't think I truly don't think we're supposed to get to the end of the movie. And think McCandless is a great person. Like, now, they end up together, seemingly at the end of the film. And he's a better person who does ultimately respect her autonomy and stuff. Way more than like anybody else in the film. But it's not initially, I think there is it is playing with this idea of, like, he's also shaped by the society he was raised in. And finds her demure, submissive. Not submissive, but, like, sort of childlike traits attractive, which I think we're, again, in my opinion, the movie does not think is a good thing. I think I can understand how somebody could watch it and not get that, but I truly doesn't, to me, ultimately feel like the movie thinks that's okay. But speaking of McCandless being a slightly better person than everybody else in this story. There's this great exchange between him and Godwin. During the marriage proposal. Not proposal, but when he's proposing it to Godwin. Or when Godwin proposes it to him. They have this exchange. And Godwin says, yes, you can marry her on one condition. And McCandell says, well, she must agree to marry me, obviously. And God written response. Two conditions in that. One, you said, and you must live here with me. And I love that exchange so much. So funny. And I wanted to know if it came from the book.
• 39:34
  Speaker B: That exchange is not from the book. As I said earlier, it was not Godwins idea for McCandless to marry Bella. McCandless and Bella are taking a turn about the park, and he accidentally blurts out, marry me to her. And she takes that idea and runs with it. But Bella does stipulate that she wants them to go on living with Godwin after theyre married. So thats kind of.
• 40:00
  Speaker A: That's not a Godwin thing. Okay. But then at that point, this is where we're introduced to Duncan Wedderburn, who is a lawyer who's working on the marriage contract for Godwin for Max and Bella. And he sees Bella. He's interested to, like, why are you. This is such a unique marriage contract. And he goes up and he, like, meets her and is, like, you know, flirting with her and stuff, like, what sexually assaults her, which she doesn't realize, but and is, like, flirting with her and stuff and then leaves and then comes back and later, and they have sex and blah, blah. And he, like, basically, he's like, come away with me. Let's go to Lisbon. And she's like, okay. Yeah. Cause at this point, she is, like, very much entering the stage of her life where she wants to explore and find new things.
• 40:48
  Speaker B: She wants to be where the people are.
• 40:49
  Speaker A: Yes, exactly. And I wanted to know if she ran away to Lisbon with Duncan.
• 40:54
  Speaker B: She does run away with Duncan, but I believe the first place they go in the book is Odessa, although I could be wrong about that. Well, it's in Ukraine now, although I will admit that I am not up enough on my eastern european history to know, like, where. Yeah, where what that would have been considered at the time.
• 41:16
  Speaker A: Don't know. And I'm not going to comment because I have no idea. And I know it's complicated. So now they're off in Lisbon, and I really liked this. This is another scene that I thought was kind of the movie at its best that I really enjoyed in terms of the commentary on feminism, on men and that sort of thing as a criticism of men and the men in this film is that they're at this fancy dinner in Lisbon at this ball or whatever, and they're having dinner, and Bella does not like whatever it is they're eating, and she just spits it out, like, onto the plate. And they're sitting with another couple at this table, and she just spits the food out of her mouth onto the plate. And Duncan is scandalized by this. He's like, what do you, just don't do that because it's very obviously impolite. And then later, the other woman at the table has some line about holding something in her mouth or whatever. And Bella realizes that she's making an, an innuendo about, like, sex or whatever. And Bella says, ah, yes, that was a joke about his penis or something. And she says some line about Duncan's penis being salty or something like that. And again, this also scandalized because she says out loud the thing that they're.
• 42:37
  Speaker B: Looking at, the thing that is supposed to be innuendo.
• 42:40
  Speaker A: Yes. And again, so Duncan pulls her aside, and they have this kind of spat in the hallway. He's like, look, don't say any that stuff. Just say that. Say you're delightful and blah, blah, blah, all these things. And I wanted to know if that exchange and that scene came from the book, because I love the way it explores the idea that Duncan, the thing that Duncan is attracted to about her is her very forward nature and, like, the way she is not prudish and she's not shy about, like, sex and stuff like that because she doesn't know to be, like, she's not, you know, she doesn't really understand. She's not been conditioned by society to be, like, ashamed or anything like that. So he likes that about her. But then in private, but then when they're out in public, he's like, oh, you know, like, he hates that same element of her personality. He hates and is embarrassed about. And I thought that was a really good dichotomy and a really good kind of way to basically illustrate the Madonna horror complex. Kind of like a version of it, like a slightly different version of it. Again, I want to know if it came from the book.
• 43:46
  Speaker B: That specific scene is not from the book. And I do think that the movie emphasizes a little more that Madonna whore aspect of Duncan's issues with Bella. But this part of the story is also told via a letter from Duncan to Godwin, and his perspective was a little difficult to parse. So I may have been misreading that. I felt like the movie maybe emphasized that part of it a little bit more than the book did, but he does very quickly become disenchanted with Bella. And I think this was the part of the novel where I turned to you and said, I think this might be a deconstruction of the manic pixie dream girl trope. Not that title of that trope specifically, because I don't think it was coined until, like, 2005. But the trope itself is very, very old. And I do think that Bella falls into it to some.
• 44:45
  Speaker A: Absolutely.
• 44:45
  Speaker B: Yeah. That, you know, that kind of childlike, quirky, beautiful.
• 44:51
  Speaker A: Yeah. The manic, pixie dream girl trope. And it's the born sexy yesterday. Yes, it's both of those.
• 44:56
  Speaker B: Both of those.
• 44:57
  Speaker A: Literally, like, exploring and deconstructing both of those.
• 45:02
  Speaker B: But I do feel like it is at least a little bit a deconstruction of that, at least the Duncan part of the story, because I feel like what the book and the movie are positing as this idea of, like, what would actually happen if a person was really like that.
• 45:18
  Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. It's like, yeah. What if this person was actually like, this is how it actually go down.
• 45:22
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 45:22
  Speaker A: But I also just really. Yeah, I appreciated that. It really highlights the hypocrisy, you know, of Duncan and thus, men in general in that scene of, you know. Yes. He likes the fact that she doesn't, you know, she just. She just wants to have sex all the time. And she's not, you know, she's untroubled by being forward about sex and saying what she wants and is crude and, like, in certain ways and that sort of thing. But then again, when they get in society and out in front of people and she behaves the same way, he's like, wait a second. No, I don't like this. This is awful.
• 45:59
  Speaker B: No, he enjoys her eccentricities until it's no longer making him feel big and important. And he enjoys her sexuality until it's no longer just his.
• 46:10
  Speaker A: Yes, exactly. Yeah. Incredible line that I have to know is in the book. Cause it's from that same scene where as they're sitting at the table, and I think this is actually right before they have that big argument, they're sitting there eating, and a baby across the room starts crying. And she just drops her fork and says, I must punch that baby, and storms off to go punch a baby. And that killed me. And I wanna know if it was in the book.
• 46:37
  Speaker B: It is not from the book, but it is very funny.
• 46:40
  Speaker A: Yes, it's incredible. So then they get back from their little spat in the hallway, and there's this music starts playing, and they decide they must go dance. And they have this ridiculous dance scene because, again, Bella doesn't really know how to dance or anything like that. So she just kind of is doing whatever feels right. So it's very silly to our eyes. And I actually thought it was kind of interesting and fun that Duncan just joins in and doesn't really like, I.
• 47:10
  Speaker B: Think he's trying to save the moment when he joins. I think he's trying to kind of reel her in and make it less embarrassing. Yeah. And make it look a little more. Cause she just goes out there by herself, which is not really done.
• 47:25
  Speaker A: No. Yeah, that makes sense. That makes sense for sure. But then after they finish dancing, there's this old man across the broom who keeps winking at Bella. And she keeps winking back at him. And Duncan's like, what are you. What are you winking at? And she's like, that old man over there. I can't remember what she says. Something about being polite or something. I must be polite. And then he realizes, because she doesn't realize that this old man is hitting on her. And he realizes, and he goes and starts a fight. And I wanted to know if the dance scene and the old man blinking at her came from. From the book.
• 48:02
  Speaker B: Alas, none of that is from the book. But I also enjoyed those scenes.
• 48:08
  Speaker A: Yes. I thought that was fantastic. Then they get back. I believe they might have go sex or something. Have them go and have sex for some more. And then she goes and ventures out into the world for a bit. I think, for my memory, I think.
• 48:20
  Speaker B: The scene is a little bit after.
• 48:22
  Speaker A: Yeah. And she disappears for a while on her own and kind of explores Lisbon for a bit on her own. And then she comes back, and he's there, and they're having an interaction, and he's about to. She says, hey, we should have sex. And he's like, yeah, let's do it. And he's, like, going to go down on her, and he, like, pulls her dress up, and then he sees that she has these two tattoos on her. I think they're tattoos. It looks.
• 48:49
  Speaker B: I thought it was just, like, ink. Maybe somebody, like, I wrote on her with ink, but maybe they are supposed to be.
• 48:56
  Speaker A: I don't know.
