#Greta gerwig hot take

[artist-issues]

About Greta Gerwig, Little Women, and Narnia

Greta Gerwig should not be in the Narnia realm at all. As anything.

The Narnia stories are inseparable from Christianity. Greta Gerwig is a Unitarian Universalist. This means she, in her own personal life, doesn’t believe in the saving work of Jesus Christ, which is a core belief of Christianity, and a core theme in Narnia. Everything in the Narnia books hinges on this, from the character motivations to the structure of the fantasy world to the way the magic in Narnia works.

Additionally, the women in Narnia do not adhere to post-modern or even antique feministic values. They are celebrated for their love and tender-heartedness and faith, all of which require self-sacrifice. Aravis of The Horse and His Boy starts out a proud warrior escaping an arranged marriage and ends up a humbled lady of Archenland court marrying the Prince. Susan Pevensie is at her best when she’s tender-hearted and at her worst when she doubts and becomes more concerned about her own identity than others. The school that Eustace and Jill go to in The Silver Chair is derided for it’s feministic views. By contrast, modern feminism is opposed to self-sacrifice, and that is the kind of thing Greta Gerwig demonstrates belief in throughout all of her works.

Am I saying that no person who isn’t a Christian or some type of conservative when it comes to feminism can ever work on Narnia? Absolutely not. I’m not saying that. Lots of people on the Walden Media Narnia movie (the first one), which was great, were not Christians and did not believe in the saving work of Christ. But they stayed faithful to the source material, even if they didn’t believe in the source material themselves. So the story retained it’s autonomy and power.

Greta Gerwig can’t do that. She has already demonstrated that she does not know how to make a story that hangs on to it’s integral source material if she, herself, doesn’t agree with that source material. She can’t be objective, and therefore, she can’t be faithful to what Narnia is.

How do I know that? Little Women.

I don’t care if you liked the Little Women movie by Greta Gerwig. I don’t care if the acting was “amazing” and I don’t care if Timothee Chalamet and Florence Pugh are great in it. I said exactly what I said. Greta Gerwig made a great movie—but she made a terrible adaptation of Little Women.

It was not Little Women. She made changes to Little Women. What changes, you ask? Changes to the specific pieces of the source material that did not reflect Greta Gerwig’s personal views.

That’s the cardinal sin for directors of adaptive stories or remakes—to make changes to the core themes of a classic tale, because you don’t agree with those core themes. That’s called mutilation, not “updates.”

Here’s how she did it in two major ways in Little Women:

She cut out Jo’s humble response to Friedrich’s gentle rebuke of sensation stories, and replaced it with a feministic self-pitying outburst from Joe and s borderline apathetic, cool piece of feminist advice from Friedrich. That takes all the continuity out of it and warps the characters. That scene is so pivotal in the book. It’s Jo, respecting a man who is much older and excellent in character than any other she’s ever known, and feeling immediately humbled by him calling her out. She’d never have responded that way if Laurie called her out. They would have argued. But this scene was supposed to show what Jo needed from a future romantic partner. She needed someone she respected, someone who could be wise and gentle—two things Laurie is not. She needed someone who would help her take her eyes off of worldly success and herself, and onto eternal benefits to mankind, specifically, the effect her stories might have on children. His gentle, respectful, wise love (and the love of characters like Beth) turns Jo from a self-absorbed writer into a selfless mother, like her own Marmee.

But Greta Gerwig never wanted Jo to be a selfless mother. She wanted, and I quote, “Jo’s love to be her work, and her romance with Friedrich secondary.” You know why?

Because that’s what Greta Gerwig believes in. Greta Gerwig’s life is her work. Watch any of her movies, you’ll see the smudge marks of that wholehearted belief all over them. She can’t even be objective when the whole point of a character is to make work secondary, as was certainly the case with the character of Jo March. No. She has to twist up one of the best American heroines ever into an automaton of herself.

The second way she mutilated source material is with Amy and Laurie. In the books, Amy and Laurie grow to love each other out of the character deficiencies that they make up for in one another. At the start of their courtship, Amy is ambitious and Laurie is lazy. Amy wants to marry for advantage, and Laurie wants to make much of his spurned love for Jo by giving up on life. And that’s it.

It’s Amy who first wakes up to feeling something romantic toward Laurie, not Laurie, and Laurie is not the first to make a move on her. Laurie does not know he is in love with Amy until well after she knows she loves him. Then, he does not make the first outward advance on Amy. They both come to the same conclusion together; when they do, she does not resist. In Greta Gerwig’s version, he’s back to falling in love with a girl who’s resisting, because that’s where Timothee Chalamet’s emotional acting shines or whatever.

But that’s not the worst part. The worst part is that she adds a feminism speech from Amy, as a reason for her resistance, and she subtracts the scene where Laurie actually proposes. The scene where Laurie proposes, in the book, is so beautiful.

