|
This movie was great and the ending was alright, but it seems like it would be more cleanly resolved to have the end mirror the beginning of the movie, where everyone in Barbieland CAN be flat-footed, wake up cranky, have a bad day, etc, and still be president. You could have Barbie driving a 1993 Honda civic with a bad tail light and still have her be just as successful and powerful without having to be perfect. Ken's resolution was hilarious, if a little bit frantic. But it was awesome
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
I thought the husband was adorkable. He's giving it his all and ... missing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
It's funny because there were parts you'd think reactionaries would latch on to but they got too distracted by pink feminism. Like how Ken learns Patriarchy exists yet fails to get a job as an executive, doctor or lifeguard. If feminists are so right then he'd be able to get those jobs no problem! Yet he gets rebuffed each time, with the implication that under a meritocracy he would actually have to objectively prove his competence, which he obviously can't do. The Quartering could easily make some three hour video essay "12 ways the Barbie movie proves feminism is BULLSHIT" yet they miss that opportunity because they're not willing to dig deep enough. They could rightly argue that Mattel is just pinkwashing all the way to the bank with this movie but instead conclude Mattel had obviously gone WOKE by having such a feminist movie. It's obviously just DEI social engineering all the way down. Even when they are stopped clocks and rightly point out that a big company like Mattel is only thinking of the bottom line, they pull a hard right at a fork in that thought process and conclude it's because of DEI and Blackrock Social Credit gobbledygook instead of the more boring boardroom workshopping of, "how can we use this film to make money and be edgy just shy of spooking investors?" You also have these types really wedded to "traditional" values and gender roles who could try to argue that is just in their nature for Barbies to be hyperfeminine; all Kens had to do to get their support was exhibit Traditional Masculinity and the Barbies just went in lockstep, meanwhile those Barbies had to be straight up hypnotized and isolated to be turned against traditional Masculinity. The Barbies may occasionally be pilots and lawyers and presidents but the important thing is they Know Their Place and themselves don't try to break out of the natural order of Barbieland (except Stereotypical Barbie of course). Allan could be seen as a soyboy quisling who represents acceptable 'masculinity' by leftists. If they find anything unacceptable about him it's the idea he could beat up 5 construction Kens by himself. I know I'm overthinking it here but I'm just disappointed in how lazy their criticisms are. Like someone can write a bad essay about a book they were supposed to read, while their opinions might be terrible they could still demonstrate they read the text and understand it, but reactionaries can't even invest that much energy which thankfully, makes their points far less persuasive in the process.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:
I was under the impression the construction workers were from the real world under the orders of Mattel to not let any more Barbies (or Kens) from escaping.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:It's funny because there were parts you'd think reactionaries would latch on to but they got too distracted by pink feminism. Like how Ken learns Patriarchy exists yet fails to get a job as an executive, doctor or lifeguard. If feminists are so right then he'd be able to get those jobs no problem! Yet he gets rebuffed each time, with the implication that under a meritocracy he would actually have to objectively prove his competence, which he obviously can't do. The Quartering could easily make some three hour video essay "12 ways the Barbie movie proves feminism is BULLSHIT" yet they miss that opportunity because they're not willing to dig deep enough. Reactionaries don’t require themselves to engage with the text because their worldview does not require them to engage with the world as is, but merely as a straw man they can continue to antagonize/be antagonized by
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
Android Apocalypse posted:I was under the impression the construction workers were from the real world under the orders of Mattel to not let any more Barbies (or Kens) from escaping. I picked up that they were Kens since they didn’t know how walls work, which was one of my favourite gags of the film
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Reactionaries don’t require themselves to engage with the text because their worldview does not require them to engage with the world as is, but merely as a straw man they can continue to antagonize/be antagonized by Also you cannot construct any kind of coherent critique if you are willfully illiterate and contemptuous of reading.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Flux Wildly posted:I picked up that they were Kens since they didn’t know how walls work, which was one of my favourite gags of the film " We need to hurry and do something before they figure out how to build that wall horizontally! " lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
