>Greta Gerwig makes anti-woman, anti-feminist movie
oh boy do we get to go through the Fury Road shit again? "Uhh it's actually making fun of feminists because I didn't like it"
>it's actually making fun of feminists
no.
it outright says:
-women are manipulative
-women do not support each other
-women pressure other women with unrealistic expectations
-women pressure themselves with unrealistic expectations but blame society instead
And it says: >Daughter: "Everyone hates women, men hate women, women hate women, it's the one thing we can all agree on" >Barbie (to Mother): "Is this true?" >Mother: "It - It's complicated. Hate is a strong word." >Daughter: "OH COME ON, MOM!"
then the mother and daughter and Barbies go manipulate the Kens so they can rig an election and return Barbieland to an apartied state.
What is "feminist" about that?
If Michael Bay had written it, he'd be hanging from a streetlight in Beverly Hills.
Except the movie is painting women as the VICTIMS; even victims of themselves. The messaging couldn't be more obvious: We have to be united hyper-feminists because the Patriarchy is the true enemy.
you sweet soul, you haven't been tainted by listening to feminist bullshit
none of those 'bad things' are anti-feminist, because the fundamental tenet of feminism is that women are superior and deserve to have everything, and all the bad things that happen to them are undeserved. when a feminist says >women do not support each other
for example, what they mean is >some women aren't stupid enough to support me in my goals
did you think that rigging the election in Barbieland was supposed to be a bad thing? women do not have that kind of universalist morality. just look at how they view things like cheating, divorce, being drafted etc. in a man/woman context.
I agree that the women who think this movie is profound are morons, though. We're 100 percent together on that one.
Except the movie is painting women as the VICTIMS; even victims of themselves. The messaging couldn't be more obvious: We have to be united hyper-feminists because the Patriarchy is the true enemy.
You're both wrong: It doesn't imply either of those things. It's exceptionally self-contradictory, because it didn't know whether to play the "Barbie World", its highly hyperbolic genderswapped metaphor for the "patriarchy" concept, straight or not. That's why it ended up arguing both for and against the status-quo at the same time, which it equates with the utter domination of either one sex over the other (depending on whether you apply it to the fictional Barbie World, or the fictional "real" world, that can be either way around).
Of course, you could say that it only argues against the status-quo and that the women "winning" in the Barbie world is a tragic ending. But that approach completely collapses when you notice how the Barbie world's status quo is portrayed as a desirable state all the way through, especially while Barbie visists the "real" world, which is demonized by the narrative and the main character herself. And, let's not fool ourselves, by large parts of the target audience.
In short: The script had the right idea (even if a very simplistic one), but didn't manage to stick to it.
I'd accuse it of trying to lay both side of the fence, but I don't think Greta and Noah are that clever.
Look at Frances Ha.
She's poor and directionless.
She's sabotaging her own life. and probably needs mental health guidance.
She is a tragic figure making tragic self-destructive life decisons as the clock ticks down ---- and they play her as just optimistic and quirky.
Probably because they've never seen life from anything but a trust-fund perspective.
So I can't say they deserve the benefit of the doubt, because they've already proven they don't.
>Being a woman is hard because sometimes men don't let us walk all over them >Being a man is hard because women walks all over us >The solution is for men to shut up
I edged to Margot Robbie's delicious feet the entire film
YOU KNOW THE WHOLE FOOT MEME THING OF THE LAST FEW YEARS WAS A MULTI-UNIVERSITY SOCIAL MANIPULATION STUDY ...RIGHT?
there are people with a legit foot fetish but there are exceedingly few, and it surfaces in adolescence, not later in lfe.
It's also linked to a mis-wiring i the brain.
You weren't talking to your 12-year-old bros about feet.
You caught your "foot fetish" a few years ago.
So was the 'le pits' fetish meme, the interracial meme, and how now a Cinemaphiletard wants to bring in DOGGED memes. You'll notice its obvious samegayging when the random meme fetish gets posted and it receives two or three simple 'based' and 'you know it!' type of replies to them like clockwork
>was it an incel nod or what?
Frankly, the movie kind of proves a lot of incel talking points about how men are systematically devalued by modern society.
At the end of the movie, Ken has nothing. He loses all of the power and respect he earned from creating the patriarchy, he has no home, no job, and he learns that his Barbie never even loved him at all.
The movie's response to this is to have Ken decide that this is all "good Kenough" for him.
I haven't seen the film. I had no idea it was that depressing.
No, what happened in the end was fulfilled Ken's arc, which had equal weight to Barbie's.
Barbie always had a good day, ken only had a good day if Barbie looked at him. Ken based all his value on what barbie thought of him. His final lesson was Learning to appreciate himself without Barbie or her approval. That's where the slogan "I'm KENough" comes from. He's his own person now.
>appreciate yourself without needing women's approval
nice message, kinda ruined coming from the people that will call a married man an 'incel' when he upsets them.
He's his own person with NOTHING
He has no place in Barbieland. No status, no meaning, not even a home apparently. He has no meaningful representation in government or judicial matters. All that might be good enough for Ken the character, because it was time to end the movie, but do you really think that having nothing in life with nothing to live for would be good Kenough for you...?
He has nothing BECAUSE he did nothing but try to win a girls affection who didn't like him back.
Now that he can actually focus on himself he can stop being "beach" ken and become something real.
>Ken based all his value on what barbie thought of him
Right, because she was never able to give him the progeny which his whole entire kit IS FOR. EVERYTHING he does is just to get her to look at him because without the ability to bear children Ken is worth NOTHING.
whatever its message was... I think we can all agree that it wasn't very clear.
The whole point of the movie is to mine it for content for as long as you can wring bits of info out. There was a whole lot - for a whole giant spread of people.
Shallowest definition of value. Value is never and will never be self-imposed. It is born through rigorous investigation of virtue and ethics, it is necessarily a cultural product because the nature of value as virtue, and virtue as service (to oneself and others).
we don't really see this a lot in the west because we have a legally enforced marital monogamy. you see some poly dating shit, but it's usually fat weirdos or older swingers. polygamous cultures have to deal a lot more with incels with nothing to lose going around starting shit because chads take the women for themselves
on the one hand it has a very stupid message that it completely fails to support. on the other, it is the most legitimately joyful and entertaining movie i've seen in years.
I just couldn't get over how mean spirited and cynical the movie was. And it wasn't even like it was being clever about it, it was present in EVERY SINGLE FRICKING SCENE!!!! You couldn't escape it. The movie felt like it was on the verge of ripping its hair out every step of the way. It was a bizarre watch
i felt the exact opposite. it was like watching a girl who has been told she's oppressed all her life trying to play the role she's been given, but who's naturally bubbly personality is so ill-suited to it that it keeps shining through and fricking up her attempts to be a tumblr witch
>have family reunion a month or so ago >go out to a fancy restaurant for dinner >childless wine aunt brings up Barbino >unironically uses the word patriarchy >mfw >next day she wants everyone to go see it with her >thankfully grandad wasn't interested so the rest of us walked around downtown while she took my mom and my other childless wine aunt to go see it.
Very telling. At least Kenborea-posting is funny.
Keep this brief
genuinely funny bits scattered thru out, due large part to the Kens. Horses as an extension of Man, multiple Kens gazing into the eyes of multiple Barbies singing the same Matchbox20 song on the beach, Goose discarding his mink to the lil Chance the rapper black effeminate Ken, thinking about the forced Kenough meme (Ken is me), Goose stole the show, clearly.
The script felt inconsistent, like 45 writers pandering to target niche audiences, each writer a PR for each niche... read like it was a ginormous octopus, tentacles in all the sauces. Went hard on the Cinemaphileg audience, obvs there was a campaign here, during the incubation hype period of the film.