• 48:57
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 48:57
  Speaker A: That could be. That would probably make sense. Sense. Maybe she just wrote on it. No. Yeah, because she has the pen that she writes. That's probably what it is. I thought she. Yeah, that makes more sense. But anyway, so she has written soft and softer on her, the inner thighs of both of her legs. And she. And he's like, what is this? And she explains that some guy asked her, like, how soft her skin was, and she was like, oh, probably. And she's like, well, the skin on my inner thighs is the softest. And then she, like, something about feeling, which was softer. And so she wanted to remember. So she wrote it down on her legs. And one is soft, and the other is softer. And this obviously annoys Duncan because she explains during that without realizing, she's like, oh, yeah, and then he ate me out. And he's like, what? And he's, like, freaking out. And she's like, what are you talking about? What's your deal? Because to her, she does not understand the concept of monogamy at all. And I wanted to know if that scene came from the book. Cause I enjoyed that scene.
• 49:53
  Speaker B: It was also not from the book. I was actually pretty neutral on this one. I thought it was fine.
• 49:58
  Speaker A: Okay.
• 49:58
  Speaker B: I didn't do a ton.
• 49:59
  Speaker A: I just thought it was funny, particularly if there had been tattoos. I thought it was very funny. But even still, I just thought, like, the writing, the soft and soft runner was very funny. And then this specific line cracked me up is that he then storms out because he's very upset that she's been sleeping with another or, you know, having sex with somebody else. And as he's leaving, she yells at him, what about the tongue play you were about to perform? Is that not happening? And he, like, slams the door. And I want to know if that line came from the book.
• 50:30
  Speaker B: Also not from the book. But I did think that line was funny.
• 50:33
  Speaker A: It is. It is very funny. So then he's very upset with her because she wants adventurer, blah, blah, blah. And he's like, all right, well, I have an idea. And he's like, get in this trunk. And then he puts her in a trunk and takes her onto a cruise ship. And then they're on this cruise ship now. And this is, like the next vignette or the next, you know, stop on this odyssey that she's on, and they meet some people. She's, like, wandering through the dining area, and she meets these two people, and one of them is this older woman that. I can't remember the name. I can't remember her name.
• 51:05
  Speaker B: I think her name was Martha.
• 51:07
  Speaker A: Martha or something like that. Yeah. Margot Martha.
• 51:09
  Speaker B: I think it was Martha and Harry Astley.
• 51:14
  Speaker A: Astley. That was it. And she meets these two people. Harry Astley is a cynic. And then the old lady doesn't have, like, a. She's just an old lady who's out enjoying her life. And I wanted to know if she made friends with these two people, because I really enjoyed their scenes together. I thought they were really interesting and funny, particularly her and the old lady seeing an older woman and what the future of. She has no concept of aging or what it could mean to be an older woman or whatever. She just truly has no frame of reference for any of this. And so meeting an older woman, and the older woman is like, well, I haven't had sex in 20 years. And she's like, what? She freaks out. And I wanted to know if those two characters came from the book, because I really enjoyed them.
• 51:59
  Speaker B: So there were some changes here that I really liked. In the book, Bella does make two friends while she's traveling with Duncan, who help her start exploring and growing from more of an intellectual, philosophical perspective. Whereas up to this point, in both the book and the movie, we've been covering more like exploring your body. Now we're exploring the mind.
• 52:23
  Speaker A: Yes. Which is what the movie does, too.
• 52:25
  Speaker B: Yes. And in the book, these friends are both men. So we have an american missionary named Doctor Hooker and an Englishman named Harry Astley. And first, I absolutely adore the decision to replace the male missionary with a sassy old lady.
• 52:43
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 52:44
  Speaker B: And I like that the movie acknowledged that Bella should have female role models on this journey, especially older and wiser ones, as you pointed out.
• 52:54
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 52:54
  Speaker B: And I really liked the scene where Duncan throws the book that she's reading overboard and she just hands her another one. Harry Astley is mostly the same as he is in the book, but I felt like the movie implied that he's a queer man was an implication that I got based on, like, dress and carriage.
• 53:20
  Speaker A: Yeah, it could be.
• 53:21
  Speaker B: The actor is also an outfeed man, and I liked that a lot if that was intentional, if that was purposeful. And these two characters, I think, come off as real friends to Bella because they don't seem to be interested in using her to fulfill their own desires, unlike almost everyone else interacts with, except for Harry.
• 53:44
  Speaker A: But he acknowledges that.
• 53:45
  Speaker B: Yeah, he acknowledges that and apologizes. And also, Astley not being interested in her sexually or romantically, I think adds another layer to that, because in the book, he does ask her to marry him.
• 53:58
  Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. And we'll get to it here in the next question. But, yeah, in the film, he is using her kind of in the sense that he was like, oh, I was. I was showing you these awful things, really, just to, like, make myself feel better, kind of to ruin you, because I hated seeing your naive joy or whatever, and I'm just like, this cynical guy. And I was like, yeah, but he does apologize and, like, acknowledge the fact that he was doing that. But speaking, you mentioned the scene where Duncan throws the book overboard. That was my next question, is that Duncan starts getting upset because Bella, this is when Bella starts reading. She's getting books from Harry and from Martha. And she's starting to read more and more. And as she's reading more and more, her very unique sort of stunted speech pattern is going away. And she's speaking in a more, quote, unquote, like, traditional, you know, learned way or whatever. And I wanted to know. But this, this annoys Duncan. He does not like this in particular. And he says the reason for that is because he likes her unique way of speaking. And the fact that it's disappearing is he doesn't like that. And I wanted to know if that element came from the book.
• 55:16
  Speaker B: So similar to the movie. In the book, Bella's speech does change, grow as she herself is growing and learning. However, I don't recall a specific scene like this one with Duncan where he's, like, specifically upset by that.
• 55:32
  Speaker A: Yeah. And, you know, it is interesting because I, one of the criticisms I saw of this movie, I think that I remember reading in one of the reviews, was that the movie centered almost exclusively her sexual maturity as, like, the journey of a woman. And I don't think it does at all.
• 55:49
  Speaker B: I know I disagree with that a lot, actually.
• 55:52
  Speaker A: And maybe, I want to be fair, I maybe short change like, that was just like one sentence or one part of a review I remember reading. But that may not. I don't remember in the sum total context of the review, they may have more criticisms or whatever, but I don't agree with that at all, that particular criticism, because, yes, that is the start of her journey, but I think it's. And that's where actually, I think the movie kind of veers into a place that I think goes back to what I was saying earlier, is that while I expected it to be like a treatise on feminism and women, on autonomy and stuff like that, and it absolutely is. It's also just about growing up, period.
• 56:32
  Speaker B: Yeah, it's a coming of age story.
• 56:34
  Speaker A: Like, regardless of gender, because it is like her journey starts in this very hedonistic realm. It's all about experience. She discovers pleasure, she discovers sex. Then she discovers food. She discovers all these very simple, hedonistic pleasures. But then eventually she gets beyond that and starts reading and starts learning about philosophy and starts learning all these other things. And she enters into this more intellectual, sexual kind of pleasures and pursuits and that sort of thing. And literally, that's ultimately where the film ends up. Like, the film is about her going on that journey and becoming a fully intellectual, independent person, or not intellectual, but a fully independent person who is pursuing, like, intellectual desires and her own, whatever it is she wants to do. And it's not about just, like, oh, she, like, her whole womanhood is summed up by her, like, learning to have sex or wanting to have sex. Like, that very quickly falls away and is not what her character is.
• 57:35
  Speaker B: No, I agree. And I feel like maybe some people who levied that criticism got distracted by the fact that there is a lot of sex in this movie.
• 57:49
  Speaker A: Yeah, there is.
• 57:50
  Speaker B: There is. But even, like, later on when she goes and she's working at the brothel, that's not about her just having a lot of sex. That section is very clearly about, like, emotional maturity.
• 58:04
  Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely.
• 58:05
  Speaker B: Using the things that she's learned.
• 58:07
  Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. So, again, I thought that was an interesting critique, because I was like, that's not at all like, what, to me, the movie's about. So much so that I think that, which honestly maybe kind of is what maybe somebody would, some people might criticize the film for, because it seems like it's more about, like, this woman's autonomy and stuff like that. When I think ultimately it does kind of circle back to this being this broader, general story about just growing up and, like. And the. And the phases of your life that you go through as you're figuring out who you are, regardless of gender. Obviously, her being a woman plays a big role in that because of this society that she's growing up in. And the movie interacts. You know, the movie does a lot of commentary on the way that a woman growing up in this patriarchal world interacts with this patriarchal world and the way it affects her. But, like, ultimately, it's really about just broadly. Yeah. Like, the kind of stages we all go through in our lives and where you figure out who you are and what you want and all that sort of thing, which I thought worked and was interesting. There's this great scene where. And I don't remember why he wants to. Oh. Cause she's, like, a bad influence. Right? Like, that's like, Duncan gets upset because she's been spending all this time with Martha and Harry, and he's like, martha is the problem. She's this bad influence, and she's the one who's changing you. And he goes, I'm gonna kill her.