The two characters are in love, they know they’re in love, and neither of them is insecure about it. Amy has learned that she needs a life-partner who knows her and will protect her, like her old home-values did, and not some rich aristocrat or prince. Laurie has learned that he needs a life-partner who can stir him toward change, not through big explosive arguments and hope of conquered affection like Jo, but with gentle love and sheer inspiration, found in Amy.

So, in the most beautiful analogy for courtship that ends in marriage ever, he proposes to her while they’re rowing on a lake. She’s sitting next to him in the middle of the boat, she’s got one oar, he’s got the other, and she says, “How well we pull together, don’t we?” And he says, “so well that I wish we might always be in the same boat. Will you, Amy?” And she says “yes.”

That’s it. No argument. No big, passionate, sentimental explosion like he had with Jo. No wrenched and broken heart-strings. He didn’t have to convince her. She didn’t have to resist. Because entirely without force, and entirely without insecurity, they protected each other’s hearts and came to a conclusion that was based on something so much deeper and more eternal than fleeting passion.

Greta Gerwig cut that out and listened to Meryl Streep and put in another stormy lover’s-quarrel speech from Amy about why she couldn’t be with Laurie because she was in Jo’s shadow, and feminism and marrying for advantage, blah blah blah. It’s terrible. It’s mutilation. It ruins everything the original Little Women had.

it doesn’t matter if she got some of the characters right. It doesn’t matter if she got a lot of the quotes right. It doesn’t matter if all of Act 1 of the movie is mostly-book-accurate. If you change load-bearing themes or character motivations, you show that you can’t be objective and faithful to the source material.

It is fine if Greta Gerwig wants to make a movie about a woman who loves her work more than anything else. It is fine if she wants to make a movie about how women are under-appreciated for their minds and souls, and have characters that go on a journey to prove it. But it is not fine to use someone else’s story to say it. Make your own story, Greta Gerwig.

Oh, you already did? See: Lady Bird? See: Frances Ha? Then come up with something new. Don’t shoehorn your same beliefs into every franchise that is offered to you, like vomiting, then eating the vomit and regurgitating it over and over in new colors. Figure out how to tell someone else’s story in a faithful way, objectively, or else keep your stained hands off until you can clean them up. Especially, keep them off Narnia.

Greta Gerwig makes movies for Greta Gerwig, by Greta Gerwig. She can’t be objective, and for that, she can’t do Narnia. She can’t do it justice, she can’t do it faithfully, because she makes movies for herself, by herself.

[edenxrosey]

Who is that singular fictional character that has been so marred by public opinion and misconceptions that they are largely regarded unlikable that you, in your infinite wisdom, still fervently defend with ever fiber of your moral being for not only being misunderstood but baselessly slandered? I shall go first: Friedrich Bhaer

[justjudethoughts]

Hot take but everytime I hear "What Was I Made For?" I feel my heart shatter with the crushing weight of melancholic nostalgia and then proceed to get more upset because the Barbie Movie simply Did Not Get It™️. I know the song was based on the movie, not the other way around, but I feel like the song captures the essence of what the movie wanted to be/said it was, not what it actually was.

[gossamer-apothecary]

barbie

look i’m gonna pull out my barbie obsession real quick to say something.

i can’t stand when people are like “MaRGOt RoBBIE is too old to play barbie” “RyAN gOSling is too old to be ken in the live action movie”.

canonically barbie has held over 150 careers in her life time, including being the president of the united states which means she is at least 35 (source: barbie life in the dream house).

so margot being 32 and ryan being 42 is not too far off.

anyway thanks for listening to my rant.

i cannot wait to see what they will do with these characters like I cannot even comprehend the extent of how excited i am. margot and ryan and greta (and all the other amazing cast members, crew and costume teams) are gonna kill it.

i mean the trailer speaks for itself.

the promise of seeing barbie be the bad bitch she is and ken being a classic himbo on july 21 2023 is the only thing getting me through this semester of school.

[theflikchic]

Hate to be that person but considering Greta Gerwig misinterpreted the Garden of Eden story, I do not trust her with a Narnia adaptation.

[watcher0033]

….BARBENHEIMER gonna be the most divisive double feature in the fucking decade. The online discourse is gonna be in the books.

Watch them both in the same day, you’re gonna point a finger leonardo dicaprio meme style the entire time.

[beekneebabey]

I don't know how to say this intelligently but something is really bothering me about the reviews for the barbie movie complaining that she didn't go deeply enough into feminist critique? Like,,, it's the Barbie movie. It's not Feminist Theory 402. Also, it's a movie about how women are expected to be spectacular at everything they do and how exhausting it can be to be the representative for all women when you're just one of them and people really watched that and turned around to tell Greta Gerwig that the movie wasn't enough because it wasn't perfect?

