Hey,

If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.

One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult. All in all, worth seeing.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 21:48:49 -0700, william ahearn wrote:

> Hey,
>
> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film
> history.
>
> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source
> material -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The
> film has a sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always
> difficult. All in all, worth seeing.

The New York Times reviewer liked the last line of the movie. What was it?

On Sunday, July 23, 2023 at 3:34:09 AM UTC-4, Charles Packer wrote:

> The New York Times reviewer liked the last line of the movie. What was it?

That would be a spoiler. I laughed.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 21:48:49 -0700 (PDT), william ahearn
<wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hey,
>
>If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>

If that's your best argument to see it, it's garbage.

On Sunday, July 23, 2023 at 10:35:34 AM UTC-4, NoBody wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 21:48:49 -0700 (PDT), william ahearn
> <wlah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hey,
> >
> >If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
> >
> If that's your best argument to see it, it's garbage.

You *have* to believe that.

On 07/23/2023 09:19 AM, william ahearn wrote:
> On Sunday, July 23, 2023 at 3:34:09 AM UTC-4, Charles Packer wrote:
>
>> The New York Times reviewer liked the last line of the movie. What was it?

> That would be a spoiler. I laughed.

Yes, the last line *is* funny!

Grosses
DOMESTIC (45.4%)
$351,402,851
INTERNATIONAL (54.6%)
$423,100,000
WORLDWIDE
$774,502,851

Grosses
DOMESTIC (44.5%)
$526,309,000
INTERNATIONAL (55.5%)
$657,600,000
WORLDWIDE
$1,183,909,000

william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>
> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
> All in all, worth seeing.
>

The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.

And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.

--
Bill Anderson

I am the Mighty Favog

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:41:43 AM UTC-4, Bill Anderson wrote:

> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>
What I like about the film is that it smoked the "Go woke, go broke" nonsense. Yeah, Bud Light made one of the worst marketing decisions ever that seemed to be inspired by Mel Brooks. There was a short-lasting glitch at Target and everything calmed down. The latest Indy Jones movie died not because it was "woke" but because it was a bad movie. And then there's Barbie -- that has been described as the "Wokest" Hollywood movie -- and instead of leaving a crater, it made hundreds of millions of dollars. Ya gotta love it.

On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>
>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>
>
> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>
> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.

(Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
regardless.

moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>>
>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>>
>>
>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>>
>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>
> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
> regardless.
>
>
>
>

From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
certainly end up disproving what I just said.

Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
joke though.

--
Bill Anderson

I am the Mighty Favog

On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey,
>>>>
>>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>>>
>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>>>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
>>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
>>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
>>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>>>
>>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>>
>> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
>> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
>> regardless.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
> preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
> certainly end up disproving what I just said.
>
> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
> probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
> joke though.

Re fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a
movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...

moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>>> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>
>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>>>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>>>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>>>>
>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>>>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>>>>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
>>>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
>>>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
>>>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>>>>
>>>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>>>
>>> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
>>> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
>>> regardless.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
>> preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
>> certainly end up disproving what I just said.
>>
>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
>> joke though.
>
> Re fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a
> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...
>
>
>
>
For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired of Weird Barbie
and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the movie was consistently
smart, but it was inconsistently interesting to me.

--
Bill Anderson

I am the Mighty Favog

On 10/3/2023 4:12 PM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>>>> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>>>>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>>>>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>>>>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>>>>>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
>>>>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
>>>>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
>>>>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>>>>>
>>>>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>>>>
>>>> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
>>>> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
>>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
>>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
>>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
>>>> regardless.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
>>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
>>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
>>> preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
>>> certainly end up disproving what I just said.
>>>
>>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
>>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
>>> joke though.
>>
>> Re fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a
>> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...
>>
>>
>>
>>
> For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired of Weird Barbie
> and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the movie was consistently
> smart, but it was inconsistently interesting to me.

I shall hold to the possibility that it was merely beyond our Ken.

On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 4:46:29 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:

> I shall hold to the possibility that it was merely beyond our Ken.

Waaaaay beyond. What you two -- and the rightwing wankers -- don't get is that Barbie is a comedy. Full out including the
Ken material. It's an absolute hoot.

william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 3, 2023 at 4:46:29 PM UTC-4, moviePig wrote:
>
>> I shall hold to the possibility that it was merely beyond our Ken.
>
> Waaaaay beyond. What you two -- and the rightwing wankers -- don't get is
> that Barbie is a comedy. Full out including the
> Ken material. It's an absolute hoot.
>

Of course I understand it’s a comedy. I just didn’t laugh as much as you
did.

