Talk:Barbie (film)

Nine-dash line controversy: Unwieldy WP Not:Notability

The "Censorship" section regarding Vietnam and the Nine-Dash-Line controversy has become unwieldy. This entire section is 1500 words which is exhaustive and overwhelms the article. The banning of a film can be articulated in the Wiki Page: List of Banned Films. In fact, Barbie is already mentioned under the corresponding countries. What should be done: (1) Keep the censorship section by giving a brief description of the issue and linking the Wiki page: List of banned films. And possibly linking the Wiki page: Nine Dash Line. (2) Since there is so much information regarding this controversy with Vietnam and other countries, it may be worth creating a new page. Refer to Wiki page: Notability to determine if the material is substantive enough for its own page. Italianmagnolia (talk) 18:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't seem unwieldy at all to me, in fact it seems short than most sections of the page. This issue relates directly to the movie, moving it to an unrelated article removes important context here. It's very well-sourced, well-written, and notable. glman (talk) 18:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Mention of best picture and widespread critical acclaim in the lead paragraph

Noticed this movie is being singled out by a couple of editors with unnecessarily restrictive language. My only guess is that it has to do with the fact that the movie was do divisive.

Almost every other 2024 Oscar nominated movie has mention of a "best picture nomination" in the "lead" of their respective wikipedia articles. That also includes oscar nominated movies in 2023 and before.

Popcorn blockbuster movies like the Dune remake, TopGun Maverick and Avatar 2 also mention "best picture nomination" in its lead paragraph. Marvel's "Black Panther" is a good example of this. It is because they are WP:NOTABLE. Some popcorn blockbuster films like this may receive multiple nominations, mostly for technical awards, but it's even rarer that they are nominated for best picture of the year, let alone a film that was this influential and divisive, about "Barbie" dolls no less.lol

The movie also received acclaim and awards across the board, as in "widespread", so it is most certainly a movie that "received widespread critical acclaim". 208.46.64.50 (talk) 22:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nyxaros Inviting you to discuss the reasonable contributions I have made to the article. Asking that you explain yourself before you remove them again. It feels like you have a double standard here. Would you also be okay removing mention of "best picture" from the lead paragraphs of the wikipedia articles on the Dune remake, or any other movie you fancy for that matter? Why are you singling this movie out?? Thank you. 208.46.64.50 (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Some tweaking of sections to cut down on point-of-view pushing

Compared to other wikipedia entries about movies, some folks are giving Barbie a hardtime with convoluted passive-aggressive framing. These are mostly written in a more objective neutral fashion than this. Following the form & ettiquette of those other more cogent examples. Letting the NYT review summarize the overall critical reception clearly stacks the deck suggesting a mixed reception that isn't true. Muddling and burying as a form of synthesizing. Moving the NYT review where it is appropriate & makes sense.See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Barbie_(film)&diff=prev&oldid=1215012885 Other changes and trims to follow. 2601:280:CB00:903C:7580:40A2:4539:C4B6 (talk) 16:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

"Barbillion"

Is this noteworthy in a Wikipedia article? A made-up word by Warner Bros marketing? Seems rather silly to include a nonsense word. Feudonym (talk) 10:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2024

“Change The Kens indoctrinate the Barbies into submissive roles, such as agreeable girlfriends, housewives, and maids. Barbie arrives and attempts to convince the Barbies to be independent again. When her attempts fail, she becomes depressed. Gloria expresses her frustration with the conflicting standards women are forced to follow in the real world. Gloria's speech restores Barbie's confidence. to

The Kens exert their influence over the Barbies, mmaking them into submissive roles like compliant girlfriends, homemakers, and domestic servants. Barbie intervenes, striving to rekindle the spirit of independence among the Barbies. Despite her earnest efforts, she finds herself faced with resistance, leading to a deep sense of despondency.

Gloria, feeling the weight of societal expectations pressing down on her, passionately articulates her frustration with the double standards that women encounter in the real world. Her impassioned speech serves as a beacon of empowerment, reigniting Barbie's inner strength and resolve. With renewed confidence.” Westkayla (talk) 18:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The previous wording is grammatically better. DrowssapSMM 19:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Movie poster is tiny - can someone upload a bigger version?

When I click on the movie poster, it doesn't enlarge. I just get an absolutely miniscule image that you need a microscope to see. Can someone upload a larger version? MisterZed (talk) 17:04, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

MisterZed, since the film poster is a non-free image, Wikipedia keeps such images small as part of being a free encyclopedia. It's only used for identification here. If you want film poster images, I think another website is best. IMP Awards is one such website. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not small, though, it's tiny. It's barely more than 300 pixels high. Why can't it be say, 600 pixels? Wouldn't that still be considered "small"? Also, in the past I remember such images on Wikipedia being larger. MisterZed (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

They may have tightened it over the years. WP:IMAGERES says 250 x 400 pixels, for example. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)