Before you go see the Barbie movie, know that this is coming from a guy who’s not afraid to call Clueless a masterpiece. Now, let’s talk about why Barbie, with all its pinkness, feels a little… gray.
I’ve always admired Greta Gerwig’s talent, but I believe the jump from indie darling to blockbuster meant a difficult compromise. In Barbie, the pull of the commercial zeitgeist seems to have weakened the very artistic merits a story about a plastic doll could have brought to life.
(light spoilers)
Dudes. I watched the Barbie movie. And as a man who loves chick flicks, here’s why you don’t have to.
So, you know where I’m coming from. Movies like Clueless, 10 Things I Hate About You, and even Aliens are high on my list. My Best Friend’s Wedding, Clueless, Fried Green Tomatoes, Pretty Woman, The Devil Wears Prada, Practical Magic, When Harry Met Sally, Bridesmaids, Grease, Sleepless in Seattle, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Sixteen Candles, Love Jones, Titanic… Do Aliens and Kill Bill Count?
I loved Lady Bird. Greta Gerwig is undeniably talented. I think the leap from more independent to big budgets created some new money problems. Following the zeitgeist of popular opinion hurt the artistic merits the film could have brought.
Outside of my disagreements with some of the social messaging, I think it was average and missed some connective tissue that could have made it a classic chick flick.
Why is it average?
It’s a big budget average, in the sense that it’s trying to appeal to a large audience. You have to do your best to find the center of the line of appeal to your target audience. Not that that’s men. Young women are the highest purchasing demographic. Make a project that most women can agree on. Easy enough.
It was clunky in a way where ideas or locations or changes in the story were not unfolding smoothly. For Example:
- Ken beginning to change and rule Barbie Land.
- The walk at the end with Ruth.
- The world or rules of Barbie Land.
- Barbie just barks out about death for no reason. I get it was intentional but still…
I gave it a personal C or C+. My better half gave it a 7 out of 10, she won’t be watching again. Initially, I was open to it. I had heard both positive and negative reviews, so I was able to go in with neutrality.
So Many Unanswered Questions!
Connective tissue was left unexplained.
One of the film’s biggest missed opportunities was never showing the actual brainwashing of the Barbies. The film struggles with a lack of connective tissue, leaving key aspects of the narrative frustratingly unexplained. It’s strange that we never see any real manipulation or brainwashing of the Barbies, only our protagonists’ outright lies.
The story also fails to clarify if Barbie’s choice to become human was a personal, cathartic decision, or if she was simply a puppet of the story’s message. Did she decide to have genitals? How much self-knowledge do they have?
Where did Ruth and Barbie walk to when they had their little chat? Could there have been some kind of magical cloud that circled them? They just walked somewhere unnecessarily. Why wasn’t it just in Barbie Land?
Again! What are the rules of Barbie Land? We are never given a clear set of rules for the magical world they inhabit—leaving us to wonder about the fate of other dolls, like the one a dog got ahold of or the ones that were thrown away.
Are there other Barbie lands like parallel universes? If so, what happens to the Barbie that a dog got ahold of, or if a Barbie flies out the car window? Is there a B.C.U.? A Barbie Cinematic Universe?
What happened to that box of Barbies that Mom threw away? Were they sentient and did they die?
Answering these questions could have made for some entertaining scenes, accessible to all audiences.
In an independent you can let some things go and leave it to artistic, personal, subjective decisions/opinions. With bigger projects you have to make the spectacle large to hide the magic tricks. I think it needed more gloss or rouge. Am I getting the makeup terminology right? Rouge? I’m a dude.
Hero’s Journey or Satire?
Can Barbie be herself if she doesn’t want to join the real world? The message seems to be don’t be a doll, be more, join the real world. Her becoming real could have been a cathartic resolution to something she’s always wanted. Like Ariel in the Little Mermaid animation getting to be part of our world.
It was a nice ending to not give her a specific life or career direction.
But, I found it satire-lite. Not offensive nor thought-provoking to the target audience. An echo chamber. When it comes to the actual message, there was an opportunity to talk about what equality actually means, showing how Barbie Land could become a place of true equality affecting the real world.
Maybe we don’t want to do that.
Could there be more nuance to the 2-dimensional Barbie Land than to the real world, where an average guy doesn’t just slap Barbie on the butt in front of her boyfriend? If they wanted to paint both worlds as 2-dimensional, I wish they had leaned more into it. Enhance how black and white our world is.
His Story.
Okay. This movie is not about Ken.
Ken came back to share information about Barbie and news about the real world. When and how did that message change? It seems like Ken should have been the main villain.
Make him a great villain with a real philosophy you can understand, like Joker in The Dark Knight or Thanos. It doesn’t even need to be that deep. Ken could have had a rant about patriarchy being power and hypnotized everybody. We could see the middle of his thirst for power. Connective tissue.
They used Ken’s love and attraction to the Barbies to make them jealous and physically attack each other and control everything, like a matriarchy. But there was no irony or disagreement. This is how to operate? This is the message? Rule everything, and you can do anything you want to do.
Have you seen that movie where men say they don’t need women and we can do everything on our own? That movie is out there somewhere. I don’t, but I’m looking.
Shafts of Light in the Pinkness
Not that it was all rainbows and no beer.
Two of the great points, aside from Ken’s awesome songs:
- the arch of Ken and Barbie’s relationship, seeing him as a human being. This could be a message for the male audience? Although he adores her, and she doesn’t respect him.
- the rant that “pulled Barbie out of it.” The plot-changing rant really could have applied to both men and women. There were bits and pieces that were tailored. But both men and women have to traverse dual roads in life, especially when leading. Be nice and stern. Handle the stress and smile. That applies to anyone working towards a high position and who has bosses and/or people to manage.
This film could have been a great opportunity to show a unity not apparent to the “real world.” Could Barbies have affected real-world change?
Is the point to show the hypocrisy of the Barbie world as just the opposite of the real world? If so, that could have landed better, maybe with a joke.
But it’s Barbie Land, and it can’t be equal. Right? It belongs to Barbie.
Which is the problem.
The film pulled its punches, choosing to make a safe, big-budget spectacle rather than a truly incisive satire. It missed opportunities to connect with the audience on a deeper level and, in its desire to appeal to everyone, compromised the very artistic vision that could have made it a classic. In the end, the message of equality felt diluted, the hero’s journey felt unearned, and the potential for a truly thought-provoking critique was lost. You can’t make half a satire.
Æ