Movie Review

Out-of-the-box Barbie party gets existential in movie adventure that's fun if fleeting

The new movie Barbiepresents a rare instance in which audience members will be approaching it from multiple different angles. Adults who grew up playing with the doll will be hoping for a bit of nostalgia (or, perhaps, revenge on the impossibly-proportioned female figure). Barbie aficionados will be looking to see if their favorite doll made the cut. Kids and parents might be thinking it will be a fun and frivolous time at the movies. And cinephiles will be curious how Oscar-nominated writer/director Greta Gerwig and Oscar-nominated co-writer Noah Baumbach will imprint their style on an iconic piece of pop culture.

Photo courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures

Ryan Gosling and Margot Robbie in Barbie.

Turns out, the movie has a little bit of something for each of those factions and more. Barbie (Margot Robbie) – or, as she refers to herself more than once, Stereotypical Barbie – lives in the utopia of Barbie Land with innumerable other Barbies, including President Barbie (Issa Rae), Nobel Prize Winner Barbie (Emma Mackey), Weird Barbie (Kate McKinnon), and more. But suddenly Barbie turns into Existential Crisis Barbie when she starts having thoughts about death (wow, it really does have something in common with Oppenheimer!).

Weird Barbie sends Barbie off to the Real World to figure things out, joined by Ken (Ryan Gosling), who has no sense of self outside of his “relationship” with Barbie. The journey is illuminating in many ways, with visions of the patriarchal society sending Barbie into a deeper funk and Ken on a misguided journey. Real World mother and daughter Gloria (American Ferrera) and Sasha (Ariana Greenblatt) join Barbie to try to help her regain her confidence.

As with Barbie herself, Barbie is several things at once. It’s a self-referential ode to the many types of Barbies, Kens, and other dolls that have been put out over the years, complete with shots at parent company Mattel. It’s a fun romp with double entendre jokes, song-and-dance sequences, and enough pink to cover the entire world. And it’s an examination of outdated gender politics and perhaps an over-correction by the people who decided that Barbie could be anything and anyone she wanted to be.

While the joke is that Ken has no meaning outside of Barbie, the film gives Ken – and other Kens played by Simu Liu, Kingsley Ben-Adir, and more – a big part of the story. Even though involving the Kens to a large degree pays off in the final act, their one-note nature keeps them from having a big impact overall. Ironically, the most important male character in the film ends up being Allan (Michael Cera), a milquetoast doll who has an empathetic soul.

Where the film ultimately lands on the place Barbie holds in the world will be up for interpretation, but it's far from just a two-hour toy commercial. Gerwig and Baumbach, while definitely straying far from early collaborations like Frances Ha, still make the story their own, delivering commentary that wouldn’t come from many other filmmakers. And if you laugh a lot along the way, then all the better.

Robbie is, of course, perfect casting as Barbie, a fact that is referenced on several different occasions in the film itself. But it’s more than just her looks, as she understands the mission and delivers the performance necessary for this particular role. Gosling is not quite as successful, but still makes for a fun Ken. There are times that the actors playing other Barbies are so funny that you’ll wish Gerwig had made it all about them instead.

Barbie is very entertaining in the moment, but like the dolls themselves, it feels like a movie that will be forgotten once the novelty wears off. Its overall message is obvious but one worth repeating, and Gerwig makes sure the audience pays attention to the very last frame.

---

Barbie is now playing in theaters.

movies film

Movie Review

Much-anticipated film sequel Gladiator II tells a very familiar story

Photo courtesy of Paramount Pictures

Paul Mescal in Gladiator II.

There are some films for which making a sequel is natural, and others where a follow-up is wholly unnecessary. Gladiator, which made both tons of money and was named Best Picture at the Oscars, told an impactful stand-alone story that ended with the protagonist dead and no real loose ends. And yet because there’s always more money to be made, here we are 24 years later with Gladiator II.

The lead character this time around is Lucius (Paul Mescal), a general in a North African army who becomes a prisoner of war when the Roman army led by Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal) bests him and his troops in battle. Taken back to Rome, he is put in the pool of captured men forced to fight at the Colosseum for the amusement of twin emperors Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Caracella (Fred Hechinger).

Lucius is controlled by Macrinus (Denzel Washington), an ambitious schemer who bets liberally on his prized fighter and always has an eye to move up in the world. Meanwhile, Lucilla (Connie Nielsen), the sister of Emperor Commodus from the first film, is now married to Marcus Acacius and has a unique connection with Lucius that is fairly obvious from the get-go.

Directed once again by Ridley Scott and written by David Scarpa, the film commits a number of sins throughout its 150-minute running time, the most blatant of which is that, aside from a few embellishments, it essentially tells the same story as the first film. Lucius, like Maximus, is a deposed military leader who’s out for revenge on the person who killed his family. Instead of one obnoxious emperor, there are now two. And the only way for Lucius to earn his freedom is to fight his way out.

Stories told in the same world can echo each other and, if done well, overcome those similarities. But Gladiator II is shockingly boring for a purported sword-and-sandals epic. Scott and his team try to introduce new elements to the fights, like a gladiator riding a rhinoceros or a ship battle inside the Colosseum (with sharks!), but most of the sequences are inert with no propulsion to them.

The action fails because none of the relationships in the film amount to much. There are stand-out characters like Macrinus and the twin emperors, but instead of creating antipathy or strong feelings of triumph or defeat, the story just kind of happens without any sense of excitement or importance. Much of that issue lies at the feet of Lucius, who simply doesn’t inspire in the same way that Russell Crowe’s Maximus did.

Mescal is a fine actor who’s done good work in more intimate roles, but he’s not up to the task of being an action star, at least not in this film. Any bombast he shows with the character feels forced, and the story doesn’t give him enough opportunities to counteract that lack. Washington, however, fills up the screen with his charisma, and it’s during his scenes that the film comes closest to being rousing. Quinn and Hechinger are a lot of fun as the twin emperors, but in the end they feel like retreads of Joaquin Phoenix from the original.

Any sequel should have a purpose that sets it apart from what came before, but Scott, Scarpa, and the rest of their team fail in that respect in Gladiator II. It’s a mostly lifeless film that delivers scenes that would be exciting if they had any kind of good story to back them up.

---

Gladiator II opens in theaters on November 22.

movies film