Loved the movie. Really surprised they released a Barbie movie where the target audience isn't eight year old girls. It opens with a 2001 homage and ends on a vagina joke. But I'm not complaining. There's a bit of thematic inconsistency with the Mattel guys; a lot of the movie is explicitly about the nuances and uncomfortableness of being human but Will Ferrell is more a cartoon than anyone in Barbieland. I think the movie made the right choice there though; cartoon Will Ferrell is a lot funnier than the alternative, and I'll take a few laughs in favor of thematic consistency. I literally thought there would be a reveal that Will Ferrell was a Ken who'd left Barbieland, explaining why he was the way he was. But nope, he's just like that. Albatrossy_Rodent fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Jul 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
Albatrossy_Rodent posted:I literally thought there would be a reveal that Will Ferrell was a Ken who'd left Barbieland, explaining why he was the way he was. But nope, he's just like that. I was thinking that too, I wonder if that was a plot point that got excised. Anyway, movie great, definitely want to watch it again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
I don’t think you’re supposed to read THAT deeply - Will Farrell is a caricature of a CEO
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
1st AD posted:I don’t think you’re supposed to read THAT deeply - Will Farrell is a caricature of a CEO Not really? He seems really earnest and is best friends with all twenty of his executives, who talk in unison and enjoy mob roller skating with their boss. He's the Bert to an Ernie Hydra.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
We don't know if they enjoy roller blading, that's just a requirement to get to Barbieland.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
Albatrossy_Rodent posted:There's a bit of thematic inconsistency with the Mattel guys; a lot of the movie is explicitly about the nuances and uncomfortableness of being human but Will Ferrell is more a cartoon than anyone in Barbieland. I thought it was part of the commentary that all the Mattel employees are silly men acting like generic Businessman dolls despite being in The Real World, implying that corporate existence is just another kind of Barbieland filled with bubbleheaded Ken-types. The only exceptions are two women (Gloria and Ruth). Fun fact I learned after the movie: Ruth Handler isn’t just the creator of Barbie, she’s one of the three co-founders of Mattel. The other two are her husband and his business partner, and Mattel is named after the combination of their names. Ruth was, of course, somehow left out of the corporate name-making process.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 02:00
|
|
|
Halisnacks posted:
Cojawfee posted:It's definitely weird. For boys, a horse is just an accessory to a cowboy or a knight. Girls are the ones where the horse is the main toy or just as important as the main toy. That was a weird a aspect to the movie. Horses are symbolic of power, nobility, obedience, and man’s objectification of living creatures. Its an accessory to the cowboy theme, but for Ken it’s simply a fascination with what he discovered in the real world after seeing cops riding horses and checking out a big (picture) book on war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 06:36
|
|
|
Computer Serf posted:That sorta seems like the point. Ken is ironically more oppressed by design of Mattels objectification of Ken as more like an accessory. Ken then just becomes obsessed with the bimbofied idea of a horse as an accessory to men, like all he knows is objectification and power dynamics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 08:19
|
|
|
Expecting a right-wing review to actually engage with the film is pointless because they were never going to engage with it in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 08:47
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:I thought it was part of the commentary that all the Mattel employees are silly men acting like generic Businessman dolls despite being in The Real World, implying that corporate existence is just another kind of Barbieland filled with bubbleheaded Ken-types. The only exceptions are two women (Gloria and Ruth). 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 09:32
|
|
|
Disco Pope posted:Expecting a right-wing review to actually engage with the film is pointless because they were never going to engage with it in good faith. I'm not the first person to notice this, not by a long shot, but a lot of conservatives are unable to understand art on anything besides the most basic level because they lack any kind of empathy for the artist or for characters presented within the work. This movie has done an incredible job of making those people clown on themselves again and again because they refuse to actually challenge their own narrow worldview.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:Also note that Ken specifically does a dance-off set to 80s music because one of the glimpses of masculinity he saw in the real world was John Travolta doing the same. It's thematically consistent for his idea of masculinity to be deeply flawed and based on misunderstood snippets. Maybe this is a broader question than appropriate for the Barbie Movie thread, but has there been any theorising on the process of erstwhile (hetero) masculine things becoming queer-coded over time?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