It was heartfelt and funny and silly and hot pink and that is enough!! Where is the media literacy!! You all are legitimately hurting my heart with this trash take!! It's fine to not like the movie but how come movies about the "male experience" can be about SOME men but movies about women have to be the balm AND rage AND catharsis AND call to action for every woman ever??? It's the Barbie movie!!! Not Gloria Steinem's latest manifesto!!! Let it fucking be!!!

[rachelzeglertruther]

Why You're Wrong About Rachel Zegler

This is a long post, but there's a lot of context missing from the Rachel Zegler "discourse" that I thought I could add with my history of watching this unfold from the beginning.

The Snow White Thing

You probably know this part. There's a curated video of Rachel going viral, framed to make her seem like she's never seen Snow White, she hates the story, she hates the character, she's ungrateful, and single-handedly ruined Disney's brand. The clips from these videos are not new— they were released nearly a year ago in September 2022 and nobody cared about them at the time. Why? Because all the full interviews she did that day at the Disney Exo in 2022 showed a young, charming woman who was excited and proud to be cast in an iconic role. The interviews were very well received and it was a non story. Now that it's been edited down and cut together in a malicious way, and the people sharing them are purposefully misquoting her, they've twisted the context. Normally, this would be a non controversy. Even if that video wasn't taken out of context and spliced together to make her seem like she hates the film, most people wouldn't care. The issue is the response to the video.

Let's get this out of the way: Rachel Zegler doesn't hate Snow White. She relayed that she was afraid of the forest scene as a child and didn't revisit it again until after she was cast in the role. She has since then watched it several times and has expressed for YEARS before that interview came out that she was incredibly honored and grateful to be playing such an iconic Disney princess. If you watch the full videos that those clips came from, this comes across immediately to anyone with their own mind. If you hate someone for being scared of something as a child, I don't know what to tell you. If the role was being given to the biggest Snow White fan, you would be correct that she doesn't deserve it. Unfortunately for you, this role requires talent and Rachel has the Golden Globe and critical acclaim from people who matter within the industry (her peers and critics).

You know who does hate their beloved characters in beloved franchises but the general public still applauds them? Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, Daniel Craig, and Robert Pattinson. They've all expressed outright contempt for the roles and the films they were part of, but nobody cared. People had fun with their quotes but they still respected them. Rachel said nothing even closely resembling their remarks, but she's being torn to shreds. Are we seeing a pattern here?

Rachel never said a single bad thing about the character or the animated film— she said that it was outdated and that set people over the edge, foaming at the mouth to have her burned at the stake. If you think it would be perfectly fine to have a movie about an abused 14 year old girl run away to play housemaid for a bunch of men, get kissed in her sleep/death by an adult man, and then wake up to fall into his arms in 2024, that's certainly a hot take. If you're against remakes, direct your ire at Disney. But if you truly think that plot would work with young girls today, you're the one who's out of touch. It would do far more harm than good to portray a young woman in that light.

She also never said that there was anything wrong with romance or love. She said that the new Snow White wasn't only dreaming of that. I can't stress enough that this wasn't her decision… she was describing the plot of the new film that was written by Greta Gerwig and approved by Disney. There's a prince in the film and he will also have a more developed personality and storyline. If you have a problem with the writing, wait until it comes out so you can write your strongly worded letter to Greta. If you have a problem with the concept in general, take it up with Disney. There's no need for you to be defensive over hurting the legacy of a multi-billion dollar company or a 87 year old cartoon written by a proud racist antisemite. This is the most confusing part of the hate campaign to me because it wasn't even her opinion— she was literally describing the plot of the film she had nothing to do with. It also isn't a new thing. Disney actors have been promoting their newer films this way for years.

It's perfectly okay to like things that are problematic. It's becoming an issue that we refuse to acknowledge that maybe some things we love are harmful. What we can't do is justify why it's not problematic, and in fact everyone who calls it out is the problem and NOT their precious cartoon. The 1937 Snow White was an amazing feat of animation. It's a classic for a reason. But it was also Hitler's favorite film and was directed by a white supremacist (the one who is "rolling in his grave" due to Rachel's existence, according to his son). Things don't exist in a vacuum and we can't ignore the bad parts.

How We Got Here:

The thing that everyone is missing is the source of this campaign. This started in September of 2020 when transphobic actor Gina Carano made fun of trans people by changing her pronouns to beep/bop.boop. Rachel indirectly called her out by coming to the defense of the trans community.

She never called out Gina by name (though she rightfully could have). Mind you, Rachel's first film hadn't come out yet. Nobody knew who she was outside of those of us who were anticipating West Side Story and were fans of her covers on YouTube. She was a "nobody" in the industry. Take this part with a grain of salt because I can't confirm it, but Gina and her fans directly blame Rachel for her being banned from Twitter. Again, I really don't think that matters as she's harmful to the trans community and shouldn't have a platform. What does matter is that fans of Gina (which, let's be real, are just fans of transphobia) have been stalking Rachel's every move since then. Unfortunately for them, there wasn't much they could use against her other than to call her woke and #snowbrown when she was cast a year later as the Disney princess. The noise has always been there, but unless you were a fan of hers, you probably didn't hear about it. It wasn't until two years after this that they had something else against her.