Set design was kino, all the actors and actresses moved around in Barbie world, comfortably, second nature.
Duh absolutely propaganda,
Predictive programming, traveling through worlds, the sea to the moon to sweden? The bit about Pregnant Barbie being discontinued. Troon Barbie, who wuzza doctor, lol lmao even, yet cringing so hard felt like my mouth was bench pressing more than usual. Black troony President Barbie ala Michael Obama, getting the audience familiar this atrocious sight... the inventor of Barbie was an elder israelite from the Mike Meyers old israelite SNL skits. >whowouldvethunkit
Ask the bros at /x/ about the gnosis interpretation, as this film, as a talisman, certainly breaks the 4th wall, fighting the demiurge, death & resurrection, merging two worlds into a third, opening portals, etc.,
The ending was very BLEEK and self-deprecating, imo
Surprisingly, hearty chortles, a SAD yet enjoyable film, if you know what is being told, what to look for, however oi vey bleek, as impressionable npcs feel le power of Barbie, imagine the casuals taking leave the theater saying >Well what didja think about it?
happily to live in plastic box, the script felt powerful I liked when Ugly Betty ranted, or visit muh gynecologist, lol >left with muh feels empowered
3.6/10
Im serious, i want people to overanalye UTSL like i did. No one else ive seen make the connection that dogs = career in the movie. Its why so many actresses in the movie have a dog / bark and why he carries around dog treats.
I stopped watching when I realised it was spoonfeeding the whole way. The scene where cowboy kent walks into the city whatever, and manly things are happening all around him.
Red Scare Podcast was write when they called it a movie for NPCs who need to be constantly told what thoughts are approved to have. The narration, song lyrics, and dialogue are non-stop describing out-loud the emotions or thoughts of the characters instead of the most basic show-don't-tell storytelling. It's excruciating.
>Red Scare Podcast was write when they called it a movie for NPCs who need to be constantly told what thoughts are approved to have
kind of like how you outsourced your opinion to a fricking podcast
>movie shows power difference between two groups >both primarily serve themselves when in power and turn the other group into second class citizenry >the return to normal at the end is just fake concessions made to the underclass to make them feel better about realizing their status in society >women think this is about their veganas
They degraded women and men, it was pretty even. Everyone can be manipulated by stereotypes because sometimes it feels nice. Women being free from choices and being allowed to be ditsy. Men being free from always dominating and choosing. It's a two sided coin. What they learned in the end is that there needs to be a healthy medium between both parties because having just women or just men dominating is unhealthy for communication.
>it's actually making fun of feminists
no.
it outright says:
-women are manipulative
-women do not support each other
-women pressure other women with unrealistic expectations
-women pressure themselves with unrealistic expectations but blame society instead
And it says: >Daughter: "Everyone hates women, men hate women, women hate women, it's the one thing we can all agree on" >Barbie (to Mother): "Is this true?" >Mother: "It - It's complicated. Hate is a strong word." >Daughter: "OH COME ON, MOM!"
then the mother and daughter and Barbies go manipulate the Kens so they can rig an election and return Barbieland to an apartied state.
What is "feminist" about that?
If Michael Bay had written it, he'd be hanging from a streetlight in Beverly Hills.
>it's actually making fun of feminists
no.
it outright says:
-women are manipulative
-women do not support each other
-women pressure other women with unrealistic expectations
-women pressure themselves with unrealistic expectations but blame society instead
And it says: >Daughter: "Everyone hates women, men hate women, women hate women, it's the one thing we can all agree on" >Barbie (to Mother): "Is this true?" >Mother: "It - It's complicated. Hate is a strong word." >Daughter: "OH COME ON, MOM!"
then the mother and daughter and Barbies go manipulate the Kens so they can rig an election and return Barbieland to an apartied state.
What is "feminist" about that?
If Michael Bay had written it, he'd be hanging from a streetlight in Beverly Hills.
>it's actually making fun of feminists
no.
it outright says:
-women are manipulative
-women do not support each other
-women pressure other women with unrealistic expectations
-women pressure themselves with unrealistic expectations but blame society instead
And it says: >Daughter: "Everyone hates women, men hate women, women hate women, it's the one thing we can all agree on" >Barbie (to Mother): "Is this true?" >Mother: "It - It's complicated. Hate is a strong word." >Daughter: "OH COME ON, MOM!"
then the mother and daughter and Barbies go manipulate the Kens so they can rig an election and return Barbieland to an apartied state.
What is "feminist" about that?
If Michael Bay had written it, he'd be hanging from a streetlight in Beverly Hills.
That's not "degrading" women, moron. That's painting women are the victims; even the victims of other women who are ALSO painted as the victims. Have you never heard a feminist woman tell a non/anti-feminist woman that she has "internalized misogyny?"
But women irl today still keep crying about being muh oppressed. So is the movie saying that the Kens will march in the streets wearing penis hats and crying about oppression in 60 years from the movie's ending? Sometimes I wonder if people even think about logical consistency.
>Men being free from always dominating and choosing
Funny how your explanation of men being "free" is typical feminist doublespeak for "step away from your position of power because I said so".
So is this like Starship Troopers where everyone agrees that the actual theme is moronic, but the execution makes so that you can view it through any interpretation you can?
I think it's pretty clearly a satire. The movie goes to significant lengths to show that the "utopia" run by women is exclusive and discriminatory---not in the same way as the real world run by men, but the levels are comparable even if the forms are different.
The ultimate solution presented by the film is both men and women---personified by Ken and Barbie---must undergo self-realization, and actualize beyond the images of the world they were initially born into. You have to be able to live in the world, but not be of the world.
Barbie isn't nearly as good as it wants to be, but the message of the movie is, in my opinion, far more intricate than the circa 2017 Culture War dialogue that gets applied to it.
The left has no imagination, and to think they're capable of satire is just downright fricking laughable. The problem is pretentious homosexuals like you that read into it and try to find a message when there isn't none, the left knows exactly what they do every single time, and that's clearly fricking evident in the modern times we live in.
If you're viewing everything from a political binary, you've lost. Everything is not as easy as "left" or "right". You can either demonstrate points you have, or you can remain quiet. If you choose to do neither and speak, no one has to listen to you.
There's definitely been a major cultural shift. I just find the political diagnosis shallow---what you're talking about is correct, one could even argue at a deep level. But associating it only with political parties and talking points completely eradicates, in my opinion, a larger picture.
Barbie isn't a masterpiece, and there's plenty of modern contrivance that's been shoved into it. The story as a whole, though, is classic in form---one of departure, journey, return. Transformation from one state to the next. The ability for something, or someone, to transcend into something else.
I'm not saying that this story and its iconography can't be leveled by bad actors to communicate something amoral, or maybe even inhuman. Any story can do that, and this one in particular, given its reach, is a prime candidate.
If you're really going to get to the bottom of this, though, we have to see what the story is saying, and why people in power---not the political parties, or the ideologies, or the people who talk about them, I mean THE people in power---would want that story told, now. Why would they pair it with something like Oppenheimer?
Is it a cultural morale boost through art? Is it a coincidence, exploited for financial returns? Is it an attempt to paint one way as outdated, and another way as the future?
Is there a reason why a movie about one of the most terrifying things ever built by man, and a movie explicitly dealing with women, and what could be labeled as modern political thought, were put together?
Is it something deeper than that? Or is it all just a random series of events, linked ad hoc to build something?
I have no idea. I think it goes way beyond the Left, though.
They're just two movies that came out at the same time. That's it. People making a meme out of it wasn't intentional, because memes by nature are not forced.