• 59:33
  Speaker B: I could only hope to someday be called a bad influence by someone's debauched lover.
• 59:39
  Speaker A: Yes. And I absolutely love this character, but he's like, I'm gonna go throw her. I'll throw her overboard. And Bella's like, I dare you to. And he's like, I'll do it. And he, like, storms out to the deck and he's like, goes. And he grabs her chair and he's, like, gonna drag her over to the side and she's just laughing. And the boat completely unbothered. The boat staff are, like stopping him because he's drunk or whatever. But I love as he goes to drag her, he's like, I'm gonna kill you. And her line is, oh, good. I never imagined being murdered. How dramatic. Which is amazing. And I wonder if it came from the book.
• 1:00:17
  Speaker B: This is not from the book, but it was one of my favorite little moments in the movie.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker A: It's so good. And her character, I just thought was delightful. So then she goes and spends some time with Harry Astley, who takes her to Alexandria. And they're on this little castle.
• 1:00:37
  Speaker B: Yeah. I'm not sure what exactly they're supposed to be on.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker A: It doesn't matter. Again, this is all very surrealistic fantasy stuff. It looks like an MC Escher painting or something like that.
• 1:00:46
  Speaker B: It looks like something you'd put in a fish tank.
• 1:00:48
  Speaker A: Yeah, exactly. But they're there hanging out and, like, having lunch or whatever. And then he goes and he shows her. He goes, look, you know, like, the world's not all amazing. Look at this. And he takes her to the balcony, and then they look down into the gutters, like this, like, area below the castle kind of place that they're in. And there's all these poor people down there being miserable. And he's like, look. See, this is the real reality of the world. Like, we're only up here because they're down there and that sort of thing. Basically just explaining the cruelty of the society that they live in, because she's unaware of this. And I wanted to know if that element came from the book. And then if she also. Then after that, she's very affected by this and decides, I know, I can fix this. I'll just give all of Duncan's money that he won to the poor people and that'll fix everything. Does that come from the book?
• 1:01:45
  Speaker B: The part where she goes and sees the suffering of the poor is from the book. I don't think the money thing is, there is a bunch of stuff that happens with his, like, gambling winnings, but I do not believe she tries to give it away to the poor in the book. But she does go. Like, Harry takes her to go and see the slums, quote unquote. And she sees them from much closer in the book because they're up on this thing in the movie and looking way down at them. And there's one specific. There's a blind girl who's cradling a baby that kind of becomes the focus of that scene, and Bella wants to adopt them and take them back with her, and then is distraught when told that she can't do that. And Bella being disgusted by the way that the world is and wanting to change it, is perhaps one of the books clearest themes and strongest through lines. Comparatively, in the movie, it feels more like something that gets introduced and explored to some extent, but not fully resolved.
• 1:02:54
  Speaker A: It definitely doesn't get resolved, but I think it's left hanging. And I think it's safe to assume that that is still a pursuit of hers when the movie ends. But there's not a button put on it of, like, oh, and she set up some charity, or she is fighting to dismantle capitalism, or there's nothing, you know, like, there's no overt, like explanation of, like, what she intends to do or whatever, other than, like, she's becoming a doctor. But I do think it's safe to assume when. When this film resolves or when the film ends, that that is still one of her goals, because it is a main point of the second and third act of this film is her desire to help people as she learns about the suffering of the world. This is her college phase. So this, in the brothel scene or the brothel part, are all like, her college years, I believe, is kind of what we're going for, is what it seems like. But so then, since she gave away all the money, they get kicked off the boat that they're on, and they drop ship in France and end up in Paris, and they have no money. Well, Bella does, but Duncan is unaware of that. So they essentially have no money. But Bella is trying to go find a hotel room, ends up stumbling into a brothel. And the madame at the brothel explains, like, oh, yeah, you just, you know, like, you can have sex and for money. And she's like, what? Cause Bella's like, well, I love having sex and I love having money, so this seems like a win. And so she becomes a prostitute at a brothel for a bit. And I wanted to know if that came from the book.
• 1:04:35
  Speaker B: Yeah, it does. She becomes a worker at a brothel for a while. And I think that the book and the movie draw pretty much the same conclusion about it. Sex work is not, ipso facto, immoral, but it is another form of capitalist exploitation.
• 1:04:54
  Speaker A: Or it can. Yeah, it definitely can be. Yeah, no, it is. Yeah, I think it feels the same way, and I thought the same thing because I remember the one specific review that we talked about in the prequel, but I saw some other people complaining about her, like, you know, like, being very flippant about the fact that, oh, and then she goes and works in a brothel, like in France. And that's the line you have from that one review was.
• 1:05:15
  Speaker B: Yeah, I want to call out that one specific review because it said. I don't remember which review it was, but it said that the film portrayed her sex work as a smart financial decision. And I don't think that's true at all.
• 1:05:28
  Speaker A: I don't think it is either.
• 1:05:30
  Speaker B: I think we see Bella being initially excited at having earned her own money. Understandable. Followed by a deeper understanding of the inherent problems with the way that that system is set up.
• 1:05:43
  Speaker A: Yes. Yeah, no, that's what I'm saying. And that was crazy to me because, like, I think the film actually does a pretty. To my eyes, you know, a fairly, like, balanced and good depiction of sex work in the sense that it doesn't say, this is immoral and bad, but it also doesn't say, this is awesome. This is great. Like, it is a fairly grounded, unglamorous portrayal of sex work that is like, yeah, she's making money doing this. This is giving her autonomy to some extent, but also, it kind of sucks in some regards. And she wishes she could do it a different way. Like, you know.
• 1:06:19
  Speaker B: Yeah, she. And she talks about that specifically, too, in the movie she wants. She's like, I could be into this, but maybe we could do it slightly differently.
• 1:06:28
  Speaker A: Yeah, exactly. Yeah. And I. So I thought the same thing. I was like, I don't know how you could watch this and think this is the movie, like, glamorizing sex work or anything like that. It's only glamorizing in the sense that it takes the correct moral position, which is that it doesn't demonize sex work. And if that's your problem with it, then I. Sorry, you just. You have a problem with your moral framework if you think sex work is immoral. It's just. Yeah, it's. You know, I think it very accurately examines the context with. Within which it exists and the patriarchal system within that it exists within and says, these are all issues with it. But inherently, sex work is not bad. It is. All of the facets and ways that it works are problems that maybe could be fixed and solved if, you know, we fix.
• 1:07:15
  Speaker B: If we fixed and solved them.
• 1:07:17
  Speaker A: Yes, exactly.
• 1:07:19
  Speaker B: Also, if you're like that worried about a very slightly ahistorical depiction of sex work, please just read the book. Because she actually doesn't earn any money in the book because she ends up. The madame ends up taking her wages to pay off a health inspector that she upset, which I think was one of the reviews gripes was that, well, if she was actually working in a brothel, all of her money would be gone for room and board and things. So this is not a good portrayal. Okay, take a breath.
• 1:07:53
  Speaker A: It just blows my mind because I.
• 1:07:54
  Speaker B: Guess this is very clearly not set in actual history.
• 1:07:57
  Speaker A: And on top of that, it is a very. I would think, overall, it's a more negative than positive portrayal. It is not like this glowing, like, wow, this is amazing thing. But I don't think in, like, a. At least in my opinion. Again, I'm not a sex worker. I. You know, like, I've never been with a sex worker. Like, I'm just saying, like, to me, it seems like a fairly, like, grounded, realistic. I don't want to say both sides, like, exploration of sex work, but one that acknowledges the issues while not. Yeah. While not demonizing the actual and while.
• 1:08:37
  Speaker B: Also acknowledging that, yeah, this does give her some level of autonomy in a world where it's very, very hard for.
• 1:08:43
  Speaker A: Women and occasionally enjoyment. Like, I think that's another issue. Element of it that I think is fair is, like, she doesn't enjoy having, you know, doing this with every patron that she has, but occasionally she does, and it's like, fine. Like. And it's good, even. Like, it just depends. And it's like. Again, I think the fact that it's any. I think for some people, any portrayal of sex work that isn't just. This is awful and horrible and nothing, like, should be illegal. And, like, you know, like, anybody who does this is immoral or whatever, I don't. I just think that, you know, for some people, that's. That's the only depiction of sex work there down for which I think is silly.
• 1:09:21
  Speaker B: Also, the guy who was, like, skittering around the room like a crab cracked me up. Very funny. Yeah.
• 1:09:28
  Speaker A: Because I just don't explain. Just, like, yeah, we get, like, a montage of her sleeping with rand or, you know, servicing clients, and it's, like, random stuff. And. Yeah, one of them is this guy.