If you've recently seen a video of Rachel crying circulating that claims to be her reaction to the recent Snow White backlash, it's an old video. It's from a vlog from her youtube channel posted in June 2022. It was in response to these exact same transphobic anti-woke conservatives who thought that they had something when she did an interview on the red carpet of the Shazam premiere. When asked why she joined the DC universe, she responded "I needed a job." It was generally well received by most people who thought it was cute and funny, but those who were waiting in the shadows latched onto it as an excuse to send her death threats.

The video was also about a month after she was invited to present at the 2022 Oscars and was made to seem like she bullied the Academy (as a no name newcomer, mind you) into letting her attend. In reality, a fan left a comment on her Instagram asking what she was wearing to the event. She responded that she wasn't invited but would be rooting for everyone from her couch in her boyfriend's pajamas. It was the public who demanded she get an invite and the Oscar's must have agreed that it was very odd that the lead actress of a film that was nominated for Best Film wouldn't get an invite. Whether it was an oversight on their part or a scheduling issue with Rachel's filming, I truly think there was no malicious intent from either party. Keep in mind, she used to be very active with her fans (she's a huge fangirl of things herself and has always had a strong relationship with her fans) and she wasn't used to her comments becoming articles and national tv segments. This was the first time it happened to her. It appears she learned that she's not just a girl who posts on YouTube anymore and she's going to be put under a microscope for every move she makes. She has since shut down her Instagram comments and rarely interacts with fans outside of liking comments these days because of this.

I know this is long, but I need people to understand where this is all coming from. It didn't just happen out of nowhere. It's an orchestrated campaign built by violent conservatives, and thousands of women who saw Barbie this summer are hopping on the bandwagon to beat another woman into submission because they have a lot of internalized misogyny to deal with. She's not smug, you just hate women. It's okay to find people annoying, but it's valuable to look into why you think that. If you see a confident young woman expressing views that don't actually harm anyone and you think she needs to be "humbled" and "put in her place" by the entire internet dogpiling her, you've lost your mind. Using "body language experts" (fake job) to diagnose her as a psychopath is so vile. Everytime someone mentions her name online, the comments beneath it are full of the most violent, misogynistic, racist things I've ever seen. If you're contributing to that, you've chosen your side. Reevaluate or seek help.

I'm tired of seeing this happen to young women. We let this happen to Jennifer Lawrence, Brie Larson, Millie Bobby Brown, Halle Bailey, and Jenna Ortega. It's one thing to call out celebrities and hold them accountable when they're doing something actively harmful, but that's not what this is about. That's never been what this is about. We pick these girls to pieces and examine them and pull them apart to justify our hatred of young women who rise to success too quickly for our liking. We dogpile and try to stamp out the flame before they burn too bright. Barbie is still in theaters and you all loved it, yet you're demanding that a bright girl with a big future be small and submissive and humbled because you have issues. That's not feminism. You're just the girls who would have bullied Weird Barbie for using her hands too much when she talks.

[raspberry-arev]

You know that ancient (and wonderful) Tumblr take on love triangles... where the girl is aroace and the two hot men realize they were moreless trying to impress each other and start dating instead?

Well I already subscribe to the Aroace Barbie head canon, so Greta Gerwig, 2Ken When?????

(the colors are a bit silly again but that's just my alcohol marker thing. I try, it does a thing, I might not be satisfied but it's too late now bithc) (also they would be so good for each other. himbo on himbo romance. "Kenning all over each other" in Ryan Gosling's words)

[thatscarletflycatcher]

My first reaction when finishing this movie was: well, that was a MEAN movie. Most of the characters in it have no actually human drives, desires, needs or interpersonal connections (SPECIALLY the main Barbie) and those who do, are relentlessly mocked for it.

Gloria's husband is the peak example of this. The movie roasts him furiously every time he's onscreen for the egregious sin of... having a difficult time learning a second language. That he's trying to learn because it is a culturally significant language to his wife and daughter. Even if it is very hard for him. He tries because he loves them. The movie frames this as pathetic and cringe-worthy.

The same thing happens with Ken. His love for horses, his need to be noticed, loved and appreciated, his drive for connection, are all treated as shameful weaknesses. But that's what makes a character... compelling. Endearing, even. Because it makes that character human. That's why so many people came out of the movie liking and caring the most about Ken (the whole "they do because MISOGYNY!!!! thing. I'm so fed up about everything being called misogyny. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means. Anyways).