--
Bill Anderson

I am the Mighty Favog

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:41:43 AM UTC-5, Bill Anderson wrote:
> william ahearn <wlah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
> > hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
> > crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
> > again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
> >
> > One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
> > -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
> > sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
> > All in all, worth seeing.
> >
> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>
> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>
> --
> Bill Anderson
>
> I am the Mighty Favog

The DVD is out. No extras on this version.
It interested me enuff to watch an entire hour. Rest for next week.

On 2023-10-03 20:12:05 +0000, Bill Anderson said:

> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
>>>>> william ahearn <wlahearn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
>>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
>>>>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
>>>>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
>>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
>>>>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
>>>>>> All in all, worth seeing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
>>>>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
>>>>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
>>>>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
>>>>>
>>>>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.
>>>>
>>>> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)
>>>> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
>>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
>>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
>>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
>>>> regardless.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
>>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
>>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
>>> preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
>>> certainly end up disproving what I just said.
>>>
>>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
>>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
>>> joke though.
>>
>> Re fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a
>> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...
>>
>>
>>
>>
> For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired of Weird Barbie
> and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the movie was consistently
> smart, but it was inconsistently interesting to me.

I noticed a headline a few days ago that BAFTA ("British Oscars" if you
will) snubbed this movie completely in their noms, I didn't investigate
more deeply though since it has minimal appeal to me (might be worth it
to turn down the sound and ogle Robbie for two hours, lol).

On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 4:34:14 AM UTC-6, super70s wrote:
> On 2023-10-03 20:12:05 +0000, Bill Anderson said:
>
> > moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> >>> moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 9/14/2023 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:
> >>>>> william ahearn <wlah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hey,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five minutes of this film. It's
> >>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film buff. The content will drive the MAGA
> >>>>>> crowd up the wall while they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once
> >>>>>> again it will show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to the source material
> >>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films based on novels. The film has a
> >>>>>> sly humor although maintaining this form of comedy is always difficult.
> >>>>>> All in all, worth seeing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as you say, and the final joke worked
> >>>>> as well. There were some funny bits in between, however this was a movie
> >>>>> aimed not at me, but at little girls on one level and grown women on
> >>>>> another. Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And it’s nice to know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor..
> >>>>
> >>>> (Since it was fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel..)
> >>>> While I appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it
> >>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very
> >>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in hysterics
> >>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled. Compulsory viewing,
> >>>> regardless.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel supported the
> >>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits aren’t as stupid as
> >>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve also read that Mattel is now
> >>> preparing movies for every toy in its product line, which will almost
> >>> certainly end up disproving what I just said.
> >>>
> >>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button there toward the end? I
> >>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final
> >>> joke though.
> >>
> >> Re fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a
> >> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired of Weird Barbie
> > and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the movie was consistently
> > smart, but it was inconsistently interesting to me.
> I noticed a headline a few days ago that BAFTA ("British Oscars" if you
> will) snubbed this movie completely in their noms, I didn't investigate
> more deeply though since it has minimal appeal to me (might be worth it
> to turn down the sound and ogle Robbie for two hours, lol).

The Brit Class system is the same as the Good Ole Boys system in Barbie. Of course Brits were snubbing. Men, Woo Yaa !

On 2024-01-25 01:46:18 +0000, JG Rove said:
> On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 4:34:14 AM UTC-6, super70s wrote:
>> On 2023-10-03 20:12:05 +0000, Bill Anderson said:>> > moviePig
>> <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson
>> wrote:> >>> moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >>>> On 9/14/2023
>> 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:> >>>>> william ahearn <wlah...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:> >>>>>> Hey,> >>>>>>> >>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five
>> minutes of this film. It's> >>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film
>> buff. The content will drive the MAGA> >>>>>> crowd up the wall while
>> they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once> >>>>>> again it will
>> show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.>
>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to
>> the source material> >>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films
>> based on novels. The film has a> >>>>>> sly humor although maintaining
>> this form of comedy is always difficult.> >>>>>> All in all, worth
>> seeing.> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as
>> you say, and the final joke worked> >>>>> as well. There were some
>> funny bits in between, however this was a movie> >>>>> aimed not at me,
>> but at little girls on one level and grown women on> >>>>> another.
>> Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.> >>>>>> >>>>> And it’s nice to
>> know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.> >>>>> >>>> (Since it was
>> fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)> >>>> While I
>> appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it> >>>>
>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very> >>>>
>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in
>> hysterics> >>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled.
>> Compulsory viewing,> >>>> regardless.> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel
>> supported the> >>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits
>> aren’t as stupid as> >>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve
>> also read that Mattel is now> >>> preparing movies for every toy in its
>> product line, which will almost> >>> certainly end up disproving what I
>> just said.> >>>> >>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button
>> there toward the end? I> >>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But
>> it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final> >>> joke though.> >>> >> Re
>> fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a> >>
>> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> > For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired
>> of Weird Barbie> > and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the
>> movie was consistently> > smart, but it was inconsistently interesting
>> to me.
>> I noticed a headline a few days ago that BAFTA ("British Oscars" if
>> you> will) snubbed this movie completely in their noms, I didn't
>> investigate> more deeply though since it has minimal appeal to me
>> (might be worth it> to turn down the sound and ogle Robbie for two
>> hours, lol).
>
> The Brit Class system is the same as the Good Ole Boys system in
> Barbie. Of course Brits were snubbing. Men, Woo Yaa !