And the movie is still; >inequality bad >lets try equality >nah, that's worse, back to being bad.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I don't quite agree. I think the movie shows that either society is flawed, and that it's up to individuals to find their sense of wholeness. The two main characters of the film, representing men and women, each have to go through significant realizations of this idea. Barbie has to relinquish the idea of being beautiful, and Ken has to relinquish the idea of finding completion in his "career", or the woman he loves.
I think it's notable to demonstrate that Barbie doesn't have to give up beauty, and Ken doesn't have to give up his passions. They have to realize that what they have been chasing is fictitious---Barbie leaves in a literal dreamworld, and the Barbie Ken envisions her to be, is simply not her. She has to be a woman enough to realize how everything she thought was right with the world, was in fact in some areas pretty wrong; and he has to realize that the first step to being a man, a real man, is sacrificing the ideals of childhood. You can still be self-possessed, and follow your ultimate passion, and maybe one day even meet that beautiful, perfect woman. In order to do that, though, you have to let go of the notion that these will simply be granted to you because you want them. You must make something of yourself first.
That's what I believe the movie is trying to demonstrate. It's done through a bit of a cynical and at times overly-coy and quirky method of delivery, but these appear to be the core themes and resolutions.
Following this, one could make the claim that the movie shows that attempting to find satisfaction in social structures is doomed to failure, as social structures are inherently flawed. All they do is exaggerate the flaws of those who build, lead, and most importantly, comprise them, until those flaws become too heavy to bear and the whole thing collapses.
7 months ago
Anonymous
You put way too much effort into analyzing a stupid movie that was never meant to be anything other than exactly what it tells you. There is no such thing as nuance to these people.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I personally think you seem like you want it to be simple because that makes it easier to deal with as a topic. To each their own.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>that was never meant to be anything other than exactly what it tells you
But what exactly is that? For something that does give you its message right on the nose, it is rather contradictory, isn't it?
7 months ago
Anonymous
Incoherence =/= nuance. It's a preachy feminist screed that was so poorly written that people misinterpreted its message.
7 months ago
Anonymous
It's a feminist screed where the only place women hold power is in a literal dream fantasy world designed by little girls. Men still very much run the real world---including the corporation who created the dreamworld where men hold all the power---even if they have to be more subtle about it.
In what way is the film even remotely suggesting textually your claims? If it's a feminist screed, it's literally the most poorly-written one that was ever created for mass audiences.
If this is feminist, then the feminists are literal morons, and how the frick did they beat men? Through, what, manipulating social conventions with their wiles and connections to interest groups? So, they're fricking moronic leftist prostitutes, who also managed to invert the whole system because groups of men want pussy and power that bad that they'd crash the whole thing to get it? And other men couldn't stop this from happening? At all? In any way? The strong and powerful men were, what? Non-existent? Off doing other shit?
I apologize, but after a few years, this rhetoric spins itself into cycles. If we're really in a cultural war, then art needs to be produced---real, honest to God art---and if any side is incapable of making honest art, then you lose. For the same reason that a country who couldn't make bombs would. And when a piece of art comes out that resonates, whether it's Marvel, or Barbie, or whatever---and I mean really resonates---you need to study that shit and understand why. Not for some bullshit pussyfricking political game, but because something, somewhere in all that mess, made a connection with another living, breathing human being, and THAT should be your primary concern.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>If this is feminist, then the feminists are literal morons
He's starting to get it.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I hope you're a young man, like early 20s. If you're 30, and posting that type of shit on this place, what are you doing?
If you're a young 20-something guy, I actually totally get it, and to a degree sympathize. I'd advise you to watch more and read more, because there really is more to life than "feminist" shit, but still, I do get it. Sometimes women really fricking suck dude.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>if any side is incapable of making honest art, then you lose.
Art doesn't need to be honest at all
>Is there a reason why a movie about one of the most terrifying things ever built by man, and a movie explicitly dealing with women, and what could be labeled as modern political thought, were put together?
What are you implying?
I am conflicted, because I would most certainly frick this actress/actor, yet at the same time I do not think they should've been a Barbie in the Barbie movie.
The two main characters are literally on opposite sides of the character development spectrum, meeting each other in the middle and realizing that life is better when not taken in extremes.
They do not. Even though Ken doesn't leave, he's clearly matured and grown beyond who he was in the beginning of the film.
Barbie herself becomes a real person. These two characters---representing men and women as groups---could not be more different than when they first started.
I honestly see this movie as a political rorschach test were it shows you what you want to see.
I don't know if this was intentional by Gerwig. It was probably more harder than making the movie apolitical.
But the blatant scenes like Barbie trying to free the other barbies from being mind controlled by litterally making them "woke" really tells you this movie was suppose to be a left leaning feminist movie. So maybe Gerwig has honestly no idea what she was actually making.
The movie is interesting either way.
I wouldn't say it's a must-see, but I do think it'll go down as a unique cultural artifact of its time. It's kind of long, but the sets are pretty cool, and it's got enough light humor to move it along. You notice the length by the end, and the story is a little incoherent in spots, but overall it's not too bad. Light summer popcorn fare with a bit of a colorful thematic sense. Like a 6.5 - 7/10.
It's alright, light and fun, feels alot like the Lego Movie with out surreal the jokes are.
Some of the hard feminist scenes are obnoxious but aren't that bad as some movies do it.
Just watch it for Ryan Gosling.
>OK, sure it's pozzed demoralization propaganda made by people who hate you, but... watch it anyway because it's le light and some movies are even worse.
Or just pick something that's actually good to watch from the ~120 years of cinema history.
It's a story about dolls who are controlled by humans from the real world.
Ken, a doll, got ideas from the real world and created a "patriarchy". All the dolls loved it.
Then a woman from the real world brought her ideas and converted all the dolls to them. This wreaked havoc in Barbieland and caused both Stereotypical Barbie and Beach Ken to self actualize.
The end
Ken isn't an idiot. He has a child's mind because a child is playing with a Ken doll in the real world. It recontextualizes all of his lines and actions in the movie.
Exactly, and not only that but a GIRL child.
Imagine a man with the mind of a 9 year old girl.
She only really cares about Barbie, and thinks of Ken as an accessory, because of course she does.
>the mind of a 9 year old girl. >She only really cares about Barbie
And then imagine that same girl writing a movie script ... this film is what you get.
How are you not getting this?
No one is saying that men in general are meaningless, but KEN, a doll made for girls as simply a companion to Barbie, has this crazy existential crisis.
This would not happen to G.I. Joe, a doll played with by boys.
AND it wouldn't happen to an anatomically correct boy doll played with by teenage girls.
But Beach Ken does "beach" and exists as a shadow because his whole blank consciousness is created by a little girl's imagination.
7 months ago
Anonymous
How are you not getting that the film is trash no matter what? I'm not even arguing what you claim I'm arguing.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>No one is saying that men in general are meaningless
"Men are worthless" is a core and pervasive component of even the least misandrist feminist thought process. It's far more likely that's what the intended message was rather than your benevolent interpretation.
In 1997 Starship Troopers was released, Directed by Paul Verhoeven and based on the novel of the same name by Robert A. Heinlein published in 1959 about soldiers fighting giant bugs in outer space. Despite that it was a serious novel as Heinlein had served in the US Navy and wanted to use Sci-fi as allegory for various social/political issues based on his point of view.
Some people took the film adaptation seriously and thought that Verhoeven had made a movie that advocated fascism when it was the complete opposite as he was quoted that the point of the movie was to show that a utopia filled with beautiful people was good for nothing other than killing bugs. The problem was that people, especially critics, didn’t understand that he had made a movie that satirized militarism and totalitarianism which was his intent from the start and blatantly obvious, I mean, they have Doogie Fricking Houser (Neil Patrick Harris) dressed like a member of the Nazi Gestapo with pretty people killing space wienerroaches fer frick sakes!?!