For stereotypical Barbie, the movie plays heavily with referencing The Matrix and The Truman Show. But it doesn't seem to understand that at the core of those stories is the idea that the human spirit craves freedom and transcendence; it can look beyond the material and oppressive constraints imposed upon it, because it is spiritual and craves infinite good and beauty and connection with others (they are both re-elaborations of Plato's Cave and Plato's allegory of the chariot, but that's matter for a long digression). Both Neo's and Truman's stories are driven by this inner desire.

That's not the case for stereotypical Barbie, though. She has no such drive or desire. Her "awakening" is completely caused by a foreign, external factor -Gloria's own crisis-, and once it happens, all she wants is to make it go away. That's why the ending of her arc feels so tacked on and out of nowhere, a going-through-the-motions sort of thing. There's no reason for Barbie to want to be human. The real world is as fake and oppressive as Barbieland, with roles reversed. It doesn't offer more freedom, it doesn't offer connection, and Barbie herself does not want connection at any point in the narrative (she has no real friends or people she actually cares about. The closest it gets is the park bench scene). And this is a huge problem for the story, because then, intentionally or not, Barbie finally desperately wanting for the statu quo to return to Barbieland is really about power and control. Weird Barbie is an object of fear because she has neither of those things; she's an outcast relegated to the position of servant that is better neither heard nor seen.

And this, sadly, also reflects on Gloria and Sasha. Gloria does have human needs and desires; she's hurt by the growing distance between her daughter and her, a natural thing during adolescence, and this is implied to be the motivating factor of her personal crisis. The natural happy conclusion of this conflict would be for Gloria to accept that her daughter growing up means that a new, different connection has to happen between them, different from that of childhood, but not necessarily because of that a lesser or less intimate one. It would also mean for Sasha to discover/rediscover how much her mom loves her, and how much she loves her mom and appreciates her. But the movie instead chooses to resolve it as "Gloria discovers she's powerful as she becomes the feminist beacon that awakens the Barbies into retaking their control of Barbieland; Sasha also discovers Gloria is powerful and now admires her because of that. Their relationship is now fixed."

And all of this to me is just so... mean. And cruel. And empty. And sad.

I remember one night at a school party I got into a conversation with another teacher about Nietzsche, the übermensch, nihilism, vitalism, etc. And he told me that while he believed Nietzsche was right about the former two (that in a way we are constituted as real and strong by a self affirmation of our will and power, and that's all that there is), the jump into vitalism was not logically warranted; but that in the end, if you don't jump into vitalism and actually create the fictions of connection (e.g. creating art, establishing relationships of care and interdependence) you end up suicidal. Such was his personal experience. And I think this is where OP's reflections tie with mine. The Barbie movie embraces and develops the nihilism and the will to power, but never really jumps into vitalism and its fictions (maybe it tries with the ending arc of stereotypical Barbie, but I don't think it succeeds) or, of course, rejects or refutes them. And so it lands in this sort of desperate emptiness of "I am what I am and that is enough, whatever that is".

[allietaylorsversionsblog]

I can’t get over how good TOG could be as an HBO series (Netflix put your filthy paws away). My hot take is they must do the first season as AB but add Nehemia’s POV in Ellywe, make it a really cool world building season and obviously get everyone hooked by ripping our hearts out with Sam/Arobynn/Endovier

ACOTAR does not need and will not do well as an adaptation and that is a hill I will die on

Edit re: Margot Robbie/SJM meeting - Greta Gerwig directed TOG epic fantasy series?!?!

[girltalkcollectives]

The Barbie Scene That Had Us All Ugly Crying in the Theater (You Know the One)

I wasn’t prepared to have an existential crisis about womanhood while eating overpriced movie theater popcorn, but there I was, mascara running down my face, as America Ferrera started that speech in Barbie.

You know exactly which one I’m talking about.

“It is literally impossible to be a woman.”

And just like that, I felt seen in a way that hit differently than any feminist text or empowerment speech ever had. Because here was this regular mom, in a movie about a plastic doll, putting into words everything I’ve felt but couldn’t explain since I was old enough to understand what being a woman meant.

I glanced around the theater, and I swear you could feel it — this collective moment of recognition from every woman in the room. Like we were all simultaneously remembering every time we’d been too much and not enough, all at once.

The thing is, I didn’t walk into that theater expecting to confront every contradiction I’ve ever lived through. I was just there for the pink aesthetics and Margot Robbie’s outfits. But then Gloria started talking about how we’re supposed to be extraordinary but somehow always doing it wrong, and suddenly I was thinking about every time I’d dimmed my own light to make others comfortable.

“Always stand out and always be grateful.”

I felt that line in my soul. I remember a time last year when I got a 100 on a final exam for one of my college classes. I literally prefaced telling my friends with “It’s not really a big deal, but…” Why? Because I’d rather downplay my success than risk being seen as boastful.

