Barbie (2023)

Director: Greta Gerwig

Cast: Margot Robbie, Ryan Gosling, America Ferrera, Kate McKinnon

Have I Seen it Before: Nope. Had ambitions to do a true Barbenheimer double feature with Oppenheimer (2023) last week, but the fates of schedules saw that it didn’t happen.

Did I Like It: It’s going to be very difficult to find a unique or unusual take on this movie. It’s so thoroughly captured the zeitgeist, if you are reading this, you probably have a very particular opinion about the film. You probably have thoughts on the subject regardless of whether or not you’ve seen the film; the only qualification is being alive in any sort of rudimentary way.

A subset of those people are men. Well, we’ll broaden the definition of that word to include male persons allowed to vote. They feel attacked by the film.

I really, truly, don’t understand how someone can come to that conclusion. Let’s forget for a moment that the movie is genuinely very funny and far, far weirder than one has any right to expect from a major studio release. The notion that Barbie is somehow anti-man is laughable on its face. Even though the Kens, led by Beach Ken (Gosling) try to bring the patriarchy to Barbieland, when the plan falls apart they are not pilloried. They’re forgiven. Ken himself doesn’t get the girl, but he wasn’t going to get the girl even if he hadn’t made all of the mistakes he did. He gets an opportunity to find some degree of happiness without Barbie, and presumably without using every photoshoot Sylvester Stallone exposed us to in the 80s as the Platonic ideal of masculinity.

What they mean to say is it empowers women, and that’s all they need to hear before they could even try to realize it is not only empowering to women, but oddly (in the best way) life affirming to men as well. I say that not as someone who might view himself as better than the complainers, but as someone who got called out pretty thoroughly by the Kens’ behavior, too. (The scene with The Godfather… struck a chord, but it was definitely a fair hit.)

I’d be willing to put money not only on the fact that it has an inside track on best picture in the spring, but also that we are about to enter an age not of mega-budget superhero-fests in hope that they have the next Avengers: Endgame (2019) on their hands, but instead of female-skewing, unashamedly weird, IP-based movies that cost about 100 million dollars. If Mr. Zaslav, head of Warner Bros. Discovery is reading this, haaaaave you met Batgirl?

Ghostbusters (2016)

Director: Paul Feig

Cast: Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones

Have I Seen it Before: Yes, indeed. More on that in a minute…

Did I Like It: It’s a Ghostbusters movie. Just go with it, guys.

In lieu of my normal write-up, I’m re-printing the blog I posted shortly after originally seeing the film in the theaters. I can’t say any of my original assessment has changed since that initial screening, except for in one element. Home video presentations of the film allow elements of the frame—especially in big effects shots—to leave the frame, seemingly in an attempt to extend whatever 3D work was done in post. I’m not sure if other films have attempted this, but it’s objectively lame. Let a film’s frame be the film’s frame. We’re just now pulling out of the dark ages of pan-and scan, and now we have to deal with this. Ugh. The movie itself is still enjoyable, though…

“Let’s Talk About Ghostbusters, shall we?”

WARNING: Some spoilers ahead.

All this week I went to various older movie theaters, catching matinees and jotting down my thoughts as I went. I’ve got a solid five weeks worth of blog entries out of my little travelogue, and I meant to put the first part of the series out this week…

But my movie theater pieces will start next week. I really want to talk about the last movie I saw this week.

Ghostbusters (2016) is fantastic. It is easily the best movie of the summer (and I spent the last week seeing pretty much everything), and it is without a doubt far superior to the depression shit show a direct-sequel Ghostbusters III would have been had it come to pass.

It’s bright, colorful, and occasionally startling*. The special effects are on point. It’s filled with awesome variations on the original gadgets, and several cool additions to the arsenal. It’s also a completely workable adventure story about four unlikely heroes saving the City of New York from imminent disaster.

In short, it is everything that a Ghostbusters movie needs to be.

Which also means that it was undeniably and consistently funny. Deal with it.

Now, I’m not going to say that the only possible reason you could have to dislike such a film is that you are so blinded by your misogyny you can’t see two feet in front of your face. You’re just going to have to deal with how much you hate women on your own time. 

Okay, some of you may be so attached to your childhood memories of the original that you worry this film will somehow break down the purity of those memories. Let me reassure you. Somewhere around the time that I heard the familiar whine of a proton pack booting up, I felt like a kid again and that feeling didn’t let up until the final post-credits scene**. The movie won’t ruin your childhood; if you’re lucky, it’ll bring you back to it. 

There may be a few quibbles with the movie, but they are so minor as to not warrant reference here. Go see Ghostbusters. Go see it twice.

That all being said, Hollywood: Please don’t remake Back to the Future. I don’t think my mortal human heart could take it.

*Anybody who insists that the original Ghostbusters is actually scary is lying, or was a child when they first saw it and has refused to develop beyond that point in the ensuing thirty years.

**Speaking of that post-tag scene: While I really hope the mentioning of Zuul isn’t meant to telegraph the jumping off point for their next adventure, an amusing exchange happened after the scene that works as a perfect microcosm of the bullshit controversy this movie has attracted just for existing.

Just as the scene ended, one girl, no more than seven years old screamed out with geekish delight, “THAT’S THE VILLAIN FROM THE FIRST MOVIE!”

Immediately, some meathead douchebag right around my age turned his nose up and said, “Uhh… Actually, Zuul was the villain in the second movie.”

This is the problem with guys like this. They’re not only assholes; they’re wrong. For a flash, I thought about defending the child, but then I realized: both she and the movie didn’t need me to defend it. Just go see it.