The evidence is that Verhoeven's 1987 film Robocop was a satirical take on 1980’s culture, specifically corporate culture, while it was Co-Scripted by Edward Neumeier who went on to adapt Starship Troopers. How anyone couldn’t see the movie as anything other than satire is beyond me, but it was Verhoeven’s follow up to Showgirls which was universally despised by the mainstream press who no doubt had their knives out for him and disingenuously reviewed the film as military propaganda.
In comparison the movie Barbie (Directed by turbofeminist Greta Gerwig) was recently released where in the story there is a placed called Barbieland where all the women are named Barbie and lead lives of luxury and leisure while every man in this world is called Ken and only exist to gratify the Barbie’s egos while having no power or control over the world they live it and reduced to sleeping outside as they apparently don’t have homes.
It should also be noted that while a blonde hair blue eyed white Barbie is the lead there’s a “diverse” collage of other Barbies that are black, trans, fat, cripple etc… while the Ken’s are all more-or-less handsome men in good shape showing the atypical female hypocrisy that women believe they should be accepted no matter what condition they’re in and never have to improve themselves, mirroring their narcissism, sense of self-entitlement and real world push to force people to accept fat and ugly women in media while men are expected to be 10/10’s and publicly shamed if they’re fat and/or ugly.
In the movie Barbie (Margot Robbie) goes to the “real world” with Ken (Ryan Gosling) where he learns about the “Patriarchy” and how men in that world are valued and have control over their lives compared to Barbieland where Ken’s are treated as accessories, have no power nor even shelter at night.
Ken comes back from the real world and implements a patriarchal system that these people behind this film depict as a fascist totalitarian dictatorship when the truth is that an equilibrium was achieved where the Barbies and Ken’s live together in harmony. But when Robbie Barbie returns from the real world she and the others create a scheme to pit the Ken’s against each other in order for the Barbies to once again assert dominance, take control and make the Ken’s second class citizens and overturn what amounts to a slave revolt.
So the message of this film is that women can only be happy subjugating men and getting everything handed to them with no adversity or hardship while it reveals that feminism was never about equality, only gaining attention and power over men.
With Starship Troopers Verhoeven took a serious source material and deliberately made it into a satire compared to Greta Gerwing’s Barbie where she took a girls toy and decided to make it into a serious tome on feminism and patriarchal oppression under the guise of a light hearted comedy but because feminists and women in general aren’t funny and have a complete and utter lack of self-awareness they’re now labelling Barbie as a subversive satirical masterpiece when the truth is that Gerwig went soo far up her own ass by turning Barbie into misandrist intersectional feminist propaganda that it inadvertently turned in on itself becoming a parody of that ideology which simply amounts to hating men because women never intellectually, mentally and emotionally develop beyond grade school and their Daddy issues.
This is the reason why the movie has done soo well as women soo desperately want Barbie to be their Joker so they can cultivate victimhood status in the oppression Olympics.
The difference is that Arthur was living in poverty and facing hardship due to physical and psychological disabilities inflicted upon him as a child as a result of abuse at the hands of his "Mother" showing that it's women that create people like him and women couldn't stand it because it went against their narrative of "white male privilege" which is why they tried to incite theater shootings and shows just how evil and rotten they are.
Meanwhile Barbie is about a woman who has a first world problem existential crisis because she's now post-wall while it's symbolic that things start going bad in her world as she's now getting older and can't maintain her life of luxury and leisure anymore because she never had any value beyond her looks which are depleting by the second along with her financial status as a result of no longer being able to manipulate simps into supporting her.
7 months ago
CreepyThinMan
The rise of the Ken's is a metaphor for how these women see themselves getting older with their options slowly dwindling and create this fantasy in their minds that they're now being dominated by a patriarchal system of evil white straight men which only suddenly began to control their lives once they started pushing 30 and use it as an excuse as to why they didn't make something of themselves because of their narcissistic sense of self-entitlement where they think because they want something it means that they deserve it.
Tricking the Ken's into fighting each other is also meant to represent women undermining society to their benefit and the detriment of stability because of women's sociopathic need to create drama by inserting themselves into anything men create and/or care about that takes attention away from them and destroying it as they have done in the real world with movies, tv shows, videogames, comicbooks and western civilization in general.
7 months ago
CreepyThinMan
Now, I’m willing to concede that I might be wrong and Gerwig is secretly a genius by injecting her film with soo much toxic feminism that she knew women would be stupid enough to get the wrong message and see it as a tale of female empowerment, which they have, thereby suckering them into making Barbie a billion dollar grossing hit which, if that is the case, then Gerwig has pulled off the greatest troll game of this century to which she has my respect.
Or it could be that I’m giving her too much credit and that she’s just a stupid c**t!
woman have this annoying habit of saying what they mean, but then hiding behind "IT WAS JUST A JOOOOOOOKE". This movie is pretty much that. They want you to think it's satire, but then call you a moron who doesn't get it when you call them out on it that it's not.
This. They push the gender politics on you and then fall back on the claim that it's just a movie about plastic dolls for girls when you call out said gender politics.
This movie is proof that when your message is based on something petty and stupid, like gender or race, the final product you create, regardless if it echos your opinion or your enemies', will always be moronic garbage.
>make a propaganda movie so insanely feminist and anti-male that everyone who watches it only cares about the Kens
>LE HECKIN PROPAGANDA FILM ABOUT A DOLL FIGURING OUT HER PURPOSE IN LIFE AND GETTING A vegana NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I WILL MARRY REPRODUCE
>>LE HECKIN PROPAGANDA FILM ABOUT A DOLL FIGURING OUT HER PURPOSE IN LIFE AND GETTING A vegana NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I WILL MARRY REPRODUCE
WITNESSED
It was anti-woman.
It literally SAYS SO.
And if that's not enough, it portrays women as horrible.
Anyone who thinks this film is feminist is a fricking moron. lol
>Greta Gerwig makes anti-woman, anti-feminist movie
oh boy do we get to go through the Fury Road shit again? "Uhh it's actually making fun of feminists because I didn't like it"
>it's actually making fun of feminists
no.
it outright says:
-women are manipulative
-women do not support each other
-women pressure other women with unrealistic expectations
-women pressure themselves with unrealistic expectations but blame society instead
And it says:
>Daughter: "Everyone hates women, men hate women, women hate women, it's the one thing we can all agree on"
>Barbie (to Mother): "Is this true?"
>Mother: "It - It's complicated. Hate is a strong word."
>Daughter: "OH COME ON, MOM!"
then the mother and daughter and Barbies go manipulate the Kens so they can rig an election and return Barbieland to an apartied state.
What is "feminist" about that?
If Michael Bay had written it, he'd be hanging from a streetlight in Beverly Hills.
Except the movie is painting women as the VICTIMS; even victims of themselves. The messaging couldn't be more obvious: We have to be united hyper-feminists because the Patriarchy is the true enemy.
you sweet soul, you haven't been tainted by listening to feminist bullshit
none of those 'bad things' are anti-feminist, because the fundamental tenet of feminism is that women are superior and deserve to have everything, and all the bad things that happen to them are undeserved. when a feminist says
>women do not support each other
for example, what they mean is
>some women aren't stupid enough to support me in my goals
did you think that rigging the election in Barbieland was supposed to be a bad thing? women do not have that kind of universalist morality. just look at how they view things like cheating, divorce, being drafted etc. in a man/woman context.
I agree that the women who think this movie is profound are morons, though. We're 100 percent together on that one.
This. Women/Feminists believe the ends justify the means.
