It was fecking terrible. I’ll admit that I didn’t expect to like it, but I expected to be able to see the quality, even if it wasn’t to my tastes. There were a handful of decent scenes, mainly involving Ken; but that was it. Was a struggle to even finish it. The first half of the movie is okay, but the second half is just atrocious. Do not understand the hype at all.
Film Greta Gerwig's BARBIE (Margot Robbie/Ryan Gosling)
- Thread starter Salt Bailly
- Start date
They needed somebody like Mike Judge to do a polish on the script, or even Trey Parker and Matt Stone. It didn't have to be profane (as those choices would have done), but they understand how to subvert convention. It was tame and after the second half it became basically a SNL goof off shit fest. They did not stick the landing, they landed the airplane in a fecking tree, basically.You should have heard what my wife thought of it
The very end was just a bit cringeworth. The rest of the last third of the film was the true disaster.
Ken, who did like the matriarcy, discovers patriarch and goes back and imposses it on all, by telling previously independent women what to do, which apparently instantly brainwashed them. Barbie solves it by reimposing total matriarcy again and blah blah blah. The ghost of Barbie's creator appears to say women can be whatever they want (as long as ... children) and Barbie becomes a real girl with a reproductive system.
Oh yes. And the daughter who originally hated Barbie for all the usual/right reasons almost instantly ends up as a Barbie cheerleader wearing pink because .... reason.
Casting was good but it could have been actually clever and subversive (and much funnier) but it was just dumb and dumber still.
Started watching it. Stopped watching it after 10 minutes.
I find once you've came, you lose all interest
I think this is rather accurate, and I feel that a lot of people are not liking for not being something it never tried to be, or by creating imaginary scarecrows of reasons in their mind. It was a fine film. Not the best of the year - that was Aftersun - but amongst the best.
It wasn't the subversive female empowerment comedy film that it was sold as, but worse than that it ended up being outright misogynist. It could have been great but was almost insultingly terrible. Sadly.
It really wasn't misogynist, that's a downright insane take.
And it wasn't terrible by any stretch of the imagination.
As for the bolded - by whom? Marketing? Some critics that saw in it what they wanted to? Because I saw a million different takes about what it was and what it wasn't, and what Gerwig and Baumbach were saying to us and weren't saying to us, which were just people's opinion on the film and not what the actual writers/director said.
The whole last third of the film was wildly misogynist. And the end even more so.
And a huge part of the marketing of this film was that it subverted the awful original Barbie doll ideology. In the end it just further promoted it.
It really, really wasn't. I have no idea how you could come away with that impression.
I dunno. Maybe because it was. And all of the women I knew who watched it hated it for the same reasons.
Intelligent women (albeit ones who dominate men) suddenly became subservient because Ken. Then the solution was a reversion to matriarcy. Followed by the nauseating, "you can be a real girl" ending.
Re: all the different takes. I think this would match up well with the symbolic nature of Barbie because arguably it's never been a product that has any particular function except reflecting what people want it to be. I wonder if Gerwig's lack of a focus and movement away from dogmatic ideas (if Wibble is to be believed about its flipflopping towards the end) was meant to mirror that, which in all honesty would be quite smart if a little pessimistic. It's something I find is generally the case when it comes to marketing products in 2k23 where it's not really about telling people what something is anymore but about positioning the consumer in a way where they believe a product can fill any number of roles depending on their individual motivation.
Admittedly I haven't seen the movie so I could be talking out of my arse but it really does sound like this movie can be many different things depending on the viewer's position.
Formless is a word I wanted to use.
Admittedly I haven't seen the movie so I could be talking out of my arse but it really does sound like this movie can be many different things depending on the viewer's position.
Formless is a word I wanted to use.
I know what I was hoping for with this movie was a post-modernist take on gender roles. Sort of. I expected more from Gerwig and Baumbach. I was hoping for more of a deconstruction and then a celebration of the product, as was done in The Lego Movie. The Lego Movie had no right to be as funny and clever as it was. Maybe Lord & Miller should have done Barbie, because at the end of the film, it was little more than a commercial.