Barbie isn't a British movie, so it shouldn't even remotely be able to
qualify for the BAFTAs.

It'a bit like the ridiculousness of "Britain's Got Talent" where they
allow acts from other countries to enter. There are already "Got
Talent" and knock-off shows in numerous other countries for non-British
acts to enter in their own country.

On 2024-01-25 01:59:54 +0000, Your Name said:

> On 2024-01-25 01:46:18 +0000, JG Rove said:
>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 4:34:14 AM UTC-6, super70s wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-03 20:12:05 +0000, Bill Anderson said:>> > moviePig
>>> <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson
>>> wrote:> >>> moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >>>> On 9/14/2023
>>> 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:> >>>>> william ahearn <wlah...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:> >>>>>> Hey,> >>>>>>> >>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five
>>> minutes of this film. It's> >>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film
>>> buff. The content will drive the MAGA> >>>>>> crowd up the wall while
>>> they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once> >>>>>> again it will
>>> show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to
>>> the source material> >>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films
>>> based on novels. The film has a> >>>>>> sly humor although maintaining
>>> this form of comedy is always difficult.> >>>>>> All in all, worth
>>> seeing.> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as
>>> you say, and the final joke worked> >>>>> as well. There were some
>>> funny bits in between, however this was a movie> >>>>> aimed not at me,
>>> but at little girls on one level and grown women on> >>>>> another.
>>> Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.> >>>>>> >>>>> And it’s nice to
>>> know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.> >>>>> >>>> (Since it was
>>> fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)> >>>> While I
>>> appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it> >>>>
>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very> >>>>
>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in
>>> hysterics> >>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled.
>>> Compulsory viewing,> >>>> regardless.> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
>>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel
>>> supported the> >>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits
>>> aren’t as stupid as> >>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve
>>> also read that Mattel is now> >>> preparing movies for every toy in its
>>> product line, which will almost> >>> certainly end up disproving what I
>>> just said.> >>>> >>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button
>>> there toward the end? I> >>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But
>>> it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final> >>> joke though.> >>> >> Re
>>> fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a> >>
>>> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...> >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired
>>> of Weird Barbie> > and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the
>>> movie was consistently> > smart, but it was inconsistently interesting
>>> to me.
>>> I noticed a headline a few days ago that BAFTA ("British Oscars" if
>>> you> will) snubbed this movie completely in their noms, I didn't
>>> investigate> more deeply though since it has minimal appeal to me
>>> (might be worth it> to turn down the sound and ogle Robbie for two
>>> hours, lol).
>>
>> The Brit Class system is the same as the Good Ole Boys system in
>> Barbie. Of course Brits were snubbing. Men, Woo Yaa !
>
> Barbie isn't a British movie, so it shouldn't even remotely be able to
> qualify for the BAFTAs.

Be that as it may it still qualifies:

"The British Academy Film Awards, more commonly known as the BAFTA Film
Awards, is an annual award show hosted by the British Academy of Film
and Television Arts (BAFTA) to honour the best British and
international contributions to film.

Most of the awards are open to all nationalities, though there are
awards for Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British
Writer, Producer or Director. Only UK films are eligible for the
categories of The British Short Film and British Short Animation
awards."

- Wikipedia

> It'a bit like the ridiculousness of "Britain's Got Talent" where they
> allow acts from other countries to enter. There are already "Got
> Talent" and knock-off shows in numerous other countries for non-British
> acts to enter in their own country.