You're both wrong: It doesn't imply either of those things. It's exceptionally self-contradictory, because it didn't know whether to play the "Barbie World", its highly hyperbolic genderswapped metaphor for the "patriarchy" concept, straight or not. That's why it ended up arguing both for and against the status-quo at the same time, which it equates with the utter domination of either one sex over the other (depending on whether you apply it to the fictional Barbie World, or the fictional "real" world, that can be either way around).
Of course, you could say that it only argues against the status-quo and that the women "winning" in the Barbie world is a tragic ending. But that approach completely collapses when you notice how the Barbie world's status quo is portrayed as a desirable state all the way through, especially while Barbie visists the "real" world, which is demonized by the narrative and the main character herself. And, let's not fool ourselves, by large parts of the target audience.
In short: The script had the right idea (even if a very simplistic one), but didn't manage to stick to it.
I'm rthis guy
and I agree with you.
I'd accuse it of trying to lay both side of the fence, but I don't think Greta and Noah are that clever.
Look at Frances Ha.
She's poor and directionless.
She's sabotaging her own life. and probably needs mental health guidance.
She is a tragic figure making tragic self-destructive life decisons as the clock ticks down ---- and they play her as just optimistic and quirky.
Probably because they've never seen life from anything but a trust-fund perspective.
So I can't say they deserve the benefit of the doubt, because they've already proven they don't.
Al Bundy is a b***h though. He let women get away with everything.
it was so feminist it revealed all of women’s flaws and women and gays clapped anyway
society is collapsing
>Being a woman is hard because sometimes men don't let us walk all over them
>Being a man is hard because women walks all over us
>The solution is for men to shut up
I edged to Margot Robbie's delicious feet the entire film
dis homie edgin'
YOU KNOW THE WHOLE FOOT MEME THING OF THE LAST FEW YEARS WAS A MULTI-UNIVERSITY SOCIAL MANIPULATION STUDY ...RIGHT?
there are people with a legit foot fetish but there are exceedingly few, and it surfaces in adolescence, not later in lfe.
It's also linked to a mis-wiring i the brain.
You weren't talking to your 12-year-old bros about feet.
You caught your "foot fetish" a few years ago.
You've been manipulated, fren.
So was the 'le pits' fetish meme, the interracial meme, and how now a Cinemaphiletard wants to bring in DOGGED memes. You'll notice its obvious samegayging when the random meme fetish gets posted and it receives two or three simple 'based' and 'you know it!' type of replies to them like clockwork
anon i literally watched lesbian foot fricking as an early teen.
Meh.
I’m not sexually attracted to feet, but they are still a cute part of the body.
You're moronic
Anything in the film that could be interpreted as parodying feminism was entirely accidental.
I didn’t really “get it.” Was this like Joker for women?
No. Joker was the Joker for women.
Judeo Feminist propaganda.
it was just a marketing ploy
it was shit, is what it was
Me.
>ms robbie you haven't been fricking incels enough
>Men will literally go to war if they are denied pussy
was it an incel nod or what?
You tell us, incel.
irl they will go to war if it stands a chance of GETTING them pussy, but that would be too problematic for movie to acknowledge.
>was it an incel nod or what?
Frankly, the movie kind of proves a lot of incel talking points about how men are systematically devalued by modern society.
At the end of the movie, Ken has nothing. He loses all of the power and respect he earned from creating the patriarchy, he has no home, no job, and he learns that his Barbie never even loved him at all.
The movie's response to this is to have Ken decide that this is all "good Kenough" for him.
I haven't seen the film. I had no idea it was that depressing.
That's not what happened
No, what happened in the end was fulfilled Ken's arc, which had equal weight to Barbie's.
Barbie always had a good day, ken only had a good day if Barbie looked at him. Ken based all his value on what barbie thought of him. His final lesson was Learning to appreciate himself without Barbie or her approval. That's where the slogan "I'm KENough" comes from. He's his own person now.
>appreciate yourself without needing women's approval
nice message, kinda ruined coming from the people that will call a married man an 'incel' when he upsets them.
>just stay single alone and unloved, thats kenough for you!
He's his own person with NOTHING
He has no place in Barbieland. No status, no meaning, not even a home apparently. He has no meaningful representation in government or judicial matters. All that might be good enough for Ken the character, because it was time to end the movie, but do you really think that having nothing in life with nothing to live for would be good Kenough for you...?
Well, maybe Ken will have something to live for in 15 years. Emphasis on the "thing".
He has nothing BECAUSE he did nothing but try to win a girls affection who didn't like him back.
Now that he can actually focus on himself he can stop being "beach" ken and become something real.
>Ken based all his value on what barbie thought of him
Right, because she was never able to give him the progeny which his whole entire kit IS FOR. EVERYTHING he does is just to get her to look at him because without the ability to bear children Ken is worth NOTHING.
The whole point of the movie is to mine it for content for as long as you can wring bits of info out. There was a whole lot - for a whole giant spread of people.
Yeah that just boils down to MGTOW garbage.
Men and women need each other, that's the truth and that message was not only missing form the movie it took an active stand against it.
It wasn't trying to say men and women don't need each other. Only a loner would come to that conclusion which is why MGTOW died off.
Don't base your value off how others treat you. Don't hold onto someone who doesn't appreciate your value. Don't be beholden to vanity.
Shallowest definition of value. Value is never and will never be self-imposed. It is born through rigorous investigation of virtue and ethics, it is necessarily a cultural product because the nature of value as virtue, and virtue as service (to oneself and others).
>Yeah that just boils down to MGTOW garbage.
>Men and women need each other
Literally pick one
we don't really see this a lot in the west because we have a legally enforced marital monogamy. you see some poly dating shit, but it's usually fat weirdos or older swingers. polygamous cultures have to deal a lot more with incels with nothing to lose going around starting shit because chads take the women for themselves
Why the only black dude look like his shirt should say "OUCH!"
nich touch that the surface isnt even real sand, havent noticed
are those good looking feet my fellow foot enjoyers
She knows her real public
Hey Dan Schneider is working again.
So is this just stepford wives but they became sentient?
they need to do a sequel where barbie cant find a job in the real world and she gets endometriosis.
I wouldn't know. I don't watch movies starring gays
i can't believe Barbie's fricking dead
on the one hand it has a very stupid message that it completely fails to support. on the other, it is the most legitimately joyful and entertaining movie i've seen in years.
>it is the most legitimately joyful and entertaining movie i've seen in years.
damn you got 9777 trannies on your phone?
Whatever chud.
Handsome guy
The room in your pic is what the average trans """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""girl's""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" room looks like.
>legitimately joyful
The movie is basically one long whining tantrum. Hardly "joyful", aside from the superficial aesthetics and misleading marketing.
*headcanon*
i accept your concession
Just wait until they make the live-action He-Man movie and it will be even worse than this.
dunno how you gays watched this, turned it off after 20 mins, literal mental torture
Because I’m a true kinographer unlike you
Yes.
But not in the way that you mean.
Explain, moron.
I hate modern women.
It's okay. They hate themselves too.
They also hate you, but that's different.
It's current year. It's okay to come out of the closet, buddy.
the comedy is kinda silly and Margot is ridiculously beautiful
it was shitire
I just couldn't get over how mean spirited and cynical the movie was. And it wasn't even like it was being clever about it, it was present in EVERY SINGLE FRICKING SCENE!!!! You couldn't escape it. The movie felt like it was on the verge of ripping its hair out every step of the way. It was a bizarre watch
i felt the exact opposite. it was like watching a girl who has been told she's oppressed all her life trying to play the role she's been given, but who's naturally bubbly personality is so ill-suited to it that it keeps shining through and fricking up her attempts to be a tumblr witch
>have family reunion a month or so ago
>go out to a fancy restaurant for dinner
>childless wine aunt brings up Barbino
>unironically uses the word patriarchy
>mfw
>next day she wants everyone to go see it with her
>thankfully grandad wasn't interested so the rest of us walked around downtown while she took my mom and my other childless wine aunt to go see it.