Halisnacks posted:Maybe this is a broader question than appropriate for the Barbie Movie thread, but has there been any theorising on the process of erstwhile (hetero) masculine things becoming queer-coded over time? This kind of reminds me of how hetero-masculinity seems to be constantly contracting over time, because at one extreme looking/acting "too" macho will give the implication you are trying to attract the "wrong" kind of attention. So at one point things like speedos or shirts with midriffs were considered suitably masculine, but over time these things came off as "gay" because it was assumed only gay men would be interested in seeing another man's abs or quads in that context. So being manly enough has a constant sunk cost to it, the subject has to constantly stay on top of the moving target that encompasses masculinity and heteronormativity. The man will never be manly Enough, never be straight enough, it is an endless struggle over time. Which makes sense in how Ken was reassured that he was "Kenoigh"- he doesn't need to have the validation of Barbie nor be the Superior Ken. Which is why I find Alan so charming; he's Ken's (under appreciated) friend, he doesn't need to be more Ken than Ken, he doesn't need Barbie to love him. He's just Alan, and that's all right. Perhaps that explains why he was so supportive of the Barbies--he doesn't need a Kensurrection to assert his place in the hierarchy, I feel like he's happy with who he is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:This kind of reminds me of how hetero-masculinity seems to be constantly contracting over time, because at one extreme looking/acting "too" macho will give the implication you are trying to attract the "wrong" kind of attention. So at one point things like speedos or shirts with midriffs were considered suitably masculine, but over time these things came off as "gay" because it was assumed only gay men would be interested in seeing another man's abs or quads in that context. Just as the patriarchy hurts men, heteronormativity hurts straight people. Although I do wonder if it’s always contracting in one direction: it feels like wearing pink or skinny jeans eventually became acceptable in straight masculinity. quote:Which is why I find Alan so charming; he's Ken's (under appreciated) friend, he doesn't need to be more Ken than Ken, he doesn't need Barbie to love him. He's just Alan, and that's all right. Perhaps that explains why he was so supportive of the Barbies--he doesn't need a Kensurrection to assert his place in the hierarchy, I feel like he's happy with who he is. Alan seems happy with himself, but not necessarily happy with where he is or his position in Kendom and even (although to a much lesser extent) Barbieland. His whole attempted escape to the real world read to me as a queer kid who is secure in the self-knowledge of their identity but knows they need to leave their hometown to find their tribe in the big city.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 19:38
|
|
|
When I was in high school wearing pink and wearing short shorts was done to be loud and disruptive by the kids who did it. They only threw that on during spirit days or something like that Now that’s just the style
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
A Fancy Hat posted:...a lot of conservatives are unable to understand art on anything besides the most basic level because they lack any kind of empathy for the artist or for characters presented within the work. Yes, or to understand irony, subtext, or any complexity of tone or meaning that isn't made explicitly obvious within the narrative. The idea that the Barbie movie is 100% sincere about its hyperbolic and often satirical commentary on gender is an absolutely insane perspective. I saw this last night, so sorry if this conversation already happened up-thread. But I find it pretty funny that this actually does bear a more-than-passing thematic and plot resemblance to Blade Runner 2049. An artificial person (who's also explicitly a commodity and has a very rigid behavioral purpose) begins to experience unwanted emotional disturbances that seriously violate her prescribed social role, to the horror and anger of the corporation that built her, leading to a pursuit to try and retire her and a ton of hand-wringing about blurring the imaginary line between the artificial and real world. Both end with the revelation that the difference between a fake person and a "real" person is ultimately self-identity and the assertion of agency. Also, she takes along a partner - another artificial person who's supplemental and fully dependent on her - only instead of him being replaced by a menacing, black-eyed, giant, nude doppelganger, this one turns into Andrew Tate. The "Ryan Gosling is in a relationship with a doll" trilogy is actually pretty solid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:I thought it was part of the commentary that all the Mattel employees are silly men acting