Once Will Farrell started hogging the screen, the movie died. The Barbie world was set up to contrast with the real world, but when they start showing the Mattel execs and Will Farrell, there is no "real world" and it's all farcical nonsense played as broadly as possible. If the Mattel execs exist in the same dimension as the doctors and cops did, then when Ken shows up and asks to perform a surgery because he's male - they would have let him do it. I think this speaks to the choppiness of the film, of the uneven narrative.
We also have big screen stars (Robbie, Gosling) doing funny but nuanced performances, then they are weighed down by TV hacks. Kate McKinnon sucks and so does Will Farrell, their years of mugging on SNL has rendered them incapable of any other style of "acting".
I think the biggest problem with the film is how it attempted to critique patriarchy. I think this is the "misogynist" part @Wibble was talking about. In Barbieland, women run everything and the males are props, which is a reverse image of the worst aspects of the real world. However, once Ken discoversthe patriarchy horses, he immediately adopts the worst aspects of "toxic masculinity" - and the Barbie women eat it up. They go from Supreme Court / Doctor / Lawyer / Scientist Barbie to French Maid outfit Barbie serving beer. There's no reason it happens, it just does. This ignores a lot of things about the real world, which is namely that the patriarchy is fueled by exploiting women. So: this isn't an area a film for little girls (and the little girls who grew up) to dwell on. They sort of touch on it, the songs sort of allude to it, it's all very "meta" and wink-wink, speaking different text to adults than children, but at the end of the day it was a 2 hour fecking commercial.
No matter how much one likes Gerwig, Robbie, Gosling, whatever, it's still a commercial. The fact that NYC indie darling Gerwig made it, gave many of us (me) hope that she would really stand this thing on its head. Instead, Barbie is suddenly overcome with the thoughts of dying, and it leads to whatever qualifies as plot in this film. I'm thinking way too much about a product that ultimately is as substantive as cotton candy and meant to be taken as seriously as a disco pop song.
It's not a great movie, it's barely above average. I think Gosling was great and the Ken songs were great. I'd give it a C, or like a 6/10. My opinion has changed somewhat the longer it's been since I actually watched it. The fact they are trying to pump Gerwig for Best Director and Gosling for Supporting Actor makes me feel that the backlash is in full swing.
Once Will Farrell started hogging the screen, the movie died. The Barbie world was set up to contrast with the real world, but when they start showing the Mattel execs and Will Farrell, there is no "real world" and it's all farcical nonsense played as broadly as possible. If the Mattel execs exist in the same dimension as the doctors and cops did, then when Ken shows up and asks to perform a surgery because he's male - they would have let him do it. I think this speaks to the choppiness of the film, of the uneven narrative.
We also have big screen stars (Robbie, Gosling) doing funny but nuanced performances, then they are weighed down by TV hacks. Kate McKinnon sucks and so does Will Farrell, their years of mugging on SNL has rendered them incapable of any other style of "acting".
I think the biggest problem with the film is how it attempted to critique patriarchy. I think this is the "misogynist" part @Wibble was talking about. In Barbieland, women run everything and the males are props, which is a reverse image of the worst aspects of the real world. However, once Ken discovers
No matter how much one likes Gerwig, Robbie, Gosling, whatever, it's still a commercial. The fact that NYC indie darling Gerwig made it, gave many of us (me) hope that she would really stand this thing on its head. Instead, Barbie is suddenly overcome with the thoughts of dying, and it leads to whatever qualifies as plot in this film. I'm thinking way too much about a product that ultimately is as substantive as cotton candy and meant to be taken as seriously as a disco pop song.
It's not a great movie, it's barely above average. I think Gosling was great and the Ken songs were great. I'd give it a C, or like a 6/10. My opinion has changed somewhat the longer it's been since I actually watched it. The fact they are trying to pump Gerwig for Best Director and Gosling for Supporting Actor makes me feel that the backlash is in full swing.
Good post, pretty much this.
And this.
Essentially it was a movie about transitioning, literally and figuratively. Failed the landing on both counts.
She's great
Watched it on a flight a few days ago and I have to say I really enjoyed it. A little facile at times but I think it wrote its message large enough for everyone to get it. Even if it's a little unclear at times what 'it' was.
I thought it was entertaining and the ‚feminist message’ should not be taken too seriously. It was quite different and funny.
Meh, do you pay much attention to these kind of awards? It's mostly lobbying and posturing.
What other screenolays was it up against?
