Jotham Posted January 4 Posted January 4 (edited) Quote “We can know things and still need to hear them out loud. It can still be a cathartic,” Ferrera said. “There are a lot of people who need Feminism 101, whole generations of girls who are just coming up now and who don’t have words for the culture that they’re being raised in. Also, boys and men who may have never spent any time thinking about feminist theory. If you are well-versed in feminism, then it might seem like an oversimplification, but there are entire countries that banned this film for a reason.” “To say that something that is maybe foundational, or, in some people’s view, basic feminism isn’t needed is an oversimplification,” the actor continued. “Assuming that everybody is on the same level of knowing and understanding the experience of womanhood is an oversimplification.” Edited January 4 by Jotham 5
WeFoundWill Posted January 4 Posted January 4 Crazy how she needed to spell it out to some.… The sheer amount of ppl walking out of that theater no thoughts, head absolutely empty was astonishing 3
Cheers Posted January 4 Posted January 4 A movie about feminism yet the director let KEN get the most memorable scenes/steal the show. Point lost. 7 1
Draper. Posted January 4 Posted January 4 She’s right, the movie is not trying to be something intricate. Greta was already a stablished feminist voice in cinema, she knew what she was doing: taking the opportunity of making a commercial blockbuster to bring feminism to any person with any previous knowledge about it. And yeah, if you read twitter regularly or care about social issues you already knew everything being said in it; but that’s not the case for so many people. Specially for the people that the movie tries to target the most: mothers from generations in which these conversations were not common, kids who are still too young to talk about these things but can understand some of the themes and boyfriends who are probably not even aware of their own sexist ways. 7
Rep2000 Posted January 4 Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, Cheers said: A movie about feminism yet the director let KEN get the most memorable scenes/steal the show. Point lost. And what about it? The problem with modern feminism that we need to educate men on it more than women. And Ryan Gosling already stole the show even during the press tour. He understood the assignment.
Specter Posted January 4 Posted January 4 Lol Please. It is feminism 101 because it is the most palatable, guaranteed-to-profit direction they could go with. Let's be serious now. If it actually had any teeth a) it would not succeed in most markets (sadly) and b) would become a public source of anger (something that has already been tried by RW ghouls). That it is oversimplified is not the bulk of the critique; that it is just enough to be profitable and palatable is. Cute spin though on her end, and she's not entirely wrong. But let's not get carried away with the ItS banNeD foR a ReAsOn. 8 1
Kingdom Posted January 4 Posted January 4 14 minutes ago, Draper. said: She’s right, the movie is not trying to be something intricate. Greta was already a stablished feminist voice in cinema, she knew what she was doing: taking the opportunity of making a commercial blockbuster to bring feminism to any person with any previous knowledge about it. And yeah, if you read twitter regularly or care about social issues you already knew everything being said in it; but that’s not the case for so many people. Specially for the people that the movie tries to target the most: mothers from generations in which these conversations were not common, kids who are still too young to talk about these things but can understand some of the themes and boyfriends who are probably not even aware of their own sexist ways. I get that intent, but that scene is very cringe and tacky in its execution. It wasn't seamless and felt like a ted talk in an actual MOVIE. 2
Strawberry Bubble Posted January 4 Posted January 4 People criticize this movie for not being simple and fun enough. And now it seems that it is not complex enough. Anyway, this movie was going to be criticized in any scenario because of the topics it talks about and because it had a lot of hype that was lost.
ImpressMeMuch Posted January 4 Posted January 4 22 minutes ago, Cheers said: A movie about feminism yet the director let KEN get the most memorable scenes/steal the show. Point lost. that says more about the audience tbh people will always celebrate a man for doing the least lol 5
Zefierce Posted January 4 Posted January 4 23 minutes ago, Cheers said: A movie about feminism yet the director let KEN get the most memorable scenes/steal the show. Point lost. Right? It's very telling the most loved character was Ken with the patriarchy he brought
Draper. Posted January 4 Posted January 4 19 minutes ago, Phantom said: Lol Please. It is feminism 101 because it is the most palatable, guaranteed-to-profit direction they could go with. Let's be serious now. If they wanted a movie that was the most palatable and that would make a profit they could have just made a comedy that didn’t try to explain feminism at all. The amount of money this movie made is not a given AT ALL.
Into The Void Posted January 4 Posted January 4 I thought the movie was great and well done in getting any message across.