Very telling. At least Kenborea-posting is funny.
Keep this brief
genuinely funny bits scattered thru out, due large part to the Kens. Horses as an extension of Man, multiple Kens gazing into the eyes of multiple Barbies singing the same Matchbox20 song on the beach, Goose discarding his mink to the lil Chance the rapper black effeminate Ken, thinking about the forced Kenough meme (Ken is me), Goose stole the show, clearly.
The script felt inconsistent, like 45 writers pandering to target niche audiences, each writer a PR for each niche... read like it was a ginormous octopus, tentacles in all the sauces. Went hard on the Cinemaphileg audience, obvs there was a campaign here, during the incubation hype period of the film.
Set design was kino, all the actors and actresses moved around in Barbie world, comfortably, second nature.
Duh absolutely propaganda,
Predictive programming, traveling through worlds, the sea to the moon to sweden? The bit about Pregnant Barbie being discontinued. Troon Barbie, who wuzza doctor, lol lmao even, yet cringing so hard felt like my mouth was bench pressing more than usual. Black troony President Barbie ala Michael Obama, getting the audience familiar this atrocious sight... the inventor of Barbie was an elder israelite from the Mike Meyers old israelite SNL skits.
>whowouldvethunkit
Ask the bros at /x/ about the gnosis interpretation, as this film, as a talisman, certainly breaks the 4th wall, fighting the demiurge, death & resurrection, merging two worlds into a third, opening portals, etc.,
The ending was very BLEEK and self-deprecating, imo
Surprisingly, hearty chortles, a SAD yet enjoyable film, if you know what is being told, what to look for, however oi vey bleek, as impressionable npcs feel le power of Barbie, imagine the casuals taking leave the theater saying
>Well what didja think about it?
happily to live in plastic box, the script felt powerful I liked when Ugly Betty ranted, or visit muh gynecologist, lol
>left with muh feels empowered
3.6/10
I'd rank it a bit higher but this is a good post
Ty, I chose 3.6 deliberately, granted there's wiggle room, could be a 3.9 or stretching it to an 6.3, 6.9 would be pushing it, tho
i havent seen this movie and dont plan on watching it but wtf did i just read
You should watch and post about Under the Silver Lake. Seems like you would enjoy overanalyzing a movie about overanalyzing.
>Yas Kween, donut analyze, accept misdirection, efforts best wasted
Im serious, i want people to overanalye UTSL like i did. No one else ive seen make the connection that dogs = career in the movie. Its why so many actresses in the movie have a dog / bark and why he carries around dog treats.
best post I've read in months
>Cinemaphileg audience
I stopped watching when I realised it was spoonfeeding the whole way. The scene where cowboy kent walks into the city whatever, and manly things are happening all around him.
Red Scare Podcast was write when they called it a movie for NPCs who need to be constantly told what thoughts are approved to have. The narration, song lyrics, and dialogue are non-stop describing out-loud the emotions or thoughts of the characters instead of the most basic show-don't-tell storytelling. It's excruciating.
>Red Scare Podcast was write when they called it a movie for NPCs who need to be constantly told what thoughts are approved to have
kind of like how you outsourced your opinion to a fricking podcast
women can't satire and it was written/directed by a woman. it was serious.
Hari Nef's swinging hog in the dance scene had to be satire. Are we blaming Bambaugh?
It was better than Oppenheimer, that's for sure.
>We just explained to them the immaculate, impeccable, seamless garment of logic that is patriarchy, and they crumbled.
>movie shows power difference between two groups
>both primarily serve themselves when in power and turn the other group into second class citizenry
>the return to normal at the end is just fake concessions made to the underclass to make them feel better about realizing their status in society
>women think this is about their veganas
I liked it.
whatever its message was... I think we can all agree that it wasn't very clear.
you morons overanalyze this moronic movie way too much, it was written by a modern millennial woman and her friends, it has no hidden meaning
i want to frick the troony barbie!
It’s a movie for the gays
It was garbage
>make movie empowering women and degrading men
>"ackshully its smurt satire"
Hollywood hasn't been that clever in decades.
They degraded women and men, it was pretty even. Everyone can be manipulated by stereotypes because sometimes it feels nice. Women being free from choices and being allowed to be ditsy. Men being free from always dominating and choosing. It's a two sided coin. What they learned in the end is that there needs to be a healthy medium between both parties because having just women or just men dominating is unhealthy for communication.
Women should never be allowed to make life altering decisions.
Except history has proven that Men in control (Patriarchy) is the superior system.
If that was true, it would be a much different world.
Yea it would be a better world.
>They degraded women
They absolutely did not.
see:
That's not "degrading" women, moron. That's painting women are the victims; even the victims of other women who are ALSO painted as the victims. Have you never heard a feminist woman tell a non/anti-feminist woman that she has "internalized misogyny?"
Oh thank God, one line of dialogue really balances out all the blatant male hate.
Brewskie beer me baby
Everything in Barbieland went back to the way it was at the end of the movie, how is that a 'happy medium'?
They specifically say that the kens are just beginning their suffragette movement and in 60 years will reflect how much power women will today have.
But women irl today still keep crying about being muh oppressed. So is the movie saying that the Kens will march in the streets wearing penis hats and crying about oppression in 60 years from the movie's ending? Sometimes I wonder if people even think about logical consistency.
>Men being free from always dominating and choosing
Funny how your explanation of men being "free" is typical feminist doublespeak for "step away from your position of power because I said so".
So is this like Starship Troopers where everyone agrees that the actual theme is moronic, but the execution makes so that you can view it through any interpretation you can?
No. The execution turns it into a complete mess.
I think it's pretty clearly a satire. The movie goes to significant lengths to show that the "utopia" run by women is exclusive and discriminatory---not in the same way as the real world run by men, but the levels are comparable even if the forms are different.
The ultimate solution presented by the film is both men and women---personified by Ken and Barbie---must undergo self-realization, and actualize beyond the images of the world they were initially born into. You have to be able to live in the world, but not be of the world.
Barbie isn't nearly as good as it wants to be, but the message of the movie is, in my opinion, far more intricate than the circa 2017 Culture War dialogue that gets applied to it.
The left has no imagination, and to think they're capable of satire is just downright fricking laughable. The problem is pretentious homosexuals like you that read into it and try to find a message when there isn't none, the left knows exactly what they do every single time, and that's clearly fricking evident in the modern times we live in.
If you're viewing everything from a political binary, you've lost. Everything is not as easy as "left" or "right". You can either demonstrate points you have, or you can remain quiet. If you choose to do neither and speak, no one has to listen to you.
I have a point, you're just a homosexual that ignored it acting like our entire culture hasn't been infected by this nonsense.
There's definitely been a major cultural shift. I just find the political diagnosis shallow---what you're talking about is correct, one could even argue at a deep level. But associating it only with political parties and talking points completely eradicates, in my opinion, a larger picture.
Barbie isn't a masterpiece, and there's plenty of modern contrivance that's been shoved into it. The story as a whole, though, is classic in form---one of departure, journey, return. Transformation from one state to the next. The ability for something, or someone, to transcend into something else.
I'm not saying that this story and its iconography can't be leveled by bad actors to communicate something amoral, or maybe even inhuman. Any story can do that, and this one in particular, given its reach, is a prime candidate.
If you're really going to get to the bottom of this, though, we have to see what the story is saying, and why people in power---not the political parties, or the ideologies, or the people who talk about them, I mean THE people in power---would want that story told, now. Why would they pair it with something like Oppenheimer?
Is it a cultural morale boost through art? Is it a coincidence, exploited for financial returns? Is it an attempt to paint one way as outdated, and another way as the future?