like generic Businessman dolls despite being in The Real World, implying that corporate existence is just another kind of Barbieland filled with bubbleheaded Ken-types. The only exceptions are two women (Gloria and Ruth). That’s not precisely it, because the Kens are not really human and just represent the idea of a doll. Will Ferrel, as a contrast, is human (albeit a dumb guy). So, just to recap the premise of the Matrix trilogy: in an abstract post-apocalyptic future-time, robots develop a life-support system for humanity. There’s debate within the films as to why the robots are doing this, but it’s most likely to serve as a type of wildlife preserve for the dying humanity. The robots’ system is run by a variety of hyperintelligent AIs who behave like angels, and the whole thing is an allegory for Gnosticism. When an angelic AI malfunctions, it is “cast down to Earth”: exiled to the matrix system, where it can be contained inside a humanoid avatar. The Gnostic demiurge polices reality from a magical skyscraper, using “agents” who appear as men in black suits. This is conspiracy theory imagery - thematic overlap with the movie Men In Black, which uses aliens in place of AIs, to the same effect: “Every time you've heard someone say they saw a ghost, or an angel. Every story you've ever heard about vampires, werewolves, or aliens, is the system assimilating some program that's doing something they're not supposed to be doing.” Anyways, the point is that the matrix just straightforwardly is reality on Earth. It’s our everyday symbolic reality, where there is a capitalist system, smog, pollution, etc. And this means that, when Barbie travels to “the real world”, she is actually entering the matrix - cast in the role of a malfunctioning AI. And, more importantly, this means Gloria is an MIB - a rogue agent. When told that a woman is walking around claiming to be Barbie, Gloria immediately understands the situation and the stakes. She knew, from the very beginning, that Barbieland exists. But this is where the story differs from Matrix, because Will Ferrel’s character isn’t the demiurge in charge of all reality. He’s just one among thousands of human CEOs influencing humanity through individual IPs and brands. There’s absolutely nothing special about him, except that he controls access to the Barbie IP - which makes him magical to Gloria. He holds enormous influence over Gloria’s sense of reality and sense of self. She thinks that working at Mattel grants her special powers. But, as with any conspiracy theory, the paranoid fantasy is used to make sense of a more complicated reality. A reality where, for example, Barbie dolls are made in factories owned by capitalists who exploit workers. The CEO is not a fun guy. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jul 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 02:10
|
|
|
Only ever seen this happen this quick for limited/indie expansions https://twitter.com/ERCboxoffice/status/1684687106856398855
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 03:05
|
|
|
I thought it was brilliant. Brilliant. Everything was amazing -- the sets, the acting, the writing, how constantly unpredictable it was, but what's sticking with me is the final perfect flourish of how the Kens end up. Because, y'know, their existence is demonstrably unfair, right? Ken has valid grievances, they're apparently all homeless, they're defined by their possessions and more than that, their Barbies, they're not allowed to be everything because they're not allowed to be anything. And at the climax, when you see the party in the Supreme Court and Stereotypical Barbie looks really unenthused, you think oh okay, she's going to speak up and point out that they're replacing one unjust system with another, and then no, they just go ahead and do it and cheerfully kick the Kens back out of sight and out of mind. It's intentionally building up the male audience members into a #NotAllMen huff of wanting justice for them, and then the narrator steps in with this absolutely merciless stilleto to the lungs. "Oh, don't worry about the Kens. They'll get as much power in Barbieland as women have in the real world!" loving perfect. You're mad about the fake injustices suffered by fictional characters? Great, here's all the power. Go fix it. Also, I don't have much of an ear for accents, but does Margo Robbie drop the California-speak and start letting her real accent slip in once Stereotypical Barbie suffers her existential crisis? It really sounded like it to me. Regardless, it was an amazing acting job. After she goes face-down in the fake grass, she somehow never looks like Barbie again, despite still being literally the same person with the same face.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 04:09
|
|
|
Vaguely related but all the Barbie skits that SNL did were hilarious. Barbie grilling Skipper about the action figures she's hanging out with:  "Did he touch your Made in China?"Which also reminds me that I think Weird Barbie had a thing for Beach Ken, pretty sure she said something like "I'd like to get under his shorts and get my hands over that featureless bulge he's got underneath!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 05:33
|
|
|
