this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
488 points (97.8% liked)
Not The Onion
12378 readers
506 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I know I didn't watch it ~~or have any interest to do so~~. But... Were the assumptions I have about it true? In that just like the woke craze a few years back, its message backfired by essentially smacking the pendulum from where ever it was between masculism and feminism, to the extreme edge of feminism. This, to the point it becomes toxic, and making it what it seems now, the butt of a joke?
I also understand the primary purpose of the movie was likely for repopularizing the line of toys. It still had some form of message.
ETA: this was an honest question and in no way was implying any disrespect to women, the feminism movement, or the woke culture. I've just seen a bit of criticism and countless jokes that make fun of the film, that it becomes nearly impossible to to discern the truth.
Also with Mattel being the primary funding, I assumed that greed took over and they diverged from the original purpose of the product line and just created what seemed like a polarizing story on the outside to help sell.
Your assumptions aren't true at all. It looks like it's heading that way part-way through the film, when Barbie and Ken are at odds with each other. And then it goes ahead and empowers all the men as well. It's certainly critical of toxic masculinity but I think it's empowering for both men and women overall. Obviously your Ben Shapiro types were offended by it because it's not trying to appeal to incels, and it is woke, but not in a bad, inauthentic way.
I don't think it's really supposed to re-popularise the line of toys either. Sure, people who liked the toys when they were young will probably find details they appreciate, but it's not meant to sell the toys. It's not aimed at the demographic (young girls, typically) who would want to buy dolls. It's not an R-rated film, of course, but I'd say anyone under 12 probably isn't going to get much out of it, and it's probably much more enjoyable for adults overall. It's pretty philosophical and thoughtful, and has quite a lot of metaphors and symbolism that would be lost on younger viewers.
Rather than aiming to sell toys, the film is the product; it's a way to make money with the Barbie brand from audiences outside of the toy-buying demographic. And it achieved that (by being a good film).