Is there a reason why a movie about one of the most terrifying things ever built by man, and a movie explicitly dealing with women, and what could be labeled as modern political thought, were put together?
Is it something deeper than that? Or is it all just a random series of events, linked ad hoc to build something?
I have no idea. I think it goes way beyond the Left, though.
They're just two movies that came out at the same time. That's it. People making a meme out of it wasn't intentional, because memes by nature are not forced.
And the movie is still;
>inequality bad
>lets try equality
>nah, that's worse, back to being bad.
I don't quite agree. I think the movie shows that either society is flawed, and that it's up to individuals to find their sense of wholeness. The two main characters of the film, representing men and women, each have to go through significant realizations of this idea. Barbie has to relinquish the idea of being beautiful, and Ken has to relinquish the idea of finding completion in his "career", or the woman he loves.
I think it's notable to demonstrate that Barbie doesn't have to give up beauty, and Ken doesn't have to give up his passions. They have to realize that what they have been chasing is fictitious---Barbie leaves in a literal dreamworld, and the Barbie Ken envisions her to be, is simply not her. She has to be a woman enough to realize how everything she thought was right with the world, was in fact in some areas pretty wrong; and he has to realize that the first step to being a man, a real man, is sacrificing the ideals of childhood. You can still be self-possessed, and follow your ultimate passion, and maybe one day even meet that beautiful, perfect woman. In order to do that, though, you have to let go of the notion that these will simply be granted to you because you want them. You must make something of yourself first.
That's what I believe the movie is trying to demonstrate. It's done through a bit of a cynical and at times overly-coy and quirky method of delivery, but these appear to be the core themes and resolutions.
Following this, one could make the claim that the movie shows that attempting to find satisfaction in social structures is doomed to failure, as social structures are inherently flawed. All they do is exaggerate the flaws of those who build, lead, and most importantly, comprise them, until those flaws become too heavy to bear and the whole thing collapses.
You put way too much effort into analyzing a stupid movie that was never meant to be anything other than exactly what it tells you. There is no such thing as nuance to these people.
I personally think you seem like you want it to be simple because that makes it easier to deal with as a topic. To each their own.
>that was never meant to be anything other than exactly what it tells you
But what exactly is that? For something that does give you its message right on the nose, it is rather contradictory, isn't it?
Incoherence =/= nuance. It's a preachy feminist screed that was so poorly written that people misinterpreted its message.
It's a feminist screed where the only place women hold power is in a literal dream fantasy world designed by little girls. Men still very much run the real world---including the corporation who created the dreamworld where men hold all the power---even if they have to be more subtle about it.
In what way is the film even remotely suggesting textually your claims? If it's a feminist screed, it's literally the most poorly-written one that was ever created for mass audiences.
If this is feminist, then the feminists are literal morons, and how the frick did they beat men? Through, what, manipulating social conventions with their wiles and connections to interest groups? So, they're fricking moronic leftist prostitutes, who also managed to invert the whole system because groups of men want pussy and power that bad that they'd crash the whole thing to get it? And other men couldn't stop this from happening? At all? In any way? The strong and powerful men were, what? Non-existent? Off doing other shit?
I apologize, but after a few years, this rhetoric spins itself into cycles. If we're really in a cultural war, then art needs to be produced---real, honest to God art---and if any side is incapable of making honest art, then you lose. For the same reason that a country who couldn't make bombs would. And when a piece of art comes out that resonates, whether it's Marvel, or Barbie, or whatever---and I mean really resonates---you need to study that shit and understand why. Not for some bullshit pussyfricking political game, but because something, somewhere in all that mess, made a connection with another living, breathing human being, and THAT should be your primary concern.
>If this is feminist, then the feminists are literal morons
He's starting to get it.
I hope you're a young man, like early 20s. If you're 30, and posting that type of shit on this place, what are you doing?
If you're a young 20-something guy, I actually totally get it, and to a degree sympathize. I'd advise you to watch more and read more, because there really is more to life than "feminist" shit, but still, I do get it. Sometimes women really fricking suck dude.
>if any side is incapable of making honest art, then you lose.
Art doesn't need to be honest at all
>Is there a reason why a movie about one of the most terrifying things ever built by man, and a movie explicitly dealing with women, and what could be labeled as modern political thought, were put together?
What are you implying?
God you are so FRICKING stupid man holy shit. You're a net negative to the world, stop breathing the same air I am.
Was she the cutest or not?
ywnbarw
You can bet that they offerered the role to Hunter Schafer and she rejected it after reading the horrible script.
good, Queen (male) Hari is hotter than Hunter anyways
You know that's not true.
I am conflicted, because I would most certainly frick this actress/actor, yet at the same time I do not think they should've been a Barbie in the Barbie movie.
>I do not think they should've been a Barbie in the Barbie movie.
To be fair, no one should.
center of attention denied, loony troon
It was satire dressed up as pro-feminism.
The two main characters are literally on opposite sides of the character development spectrum, meeting each other in the middle and realizing that life is better when not taken in extremes.
>realizing that life is better when not taken in extremes.
But that never happens. In fact, they go right back to the absolute extreme in the end.
They do not. Even though Ken doesn't leave, he's clearly matured and grown beyond who he was in the beginning of the film.
Barbie herself becomes a real person. These two characters---representing men and women as groups---could not be more different than when they first started.
>he's clearly matured and grown
>Barbie herself becomes a real person.
I think you might have watched a different Barbie film. Pic related maybe?
I don't understand what you're inferring by this.
I honestly see this movie as a political rorschach test were it shows you what you want to see.
I don't know if this was intentional by Gerwig. It was probably more harder than making the movie apolitical.
But the blatant scenes like Barbie trying to free the other barbies from being mind controlled by litterally making them "woke" really tells you this movie was suppose to be a left leaning feminist movie. So maybe Gerwig has honestly no idea what she was actually making.
The movie is interesting either way.
Women aren't intelligent enough to properly do satire.
Read Jane Austen homie
I still haven't seen it, am I missing out?
I wouldn't say it's a must-see, but I do think it'll go down as a unique cultural artifact of its time. It's kind of long, but the sets are pretty cool, and it's got enough light humor to move it along. You notice the length by the end, and the story is a little incoherent in spots, but overall it's not too bad. Light summer popcorn fare with a bit of a colorful thematic sense. Like a 6.5 - 7/10.
It's alright, light and fun, feels alot like the Lego Movie with out surreal the jokes are.
Some of the hard feminist scenes are obnoxious but aren't that bad as some movies do it.
Just watch it for Ryan Gosling.
>OK, sure it's pozzed demoralization propaganda made by people who hate you, but... watch it anyway because it's le light and some movies are even worse.
Or just pick something that's actually good to watch from the ~120 years of cinema history.
Then don't fricking watch it.
Not him, but what do you think I've been doing all this while?
>the patriarchy is a product of your boredom for having a too easy life
I never thought anyone would be bold enough to claim this on a movie.
It's a story about dolls who are controlled by humans from the real world.
Ken, a doll, got ideas from the real world and created a "patriarchy". All the dolls loved it.
Then a woman from the real world brought her ideas and converted all the dolls to them. This wreaked havoc in Barbieland and caused both Stereotypical Barbie and Beach Ken to self actualize.
The end
>itt: men arguing about women bad and feminism bad
>literally the movie
Ken isn't an idiot. He has a child's mind because a child is playing with a Ken doll in the real world. It recontextualizes all of his lines and actions in the movie.
Exactly, and not only that but a GIRL child.
Imagine a man with the mind of a 9 year old girl.
She only really cares about Barbie, and thinks of Ken as an accessory, because of course she does.
>the mind of a 9 year old girl.