The part about never admitting we’re doing any of it unless we want to be called difficult? I actually snorted in the theater (sorry to the people behind me). Because right before I went to see that movie, my roommate called me “high maintenance” for having basic boundaries about cleaning schedules. The bar is literally in hell.

Sitting there, watching this scene, I thought about every woman in my life who’s lived this impossible paradox. My mom, who was told she was “too aggressive” for asking for a raise after 15 years at her company. My best friend, who got called “difficult” for turning down a guy who wouldn’t take no for an answer. Me, being told I’m “too sensitive” for calling out sexist jokes while also being told “too cold” for not laughing at them.

You want to know the most ironic part? Some critics called this speech “too on the nose” or “heavy-handed.” And isn’t that exactly what Gloria was talking about? Even when we perfectly articulate the impossible standards we face, we get criticized for how we articulate them.

I left that theater feeling different. Not because anything had changed, really, but because finally, someone had named this thing we’ve all been feeling. In a summer blockbuster. In hot pink. In a movie about a literal plastic doll.

Sometimes I rewatch that scene on Tiktok when I need to remember I’m not crazy for feeling overwhelmed by these contradictions. When I need to remember that every woman I know is doing this impossible dance of being everything and nothing all at once.

To the woman who sat next to me in the theater and offered me a tissue during that scene without saying a word — thank you. To America Ferrera for delivering those lines like she was reading from my diary — thank you. To Greta Gerwig for sneaking this truth bomb into a movie about Barbie — thank you.

And to every woman reading this who’s ever felt like she’s failing at being a woman because the requirements are impossible — you're not alone. We’re all just trying to navigate this pink paradox together.

Link to our website: https://girltalkcollectives.com/

[mariacallous]

“Barbenheimer”—the collective celebration around the release of the Barbie and Oppenheimer movies—has collided with the wedding industrial complex. That’s not a joke. According to a Variety story this week, people are planning on taking their friends and family, prenuptials, to see the two films as a double feature. People who aren’t getting married are planning similar movie-watching marathons. It’s the kind of viral cultural moment marketing teams dream of. It also feels like a sign of the end times.

This sense of dread doesn’t stem from the public’s collective yearning to absorb stories about a Mattel doll and the development of atomic weapons at the same time. It’s because this weekend promises the kind of “let’s all go to the movies!” hype (and box office haul) that cinemas haven’t seen since before the Covid-19 pandemic shut theaters down—and it’s happening as Hollywood is going on strike.

This week, WIRED rolled out a series of stories detailing what we believe the future of entertainment might entail. The purpose was to look at how all aspects of culture, from books to video games to YouTube, could be impacted by advancements in technology. As we worked on it, though, something happened: Contract talks between Hollywood studios and the writers and actors unions began to break down. One of the major sticking points in those negotiations was the use of artificial intelligence in movie- and TV-making. Suddenly, as Madeline Ashby wrote in her essay this week, the world was in the midst of Hot Strike Summer.

Then, Hot Strike Summer slammed into the Barbenheimer moment. Once the Screen Actors Guild—American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, or SAG-AFTRA, called for a walkout, stars could no longer smile on red carpets without looking like scabs. The stars of Oppenheimer walked out of the film’s London premiere when the strike began. The cast and filmmakers behind Barbie, which premiered before SAG called for a strike, voiced their support. Soon, “This Barbie Is Now on Strike” became the headline, transforming one of the world’s most well-known figurines into Norma Rae. The marquee at my local theater in Brooklyn listed both movies alongside the phrase “Atomic Kenergy,” while The New York Times asked, “Can I Watch ‘Barbenheimer’ Despite the Hollywood Strikes?” (Short answer: Yes.)

To that end, the strikes will not affect Oppenheimer or Barbie’s opening weekend box office numbers. Earlier this week, AMC Entertainment reported that some 40,000 people had bought tickets for both films, and together they’re estimated to make around $150-200 million domestically, with Greta Gerwig’s send-up of the Mattel doll bringing in a bigger chunk than Christopher Nolan’s historical drama about the man behind the atomic bomb.  

But what matters is what happens after this weekend. By all accounts, Hot Strike Summer seems poised to last beyond one season. Even before SAG went on strike, studio sources were telling reporters that the plan was to let the strike “drag on until union members start losing their apartments and losing their houses.” In response to that, actor Ron Perlman took to social media to say “listen to me, motherfucker—there’s a lot of ways to lose your house.” He later walked that back, but when Hellboy enters the chat, you know it’s not going to end gently.

The longer writers and actors are on strike, the bigger the hole next summer or the summer after that, when the movies that would be filming right now aren’t ready. (Deadpool 3 and the sequel to Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One, for example, are both currently on hold.) Cinemas have been bouncing back in the years since Covid restrictions were lifted and people began feeling comfortable in movie houses again. A lackluster year brought on by a dearth of films could prove detrimental.

