This is a review. It contains spoilers.
One of those fun little facts about Barbie as a cultural phenomenon is how she came to look the way she did. While the official corporate line is strictly about Ruth Handler’s desire to create an adult alternative to the baby dolls available to her daughter, that’s only part of the story. Because before they could sell the iconic Barbie doll, they needed to create it. Her face didn’t just spring from the ground.
Enter Lilli, the German sex gag gift in the form of a blonde sex worker.
Reviewing at images of Lilli, you’re getting a more lascivious version of the classic Barbie look. The minor differences between them make all the difference. Her lips are almost pursed, her eyebrows arched in mild disdain. The original Barbie was a teen model, but her mother mold was an escort. A fact that the new blockbuster ‘Barbie’ (2023) conveniently leaves out.
This is a film about the “stereotypical Barbie” and her struggles towards and against humanity, but what does that title mean? It certainly cannot be original, despite an opening that places Margot Robbie in the iconic stripped swimsuit. She’s too…direct. Alert. Mature. Instead, the space she holds is purely conceptual. She’s the basic version of herself. The film is about her, and thus cannot really handle whatever baggage the existence of Lilli brings with her. And baggage she would bring.
“In her cartoon incarnation, Lilli was not merely a doxie, she was a German doxie – an ice-blond, pixie-nosed specimen of an Aryan ideal – who may have known hardship during the war, but as long as there were men with checkbooks, was not going to suffer again.” – Forever Barbie: The Unauthorised Biography of a Real Doll by M.G.Lord
I don’t bring this up to mock the place that the Barbie brand is now, or to belittle the people who have found inspiration to this blonde multi-hyphenate. But in the context of this film drowning in references and increasingly shallow meta-analysis, this whole background sits strangely. A little thought scratches at the back of my mind. Obviously, I didn’t expect the movie to stop and address it, but I did want to note what about the narrative was being reinforced here.
‘Barbie’ is a movie about two things. The first, already discussed, is Barbie (the character and the concept) rejecting and then accepting the reality of becoming human. It’s very artistic and conceptual, but also simple and direct. The fairytale portion of the script, so to say. She was accidentally granted emotions, and as a result, cannot remain in Barbieland.
Barbieland, by the by, is a utopia run by the Barbies, who hold all positions of power and influence. This is mostly by the way of cute gags, where Hari Nef, Issa Rae, Michael Cera, and (weirdly) Dua Lipa steal the show. I laughed at every one of her flat and stupid line reads. This world is fun and pink, but very synthetic. Shiny, beautiful plastic, showcased in lovingly crafted sets that make the film a bit more magical. A beauty too powerful for humanity. By the end, Barbie cannot remain in Barbieland. She’s too alive.
The other thread is feminism, patriarchy, and Ken.
I cannot emphasize enough how good Ryan Gosling is in the role of Ken. Nobody embarrasses themselves, and plenty got belly laughs, but he is the strongest of the bunch. If they hadn’t become completely worthless, I’d say he’s a shoe-in for a Golden Globe.
It’s all just so well-calibrated. The bitter bubbliness of a man built to love a woman who doesn’t love him back. Because, as the saying goes, it’s Barbie…and Ken. Never just Ken. Gosling finds the comedy in every little moment. It isn’t necessarily a childish performance, but there is a theatrical bent to his bumbling energy. He pines for this unreachable woman, throws his weight around against alleged rivals, and then…discovers patriarchy. Which is where the film begins to lose itself.
It isn’t that the film is saying anything bad. This is not a strike against the morality of the movie about dolls. But the script explicitly politicizes the role of Barbie as a cultural object from the start and gets increasingly direct over time. From the child Sasha (Ariana Greenblatt) calling Barbie a fascist, to the first of three thematic climaxes, where America Ferrara monologues about the plight of womanhood. A scene that received a round of applause in my theatre.
Furthermore, the movie’s third act conflict is also explicitly about how the Kens respond following years of oppression – and they do this via a political coup and brainwashing. They then tie the Kens’ ascendancy to women, in a way that just doesn’t really work. Kens are purely ornamental within the world of Barbie, and that is fine with them, until their Barbie’s don’t want them. Women, by contrast, are people.
To be clear, my issue is not with Barbie being political. This is pretty basic stuff. It’s extremely direct in how it wants to be the impossible expectations we place on women. That’s fine, I agree with the argument, and it’s working for general audiences. This a family movie, I cannot begrudge simplicity.
But when you pair patriarchy with Ken, it doesn’t really gel. It’s almost there as a concept, but cannot quite stick the landing. Like a lot of the script, I think it needed a sense check. The whole thing has the same vibes to making the predators the minority in ‘Zootopia’ (2016), in that it isn’t saying what it thinks it’s saying.He’s supposedly tearing the system apart by introducing these concepts, but the film understands that this is a ridiculous premise and doesn’t even bother trying to show us how he convinced anyone. It’s a wise choice.