On 2024-01-25 12:59:16 +0000, super70s said:
> On 2024-01-25 01:59:54 +0000, Your Name said:
>> On 2024-01-25 01:46:18 +0000, JG Rove said:
>>> On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 4:34:14 AM UTC-6, super70s wrote:
>>>> On 2023-10-03 20:12:05 +0000, Bill Anderson said:>> > moviePig
>>>> <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >> On 10/3/2023 12:00 AM, Bill Anderson
>>>> wrote:> >>> moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:> >>>> On 9/14/2023
>>>> 9:41 AM, Bill Anderson wrote:> >>>>> william ahearn <wlah...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:> >>>>>> Hey,> >>>>>>> >>>>>> If nothing else, see the first five
>>>> minutes of this film. It's> >>>>>> hysterical, especially for a film
>>>> buff. The content will drive the MAGA> >>>>>> crowd up the wall while
>>>> they're stuttering "woke" the whole way and once> >>>>>> again it will
>>>> show their lack of knowledge about real history and film history.>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One could argue that this film slides a lot closer to
>>>> the source material> >>>>>> -- the story of a doll -- than most films
>>>> based on novels. The film has a> >>>>>> sly humor although maintaining
>>>> this form of comedy is always difficult.> >>>>>> All in all, worth
>>>> seeing.> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> The opening sequence was brilliant, as
>>>> you say, and the final joke worked> >>>>> as well. There were some
>>>> funny bits in between, however this was a movie> >>>>> aimed not at me,
>>>> but at little girls on one level and grown women on> >>>>> another.
>>>> Apparently lots of them enjoyed it.> >>>>>> >>>>> And it’s nice to
>>>> know corporate Mattel has a sense of humor.> >>>>> >>>> (Since it was
>>>> fantasy writ large, I saw nothing actionable by Mattel.)> >>>> While I
>>>> appreciated the movie, I wish I had enjoyed it more, but it> >>>>
>>>> triggered my watch-checking tell. I agree that it seemed very> >>>>
>>>> audience-specific -- e.g., two women I watched it with were in
>>>> hysterics> >>>> over the foot-flattening, while I only chuckled.
>>>> Compulsory viewing,> >>>> regardless.> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>> From what I have read, I’ve come to believe corporate Mattel
>>>> supported the> >>> script 100%. At least this once it seems, the suits
>>>> aren’t as stupid as> >>> they are generally presumed to be. I’ve
>>>> also read that Mattel is now> >>> preparing movies for every toy in its
>>>> product line, which will almost> >>> certainly end up disproving what I
>>>> just said.> >>>> >>> Should I admit that I hit the fast-forward button
>>>> there toward the end? I> >>> probably shouldn’t admit that. But
>>>> it’s what I did. Didn’t miss the final> >>> joke though.> >>> >> Re
>>>> fast-forwarding/watch-checking, it's a bit odd that'd happen in a> >>
>>>> movie that I really did feel was consistently smart. ADD maybe...> >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For me it was simple: they were jabbering and I was tired
>>>> of Weird Barbie> > and I had lost interest so I checked out. Maybe the
>>>> movie was consistently> > smart, but it was inconsistently interesting
>>>> to me.
>>>> I noticed a headline a few days ago that BAFTA ("British Oscars" if
>>>> you> will) snubbed this movie completely in their noms, I didn't
>>>> investigate> more deeply though since it has minimal appeal to me
>>>> (might be worth it> to turn down the sound and ogle Robbie for two
>>>> hours, lol).
>>>
>>> The Brit Class system is the same as the Good Ole Boys system in
>>> Barbie. Of course Brits were snubbing. Men, Woo Yaa !
>>
>> Barbie isn't a British movie, so it shouldn't even remotely be able to
>> qualify for the BAFTAs.
>
> Be that as it may it still qualifies:
>
> "The British Academy Film Awards, more commonly known as the BAFTA Film
> Awards, is an annual award show hosted by the British Academy of Film
> and Television Arts (BAFTA) to honour the best British and
> international contributions to film.
>
> Most of the awards are open to all nationalities, though there are
> awards for Outstanding British Film and Outstanding Debut by a British
> Writer, Producer or Director. Only UK films are eligible for the
> categories of The British Short Film and British Short Animation
> awards."
>
> - Wikipedia

That's why I said "shouldn't qualify" rather than "doesn't qualify". :-)

It's the British awards, so *should* be for Britsh entertainment only.
American movies and TV shows already have multiple awards of their own,
as do many other countries - even here in New Zealand they have their
own crappy awards (once known as the GOFTAs, Guild of Film and
Television Arts).

>> It'a bit like the ridiculousness of "Britain's Got Talent" where they
>> allow acts from other countries to enter. There are already "Got
>> Talent" and knock-off shows in numerous other countries for non-British
>> acts to enter in their own country.