Yesterday, Comic-Con International began in San Diego. Typically, or at least before the pandemic, the event has been full of panels with flashy stars promoting their next big movie or TV series. As long as SAG is on strike, those celebs won’t show. Some attendees will likely welcome the event’s return to its comics roots, rather than the Hollywood hype-fest it has become. But no matter what happens, it will be unlike any Comic-Con in recent memory. Maybe a little less plastic, but not fantastic.

[gossamer-apothecary]

okay barbie exceeded my expectations. i will never show kenough gratitude for greta making this masterpiece.

[starsopinions]

The Golden Globes...

It has been the hot topic the last few days: The Golden Globes. And because there aren't enough opinions out there already, this is mine. Here is my opinion on all of this from the point of view of a teenage girl who would one day like to work in the film industry.

We as a society have had a history with sexism but I'd like to think that in the twenty-first century, we are all equal. Unfortunately, I am proven wrong time and time again.

I was very excited to watch the Golden Globes, as a film fanatic I was very interested in who would win. Being a Swiftie, I was hoping for a win for Taylor and as a huge Greta Gerwig fan I was rooting for at least a few wins for Barbie. I didn't get either but we did get something far worse. yay!!

I'm sure you've seen the 'jokes' that were made but let me recap:

"Oppenheimer is based on a 721-page Pulitzer Prize-winning book about the Manhattan Project, and Barbie is on a plastic doll with big boobies."

"The key moment in Barbie is when she goes from perfect beauty to bad breath, cellulite, and flat feet. Or what casting directors call character actor!"

"Yo, I got the gig 10 days ago, you want a perfect monologue? Yo, shut up. You’re kidding me, right? Slow down. I wrote some of these, and they’re the ones you’re laughing at.”

“The big difference between the Golden Globes and the NFL — on the Golden Globes, we have fewer camera shots of Taylor Swift."

To make matters worse, he added this in an interview with Variety the morning after The Golden Globes:

"Yes, I’m a stand-up comic but that hosting position it’s a different style. I kind of went in and did the writer’s thing. We had 10 days to write this monologue. It was a crash course. I feel bad, but I got to still say I loved what I did.”

I think that it is disrespectful and the fact that they didn't even think about if it would fall flat or not is horrible. The comments were written by multiple people, so multiple people read them (all men, no doubt) and not a single one thought that it might not go well?? I am baffled. This is not some cheap festival we are talking about these are the Golden Globes! How can something like this go wrong so badly??

I am personally so disappointed about it because 2023 was such a good year for women. The Eras Tour, The Renaissance Tour, Barbie, I can go on.

These aren't just projects featuring women, we all made friendship bracelets for The Eras Tour. We all wore pink to the movie theatre for Barbie and then we all cried for 'What Was I Made For?'. Those are experiences, that is womanhood! and I had so much fun!! I was at the movie theatre and there was this lady and she must have been well in her 70s and she was wearing this beautiful, hot pink (!), prom-style dress and she came up to me and she told me how it was her birthday and she was taking her grandchildren to see Barbie. And if that isn't the best thing you have ever heard then I don't know what to tell you! And that is just one example of how beautiful womanhood is. I am telling you this to showcase that no, Barbie is not just a plastic doll with big boobies. I feel like you would know that if you actually watched the movie and respected the people who worked so hard to create it. It breaks my heart to see people make fun of it like that.

It is so sad for me to see because these are the people I admire. They put their hearts and souls into this and they make these beautiful things. Greta Gerwig and Taylor Swift have worked so hard to get there and they still aren't respected like their male counterparts are. Did you hear a single joke about a man? Me neither because there weren't any.

It is so sad to see because it shows how it doesn't matter what we do, how hard we try or how successful we are. We will never be treated fairly.

It is so sad to see because these are the most successful women in the industry, if they aren't respected, I will never be either.

Loads of people think that these are "just jokes" but I disagree. These kinds of "jokes" reveal how men treat women in society. It might sound dramatic but it is true. It is all good when women make them money and fix the economy, but giving them basic respect is too hard to ask. It makes me angry that a comedian that no one has ever even heard of is allowed to make these kinds of comments about some of the successful women in the world. In the future, they should hire people who are actually funny and not disrespectful (and maybe even a woman? Shocking, I know).

Thanks for reading

- star ☆

[tortoisebore]

IDK IF YOU’RE STILL DOING THIS BUT!

How would wolfstar act during Barbenheimer? Who wants to see what? How are they dressed?

