Exploitation or Empowerment?

American cinema is reckoning with a current landscape of polar extremes, warring ideologies, and endless incertitude on what constitutes accurate representation. Between the ever changing political and cultural waves that demand films to more responsibly and intentionally utilize their depictive power, new questions arise for Hollywood to answer in conjunction with entertainment factor. A distinctive film, in both commercial and critical senses, often has to decide how to stir widespread controversiality in a widely appealing way. Who do we want to please? More importantly, who do we want to piss off?

In trying to fulfill this oxymoron of pleasing controversiality, cinema toes the line between empowerment and exploitation. When does the portrayal of people of color shift to trauma porn? When does complexly addressing the vulnerability of children turn unethical? And, as prominently displayed in this year’s Oscar race with Poor Things, where is the fine line between liberating women from societal constraints and reinforcing regressive stereotypes?

Unexpected frontrunner Poor Things follows the Frankenstein-like story of Bella Baxter, a young woman living in Victorian-styled England, as she undertakes sexual and individual discovery. Poor Things is, without a doubt, my favorite of the nominees this year. A riotous, outrageous, destabilizing whirlwind, director Yorgos Lanthimos takes the concept of female sexuality ownership to potent, graphic heights. The film aims to embody female empowerment through Bella Baxter’s sexual liberation standing as a cornerstone of feminist theory, depicted with the intention of challenging the “Male Gaze”. The numerous male characters that attempt to possess Bella are thwarted through Bella’s agency in her choices, sexual and otherwise.

Poor Things has drawn backlash, some believing that the nudity is exploitative, that there are ethical issues with the premise that Bella has the brain of a child, and that she still operates under the male gaze both in the story and under the fact the director is male. Strikingly presented here is the question of exploitation versus empowerment. The film pushes the boundaries of what has been previously been displayed with female sexual ownership and exploration. However, in showcasing a character disregarding preconceived expectations or stereotypes of how a woman should behave, there is worry that the film actually feeds into exploitative sentiments by way of that disregard. In my opinion, cinema relies on a certain suspension of disbelief, and the story is not based in reality and therefore deserves some suspension of ethical scrutiny for total appreciation of what is revolutionarily feminist. In the case of Poor Things, I believe the exploitative line is crossed through a potential viewer interpretation rather than a complete communication. Poor Things is inherently empowering not only for those who conceptually relate, but also towards viewers who possess the capacity to endure a new perspective.

In a less overt manner, numerous other films in the Oscar race raise parallel concerns of exploitation or empowerment. In Killers of the Flower Moon, the plot based on violent injustice towards the Osage people is centered around the assailants' psyches. Maestro, a biopic on American composer Leonard Bernstein and his wife Felicia Montealegre, primarily revolves around Bernstein’s social and romantic controversies, with Felicia utilized as a doting device. I laud Origin’s direct and vital visual representation of Isabel Wilkinson’s theory on caste, but do consider critic’s questioning of Duvernay’s use of traumatic events and visuals for further cinematic impact. Through witnessing the Barbie versus Oppenheimer trend, and Barbie’s numerous upsets throughout the awards season, I consider a broader exploitation of Barbie’s cultural impact, as well as Barbie’s role in Oppenheimer’s success.

In asking these questions, I am not denying the extensive merits and notable achievements (or even further pitfalls) of these undeniably dynamic works of art. Though I hold my own opinions on where each film falls on the spectrum between exploitative and empowering, as exemplified by Poor Things, there can be no universally accepted answer. Rather, I implore people to use this lens of exploitation or empowerment to better understand the resulting influence of these films and to continue representationally relevant conversations. For me, there is no balance between exploitation and empowerment. Instead, there is addressing exploitative systems, potentialities, and controversies with dual consideration of intent and impact. Ultimately the dialogue sparked by this year’s Oscar picks and modern cinema, is indicative of a larger reckoning to examine not only the art itself but consider the art’s perpetuation of the systems and structures they seek to reflect and address.