• 1:09:40
  Speaker B: She's just, like, lounging, and he's, like, crab walking around the room.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker A: He's almost doing, like. Like, golem. Like, moving, like, golem. And she's just kind of, like, laying there. It's very funny. And then. So during this scene where she's also one of the other prostitutes in this brothel's name is Twynette, who she becomes friends with and eventually lovers with. And they. Twinette is a socialist and is introducing Bella to socialism. She gives her a pamphlet, and they go to socialist meetings together. And as they're off to one of their meetings, she's abandoned Duncan at this point, but he's still hanging around because he doesn't have any money or anything, and he's just wailing and being miserable. And he confronts her at one point, her and twinette, and he's yelling at her and like, well, how could you do this? Bah. And as she's like, look, we're getting out of here. Bye. And as she's leaving, he's like, you're whores. And they both turn around and Bella says, we're our own means of production. And I thought that was great, and I wanted to know if it came from the book.
• 1:10:45
  Speaker B: It doesn't. But this was another favorite little moment of mine.
• 1:10:48
  Speaker A: Yes, it's fantastic. I mean, you can't argue that within that framework. I mean, you definitely own the means of production. Well, to be fair, not really. They're working in a brothel where the woman, you know, they're paying like a. But it's a good quippy line. All right. It's a good quippy comeback. So meanwhile, back in London, we find out that Godwin is. They're missing Bella. Godwin and McCandless are missing Bella. So Godwin decides to make another Bella, a new Bella, a Bella 2.0, I believe Felicity is her name. I wanted to know if that came from the book. Did they replace her with another one?
• 1:11:27
  Speaker B: No. And I have to say, I don't really care for that.
• 1:11:33
  Speaker A: I feel like it didn't.
• 1:11:36
  Speaker B: I'm not entirely sure what it was meant to be.
• 1:11:39
  Speaker A: That's what I mean. Yeah.
• 1:11:40
  Speaker B: But whatever it was didn't land for me.
• 1:11:45
  Speaker A: I think the issue is that they just don't do enough with it.
• 1:11:48
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:11:49
  Speaker A: Like, I think, obviously, I think the commentary is like, look, this guy, it's not about the specific person. It's just he wants this woman to Lord over. Not Lord over, but, like, to control, to be the God of literally his. She calls him God because.
• 1:12:06
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:12:06
  Speaker A: And so he likes that place of power. And when Bella leaves, he's now missing that power dynamic that he had. And so he wants to create another one of those to fill that vacuum and so that he can be God again, I think, is what they're going for. But again, it's so fleeting in the movie, and it's there so miniatively that it doesn't.
• 1:12:27
  Speaker B: And I think we're meant to maybe see him realize that what he's actually missing is that, like, paternal relationship that he had with Bella. Yeah, maybe. And it's not. This new thing is not fulfilling that.
• 1:12:46
  Speaker A: And I think also, I think we're supposed to. Yes, the paternal relationship, but specifically that it's not just the paternal relationship. It's specifically the dynamic and the relationship he had with Bella as a person. And not, like, just the fact that there's this girl who is, quote, unkind of his daughter. Felicity fills that role of being this, like. Like, I think the movie is doing this thing where that's why he initially creates Felicity, is to fill this void that he feels like is there where he has this. This daughter figure. But then he realizes, and I think we're to realize, that it's actually not just the experience of having a daughter necessarily, or having this person in his care that he is, like, the quote unquote father of. It's specifically the dynamic that he had with Bella and that he actually likes Bella as a person and that she's not some easily replaceable thing.
• 1:13:38
  Speaker B: Right.
• 1:13:39
  Speaker A: As a result of that, we kind of get this weird. Felicity is dealt with this kind of weird, like.
• 1:13:45
  Speaker B: Yeah. With this, like, odd dismissiveness.
• 1:13:48
  Speaker A: Yes. Feels like tea, almost. Yeah. And that almost feels like maybe one of the more. One of the criticisms I would levitate the film is that in its haste to humanize Bella, it kind of dehumanizes Felicity in a way that feels strange and never really addresses.
• 1:14:06
  Speaker B: Yeah, I agree.
• 1:14:07
  Speaker A: Now, again, at the end, she becomes part of the. The happy commune they got going on, but, yeah, it still feels a little strange.
• 1:14:15
  Speaker B: Yeah. Yeah. I was not really a fan of that decision.
• 1:14:19
  Speaker A: Yeah. So at this point, Godwin is dying because he has cancer that has spread, and he has McCandless. Go figure out where Bella is so he can bring her home so that he can see her again before he dies. And Bella does return and reunite with Godwin, and he explains the truth. And I want to know if that came from the book. Does she return to a dying Godwin and find out who she actually is from him?
• 1:14:47
  Speaker B: She does eventually get back home, but it's not because Godwin was dying. She becomes disillusioned with the brothel life and decides it's time to go back home. Now, the movie has Godwin flat out tell her the truth about her origin, which I appreciate in the book. It's a little bit confusing because it's kind of a confusing scene. There's a lot of people talking over each other in this scene in the book, but her origins kind of come out in the wash while they're talking with Blessington after he interrupts the wedding. So we don't have this scene where he confesses.
• 1:15:29
  Speaker A: Yeah. And again, I think that's partially the movie is definitely making Godwin a ultimately more sympathetic character by having him kind of confess and acknowledge all of this stuff. And I get why some people wouldn't be into that. So speaking of the wedding, she comes back and she agrees to actually, she asks McAndles to marry her this time in the film at least. And they're gonna get married. And they're at the church having their wedding. And Duncan has. Drags Alfie Blessington in, who he found because when they were on that ship and that one random person was like, Victoria Blessington, he remembered the Blessington name and then was able to figure this all out and find Bella's ex husband. And I wanted to know. And then they storm in and interrupt the wedding. And I want to know if that came from the book and if she goes back with him because that was an interesting kind of, like, twist that I really wasn't expecting. But it makes sense is that she. She abandons, she leaves. She's like, I'm gonna go with you. And she goes with Alfie because she wants to learn about her mom's life.
• 1:16:39
  Speaker B: Like, what happened, her actual history.
• 1:16:41
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:16:41
  Speaker B: So I spoiled this in the previous question, I guess. But, yes, he does interrupt the wedding. She does not go back with him in the book. What happens is that they're all having this tete a tete kind of about who she is and where she belongs. And she actually recognizes Blessington as earlier when she's working in the brothel, they mention that there's this masked man who frequents the establishment, and he comes in and they call him. Hang on. What do they call him? They call him Monsieur Spankybot. And he likes to come in and be spanked and treated like a baby in the brothel. And she recognizes him as this, and he's so embarrassed that he leaves, and then he commits suicide two days later.
• 1:17:42
  Speaker A: Oh, wow. Okay.
• 1:17:44
  Speaker B: Yes. Much to think about there.
• 1:17:46
  Speaker A: Yeah. I don't even know if I want to even dig into. That's a whole different.
• 1:17:51
  Speaker B: The book is satirical, and it's really not important in the broad context of the book. That's just how this storyline gets wrapped up.
• 1:18:01
  Speaker A: Right.
• 1:18:02
  Speaker B: But I appreciate that the movie chose to have her actually go into the belly of the beast.
• 1:18:08
  Speaker A: I think that makes sense.
• 1:18:09
  Speaker B: In order to close out her odyssey, the kind of danger that we see her in is discussed in the book. Like, they do discuss that she was gonna get this genital mutilation operation and all this stuff.
• 1:18:24
  Speaker A: So that is at least. So he is seemingly a sadistic fuck in the book as well.
• 1:18:31
  Speaker B: Yeah, he's got stuff going on for sure, but it's all kind of theoretical in the book because she never leaves with him. Okay. She does tell him to fuck off in the book, and that is a great moment.
• 1:18:45
  Speaker A: Yeah, no, I really liked her going and confronting him and not even confronting him, but kind of, like, going to, like, suss out, like, what? Like, what happened to her mom, like, what happened with Victoria, and, like, why did she kill herself? And, like, what was going on with that? And then this kind of. I will say it feels he's a little cartoonishly evil.
• 1:19:07
  Speaker B: A little bit?
• 1:19:08
  Speaker A: Yeah, a little. But there are cartoonishly evil people in the world. It's not like they don't exist. And this whole movie is obviously very heightened and surreal. So it's not like, I don't know why I would single that out as being unrealistic or anything like that. But I did like having her go and have that whole dinner scene with him and kind of figure out what his whole deal was and learn about her mom's past and why this all happened and then gives her closure on the story with her mother and what happened there in a way that I think is important and interesting. And I think it works better than if they had just thrown in the brothel thing with that whole different thing. I think that would have been too messy and weird to try to wrap up in a way that worked and made sense, whereas having her actually confront the man ostensibly responsible for her mom's killing herself and that sort of thing, and, like, this. This evil guy, like, making him the final boss kind of, I think, works. Again, as you said, she is on an odyssey. Like, literally, that is what we're doing here. And so, yeah, I like that change. I think that makes a lot of sense. My final question here was, does Bella transplant Alfie's brain into, or. Sorry, a goat's brain into alphys body, because that is how the film ends.
• 1:20:29
  Speaker B: No, she does not transplant a goat's brain into his head. I appreciate this as a full circle moment. I'm also not sure what the poor goat did to deserve that fate.
• 1:20:41
  Speaker A: Yeah, me either. I feel like, if anything, it should have been the other way.