Honestly not really. The best films rarely even get nominated(The correct winner should have been Ferrari). Although I did like that Paul Giamatti won best actor for the Holdovers.
I think the contradictions and strange feminism of the film make it a great and interesting watch but a screenplay it’s proper shite and confused.
May December
Air
Maestro
The Holdovers
Past Lives
I’ve only seen The Holdovers and Past Lives.
I haven't watched the Holdovers yet but really want to. Air and Maestro don't interest me at all, and Past Lives is wonderful - that would have been a worthy nod for Celine Song.
Reminded me of Planes, Trains and Automobiles. A really funny comedy with a lot of heart. Definitely will be Christmas classic in the future
Giamatti and Dominic Sessa are brilliant together on screen. Also maybe because there were so many biopics of historical figures this year. It was nice to see Giamatti performance of just a normal dude.
I would be interested in reading your review. I wanted to like it especially with the Cat Power and Sharon Van Etten soundtrack. But it didn’t click with me for whatever reason.
If I want to see two people unable to feck each other I watch In The Mood Love for the millionth time!
I thought it wasn't out yet here in Spain but turns out it is so I might go soon - or when I'm back in Paris next week, my brother hasn't seen it either and apparently fancies it.
Honestly, I'd find it hard to say exactly what about it I liked most, it was more an overall positive feeling of it. It felt very grounded I felt, the performances and chemistry between the various characters felt quite organic. I loved the lead actress, just bullish enough to be charming without being overly annoying - and I loved how understated so many plot points were. The relationship between her childhood friend and her husband, the awkwardness of it all, the cultural divide that had grown between Nora and Hae Sung... Little touches like him still calling her Na Young... The overarching "past lives" Korean theme that felt quite poetic.
I had been told it was quite similar in tone to Aftersun by a friend, which I don't quite get - and I don't think it's quite as good as Aftersun - but I think it's a pretty little film that works really well for what it's doing, if that makes sense. It definitely works well if you're "charmed" by it, because there's no bells and whistles (with regards to the In the mood for love comparison, if you don't particularly like the story, you're still mesmerized by how aesthetically beautiful it is - this isn't the case here).
Cheers for the review. I definitely agree with you but that’s sort why I didn’t connect with it. It’s a very subtle well made film but almost everything felt too perfect.
The performances are great but everyone was so nice all the time. Their reactions to the situation was respectable, thoughtful, claim and considerate. As if they sat through 100 therapy sessions on the power of mindfulness. Which was interesting to see but enrage my inner catholic guilt.
The moment she recommends eternal sunshine of the spotless mind and then he watches it is very sweet and but of course she chooses that film! Even the characters taste in movies is too perfect. I wanted her to recommend Showgirls or Terminator 2. I wanted something to undercut the upper class writer schtick but it never happened.
There wasn’t one scene where she goes off to the toilet to rub one out to a picture of the
hot Korean guy while her dork husband is sleeping. It needed more filth and anger for me. Although this might just be my bitterness towards upper middle class city dwellers
Last edited:
Nah I get what you didn't like about it, it makes sense. I guess I was just in the right mood for it (you might say, I was in the mood... for love) and it connected well.
to her potentially recommending Showgirls to him, that would have been quite the twist. If she'd recommended him a Mann marathon and he'd traveled to the US with a mullet, you'd be heralding it as the best film of the year, wouldn't you?Yeah I definitely can see why people like it and maybe me watching it at 4am along side a bottle of Jameson whiskey wasn’t the neutral setting.
And it’s never mentioned by the two characters. A silent nod and acknowledgment between the two is all that is needed while the husband looks on utterly confused. The bar scene is them discussing in Korean why in ideological terms it makes perfect sense for Neil Mccauley to kill Waingro instead of escaping.
Yeah I definitely can see why people like it and maybe me watching it at 4am along side a bottle of Jameson whiskey wasn’t the neutral setting.
And it’s never mentioned by the two characters. A silent nod and acknowledgment between the two is all that is needed while the husband looks on utterly confused. The bar scene is them discussing in Korean why in ideological terms it makes perfect sense for Neil Mccauley to kill Waingro instead of escaping.
The Jameson setting! Love it. Not quite how I'd imagine appreciating it, but hey!As for the rest - any film that doesn't directly reference Mann is shit, I agree.