Barbie (2023)

Moothead2 said:
Everything that challenges your world view is pRopAgAnDa these days :cry: *snip - quote about Barbies having prestigious jobs and Ken just being Ken*

Imagine being livid over this.
Click to expand...

The funny thing about this clearly ‘before watching the film’ complaint is that…

… Ken’s lack of importance / nobody caring about men in the Barbie world is what drives him to be the main antagonist.

In the end, the Barbies recognise they treat all the Ken’s terribly and offer to integrate them into their shared society… but only slowly and not making things 50:50 right away (the Kens want 50:50 judges on the Supreme Court but the Barbies only allow them to have one judge in a lower court, which the Ken’s are really grateful for). The narrator then concludes that hopefully one day in the far future the Ken’s and real life women may have some semblance of real equality :o :p

Quite smart really - I liked it.
 
Nitefly said:
… Ken’s lack of importance / nobody caring about men in the Barbie world is what drives him to be the main antagonist.

In the end, the Barbies recognise they treat all the Ken’s terribly and offer to integrate them into their shared society… but only slowly and not making things 50:50 right away (the Kens want 50:50 judges on the Supreme Court but the Barbies only allow them to have one judge in a lower court, which the Ken’s are really grateful for). The narrator then concludes that hopefully one day in the far future the Ken’s and real life women may have some semblance of real equality :o :p

Quite smart really - I liked it.
Click to expand...

So just to clarify -

If viewed as a mirror to society through the ages - the Ken's started off as pre-1900's women i.e. with no importance within the matriarchy of Barbie World, then in the middle-2/3's they begin their fight for equal rights as per 1920's women, then by the end of the film they've started to gain a few positions of power as per 1970's women and then the film ends at that point with Barbie World (which sits alongside real life in 2023 correct?) as a mirror to 1970's, or 50 years behind where equality is right now, with a voice over to say "maybe one day Barbie World will be where the real world is today".

And the audience should recognise that this current Barbie World situation is an allegory to the 1970's, and not current times, maybe as an education piece to young girls of today as an example of just how far we've come in those last 50 years and how positive the outlook is for young girls today compared to how the current Barbie World looks for the Kens which is an equivalent to where their grandmothers started, maybe giving women both young and old something to bond over - Am I right or am I over-thinking this?

I'm obviously not the target audience so I won't be watching this but, as I thought you did a good job explaining Indy 5 for me along the same lines, I was hoping you'd do the same again because the reviews I've read so far really seem to identify with your "people will hate it without understanding it" bits.
 
Last edited:
ianh said:
So just to clarify -

If viewed as a mirror to society through the ages - the Ken's started off as pre-1900's women i.e. with no importance within the matriarchy of Barbie World, then in the middle-2/3's they begin their fight for equal rights as per 1920's women, then by the end of the film they've started to gain a few positions of power as per 1970's women and then the film ends at that point with Barbie World (which sits alongside real life in 2023 correct?) as a mirror to 1970's, or 50 years behind where equality is right now, with a voice over to say "maybe one day Barbie World will be where the real world is today".

And the audience should recognise that this current Barbie World situation is an allegory to the 1970's, and not current times, maybe as an education piece to young girls of today as an example of just how far we've come in those last 50 years and how positive the outlook is for young girls today compared to how the current Barbie World looks for the Kens which is an equivalent to where their grandmothers started, maybe giving women both young and old something to bond over - Am I right or am I over-thinking this?

I'm obviously not the target audience so I won't be watching this but, as I thought you did a good job explaining Indy 5 for me along the same lines, I was hoping you'd do the same again because the reviews I've read so far really seem to identify with your "people will hate it without understanding it" bits.
Click to expand...

The most important thing to say is that it’s all predominantly played for comedy and giggles. So you may be overthinking it slightly!

In the film, the Kens effectively revolt and ‘Barbie Land’ becomes a hyper masculine ‘Ken-dom’, informed from Ken’s naive empowerment of being a man in the real world. As it was, in Barbie lane nobody cared that they didn’t even have homes, nor any professional jobs (unlike the Barbies).

Prior to this, Barbie (Robbie M) - happy, positive and ‘happy to be a role model for woman’ - has travelled to the real world to understand why she is suddenly thinking very un-Barbie thoughts about death. During her visit, she generally has an absolutely terrible time of it, being treated like a bimbo and rinsed by children for being an absolutely terrible role model: a promotor of needless consumption, unfulfillable dreams and ruiner of woman’s self image for decades. What follows for Barbie is basically an exploration about how being woman is not just being ‘pre-determined to be an astronaut’ and succeeding at everything, but largely a giant mess which she finds tragic but must overcome to transcend to ‘becoming a human’. Likewise, the Kens have to grow as well.

