Barbie

version

Well-known member
They'll turn the sets into a theme park or something if they have any sense, seems a shame to get rid of them once the film's done.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
They'll turn the film sets into a theme park or something if they have any sense, seems a shame to get rid of them once the film's done.
A lot of productions just have auctions after the wrap, or sometimes they give stuff away to crew, keep it in storage until they figure out what to do it, or liquidate it. Using set pieces for a theme park or immersive experience (maybe like that Friends experience in NYC?) could also makes sense from a business perspective, if theres enough of a cult following.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Some friends/family of mine who are in set design, craftsperson unions, etc, have their interior design informed largely by furniture and set pieces from previous gigs. That was one of the reasons I was considering joining the union.
 
The main complaint I've seen is they couldn't seem to integrate the themes in a creative way and ended up having characters deliver monologues about patriarchy and being a woman.
Yesthe dolls lacking self awareness also certain points fell down with this, I suppose you could say that’s the joke but if felt like a cheap attempt at being subversive and doesn’t land imo
 

Benny Bunter

Well-known member
Doubt I'll bother, but my partner went to see it yesterday and I expected her to tear it to pieces for being weak libfem woke rubbish and/or blatant Mattel repackaging PR to sell dolls (which it undoubtedly is) but she said it's a good laugh as long as you don't take it too seriously.
 
This is him on WALL-E (a great film) and Batman and is relevant here

oyou's remarks on readings of The Dark Knight makes some important points about ideology. Focusing on the supposed "message" of the film – as both neoconservative interpretations of the film, and their critics, including me, do – is in danger of missing the way in which ideology works in capitalism. The role of capitalist ideology is not to make an explicit case for something in the way that propaganda does, but to conceal the fact that the operations of capital do not depend on any sort of subjectively assumed belief. It is impossible to conceive of fascism or Stalinism without propaganda - but capitalism can proceed perfectly well, indeed better, without anyone making a case for it.

In the responses to The Dark Knight I posted here, it was Wayne Wedge who captured the way that the film functions as a hyper-object in late capitalism. The very multivalence of The Dark Knight, its capacity to generate radically different interpretations, to elicit discourse, is what makes it a highly efficient meta-commodity. A text with a single monologic Message, even supposing such a thing could exist, would not be able to 'provoke the debate' which capitalist culture now feeds upon.

It not only that a cultural object can be opposed to capitalism on the level of content, but it serve it on the level of form; one could convincingly go further and argue that the ideology of capitalism is now 'anti-capitalist'. The villain in Hollywood films is routinely the 'evil multinational corporation'. So it is, once again, in Disney/ Pixar's Wall-E, which, like The Dark Knight, has provoked all kinds of bizarre conservative readings. "This is perhaps the most cynical and darkest big-budget Disney film ever," claims Kyle Smith. "Perhaps never before has any corporation spent so much money on insulting its customers. (By way of parenthesis, since it isn't relevant to my argument here, this, from Paul Edwards, is priceless: "WALL-E is the story of what results when a liberal vision of the future is achieved: government marries business in the interest of providing not only 'the pursuit of happiness' but happiness itself, thus creating gluttonous citizens dependent on the government to sustain their lives.")
 
Top