Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is making waves this awards season, but not everyone is celebrating. And it’s Ryan Gosling’s nominations for his iconic Ken to Margot Robbie’s Barbie that has created a stir.
For fans, Gosling’s nomination is a betrayal of what the movie stands for. In its exploration of feminism, Barbie used Gosling’s character to portray toxic masculinity. The actor’s award nominations, thus, have led to an online debate with fans accusing critics of “missing the point of the movie.”
Gosling has been nominated for several awards for his portrayal of Ken, a Mattel doll best known for being Barbie’s ‘boyfriend’. These include Best Supporting Actor at the Critics’ Choice Awards, Boston Society of Film Critics’ Awards, and the Golden Globes.
Honestly, it appears as if fans missed the point of Gerwig’s film. To say that the spotlight on Ken in the real world follows the patriarchal trap of the reel world is to do a disservice to the craft of filmmaking and the profession of acting. Fans’ investment in the film’s narrative blinds them to the larger context—the fact that, at the end of the day, Barbie is just a movie. It has a storyline, characters, and arcs that are open to criticism and should be judged for their merits and demerits.
Morally grey characters should not be pushed aside. Critics appreciate actors who push conventional boundaries and give laudatory performances. And awards should reflect that. Would you say Joaquin Phoenix’s Joker (2019) winning the Best Actor Oscar “misses the point” of the movie about a supervillain? Or would you say it acknowledges an actor for delivering a great performance and honing his craft with each film?
Films aren’t gospel truth on society
Liking a movie is one thing, but to elevate it to such high standards that even appropriate, nay positive, criticism for it invites backlash is another thing altogether. Then the film is no longer being treated as a piece of art seen in a particular context by a particular audience. It is now being seen as a universal social commentary that must only be criticised based on standards set by the film itself. That’s not a good sign for either films or society.
Good movies can shine a light on those parts of society that we know to be true but shy away from acknowledging. But no matter how good a film is, it is not a replacement for society. No film encompasses all there is to know about society, politics, or gender. No film is perfect, period.
Gosling received nominations because critics liked his portrayal of a flawed character. Isn’t that what good acting is all about? It doesn’t negate Barbie’s storyline.
Gerwig’s Barbieland is a (largely White) feminist utopia, but it does correctly show how toxic masculinity wreaks havoc on society. Moreover and quite importantly, it warns against one idea and one group leading society and making all its decisions. The film ends with Robbie’s Barbie apologising to Gosling’s Ken for not considering his feelings.
By ignoring Ken’s evolution and the praise given to Gosling’s performance, isn’t the audience doing the same thing that Barbieland was criticised for in the movie?
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)