From all angles, it’s as much about mental health as it is about feminism and masculinity - it borders on touching in its better moments.

Meanwhile, the future equality of opportunity stuff re: judges is a throwaway jibe that’s played for comedic effect (I presume in the context of men saying it’s unfair to have positive discrimination - which is not unreasonable but it means that things can be frustratingly slow, much like how in real life it can take generations for society to change), which IMO was pretty funny tbh.

^edited.
 
Last edited:
Nitefly said:
The most important thing to say is that it’s all predominantly played for comedy and giggles. So you may be overthinking it slightly!

In the film, the Kens effectively revolt and ‘Barbie Land’ becomes a hyper masculine ‘Ken-dom’, informed from Ken’s naive empowerment of being a man in the real world. As it was, in Barbie lane nobody cared that they didn’t even have homes, nor any professional jobs (unlike the Barbies).

Prior to this, Barbie (Robbie M) - happy, positive and ‘happy to be a role model for woman’ - has travelled to the real world to understand why she is suddenly thinking very un-Barbie thoughts about death. During her visit, she generally has an absolutely terrible time of it, being treated like a bimbo and rinsed by children for being an absolutely terrible role model: a promotor of needless consumption, unfulfillable dreams and ruiner of woman’s self image for decades. What follows for Barbie is basically an exploration about how being woman is not just being ‘pre-determined to be an astronaut’ and succeeding at everything, but largely a giant mess which she finds tragic but must overcome to transcend to ‘becoming a human’. Likewise, the Kens have to grow as well.

From all angles, it’s as much about mental health as it is about feminism and masculinity - it borders on touching in its better moments.

Meanwhile, the future equality of opportunity stuff re: judges is a throwaway jibe that’s played for comedic effect (I presume in the context of men saying it’s unfair to have positive discrimination - which is not unreasonable but it means that things can be frustratingly slow, much like how in real life it can take generations for society to change), which IMO was pretty funny tbh.

^edited.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Again, even though I'm never going to see this I still like to see various reviews from a range of YT movie reviewers and had recently seen the Critical Drinker's review which sparked my interest. My views on films are usually close to his, despite a few differences over individual films, but with his last 2 reviews (Indy 5 which we chatted about before and now this) it feels like a lot of the severely negative reviews, such a CD's, are based way more around hyperbole around a single issue than his previous reviews i.e "the screenwriters detest all men" etc whilst ignoring all other good and/or bad aspects of it.

This level of hyperbole, to me at least, felt excessive rather than being earned with this appearing to be a middling 4/10 to 7/10 film from most folks (once you take the obvious 1/10 and 10/10 review bombing away) with many of the usual "modern film" problems (flat jokes, poor script, confused messaging etc) being reported by other the reviewers I also tend to agree with over "good/bad" films, such as Jeremy Jahns, Chris Stuckmann & Penguinz0 (Charlie) etc, only minus the hyperbole.

I suppose I'm saying that I think that, in particular, lots of the recent negative reviews aren't as clear as they should have been at reviewing a film, as they've been hyper focused onto 1 single issue (male treatment by female writers) at the expense of a wider critique of the entire film as a whole i.e. what else is it bad at outside of that single issue etc.
 
Last edited:
Efour said:
The level at which some of my favourite reviewers have gone at Barbie, which i enjoyed, has "woken" me to the fact their brand is more important than a good review.
Click to expand...
It’s the same for all of those types of channel, they don’t get views for saying something is “ok” or “has some positives, some negatives”. It has to be a black and white view, able to be summarised in 5 seconds.
 
Efour said:
The level at which some of my favourite reviewers have gone at Barbie, which i enjoyed, has "woken" me to the fact their brand is more important than a good review.
Click to expand...
$155 million USD opening weekend.Probably smashed a few records. Almost double Oppenheimer at $80 million USD. If you'd listened harder to these youtube reviewers you never would have even seen it. I suspect 100's of thousands of their other viewers won't.

I'm still 50/50 on whether I'll watch it (but not cos of the reviews)!


rp2000
 
Last edited:
Just hot back from it, enjoyed it, solid 7 for me, and the previous detailed reviews sum up things pretty well indeed.

The people shouting the loudest have actively chosen to miss the actual messages within the film to get them views/clicks.
 
Darujhistan said:
Do to you think there's a lot of crossover between Barbie The Movie enjoyers and Bronies?

I'd like to see that Venn diagram...

:D
Click to expand...