• 1:20:44
  Speaker B: Around.
• 1:20:44
  Speaker A: They should have put his brain into the goat's body, even that still. But, like.
• 1:20:50
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:20:50
  Speaker A: Cause they're like, I guess he just dies. Yeah. I don't understand why. It is a very strange choice, and I'm not sure works other than as a comedy beat.
• 1:21:01
  Speaker B: Yeah. It's like a comedic, full circle moment beat. But, like, other than that.
• 1:21:08
  Speaker A: Because it's not. Because, like, thematically, it's like, what is? Like, it's not like he's being punished. He's dead. It's a goat brain in his body. Like, his brain is dead.
• 1:21:19
  Speaker B: I mean, maybe he is in the goat, and we just don't see him in the goat.
• 1:21:24
  Speaker A: Yeah. I don't know. Yeah, it doesn't really. I'm not sure it really works necessarily, again, as, like, a comic button, which, again, goes back to kind of what I was saying earlier, that I think this movie is more interested in being funny than it is in being anything else. Maybe not more interested in being funny, but it's almost as interested in being funny as it is at saying anything else. But. All right, speaking of what this movie is trying to say, let's get into it. We have some stuff to talk about in lost, in adaptation.
• 1:21:50
  Speaker B: Just show me the way to get out of here and I'll be on my way. Yes.
• 1:21:56
  Speaker A: Yes. And I want to get unlost as soon as possible.
• 1:21:59
  Speaker B: So I put this here because I don't know where the fuck else to put it. This is a fairly truncated adaptation. The book is actually divided into four parts, and the movie is really only concerned with one of those parts, which is kind of the main narrative of the book. And that's Doctor McCandless memoir that details his wife's extraordinary origin story, which means that what the movie is missing, aside from the kind of frame story that I talked about in the prequel, is the letter that follows the memoir. And that letter is from Victoria McCandless, aka Bella Baxter. And in that letter, she basically says, I don't know what my husband's problem was, but none of this is true. Here's what actually happened, and then gives a very straightforward, grounded version of events.
• 1:23:08
  Speaker A: Okay, interesting.
• 1:23:11
  Speaker B: Now, much of the criticism levied at the film, as we discussed in our prequel episode, and also in this episode, was in regard to it being male centric, focused on the male gaze due to its male director and male writer. I don't fully agree with that. There are moments in the film where I definitely do, but overall, I think it's more of an unconventional coming of age story. And most of the sexy stuff in this film is really not very sexy at all.
• 1:23:46
  Speaker A: I've said before, I think, on this podcast, that I almost find I have no issues with sex scenes in movie, but I never find. Almost never find them actually sexy or, like, tittle.
• 1:23:58
  Speaker B: My hot take is that they're often not meant to be.
• 1:24:01
  Speaker A: And that's. Yes, I agree with almost. Almost always.
• 1:24:04
  Speaker B: Almost always not meant to be.
• 1:24:06
  Speaker A: Yes. And, yeah, and in this movie in particular, I think none of the sex scenes in this movie, barring maybe, like, one or two, are meant to be at all, like, erotic. I think maybe the very first time she has sex with Duncan, like the Bay, or not the very first time, but the sex scenes in the hotel room in Lisbon maybe kind of like. But she's discovering her sexuality and she's like, they're having sex all over the hotel room or whatever. I think that one is supposed to be slightly erotic. Slightly? Or do you disagree?
• 1:24:43
  Speaker B: No, not necessarily. I don't. I don't. I don't know because I don't think it's supposed to be erotic, per se, but I don't think it's supposed to be, like, disturbing, like, some of the other.
• 1:24:57
  Speaker A: I guess that's what I'm saying. Yeah. Yeah. That's fair. Maybe not erotic, because I also did not find that one remotely. No, the only one that I think is supposed to be remotely erotic is her and twinette. Yeah, but. Which makes sense because it's the only one where it's, like, her full agency with.
• 1:25:20
  Speaker B: Agency. Full consensual. Yeah, yeah.
• 1:25:23
  Speaker A: Without any level of, like, coercion or anything like that. And that's the only one that I think. And even that one, again, it's not, like, super erotic, but it's the only one that I think even feels a little erotic, whereas.
• 1:25:37
  Speaker B: Yeah, and even then, it's really. It's more, like, romantic and tender than it is erotic.
• 1:25:43
  Speaker A: Exactly.
• 1:25:45
  Speaker B: The main scene that bothered me in this film, and it was because of the way that it was, like, framed and shot, was that very first initial scene where she masturbates for the first time and she's laying in the bed and we, like, just see her feet.
• 1:26:01
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:26:02
  Speaker B: That one, I thought was framed more erotically than, like, anything else, really, in the movie. Yes.
• 1:26:08
  Speaker A: It's interesting. I guess it is. But it's also funny because. I agree. But it's also the only one where you see nothing. It's just literally her legs and the wall. You know what I mean? Yeah, but it is definitely a less.
• 1:26:26
  Speaker B: Is, I don't really think you need bits to be erotic.
• 1:26:29
  Speaker A: No, I agree. But I think most people. No, I completely agree. I'm saying that think most people would not maybe view that one as. Hmm, interesting.
• 1:26:41
  Speaker B: I thought it was framed as more, like, sensual.
• 1:26:46
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:26:46
  Speaker B: And.
• 1:26:47
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:26:48
  Speaker B: No, I think perhaps titillating than anything else in the movie, perhaps by virtue of not seeing.
• 1:26:55
  Speaker A: I think that's what it is. Yeah. I think maybe they thought and maybe. I don't know if it's intentional or not, but I think it may be a case where the filmmakers felt like that was a less erotic way to portray it, but because everything else is kind of so matter of factly shot, like the rest of the sex scenes, I don't know. It's interesting. Interesting? Yeah, because I didn't find that one to be like, I don't know. Yeah. Hmm. I don't know. Anyways, sorry.
• 1:27:25
  Speaker B: So all this to say, though, you know, I don't really agree with a lot of the, like, misogyny, anti feminist criticism that was lobbied at this movie, but in a kind of a one to one comparison between the book and the movie, I think it could be fair to say that by nixing that letter that follows the narrative and choosing to commit to this male fantasy tale, the movie does remove some of her agency.
• 1:27:57
  Speaker A: Yeah, that's one of those. That's really interesting, because it's.
• 1:28:00
  Speaker B: And, like, I don't even think that she doesn't have agency throughout the film. Yes, but, like, when you're holding them up and comparing it one to one, it feels a little weird that they chose to nix that.
• 1:28:14
  Speaker A: It's one of those things where if you just look at the film in a vacuum and you have no idea the book exists. I don't think the film is misogynistic on its own, but, yes, when you put it within the context of this book, that they're adapting, the person adapting, it made the choice to be like, hey, actually, the part where the. The woman at the end says, hey, this is all bullshit that my husband made up.
• 1:28:39
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:28:39
  Speaker A: And you just get.
• 1:28:40
  Speaker B: We're gonna ignore that. We're gonna ignore that part, guys.
• 1:28:43
  Speaker A: There's a weird.
• 1:28:43
  Speaker B: That's not important. There's a weird energy to that.
• 1:28:46
  Speaker A: Yes, there absolutely is. That's fascinating. That is really fascinating. But, yes, but. But without that, again, not knowing that, if you just view the film, it's like, yeah, that works on its own. And I can understand the impulse to not, like, muddy the film with this extra little thing. I understand the desire to not. Then it gets weird.
• 1:29:08
  Speaker B: And the film was already a hard sell.
• 1:29:11
  Speaker A: Yes. And then having this thing at the end where it's like, oh, actually, none of that actually happened because that's the other thing. Then you're falling into this trope of people watch that, or people could watch that and be like, oh, God. It's like none of that actually happened like that. That's the thing that makes audiences grow. Hell, maybe that ending was there and it tested horribly with audience. You know what I mean?
• 1:29:34
  Speaker B: I don't know.
• 1:29:35
  Speaker A: Like, maybe they filmed that ending where she essentially explains that none of that actually happened that way, and they decided that that, like, it either tested horribly with audiences or didn't come across the way they wanted or something. But, yeah. No, that is really interesting.
• 1:29:52
  Speaker B: Yeah. I still don't agree with much of that criticism that was aimed at this film. I don't think it's particularly misogynistic. There are moments here and there that bother me, but as a whole, I don't think it is. But again, comparing them one to one, it's a weird fucking energy.
• 1:30:14
  Speaker A: No, it absolutely is. It absolutely. That's really fascinating because I had no idea that that was. That that was the case or that, you know, that that extra little bit was in the book. Huh. All right. That is it for this. That is it for. This film is lit. The show's over. That is it for lost in adaptation. It's time to find out now what Katie thought was better in the book. You like to read?
• 1:30:39
  Speaker B: Oh, yes, I love to read.
• 1:30:42
  Speaker A: What do you like to read?
