Greta Gerwig has the perfect answer to every question about Barbieland

There are a thousand densely layered visible and verbal jokes in Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach’s script for Barbie, however one specifically stands out, as a result of it’s a light-weight gag with such large story implications that it looks like an ethos. When Aaron (Connor Swindells), a low-level Mattel worker, finds out “Stereotypical Barbie” (Margot Robbie) has escaped from the fantasy world of Barbieland and entered Reality, he instantly alerts Mattel’s CEO (Will Ferrell) and the company’s board of administrators. But then Aaron takes a second to ponder the ontology of the world he lives in.

“So… is Barbieland an alternate reality?” He begins to ask. “Or is it like a place where your imagination—” In absolute unison, the total board cuts him off with a convincing “YES!”

The message is obvious: Do not assume about the underpinnings of this world. Just cease asking questions proper now. Further, due to the method Aaron will get reduce off with a sure earlier than he’s even completed itemizing the prospects for what Barbieland may be or may imply, there’s an additional layer to all of it: a suggestion that positive, all theories about Barbieland are equally legitimate, and equally meaningless. And as a result of the total Mattel board delivers that verdict in emphatic refrain, there’s an additional trace of impatience and authority to all of it, an air that claims We’ve addressed this question a thousand instances already, we’re bored with it, and we’ve come to a consensus. We simply need you to toe the occasion line on this and transfer on.

Photo: Jaap Buitendijk/Warner Bros. Pictures

It’s a humorous second each as a result of it’s so abrupt, and since there’s a lot nuance to the method Gerwig shoots and presents it. But it’s additionally pleasant in a method that’s fairly uncommon for films, as a result of it’s a pleasant, jokey invitation to simply settle for the metaphor, and never fear about the particulars of Barbie’s cosmic development in any respect.

Quite a lot of us like to assume about the particulars in films. Some of us can’t assist it. For individuals who’ve made a life out of analyzing and discussing movie, being advised “Just turn your brain off and enjoy it!” or “Don’t you know how to have fun?” is annoying and pointless. Thinking about films is enjoyable! If it wasn’t, why would there be so many on-line fora devoted to discussing and decoding popular culture? Why would wingnut concepts like the Pixar Universe Theory get a lot viral traction, as followers mess around with ridiculous concepts about their favourite films or exhibits and share them round for an viewers of like-minded armchair analysts?

That stated, typically we are able to all get too obsessive about the particulars, in methods that may distract from a narrative. Just have a look at the rise of the Reddit Detectives, the sort of people that band collectively on Reddit to share microanalysis and mysteries in popular culture, and choose them aside. The Reddit Detective is an idea, not a particular circle of individuals — a method of summing up the sort of on-line sleuths who obsessively pored over the proof in the Serial podcast, minutely decoded the on-line bread crumbs laid down for followers of Westworld as a part of that present’s viral advertising and marketing, or examined every doable trace about who Jon Snow’s mom may be on Game of Thrones.

This type of on-line sleuth — a detail-focused, collaborative fan, at all times racing to be the first to discover and put up about some Easter egg or secret connection — has completed lots of useful work on behalf of the remainder of us, like mapping every story path and doable ending in Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, or in a much less pop-culture-focused sphere, monitoring down proof of malicious moderation fraud on Reddit. But the darkish aspect of that analytical urge is the drive to choose every little thing aside and root every secret out of every story — like, say, determining every massive twist in Westworld effectively earlier than it occurred. This type of evaluation additionally takes every plot level to its logical excessive.

Image: Warner Bros. Pictures

Barbie invitations and defangs that impulse by saying that sure, all doable theories about the nature and implications of Barbieland are true, and also you’re allowed to spin out any choices you need. Does the existence of Barbieland recommend that every different common toy or character that figures closely in youngsters’ imaginations has its personal precise, tangible alternate-reality universe? Sure, why not? Is there a Sonicland, a literal Mario World, a Legoland the place the motion of The Lego Movie truly came about? Yup, that’s positive with us. But wait! Gasp! If Barbies can simply stroll out of Barbieland into Reality, might Pikachu and Mewtwo do this as effectively, main to an precise Detective Pikachu state of affairs? We’ll permit it. Could all these IPs collide in a single large real-world crossover? If you’ll be able to think about that, go forward! It’s as actual as the rest on this film.

Barbie’s “Sure, any theory goes” angle offers us all permission to dream, whereas absolving itself of any concept we give you. But extra importantly, the Mattel board is telling Aaron (and the remainder of us) that determining these particulars isn’t an vital side of this film. Does it make sense that, when Ken claims Barbie’s DreamHouse and turns it into Ken’s Mojo Dojo Casa House, that home all of the sudden and immediately manifests as a real-world product and begins “flying off the shelves”? If Barbieland characters are simply reflections of real-world toys at present being performed with, why are there so many discontinued dolls and fashions nonetheless represented in Barbieland? Why is there just one Allan?

Did any of those questions matter in the writing of Barbie? As Roger Rabbit would put it, “Only when it was funny.” There isn’t some Brief History of Time-degree handbook to the mathematical guidelines of Barbieland on the market someplace, protecting all prospects — you’re allowed to make up your personal guidelines.

Gerwig and Baumbach deal with Barbie’s weirder fantasy parts with precisely as a lot lightness and momentum as the film wants. They don’t waste time on boring disbelief and debate. Will Ferrell as the Mattel CEO factors out that Barbie characters have leaked into Reality earlier than — so there’s no want to spend lots of vitality on a bunch of characters questioning how Barbieland might be actual, choosing via the metaphysical implications, or slowing the film down by complaining about its elementary premise. They can simply transfer previous that, and get on with the humor and the trenchant evaluation of gender relationships.

Photo: Jaap Buitendijk/Warner Bros.

And when disaffected teenager Sasha (Ariana Greenblatt) and her pals are confronted with a dwelling Barbie, they don’t spend a dreary chunk of the film asking how she might probably be actual, or what it implies that she exists — they only lay into her for all the negativity she represents. It’s straightforward sufficient to argue that in that second, they don’t consider she’s the precise avatar of Barbie the doll, that they only assume she’s a perky bimbo styling herself after the toy. But the film doesn’t trouble splitting these hairs. You can learn the scene both method, and it really works positive. Are they speaking to the doll, or a human lady who admires the doll? Yes, says the Mattel board, in unison.

This type of breezy hand-waving doesn’t work for every film — in severe horror, science fiction, and fantasy, it’s rather more vital to have some sense of what the guidelines are, as a result of there aren’t any clear story stakes in any other case. But for a comedy that’s targeted totally on different particulars — precisely what the accoutrements of a Ken-dom macho man are, or why Barbie floats in every single place in Barbieland — pinning down the scientific particulars of the world simply doesn’t matter.

Barbie takes precisely the proper path via its fantasy parts by breezing previous the features of research that may make the film extra actual than it wants to be, whereas giving viewers enthusiastic consent to fill in the relaxation any method they need. Is this a film for the Neil deGrasse Tyson-style nitpickers of the world? No. Is it a film that asks the viewers to think about who they need to be and how much world they need to dwell in, whereas finishing the metaphor by leaving every little thing else in the film up to their imaginations? A hearty, resounding, choral Yes.