A Ken/Ken Interpretation of Barbie (2023)

So I did the whole Barbenheimer thing with my friend today and my eyeballs are fried from staring at a giant screen for five hours straight. So naturally, here I am back at home staring at yet another screen to write this. I’m not going to review Oppenheimer because I fell asleep for who knows how long (I was TIRED not bored). I actually watched a documentary on the atomic bomb yesterday so I had context for the film, yet I was still confused. Some people may be too stupid for Christopher Nolan films, but you don’t have to be a genius to understand Barbie (2023). So why do I feel like I am since everyone seems to miss the point?

I keep seeing on my social media of various people treating it like some sort of revolutionary feminist critique on society. I’m assuming those people are talking about the depiction of Ken, whose entire existence revolves around Barbie. In fact all of the Kens in Barbieland exist for the sole purpose of serving the Barbies. However, the film is not sending a message that all men should serve all women. If what you took away from this film is misandry, I applaud your stupidity. The Kens are to Barbieland as women are to our society. That means in our world, men are Barbies. Isn’t it obvious by the ending, where the Kens still don’t have equal power even after they are “given” the opportunity to have an identity free from the Barbies?

I think that the film tried to do too much by taking on existentialism, feminism, the patriarchy, and “girlhood”, which muddled whatever message it was aiming to achieve. From a business point of view, it would’ve made sense to just focus on Barbie’s controversial place in today’s culture. It’s still a huge success anyways so who am I to talk about business. I just wish the storytelling for the biggest film of the year was better. Still, the fact still stands that Barbie & the Diamond Castle is the best Barbie movie.