• 1:30:45
  Speaker B: Everything. I haven't talked about the frame story a ton, but I really liked the frame story set up in this book. I mentioned in the prequel that it was kind of set up similar to the Princess Bride, where the author opens it up with this introduction and says, well, actually, I didn't write this. I'm just the editor presenting someone else's words to you. And I liked it a lot. It gave me kind of. It gave me a little bit of William Goldman vibes. It also gave me a little tiny bit of Douglas Adams vibes. Really enjoyed the setup and the style. Bella calls McCandless my candle in the book, which I thought was cute.
• 1:31:35
  Speaker A: I think she might do that once in the. I remember her saying something about candle, and I thought she might have said my candle.
• 1:31:43
  Speaker B: I can't remember also, but they call him McCandless in the movie, right? That's how they pronounce it, because I definitely said McCandless throughout the entire book in my head, even though she does call him candles. So I guess that it would be McCandless.
• 1:32:00
  Speaker A: No. Yeah, because that would confuse me too, because I remember reading the character's name before we watched this movie, like, when I was doing, like, the research or whatever. And in my head I said McCandless.
• 1:32:11
  Speaker B: Because that's usually how it's pronounced, I think.
• 1:32:14
  Speaker A: I mean, there's two. It's M C C A N D L E S S. That's Meccandalus. Yeah.
• 1:32:19
  Speaker B: Anyway, I didn't particularly care for the scene in the movie where she threw a tantrum in the carriage and they, like, chloroform her and knock her out. It's a little thing. Didn't really like it.
• 1:32:33
  Speaker A: Again, I think it's just a little detail to try to reinforce the fucked up nature of what they're doing, of what Godwin is doing, is just to reinforce the fact. This is not a chill guy, necessarily. He's deeply unwell in how he handles the things and all of the decisions he makes.
• 1:32:54
  Speaker B: The movie is missing Alastair Grey's extremely healthy respect for nurses, which I found fascinating throughout this book, like, numerous times. He goes back to this idea that all of the real healing arts are done by nurses. And if doctors all vanished, patients would continue to get well because nurses know what the fuck they're doing. I thought it was very interesting.
• 1:33:19
  Speaker A: Seems like a guy who's had a lot of experience, probably with the medical system, and has mostly dealt with nurse. You know what I mean? That experience that a lot of us has had where? Like, going to a dentist where the witch McCall.
• 1:33:33
  Speaker B: Nothing but respect for my dental hygienist. Yes.
• 1:33:36
  Speaker A: Where the dental hygienist does literally everything, and the dentist comes in at the end and, like, pokes your tongue and then is like, all right, I'm out. Yeah.
• 1:33:45
  Speaker B: A part of the book is a long letter from Duncan to Godwin about his experience traveling with Bella, which devolves into Duncan feverishly listing evidence that Bella is actually a demon from hell come to torment him. And it is objectively hilarious. He lists out all of this biblical stuff about the coming of the Antichrist and then gets to this bit about, oh, they mention a cup in the Bible. I'm not really sure what the cup is, but I'm sure if we sat down and talked about it, we could figure out where the cup is and all of this.
• 1:34:22
  Speaker A: He does call her a demon at the end at the church in the movie, like, when he's like, she's a.
• 1:34:28
  Speaker B: Demon yeah, the book has a lot, lot. A lot of commentary on colonialism and in particular, England's version of it during that time period, which the movie does not really address at all. No, we dropped that whole thing. There is also a scene, and apparently this was filmed, but ended up being cut from the final version of the movie. There's a scene where she's working at the brothel where all of the prostitutes have to get inspected by a state doctor I mentioned earlier, a health inspector or whatever, that she upsets. And the reason that she upsets him is that she insists that the men who visit the brothel are the ones who ought to be inspected, because if all of the women are healthy, that means that they're the ones bringing in the disease. Can't argue with that.
• 1:35:26
  Speaker A: This is true.
• 1:35:29
  Speaker B: And I don't know how I didn't notice until almost the very end, but this movie took the story out of Scotland, which is super important and pivotal in the book. And I feel like Alistair Gray would hate that.
• 1:35:42
  Speaker A: I think I read something about this, and that's one of the things I heard people say or some mention of, like, oh, blah, blah, blah, this, that and the other, but supposedly something about him. I don't. I don't remember. But, yeah, that was there. There was discussion of that online somewhere about the fact that they changed that.
• 1:36:00
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:36:01
  Speaker A: And whether or not Alistair Gray would be okay with that. Some people think he wouldn't. And then there was somebody. I thought. I thought I read something that implied that because what's his name went and met Alistair Gray, Yorgos Lanthimos. And, like, they kind of talked about things, and I thought there was an allusion to the idea that moving the setting was, like, one of the things they may have discussed and that he was okay with, but maybe not. I don't know. I'd have to go back and find what. I don't remember what article or whatever I was reading when I saw that or what even it was alluding to, but it was something about some changes and basically implying that Aleister Gray signed off on the changes. But I don't know, like, way back in the day because he. He passed away in, like, 2015 or something, right?
• 1:36:45
  Speaker B: Uh, he passed away, like. Yeah, not like, too. Too long ago, I think. But.
• 1:36:53
  Speaker A: But it was before the film.
• 1:36:54
  Speaker B: It was before the film, yeah, yeah. He never got to see.
• 1:36:58
  Speaker A: It was 2019.
• 1:36:59
  Speaker B: Yeah, yeah.
• 1:37:00
  Speaker A: So it was before the film came out, but it was after he, like, Yorgos Lanthimos had already gone and talked to him about stuff. I don't know. The implication I got from whatever that one thing I read was, was that he apparently potentially signed off on some of the changes that were being made. But who knows? All right, that's it for better in the book. Let's find out what Katie thought was better in the movie. My life has taught me one lesson, Hugo, and not the one I thought it would. Happy endings only happen in the movies.
• 1:37:31
  Speaker B: I mentioned earlier that in the book, it's more explicit that Godwin did initially intend for Bella to be like his, his mistress, his lover. And I liked that the movie made the call to leave out what I have deemed his major incel shit, because he has this whole thing that he goes on about how in order to feel attraction, he must be objectively adored. And because he's so ugly, no one is ever going to adore him that way. So he has no choice but to, like, craft a woman from scratch. Yeah.
• 1:38:22
  Speaker A: Okay.
• 1:38:22
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 1:38:23
  Speaker A: Okay.
• 1:38:23
  Speaker B: Sure. Little moment that I really liked was when Duncan initially is gonna go try to find Bella, and he says, like, that he's gonna go use the bathroom. And he says that he has a weak bladder.
• 1:38:37
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:38:38
  Speaker B: And Godwin says, you may have prostate cancer. Look into it. And Duncan's like, will do. I think the idea that Bella wants to leave the house and making that kind of a point of friction contention within the story, especially between her and Godwin, I think that's a worthy addition to the story. That's not something that's really present in the book. Bella and Godwin actually go travel together before she elopes with Duncan. So she's, like, traveled. She's not sheltered the way that she is in the movie. I will say, I don't know if it tracks that Godwin just immediately changes his entire view when she decides she wants to leave with Duncan. But whatever. I guess I really liked when the Random hotel guest mistakes her for Victoria Blessington, and she's like, oh, I haven't seen you for years, and Bella says, and you still have not. Yeah, I'm going to use that. I like that we actually see Bella's affair with Twynette. It's kind of alluded to in the book, but we don't really see that. And I also like that it's Twynette who points out and explains what her c section scar is, because in the book, it's Duncan that does that. So I think this is a good change. And I like that Twinette comes to live with them at the end, and they have a happy little commune. This is the future liberals want.
• 1:40:24
  Speaker A: Yeah, they have their little polycule. Yeah.
• 1:40:28
  Speaker B: And also, correct me if I'm misremembering this, but I like that the movie does not actually confirm that Max and Bella got married. They definitely do in the book, but I like that the movie seems to consider confirming this to be unimportant.
• 1:40:44
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yeah, it does. Not at all. It just jumps forward and then we see them at the end and. Yeah, we don't know for sure that they did.
• 1:40:50
  Speaker B: Yeah, like, maybe they did, but it's not important.
• 1:40:52
  Speaker A: It's not really important. No, it's not about him. It's about her. All right, let's go ahead and find out what the movie nails. As I expected, practically perfect in every way.
• 1:41:07
  Speaker B: This was kind of a brief thing in the movie, but we do see that McAndles is looked down upon by his peers at the medical school, which is more of a thing in the book than. But accurate, I guess. The backstory that Godwin tells Bella about where she comes from, like the fake backstory about her parents dying in a landslide, that's from the book. And then also the way that Godwin tells McAndles about how he created Bella, also from the book where he sits him down and recounts this whole grotesque gothic tale. Bella does knock Max out with chloroform before she leaves to elope with Duncan. The specific Pete speech pattern, she only does it a little bit in the movie, but where she's, like, listing synonyms, that comes from the book. And I was really happy that they included that because I thought it was super interesting. In the book, Wedderburn does turn to drinking and gambling when he can't control keep up with Bella. And we talked about Harry Astley taking her to see the poor people ended up setting her. And she does bite his hand.