However, a basic logic problem springs from this smart decision. It wants to have its cake and eat it to. If the utopia of Barbieland is this fragile and is hurting such a significant portion of the population, why would you bother saving it?
But this is reading into things too far. I’m not the Nostalgia Critic, and this is not the issue – even if this film’s vibe is like a series of “lore” clips YouTube critics would stick in their videos in the early 2010s. Really, there’s a few actual issues on a filmmaking level to deal with. None major, but pretty much all script level.
For example, certain line readings were strangely flat. The Barbie affectation itself is fine, but there were moments that would…linger. When the film lets jokes actually punch, like when President Barbie (Issa Rae) says the world “motherfuckers” and the Kens gasp, it’s so much funnier than the hundredth lingering moment. It’s part of the Barbie aesthetic, but despite the stylistic intentions, we could have probably done with snappier and maybe even overlapping dialogue in the third act.
This leads to the real problem, which is that the final 40 minutes is way too caught up on the ensemble and not on the titular Barbie. Everyone gets to shine, even if it slows the film down. The success of the film’s emotional core is saddled directly to Margot Robbie’s unrivalled ability to portray ennui and depression, but she’s sidelined for a strong while. A supporting act in her own film. So we’re left with Gosling has the emotional anchor for a solid 20-30 minutes, along with the people-people. It doesn’t flounder, but it doesn’t thrive. So let’s talk about the real world cast.
I’ve already mentioned America Ferrara, who plays Gloria, the mother and secretary struggling with her own depression. But then you have Will Ferrell and the assorted executives, given plenty of time and jokes to pad out the film. And then Aaron Dinkins (Connor Swindells) is also there…not doing much. They all work for Mattel. It’s nothing that matters. They don’t shine, except in their cartoonish affectedness. Which defeat the whole purpose of contrasting the dolls to people.
‘Barbie’ is a film about a character, a concept, and a legacy. A very clean trio of ideas, particularly in the context of Barbie. But it’s also about depression, womanhood, humanity, corporate greed, the distance of adolescence, cynicism, misogyny, time, and about a million other things. Those parts don’t work. Or rather, they don’t work in tandem with the Barbie stuff. Maybe one could, and clearly they were going for “humanity”. But there’s too much it’s trying to say in the name of that, and it doesn’t click.
Mattel is a villain, but in a distant and goofy way. A toothless and acceptable form of ribbing, without actually grappling with anything resembling reality. They’re clearly hedging their bets by allowing these jokes at their and Ruth Handler’s expense. You might even laugh – I certainly did. But the bigger question is…why?
The film ends with Margot Robbie entering the human world and going to a gynecologist. She’s a woman now and needs medical attention. You laugh, you walk out, and then you’re left feeling a little empty. I wouldn’t complain about a silly little film like this, but Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach wrote a film that clearly wants to grapple with themes in a mature but accessible way. Baby’s first existential crisis.
It fails to consider what it’s really saying.
There’s nothing good to the humanity ‘Barbie’ has presented. The iconic blonde enters the real world and is immediately objectified, assaulted, and humiliated. She sees beauty in aging for a brief click, but in truth, the film fails to prove that this a better option for her. Everyone is happier in Barbieland. Where you live forever in joy with friends. The land, and Barbie herself, saves the relationship of a mother and daughter! Barbie leaves paradise and for what?
She simply accepts death.
I get the point. She’s too human to go back, and wants to shed perfection. It’s a fallen angel story. But the problem is, she doesn’t seem connected to anything. Not even the humans she follows back. They’re nice, but not in any particular way. She just apparently loves crying. The movie wants it to be deep that there is no clean ending for Barbie, but instead of possibilities, it suggests a void. She’s doomed to mundanity, all because one bored and lonely woman couldn’t keep her feelings to herself.
It’s hard to not make this review negative, because I do real problems to discuss – clearly. But it isn’t a bad product! You’ll laugh, you’ll feel a little sad at appropriate times, and you’ll marvel at the production design, lit in a way to make every scene feel weirdly empty. But it’s pretty!
I think we all forgot that this was always going to be an exercise in marketing and brand awareness. Barbie is not just a cultural landmark, she’s a product sold en masse to children and collectors to the tune of over a billion dollars a year. The film is meant to bolster that. It’s silly to forget, but sometimes glitter is distracting.
To conclude, I return to Lilli. A stupid toy for weird men of the past, who died to give Barbie her foundational form. However, she also suggested a life beyond this purpose. Her humanity was inferred, but it was already there. Comparatively, I think this movie might actually be the equivalent to your standard, neutral Barbie doll. Pleasant, good for kids, and not particularly stimulating to anyone who can read for fun. A void to stare into. It doesn’t lack heart, but it may lack a soul.
Because it’s a piece of plastic.