doesn't Ken actually drop a line later that he found out horses don't have anything to do with masculinity or whatever, that he just likes him regardless
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
GateOfD posted:doesn't Ken actually drop a line later that he found out horses don't have anything to do with masculinity or whatever, that he just likes him regardless Just watched last night- I think he said something like, “When I learned the patriarchy wasn’t about horses, I lost interest”
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
He says he lost interest in patriarchy when he found out it has very little to do with horses I also thought I heard Robbie's real accent during the Billie Eilish song at the end
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
Another small detail I just recalled: when the Kens are explaining finance to the Barbies, it’s all about bonds and CDs, in line with the more dated stereotypes of masculinity in Gloria’s head, rather than stonks/crypto. I think it works for the film, but I guess I don’t really get why Gloria’s view of masculinity would have crystallised so sharply as (presumably) a young child. She’s a millennial woman who stopped forming opinions of what it means to be masculine despite growing up and living in LA, dating and finding a partner, working in a corporate environment, having a kid, etc.?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
Yeah, I would’ve loved it if that scene was just idiot bros explaining NFTs. Hopefully poorly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 19:29
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:movie getting an interesting reception in china:https://thechinaproject.com/2023/07/25/in-china-barbie-triggers-heated-discussions-on-patriarchy-and-feminism/ Here's a review that's been doing the rounds on Chinese social media (translated from the Chinese): quote:A boy in the front spent the whole time explaining the movie to his female companion, including but not limited to: "This is a tribute to 2001: A Space Odyssey", who Proust was, what the meaning of existentialism was, the role of horses in American culture, and Ken's hobbies. When the point in the movie came where Ken was explaining the plot of The Godfather to Barbie, his female companion coldly asked him "does that remind you of anyone?". The boy then, most likely offended, got up and left without a word.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 21:47
|
|
|
We went and saw this earlier this week, me writing it off as a poppy bubbly chick movie that won't really have any substance. and... man, they got me. And I did not expect that. I liked the Barbie movie. I loved the Barbie movie. I haven't been that invested in a movie for a hell of a long time and I am so conflicted over that. Also I aboohoohoo'd very softly into my service dog over the part where Ruth is talking to Barbie in that void. That is some extremely deep creator vibes and they nailed the hell out of that. The beginning of Up! didn't get me, but that did. Good job, y'got me. Also the music got me to buy the album. I haven't bought an album for a movie in at least a decade. Basically, my brain is a sparkly pink empowered rage machine right now and it's delightful and it's because I went and saw a loving Barbie movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 22:09
|
|
|
I boohooed, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 22:34
|
|
|
Hot drat, I loved this movie. As a former Marine, the depiction of amphibious warfare was both brilliant and brutal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Which is why I find Alan so charming; he's Ken's (under appreciated) friend, he doesn't need to be more Ken than Ken, he doesn't need Barbie to love him. He's just Alan, and that's all right. Perhaps that explains why he was so supportive of the Barbies--he doesn't need a Kensurrection to assert his place in the hierarchy, I feel like he's happy with who he is. The only thing that sat off to me about this film was that Alan doesn't really get any resolution. He wants to get the gently caress outta Barbie land, but then is brought back and then disappears from the movie, unless I missed something. It's also a somewhat odd juxtaposition that the film makes him a punching bag for the full run, but goes to great length to note that people are good just the way they are. Like "everyone has beauty", but also "this weirdo tho, have at it". Him beating up the construction workers wan't really a turn for him, iirc they make more jokes at his expense in the wrap up. (Still loved it, and think it's brilliant, as mentioned elsewhere) edit: also, huh, they got Slash for the guitar on the big rock ballad. CatstropheWaitress fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Jul 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
any watchers actually had the toys, were you like "ohhh" when seeing ones you had as a kid that were thrown in the background thru out the movie
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2023 01:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
GateOfD posted:any watchers actually had the toys, were you like "ohhh" when seeing ones you had as a kid that were thrown in the background thru out the movie My girlfriend pointed out every Barbie and accessory she owned 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2023 02:43
|
|