>She only really cares about Barbie
And then imagine that same girl writing a movie script ... this film is what you get.
Yes, that's the joke.
Goose gets it, why don't you?
Because it's a joke on the audience's expense.
How are you not getting this?
No one is saying that men in general are meaningless, but KEN, a doll made for girls as simply a companion to Barbie, has this crazy existential crisis.
This would not happen to G.I. Joe, a doll played with by boys.
AND it wouldn't happen to an anatomically correct boy doll played with by teenage girls.
But Beach Ken does "beach" and exists as a shadow because his whole blank consciousness is created by a little girl's imagination.
How are you not getting that the film is trash no matter what? I'm not even arguing what you claim I'm arguing.
>No one is saying that men in general are meaningless
"Men are worthless" is a core and pervasive component of even the least misandrist feminist thought process. It's far more likely that's what the intended message was rather than your benevolent interpretation.
>This old hag is Barbie
Who would you have casted as Barbie?
>Who would you have casted as Barbie?
James Corden.
based
>Who would you have casted as Barbie?
Natalie Mars.
Obviously, Elle Fanning.
The only problem is that there are no charismatic and funny male actors her age who could come near Gosling.
I agree the cast was 10 years too old.
That dude from euphoria with a gay dad?
It was a vehicle for grifting money from aging roasties and it succeeded beyond expectations. Another win for the white patriarcy lol
In 1997 Starship Troopers was released, Directed by Paul Verhoeven and based on the novel of the same name by Robert A. Heinlein published in 1959 about soldiers fighting giant bugs in outer space. Despite that it was a serious novel as Heinlein had served in the US Navy and wanted to use Sci-fi as allegory for various social/political issues based on his point of view.
Some people took the film adaptation seriously and thought that Verhoeven had made a movie that advocated fascism when it was the complete opposite as he was quoted that the point of the movie was to show that a utopia filled with beautiful people was good for nothing other than killing bugs. The problem was that people, especially critics, didn’t understand that he had made a movie that satirized militarism and totalitarianism which was his intent from the start and blatantly obvious, I mean, they have Doogie Fricking Houser (Neil Patrick Harris) dressed like a member of the Nazi Gestapo with pretty people killing space wienerroaches fer frick sakes!?!
The evidence is that Verhoeven's 1987 film Robocop was a satirical take on 1980’s culture, specifically corporate culture, while it was Co-Scripted by Edward Neumeier who went on to adapt Starship Troopers. How anyone couldn’t see the movie as anything other than satire is beyond me, but it was Verhoeven’s follow up to Showgirls which was universally despised by the mainstream press who no doubt had their knives out for him and disingenuously reviewed the film as military propaganda.
In comparison the movie Barbie (Directed by turbofeminist Greta Gerwig) was recently released where in the story there is a placed called Barbieland where all the women are named Barbie and lead lives of luxury and leisure while every man in this world is called Ken and only exist to gratify the Barbie’s egos while having no power or control over the world they live it and reduced to sleeping outside as they apparently don’t have homes.
It should also be noted that while a blonde hair blue eyed white Barbie is the lead there’s a “diverse” collage of other Barbies that are black, trans, fat, cripple etc… while the Ken’s are all more-or-less handsome men in good shape showing the atypical female hypocrisy that women believe they should be accepted no matter what condition they’re in and never have to improve themselves, mirroring their narcissism, sense of self-entitlement and real world push to force people to accept fat and ugly women in media while men are expected to be 10/10’s and publicly shamed if they’re fat and/or ugly.
In the movie Barbie (Margot Robbie) goes to the “real world” with Ken (Ryan Gosling) where he learns about the “Patriarchy” and how men in that world are valued and have control over their lives compared to Barbieland where Ken’s are treated as accessories, have no power nor even shelter at night.
Ken comes back from the real world and implements a patriarchal system that these people behind this film depict as a fascist totalitarian dictatorship when the truth is that an equilibrium was achieved where the Barbies and Ken’s live together in harmony. But when Robbie Barbie returns from the real world she and the others create a scheme to pit the Ken’s against each other in order for the Barbies to once again assert dominance, take control and make the Ken’s second class citizens and overturn what amounts to a slave revolt.
So the message of this film is that women can only be happy subjugating men and getting everything handed to them with no adversity or hardship while it reveals that feminism was never about equality, only gaining attention and power over men.
With Starship Troopers Verhoeven took a serious source material and deliberately made it into a satire compared to Greta Gerwing’s Barbie where she took a girls toy and decided to make it into a serious tome on feminism and patriarchal oppression under the guise of a light hearted comedy but because feminists and women in general aren’t funny and have a complete and utter lack of self-awareness they’re now labelling Barbie as a subversive satirical masterpiece when the truth is that Gerwig went soo far up her own ass by turning Barbie into misandrist intersectional feminist propaganda that it inadvertently turned in on itself becoming a parody of that ideology which simply amounts to hating men because women never intellectually, mentally and emotionally develop beyond grade school and their Daddy issues.
This is the reason why the movie has done soo well as women soo desperately want Barbie to be their Joker so they can cultivate victimhood status in the oppression Olympics.
The difference is that Arthur was living in poverty and facing hardship due to physical and psychological disabilities inflicted upon him as a child as a result of abuse at the hands of his "Mother" showing that it's women that create people like him and women couldn't stand it because it went against their narrative of "white male privilege" which is why they tried to incite theater shootings and shows just how evil and rotten they are.
Meanwhile Barbie is about a woman who has a first world problem existential crisis because she's now post-wall while it's symbolic that things start going bad in her world as she's now getting older and can't maintain her life of luxury and leisure anymore because she never had any value beyond her looks which are depleting by the second along with her financial status as a result of no longer being able to manipulate simps into supporting her.
The rise of the Ken's is a metaphor for how these women see themselves getting older with their options slowly dwindling and create this fantasy in their minds that they're now being dominated by a patriarchal system of evil white straight men which only suddenly began to control their lives once they started pushing 30 and use it as an excuse as to why they didn't make something of themselves because of their narcissistic sense of self-entitlement where they think because they want something it means that they deserve it.
Tricking the Ken's into fighting each other is also meant to represent women undermining society to their benefit and the detriment of stability because of women's sociopathic need to create drama by inserting themselves into anything men create and/or care about that takes attention away from them and destroying it as they have done in the real world with movies, tv shows, videogames, comicbooks and western civilization in general.
Now, I’m willing to concede that I might be wrong and Gerwig is secretly a genius by injecting her film with soo much toxic feminism that she knew women would be stupid enough to get the wrong message and see it as a tale of female empowerment, which they have, thereby suckering them into making Barbie a billion dollar grossing hit which, if that is the case, then Gerwig has pulled off the greatest troll game of this century to which she has my respect.
Or it could be that I’m giving her too much credit and that she’s just a stupid c**t!
!!!FACT!!!
I almost posted a thought regarding barbie in the same vein as starship troopers. You did it without being a moron thanks for saving me the trouble
>movie that satirized militarism and totalitarianism
>made unofficial anthem for HFY
woman have this annoying habit of saying what they mean, but then hiding behind "IT WAS JUST A JOOOOOOOKE". This movie is pretty much that. They want you to think it's satire, but then call you a moron who doesn't get it when you call them out on it that it's not.
This. They push the gender politics on you and then fall back on the claim that it's just a movie about plastic dolls for girls when you call out said gender politics.
there was nothing satiric about it, it showed that women are moronic and they should be subservient to men, anything else is world ending
This movie is proof that when your message is based on something petty and stupid, like gender or race, the final product you create, regardless if it echos your opinion or your enemies', will always be moronic garbage.
Neither side won this.
Its a psyop
A Movie made for the Instagram and Tik Tok Thots
The only right opinion about barbie movie
never watched it