• I'm supposed to be this site's resident "joyless scold"

Yeah, I wonder why. Alright pal, think whatever you want and compare what I said to making excuses for saying the n-word. But anyone who takes the phrase "baby brained" as some kind of serious, toxic insult is clearly as tightly wound as a watch. People like you and your asshole, attacking replies are an example of the exact reason WHY I'm so fucking tired of talking about and hearing media discussion on this site. You're right, I should have never voiced my displeasure at all, because then I wouldn't have had to deal with all your weird pent up anger.

You're assuming a lot about me from what amounts to a mostly joking off hand comment I made because I get frustrated with how overly-critical and cynical people on this sight get about movies. I'm simply tired of people on here acting like every film that's not overtly calling for revolutionary overthrow of capitalism is evil and immoral and shit and you're bad for watching it. Like, yeah it'd be cool if every movie was as revolutionary as like Battleship Potemkin or Battle of Algiers but we still live under capitalism so they're unfortunately not. It just gets tiring here where it feels like people need to be so moralist about EVERYTHING they watch. Like it's ok to enjoy stuff that's not as progressive as us, enjoy art that was made by flawed people with flawed ideas. Sure, I'm not saying go out and listen to Skrewdriver, but most stuff is fine to like and enjoy and not necessary to decry as bad or wrong. It just feels like film/art opinions here are overly negative. Just because we don't like or vibe with something doesn't necessitate moral condemnation of it.

And for the recrod, if we're gonna talk about "toxicity" I find the original post and your reply to me way more antagonistic and hostile than my comment.

I'm starting to realize everyone on this site has baby brain movie opinions

It was very entertaining and funny and I had a good time watching it, but here's an expert from a review I wrote on part of what kept me from loving it as much as seemingly everyone else is:

With all the meta-humor on Barbie as a product (and the feminist quandaries therein) - present in this film, throughout my viewing my mind kept wandering back to David Foster Wallace's essay about modern media and the use of irony: "E Unibus Pluram: Television and US Fiction". A quote from it that feels pretty relevant is as follows:

"And herein lies the oppressiveness of instiutionalized irony, the too-successful rebel: the ability to interdict the question without attending to its subject is, when exercised, tyranny. It is the new junta, using the very tool that exposed its enemy to insulate itself."

And that's the gnawing feeling at the back of my mind that keeps me from liking this movie more. This film and its narrative are fully about using irony to analyze Barbie as a brand and product. The plot hinges on this, the themes ruminate on what it all means, but, like DFW wrote, part of me thinks this more head-on ironic approach to the film's own "product-hood" is what gives me dissonance. Because with the film's every joke and meta-comment on Barbie, I can't help but remember they're ultimately making or allowing that joke to be made because they think it will sell more Barbie. It is disarming us of our worries over Barbie as a brand in order the further the brand. It converts Barbie into feminist meta-commentary not to answering the question of "is Barbie helpful or harmful to womanhood", but to sell more Barbie. And so that's my big issue, one that was more-or-less inescapable and unsolvable to Gerwig & co. from before production even started: no amount of irony stops a commercial from being a commercial.

New Mission:Impossible is about Ethan Hunt breaking into Desantis Campaign HQ to steal the secret dossier containing info on the "Muffin Incident"

Jackson Hole? Don't ever go there. Let's just say I was getting guys who were involved with KKK.

@Dirt_Owl

bitch just drink water lol

irony to be built in poland

We gotta do like the Foot Clan does in one of the 90s live action TMNT movies, where they just have a big, sick ass warehouse filled with arcade games, junk food, music, and a half pipe to get teens to hang out there, then lure them into becoming minions of Shredder.

More like "The Young TERFS"

For as bad as the mass shootings and attacks in the US are, Canada seems to have a pointedly bad problem with angry loners attacking universities for misogynist reasons

I think the twist at the end of season one was so unnecessary, ridiculous, and stupid. And it's such a fundamental part of the show that it kinda ruins everything before and after as a result.

bullets that only hit white people

yeonmi park voice

"In North Korea they force the children to be adults and the adults to be children. I had to raise my 25 year old mother who wore diapers when I was a baby and wore a suit. The Boss Baby is real in North Korea."

I'm sure it's a total coincidence that cameras meant to "fight violent crime" just happened to be placed right by low income housing

yo, check if there's a Blue Morpho cave under there

This take is giving major STEM-lord energy

Oh yeah, everyone, I'm sure the guy who:

• directed a thoughtful, compelling movie about the elements of alienation for modern kids that can create a school shooter
• directed a movie about CIA agents faking the moon landing to manufacture consent where he and his crew/cast literally scammed their way into NASA to be able to film on-site https://www.bizjournals.com/losangeles/news/2016/09/15/operation-avalanche-crew-sneaked-into-nasa.html
• created a web series/TV show that famously set precedents for fair use laws in terms of getting away with co-opting copyrighted material in creative, artistic ways, having to fight IP holders tooth and nail the entire time. literally a big FU to the idea of modern Copyright law

is totally gonna make a film that just 100%, uncritically just is about how cool and good capitalism is and how all tech people are good and you should buy their stuff. I mean, that's why he has made a movie about a now famously obsolete/failed brand/company, right?

I'm planning on seeing this movie tomorrow, and will gladly eat crow if I'm wrong, and it is some lame embrace of how amazing companies are, but I'd be shocked if that's what it's actually about. I'm just begging everyone here to stop writing off movies/art on a gut reaction basis of whether you think it's "based" or not. Actually engage with art, or at least do some basic looking, before you decided to smear it.

THE TREATS MUST FLOW