EEEEEEE i am ALWAYS doing these ALWAYS i love them so much 🫶🫶🫶🫶🫶🫶 ((i have some unanswered ones in my inbox i promise im getting to don’t worry 💕💓💞💖))

okay first off we’ve established that they’re both insufferable wanna-be film critics & everyone hates them for it. so keep that in the background. they’re annoying as hell.

so they get wind of oppenheimer first. the teaser plays at a midnight screening of “nope” ((sirius is a jordan peele stan)) and it’s just a bunch of fire and black and white shots of cillian murphy so they’re both like “🙂 huh okay fun.” but then christopher nolan’s name is on the screen and sirius is nearly flying out of his seat bc he’s potentially the world’s biggest chris nolan stan. and he’s hitting remus on the arm and he’s all “👹 FUC K! !!!” and remus is like “oh good another nolan movie that’ll be fun love that” and enduring sirius’ semi-quiet fangirl moment but then he catches on to what the trailer is actually about and “oppenheimer” comes on the end card and then he’s ALSO having a freakout moment & he’s all “oh fuck 😧😧😧 oh fuck it’s oppenheimer 🫢 oh fuck 😵 oh fuck cheistopher nolan’s doing oppenheimer 😵‍💫😵‍ oh god.”

so for the next couple of months they’re both telling all their friends “yes so we’ve heard the inside scoop about nolan’s new film, very ambitious, word on the street is that it’s all practical & the b*mb isn’t CGI” and “did u know that christopher nolan himself created an atom b*mb on set to 1/36th scale” like they’re just making shit up from these random reddit threads & illegitimate news sites and everyone’s like “yeah great okay sure no one cares 🙄”

but then fall rolls around & remus overhears someone on the actual street talking on the phone about a barbie movie. and he does a little google and there it is, greta gerwig is doing a barbie movie with margot robbie, and holy shit sirius is going to freak ((he’s also a greta gerwig stan, they both are, obvi. sirius’ favorite of hers is ladybird and remus’ fav is little women, also obvi)). remus makes the mistake of sending sirius the article ab the movie in a text instead of in person where he could have done some damage control and he immediately gets a facetime where sirius just screeches at him for a good three and a half minutes before a single coherent word comes out of his mouth. so yes, he’s very excited for barbie, and remus is excited for greta gerwig to make everyone cry over a doll.

so they know about the movies separately and then the barbenheimer phenomenon takes over, and they become aware that not only are both movies coming out in july, they’re coming out on the same fucking day. and when they find this out they’re at home on separate sides of the apartment and marlene texts in the gc like “are we doing barbenheimer weekend orrrr” and they both take a minute to catch up but then they’re meeting in the living room like WHATTTTT😵😵😵😵😵😵

they plan a whole weekend. on saturday morning remus gets up early and makes waffles in the heart-shaped waffle maker sirius found months ago specifically for barbenheimer weekend breakfast and even puts red food coloring in the batter so they’re pink hearts with whipped cream and cherries to top it all off. and they do black coffee to drink because it gives oppenheimer vibes & they couldn’t think of anything else appetizing to go with it in a breakfast scenario.

they’re going comfort over style for the premiere bc they’re ab to be at the theater for like seven or eight hours, but sirius is wearing a hot pink malibu barbie baby tee for the occasion. remus is ✨not✨ wearing hot pink bc he’s a ✨warm autumn✨ & it’s ✨not✨ his color but he made sure sirius took one of his sweaters bc he always gets cold at movies and complains he’s freezing until remus gives him his own & that is “not happening this time, sirius, get your own fucking sweater.”

they’re doing barbie first. they got the tickets the second they went on sale, two seats in the middle of the row ⅔ of the way back into the theater bc that’s where sound designers sit for screenings & it’s a perfect view. they get their giant sodas and a big popcorn to share, plus some m&ms they snuck in to do an m&m/popcorn mix ((god tier movie snack fr)). they’re enraptured from the very first scene. giant barbie on a desert background. barbieland. the dream house. ryan gosling. all of it. it’s a masterpiece. they both cry at the end & they’re caught off guard bc wtf this wasn’t supposed to be about mothers??? what the hell???

they have a forty-five minute break between movies where they recover in the lobby for a while & refill the popcorn, but they’re getting one water bottle to share this time bc bathroom breaks are not an option & oppenheimer has like a three and a half hour fucking runtime. like they’re doing bathroom breaks twenty seconds before the movie starts bc missing part of this film would actually destroy them psychologically

they do it in IMAX, obvi, ⅔ back in the middle of the row. it’s an out of body experience. they don’t speak or move the entire time. they don’t speak or move while the credits play. they leave the theater in silence. they go home and sit on the couch and stare at the wall and remus goes “we……we should have seen barbie last.” and then they both look at each other like 😐👀? and then they’re getting up and rushing back to the theater and seeing barbie again

the next day they’re getting together with all their friends to do barbenheimer day 2 and trying not to spoil it but they’ve already talked to each other about the individual movies too much, like they laid in bed and talked about the fucking movies like idiots for multiple hours, so they need new feedback to talk over & correct everyone’s wrong opinions

and like obviously everyone hates them