• 1:42:25
  Speaker A: Yeah, she bites his hand.
• 1:42:26
  Speaker B: She bites his hand. And he bleeds a lot.
• 1:42:30
  Speaker A: All right, that's it. For better or sorry. The movie. Nailed it. We got a handful of odds and ends before we get to the final verdict. I don't know if you thought this or not, but I thought maybe there was something here that the opening shot we see of Victoria McCandless or not McCandless Blessington standing on the railing as she's about to jump. The blue dress she's wearing has these big, voluminous sleeves, and they're, like, made of this material and, like, sectioned in a way that kind of reminded me of wings. Like the way, like angel wings or something. Like wings or, like bird wings. Specifically the way they're structured a little bit, and that felt like that might be some kind of intentional, I don't know, symbolism there of, you know, she's so fleeing from this.
• 1:43:29
  Speaker B: The big, giant sleeves is a historical style that was from this time period ish. The leg of mutton sleeves. I actually thought the sleeves on that blue dress, they reminded me of armor.
• 1:43:44
  Speaker A: Oh, yeah, could be. Yeah, a little bit. That too. Yeah. Cause, yeah, there are lots of big sleeves throughout this movie, and it wasn't so much, again, the size or anything. It was literally like, the. The structure of them, to me, kind of looked like wings, but I could also see armor, too, as well.
• 1:43:59
  Speaker B: Yeah. Like, with the little sections, like you mentioned, it kind of reminded me of, like, plate armor or something. There was one point at the very beginning of this movie, I think it was when McAndles was going back to Godwin's mansion for the first time, where they're, like, going down the street and it's all, like, distorted and, like, wobbly looking. I don't know what it's like.
• 1:44:25
  Speaker A: I don't even remember this.
• 1:44:28
  Speaker B: The only thing I could think in that moment was that if we had gone to see this in theaters on the big screen, I think I would have gotten sick.
• 1:44:36
  Speaker A: I missed that.
• 1:44:37
  Speaker B: I don't know, because it was so distorted. We're gonna have to find it again after this. And it was, like, the only moment that I remember of the movie doing that. And the movie does a lot with, like, interesting camera work and things, but it's the only moment that I remember, like, that specific thing happening, and it made me feel ill. Yeah.
• 1:45:00
  Speaker A: Yeah. I did not. I did not notice that at all. But speaking of some of the outdoor scenes, I think it's in particular, like, one of the scenes with maybe where they're going out in the carriage or something, but there's a handful of the scenes, especially during the black and white section at the beginning, that I thought did just an incredible job of capturing the look and feel of older films, like the lighting and the Kuroskiro or whatever, the way the light pool, like, the pools of light and dark. And not all of it feels like old Hollywood film, but some of the. In particular, there was a shot where we're looking outside that almost looked like archival footage to me, and may have been. It may have been like footage. Like old footage.
• 1:45:47
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:45:48
  Speaker A: But there was a couple of moments like that early that I thought it did a really good job of that. And now, overall, it's not stylistically, it's not trying to look like the actual, like, film. Like the color grade and the. And the camera work and the. Everything about the look of the film isn't really recreating old film. The look of old film. Some of the sets and stuff are, like, as we talked about in the prequel, like, alluding to, like, the painted backgrounds and the very clear sound stages and all that sort of thing are evoking old Hollywood. But in terms of the actual look and feel of the film, it kind of feels, looks and feels like its own thing, at least to me. But there was a handful of moments earlier that I thought, like, during that black and white section, that to me, very much felt like it was capturing that older film look. And in particular, the scene where Max and Godwin have the conversation, where Godwin reveals what Bella's actual backstory was. I thought that was beautifully shot. The whole film's beautifully shot. It's just. It's a gorgeous film. I wasn't always a huge fan of. I liked the fisheye lens shot. There's a lot of fisheye lens shots in this.
• 1:47:02
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:47:02
  Speaker A: Which I saw some people complain about. I didn't mind those. The ones that didn't do it as much for me was the. The fisheye shot through the. The.
• 1:47:12
  Speaker B: Like, the vignette shots. Yeah, I thought those. I'm sure there was a purpose to them.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker B: Some of them felt a little random.
• 1:47:21
  Speaker A: Yeah. There was a handful of those that I didn't really get what we were doing there. Like, why are we doing this?
• 1:47:28
  Speaker B: And I will say that there were a lot of points throughout this movie, especially during the initial, like, black and white part where I was like, okay, but I see how someone might find this, like, extremely pretentious.
• 1:47:43
  Speaker A: Sure, I can get that. If you've never watched anything like this, I could see being like, I don't. You know, what is this? I don't get what we're doing here. And like I said, I had a little bit because I think it's supposed to be voyeuristic, but it, like, the little, like, vignette.
• 1:47:58
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:47:59
  Speaker A: It's almost like looking through, like, a keyhole or something. I think it's supposed to feel voyeuristic, but it didn't, to me, feel like they were used in moments that particularly felt voyeuristic, necessary or anything like that. You know what I mean? Like, there was one in particular that stuck out to me as, like, I'm not sure why this shot is being used here specifically. And it was during the scene where. The dance room scene where he rushes over to fight the guy at the other table. As he's rushing over, the camera follows him, and it's the, like, black vineyard.
• 1:48:27
  Speaker B: Yeah. And it just kind of seemed like it randomly switched to that.
• 1:48:31
  Speaker A: Yeah. And I couldn't figure out why.
• 1:48:33
  Speaker B: I don't know. I remember that moment, too, and feeling confused about why we went to that specific setup in that moment. Because it does. Like, I agree it gives you the sense of voyeurism and watching. But who's watching? I know it's me, but is there some other level to that that you're wanting me to. Not getting it?
• 1:48:55
  Speaker A: The moments that it was used didn't feel super intentional. Whereas the fisheye lynch shots in general, that didn't have the vignette thing that were just, like, the, you know, the super wide fisheye lens shots, generally, those were in moments where you wanted to see. They wanted you to see the entire set that they're in. Like, there's moments of people, like, walking around the manor and they. You want to, like, you get a really good feel for the layout of, like, the manor. Like, there's one where Godwin and Bella are having dinner. Like, one of the first big fish eye shots we see is they're sitting at that dinner table at opposite ends, and we get this big fish eye shot from the side where we can. Can see the entire dining room and them on either ends of the table. And so it's showcasing the actual, like, space that you're in and stuff like that, as well as obviously, that fish eye lens just adds this kind of surreal weirdness to it. But. And so I didn't really have any issues with the fisheye shots or. And everything else I thought was great, but it was just. Yeah, the one particular, like, keyhole vignetted thing, I couldn't. And I'm sure there's a reason Yorgos Lanthimos doesn't strike me, and maybe he is, because, you know, there's a lot of style in this movie. So maybe sometimes it is kind of style over substance, but it doesn't. This movie is so intentional in so much of what it does that I find it hard to believe that he was just like, I don't know, we'll just do this shot with this thing. Like, it doesn't. That seems not likely to me. But it didn't come across to me what was trying to be communicated by using those particular, like, keyhole fisheye lens things.
• 1:50:30
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:50:30
  Speaker A: Again, other than voyeurism just didn't really match the scenes, though. So I don't know.
• 1:50:36
  Speaker B: I thought the switch to color was so fun in this giving kind of wizard of Oz vibes.
• 1:50:44
  Speaker A: Yep. Every set is just gorgeously stunning. Stunningly gorgeous. I just. Lisbon, the whole Lisbon set, as she's walking around town, I thought was super cool and fun and interesting. And then the ship is just super gnarly and cool and, like, everywhere they go, every set is just beautifully art designed and super, like, God, the Alexandria, like I said, it reminded me a little bit of almost like an MC Escher painting or something like that. I just thought so many of the sets and the set design and everything was so cool.
• 1:51:18
  Speaker B: Oh, yeah.
• 1:51:19
  Speaker A: And I loved. I adored the title card screens. So, like, each of the sections of the film, like Lisbon, the ship, Alexandria, London they get these title cards that kind of mark the journey as we're going. And under the title cards, you get these really crazy, surreal scenes in black and white with these swirling, weird.
• 1:51:44
  Speaker B: Yeah. Shapes and background figures.
• 1:51:47
  Speaker A: In one of them, she's in a bubble floating. In one of them, she's hopping over that. She's hopping down these, like, something.
• 1:51:56
  Speaker B: They almost looked like fingers, like, on a hand.
• 1:51:59
  Speaker A: Like, super cool, weird, surrealist, like, tableaus that I thought were awesome. I was honestly wishing there was more of that. Of those in the film. I think they worked perfectly fine. I'm not sure how you would shoehorn more of that in there. I think it's used pretty much perfectly. But I just thought they were so cool. I was like, I want more of that. And we kind of mentioned it, but this whole thing really did have a vague feeling of, like, classic literature to me.
• 1:52:25
  Speaker B: Absolutely.
• 1:52:27
  Speaker A: Her going on this odyssey and learning about the world from these very unique characters who all are kind of not archetypes, but are like.