Bubble Tea Posted January 4 Posted January 4 The movie aesthetics were cute and Margot Robbie was very beautiful, and that's about all my positive comments for the film. The McDonalds of cinema 1
Talento Posted January 4 Posted January 4 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jotham said: but there are entire countries that banned this film for a reason. Bingo! I wasn't a huge fan of the film, but this critique in particular is so dumb. It's a... Barbie movie? Who in their right mind walked into it expecting it to be some monumental deep dive academic take on feminism? Of course it's simple and mainstream Edited January 4 by Talento
Psyduck Posted January 4 Posted January 4 (edited) Somebody is trying to get secure a spot in the Supporting Actress Oscar race She's wrong, of course. It's not oversimplified feminism. It's oversimplified corporate white lady feminism. The film looks at corporate boards and then says "men have all the power, women are oppressed!". Meanwhile they ignore how the majority of homeless, imprisoned, suicides are men. They could've easily had a scene where Ken stumbles upon the hordes of barely-alive homeless men that litter Santa Monica beach, but wealthy white women like Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie would rather pretend those men did not exist. The existence of those endless hordes of drug addled, sore-ridden, barely-conscious homeless men across major cities in California complicate the simple feminist propaganda they wanted the film to impart. It would raise the issue of income and class and that's a no-no since Margot Robbie does NOT want to be called out as a hypocrite for pocketing $50 million from the movie after profit participation. No, much safer to make it a safe corporate white lady version of feminist. Don't dig too deep there either though, like most masters degrees going to women now, as well as the great majority of undergrad degrees (over 2/3), or that women under 35 now out-earn men under 35 on average. Because that would make America Ferrera's "stunning and brave" on-screen rant seem stupid, and then she wouldn't be in the race for Supporting Actress. Edited January 4 by Psyduck 2
OreGuy Posted January 4 Posted January 4 SHE WAS TALKING TO BARBIES!! OFC IT IS GOING TO BE FEMINISM 101. what is hard to get? 1
rihannafan Posted January 4 Posted January 4 Don't worry, we will get complex feminism with the Polly Pocket movie 2
alfonso12 Posted January 4 Posted January 4 It's true. Tbh oversimplified feminism is better than no feminism at all, and that's what we usually get from movies. 1
playboi Posted January 4 Posted January 4 This is what happens when you try to cater to the woke crowd legit NEVER happy
AMIT Posted January 4 Posted January 4 2 hours ago, Draper. said: If they wanted a movie that was the most palatable and that would make a profit they could have just made a comedy that didn’t try to explain feminism at all. The amount of money this movie made is not a given AT ALL. If they did that the movie would have been completely ripped apart by most mainstream critics and a significant chunk of the audience alike. Barbie as a brand has been highly influential in regards to how women at large are made to look like and what they're made to represent. They would not be able to get away with pretending Barbie's problematic legacy does not exist, so they were pressured to go with the most surface-level, capitalist-friendly, completely neutered and recuperated version of ''feminism'' (because at that point it's just not feminism at all, imo) to make it all work, and that's what they did, no?
family.guy123 Posted January 4 Posted January 4 Oversimplification and yet the women haters of this website still can’t grasp its message.
LittleStarmen Posted January 4 Posted January 4 It was enough feminism for a barbie movie.... was entertaining though in a rewatch its a little SNL sketch sometimes
Tusk Posted January 4 Posted January 4 3 hours ago, Marry The Gods said: For me the movie was just boring. And it was more about Ken tbh 1
RideOrDie Posted January 4 Posted January 4 3 hours ago, Psyduck said: Somebody is trying to get secure a spot in the Supporting Actress Oscar race She's wrong, of course. It's not oversimplified feminism. It's oversimplified corporate white lady feminism. The film looks at corporate boards and then says "men have all the power, women are oppressed!". Meanwhile they ignore how the majority of homeless, imprisoned, suicides are men. They could've easily had a scene where Ken stumbles upon the hordes of barely-alive homeless men that litter Santa Monica beach, but wealthy white women like Greta Gerwig and Margot Robbie would rather pretend those men did not exist. The existence of those endless hordes of drug addled, sore-ridden, barely-conscious homeless men across major cities in California complicate the simple feminist propaganda they wanted the film to impart. It would raise the issue of income and class and that's a no-no since Margot Robbie does NOT want to be called out as a hypocrite for pocketing $50 million from the movie after profit participation. No, much safer to make it a safe corporate white lady version of feminist. Don't dig too deep there either though, like most masters degrees going to women now, as well as the great majority of undergrad degrees (over 2/3), or that women under 35 now out-earn men under 35 on average. Because that would make America Ferrera's "stunning and brave" on-screen rant seem stupid, and then she wouldn't be in the race for Supporting Actress. this is a BARBIE movie that will be seen by millions of TEENS and CHILDREN... please be SERIOUS
Recommended Posts