Wait, this isn't a film on Klaus Barbie?
For what it's worth, this is much better than Lady Bird and Little Women.
But it's a product more than a film.
Also, many people on the internet said they relate to Barbie or to Ken, or their struggles, or something. But I don't. I don't see myself in there, at all.
As for the more formal side, the film looks quite good, but I didn't like the music. Gosling was good and overshadowed Robbie.
But the real reason this film is crass is that there's no T-Rex Barbie. Even the middling Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse had a Spider T-Rex!
For what it's worth, this is much better than Lady Bird and Little Women.
But it's a product more than a film.
WARNING: "Barbie" spoilers below
An ingenious marketing campaign that earns money from people hating the company while watching a film made by that company. Also, the company itself is portrayed as a bunch of silly, quirky geese, not an evil corporation. They do spew some nonsense but they have to because otherwise their image would be too good! Also, the sales of Barbie toys, also those specifically inspired by the movie, skyrocketed. And those toys were already there to buy when the movie premiered, so it was a deliberate corporate decision to use the movie (that grossed more than a billion) to bring even more money. Even showing Mattel's heads as just men is PR genius. Because in reality, it isn't so. So somebody watches the film, Googles it, and leaves with the thought that Mattel isn't that bad!
I think this film definitely has a progressive/feminist agenda but it swerves to neither side so that everybody can have their own thoughts after seeing it. A more conservative person would be shocked by how little girls destroy the dolls, apparently spiting the traditional role of a mother. However, they'd be surprised by how the movie also says that it's OK if a woman wants to be a mother and how one of the (very remote and unaffecting, by the way) side stories here is a relationship between a mother and her daughter. A progressive person would cheer at how Barbies regained power but jeer at how there's no equality because Kens are refused even one seat in Congress, allegedly just like women are denied that in the real world. A conservative would use that as an argument that this film is woke and whatnot. And then the makers can defend themselves by saying that the movie merely suggests that there's no easy solution to the matriarchy just like there's no easy solution to patriarchy. This is genius marketing-wise. It's just like companies who change their logos to rainbow on social media for Pride Month but NOT in Arab countries.
And now we get to the main idea of Barbie. That Barbieland is somehow the opposite of the real world. A thought experiment is to replace women and men and see how it sticks. And... it doesn't, not really. It makes no sense on several points. So maybe we aren't supposed to do that, and therefore Barbieland is not really the opposite of the real world. So what is it? Like, Kens playing to Barbies. Women don't do that for men. A woman giving a feminist tirade about how hard women have it? Imagine a man saying something like this - OK, it's possible. But before that her daughter gave a similar tirade and it was supposed to be satire? And now it's sincere and genuine. (I guess?!) How do we tell the difference?
My final question is: Why did Barbie choose to be human after all? And the worst thing is I don't give a damn about this faux existentialism! This is no THE WHISPERING STAR where the character truly discovers what it is to be human. This isn't moving. This isn't even fun. I watched this film one hour ago and I can hardly remember its ending. I CAN'T remember its opening scene! Oh, I remembered, the 2001 rip-off I actually mentioned before. LOL.
An ingenious marketing campaign that earns money from people hating the company while watching a film made by that company. Also, the company itself is portrayed as a bunch of silly, quirky geese, not an evil corporation. They do spew some nonsense but they have to because otherwise their image would be too good! Also, the sales of Barbie toys, also those specifically inspired by the movie, skyrocketed. And those toys were already there to buy when the movie premiered, so it was a deliberate corporate decision to use the movie (that grossed more than a billion) to bring even more money. Even showing Mattel's heads as just men is PR genius. Because in reality, it isn't so. So somebody watches the film, Googles it, and leaves with the thought that Mattel isn't that bad!
I think this film definitely has a progressive/feminist agenda but it swerves to neither side so that everybody can have their own thoughts after seeing it. A more conservative person would be shocked by how little girls destroy the dolls, apparently spiting the traditional role of a mother. However, they'd be surprised by how the movie also says that it's OK if a woman wants to be a mother and how one of the (very remote and unaffecting, by the way) side stories here is a relationship between a mother and her daughter. A progressive person would cheer at how Barbies regained power but jeer at how there's no equality because Kens are refused even one seat in Congress, allegedly just like women are denied that in the real world. A conservative would use that as an argument that this film is woke and whatnot. And then the makers can defend themselves by saying that the movie merely suggests that there's no easy solution to the matriarchy just like there's no easy solution to patriarchy. This is genius marketing-wise. It's just like companies who change their logos to rainbow on social media for Pride Month but NOT in Arab countries.
And now we get to the main idea of Barbie. That Barbieland is somehow the opposite of the real world. A thought experiment is to replace women and men and see how it sticks. And... it doesn't, not really. It makes no sense on several points. So maybe we aren't supposed to do that, and therefore Barbieland is not really the opposite of the real world. So what is it? Like, Kens playing to Barbies. Women don't do that for men. A woman giving a feminist tirade about how hard women have it? Imagine a man saying something like this - OK, it's possible. But before that her daughter gave a similar tirade and it was supposed to be satire? And now it's sincere and genuine. (I guess?!) How do we tell the difference?
My final question is: Why did Barbie choose to be human after all? And the worst thing is I don't give a damn about this faux existentialism! This is no THE WHISPERING STAR where the character truly discovers what it is to be human. This isn't moving. This isn't even fun. I watched this film one hour ago and I can hardly remember its ending. I CAN'T remember its opening scene! Oh, I remembered, the 2001 rip-off I actually mentioned before. LOL.
Also, many people on the internet said they relate to Barbie or to Ken, or their struggles, or something. But I don't. I don't see myself in there, at all.
As for the more formal side, the film looks quite good, but I didn't like the music. Gosling was good and overshadowed Robbie.
But the real reason this film is crass is that there's no T-Rex Barbie. Even the middling Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse had a Spider T-Rex!
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.