• 1:52:35
  Speaker B: Yeah, but it is like. It's a very classic setup of, like, person goes on journey and interacts with specific characters who teach them specific lessons.
• 1:52:46
  Speaker A: Yeah. And it just. Yeah. That felt very intentional to me.
• 1:52:51
  Speaker B: Yeah, for sure. The girl who played Twynette.
• 1:52:56
  Speaker A: Yes. I also thought this was IO.
• 1:52:59
  Speaker B: If I had not already known that it was not. How do you pronounce her name?
• 1:53:06
  Speaker A: I always say eyo. It's either IO or ao Etabiri.
• 1:53:10
  Speaker B: The girl who was in the bear.
• 1:53:12
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 1:53:12
  Speaker B: If I had not known, already known that it was not her, I would have been like, clickety, clickety click, googling. Is that her? Because she does kind of look like her.
• 1:53:21
  Speaker A: There is something about. I think it's her eyes. I can't.
• 1:53:24
  Speaker B: It's something about her eyes. That's, like, has a very similar feel.
• 1:53:28
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 1:53:29
  Speaker B: I loved the costumes in this movie so much.
• 1:53:32
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 1:53:33
  Speaker B: I could do a whole episode on the costume. Did they win? Well deserved.
• 1:53:39
  Speaker A: It won, like, every art direction.
• 1:53:42
  Speaker B: Just the historical, but not historical. And, like, pulling from so many different, like, decades and reference points and the way that her, like, she's dressing herself like a child would dress themselves. And then we see her, like, personal style develop and, like. And I loved. I loved the outfit where she's wearing, like, when she's working at the brothel, but they go to, like, the medical class or whatever. And she has, like. Yeah, yeah. She has, like, this black dress with the gigantic sleeves and then, like, pointy heels and thigh high socks. Perfect Chef's kiss.
• 1:54:23
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 1:54:23
  Speaker B: Thank you and good night.
• 1:54:25
  Speaker A: Yes. It's fantastic. Another thing I thought was interesting is, like, so many of the performances in this movie would not work in, like, any other movie.
• 1:54:33
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 1:54:34
  Speaker A: And we talked about in the prequel a little bit, like, with Mark Ruffalo, like, what he was, like, talking about with his performance and just, like, so ridiculous and everybody, like, I thought Gerard Carmichael's performance was very unique and interesting, but it works for this movie. Like, but it would feel horribly, like, wooden and. And stilted in, like, any other movie. But because of this movie.
• 1:54:56
  Speaker B: Yeah, I think all of the performances are great, but if you, like, took that performance out of this film and put it in another film, it wouldn't work.
• 1:55:04
  Speaker A: It would be horrible. Yeah. Yeah. I think maybe other than, like, some of Emma Stone, I thought, is kind of head and shoulders above everybody else in this movie, especially, like, later in the film when she's doing more stuff early, it felt a little, I don't know, like, exactly what I was expecting for the, like, childlike phase where it's just like, yeah, okay. You know, I've seen this. But as she got. As she grew and matures and, like, kind of grows into herself, the subtlety and nuance in her performance, I thought, which makes sense, like, that should be the case as she. Her emotions are big and simple and.
• 1:55:43
  Speaker B: Kind of dumb when she's a really good sulky, too.
• 1:55:49
  Speaker A: Yeah. No, I just thought everybody's performances were ridiculous but perfect for this film, which was great. And I love getting to the end of the movie. I really adored because I kept wondering when the movie was actually going to end. What's the last shot of the movie gonna be, like, kind of interested to see. Because I think that could have been a very interesting thing that could have colored people's perception of the film.
• 1:56:12
  Speaker B: Yeah. Depending on what the last one.
• 1:56:13
  Speaker A: Depending on what that last shot is. Cause for a second, I thought, oh, they were gonna end on with that. We have that shot that's kind of like, slowly pulling up where Godwin's dying, and they're like, max and Bella are, like, laying next to him. And I was worried for a second that was gonna be the last shot. Cause if that's the last shot, this is a completely different movie. Yeah, but I love that it ends on. It's just a close up of her reading. That's the end of the thing, and there's nothing more grand. It's not like some. As with all the fantastic visuals and chaotic nonsense of this movie and all of the stuff it could have ended with. Just ending on a close up of her smiling as she's reading, I think, to me, cements what the movie is about, which is, again, kind of makes surprises me that people would come away from it, you know, like, with the idea that it's like, oh, like, her journey is only about, like, sex or only about, like, whatever. It's like. No, it is absolutely. Like, the last shot of the movie is her finding joy in reading. Like, that's. And, like. And, like, experiencing this rich inner world and pursuing her own intellectual pursuits. Like, that's the last shot of the movie because that's the most important thing. And so, I don't know. I thought it was kind of a perfect final shot. And I think it's very important that the film end in a way like that, because otherwise, I do think there could be. I think you could read maybe less. You could be less inclined to read it sympathetic or not sympathetically. You could be less inclined to give the movie the benefit of the doubt in terms of, like, what it was saying, but having that be the final shot, I think it's very clear what the movie is, is kind of doing. But anyways, as always, we wanted to remind you, you can head over to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, goodreads threads, any of those places. We would love to hear what you all have to say about poor things. What are your takes on it? It's a, you know, everybody's got a take. We're happy to hear yours. Let us know. We'll talk about that on the next prequel episode. You can also do us a favor by hanging over to Apple Podcasts or Spotify or YouTube. Wherever you listen, listen to us. Make sure you're subscribed. Drop us a five star rating. Write us a nice little review. That stuff always helps. And if you want to support us, you can head over to patreon.com thisfilmislit and give us a, you know, a couple bucks a month. At the $5 a month level, you get access to bonus content. We will be recording this week our episode on the land before time. If you want to hear us talk about sad dinosaur movies, that'll be your chance for that. Probably the only time we'll talk about a sad dinosaur movie. I would think.
• 1:58:49
  Speaker B: Um, I'm trying to think of another super sad dinosaur movie and I. Nothing's coming to the top of my mouth.
• 1:58:56
  Speaker A: I'm sure there are other ones.
• 1:58:57
  Speaker B: I'm sure there are other ones.
• 1:58:58
  Speaker A: There's that one. I can't remember what it's called. Isn't it just called dinosaur? There was like a Disney movie, but I don't think it's based on a book. So it would have to be a bonus episode. I have no desire to watch it if it's not based on a book.
• 1:59:11
  Speaker B: I don't remember how that one ends.
• 1:59:13
  Speaker A: I don't either, but I assume that one's sad. Probably with a meteor. I don't know. Anyways, point being, we're gonna be talking about land before time this week and you get to access to that at the $5 level. And if you want something, if there's something you would like us to talk about, give us that $15 a month and you get priority recommendations. You can shoot us. Whatever it is, you know, shoot us. A message. Say, hey, I would love you to talk about Fight club. We already did that. But whatever it is, I don't know. This is the first thing that popped into my head. Whatever that thing is, we will add it to our list as soon as we can get to it. Katie, it's time for the final verdict.
• 1:59:49
  Speaker B: Sentence fast. Verdict after? That's stupid. I struggled with a final verdict for this adaptation because I feel like I should. Like I'm supposed to have some kind of big opinion on it, but I really don't. I can see what both the book and the movie are doing. Both are flawed, but neither are failures. I can see maybe a little merit in the accusations of misogyny, but I also dont think that the movie deserved nearly as much frothing and raging as it seemed to get. I enjoyed the film. Its obviously very well done, visually stunning performances are great, and the costume work is incredible. However, to me the book felt fuller, more fleshed out. I felt like the author really had some points to make while the movie, not that the movie didn't have points to make, but I think the movie's primary concern was spectacle and for me, primarily visual spectacle. And that's fine. No shade at all. But Alastair Greys novel gave me a little more to chew on. And for that reason, I'm giving this one to the book.
• 2:01:04
  Speaker A: All right, Katie, what's next?
• 2:01:07
  Speaker B: Up next, we are going to do a little spooky spring and we're going to talk about we have always lived in the castle by Shirley Jackson, a 2018 film adaptation.
• 2:01:22
  Speaker A: Yep. Yeah, this one should be interesting. Shirley Jackson, for people who don't know, I mean, this is probably her most famous book, but haunting of Hill House, I believe is also Charlotte Jackson.
• 2:01:32
  Speaker B: And you probably read the lottery in an english class.
• 2:01:36
  Speaker A: Yes, yes. So yeah, very, very prominent author. First time we'll be doing any of her works on the show. But yeah, we have always lived in the castle. Just a little tease. It was going to be a different movie. That is a big movie that is out. But we're putting some time so that I can finish reading it because the book is long. And I'll say this, I can finish rereading it. We're not going to spoil what it is yet. But I had to reread it because I've already read it once for the show. I think it's obvious what it is at that point. But yes, we'll be doing that next month. So yeah, look out for that. But until next week when we're previewing, we have always lived in the castle and hearing what you all had to say about poor things, guys, gals, not Benny palace and everybody else, keep reading.
• 2:02:21
  Speaker B: Books, keep watching movies and keep being awesome.