When My Little Pony rebooted around 2010 time as Friendship Is Magic, it was aimed at young girls like it did in the 1980s, but it backfired and the following was instead middle-aged male basement dwellers. It had a cult like feel to it and for a few years it was everywhere. Every corner you turned there was MLP. Very much like with dubstep music, you couldn't get away from it.

Granted both MLP and Barbie had their own set of memes / internet jokes, and of course Barbie is everywhere at the moment, but it doesn't have that same annoying air about it that MLP did. Barbie's audience (to me) seems to be more across the board as opposed to the cohort of middle-aged males. So yes there will be some Bronies in Barbie's audience, but only a small subset of her audience.
 
rp2000 said:
If you'd listened harder to these youtube reviewers you never would have even seen it. I suspect 100's of thousands of their other viewers won't.
Click to expand...

Yeap I agree. It's almost a certainty that the vast majority of their viewers, like myself, wouldn't be seeing this even if the reviews for it were amazing TBH as it's not just not the kind of film that interests me/them, no matter how amazing it may/may not be.

I would also suggest that, for the vast majority of their viewers, it was probably seen as a "mum & daughter day out" type film anyway rather than a "take the whole family of mum/dad/son/daughter etc" type affair. Irrespective it's not going hurt the box office though as this was always going to be a big success, and therefore unaffected by a few hundred thousand less viewers.

Stu999 said:
It’s the same for all of those types of channel, they don’t get views for saying something is “ok” or “has some positives, some negatives”.
Click to expand...

See, I heavily disagree with your statement there. I would agree that some channels will match your statement but saying that its "all" is a big old sweeping brush to inaccurately tar everyone with there.

Stu999 said:
It’s the same for all of those types of channel, they don’t get views for saying something is “ok” or “has some positives, some negatives”.
Click to expand...

I would say that from my experience a lot of the reviews for various films over the past few years across various reviewers have been exactly the opposite, with lots of "this is great, go see it" or even "I thought this would be bad, buts its actually OK" alongside the "this is terrible" reviews.

I think that the reviewer telling people "I like this film" when the majority of their audience is also mostly to be saying "I also like this film" makes for just as much of a connection between viewer and reviewer as finding films that they both dislike, hence the channels generally have a mix of reviews rather than your suggestion that they "only do bad ones".

Again, some channels are probably just as bad as you suggest, but it's nowhere near the "all those types of channels" that you mention.
 
Efour said:
The level at which some of my favourite reviewers have gone at Barbie, which i enjoyed, has "woken" me to the fact their brand is more important than a good review.
Click to expand...
I've mentioned before that it baffled/amused me that people will state that 'proper' reviewers for papers and movie magazines are paid shills who can't be trusted, yet YouTubers who will literally get paid based on their clicks/watch count (and therefore tweak their content to chase views) are somehow more reliable sources.
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
When My Little Pony rebooted around 2010 time as Friendship Is Magic, it was aimed at young girls like it did in the 1980s, but it backfired and the following was instead middle-aged male basement dwellers. It had a cult like feel to it and for a few years it was everywhere. Every corner you turned there was MLP. Very much like with dubstep music, you couldn't get away from it.

Granted both MLP and Barbie had their own set of memes / internet jokes, and of course Barbie is everywhere at the moment, but it doesn't have that same annoying air about it that MLP did. Barbie's audience (to me) seems to be more across the board as opposed to the cohort of middle-aged males. So yes there will be some Bronies in Barbie's audience, but only a small subset of her audience.
Click to expand...

Tbh I know nothing about MLP or Barbie, I just know about the weird Bronie thing, it came up on Asmon's stream a couple of times, and just thought there's obviously middle aged men going to see Barbie I thought i'd make a joke about some crossover.

:)
 
VincentHanna said:
I've mentioned before that it baffled/amused me that people will state that 'proper' reviewers for papers and movie magazines are paid shills who can't be trusted, yet YouTubers who will literally get paid based on their clicks/watch count (and therefore tweak their content to chase views) are somehow more reliable sources.
Click to expand...
Like newspapers YT movie reviewers find their audience based on shared opinions. If they taint that social contract by posting too many 'wrong' reviews they'll lose audience.

Now you have to ask yourself who out of the proper reviewer's and YT reviewers had a) had to find/win their audience & b) who has more to lose by shilling. Ultimately I make my own mind up on movies but when I'm on the fence and I want some steer I know out of the 2 who's opinion I'd take.
 
Borderline trash borderline ok, it's a 5. If anything is overrated.

Now we need a Ken movie where they have a uprising slaughter 50% of the barbies and force them to work in kitchens. All in the name of art of course which makes it OK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom