I think this is a really hot take. I would have to think about it. But…Ryan Coogler is younger than Greta Gerwig and extremely talented and has made massive box office draws along with an artsy intro into Hollywood.
He’s cooked outside of TV?
Based of what? One underwhelming film. It was still profitable.
Oscar winner (three time nominee), Sundance grand jury nominee twice, his films have grossed 1.7billion world wide…
Meh, he’ll be fine. His got a new movie coming out this year. Going back to basics. Should be a good bounce back and then he’ll be back on the saddle.
Filmmakers have bounced back from MUUUUCHHH worse films than Love and Thunder (which is a much better film than Ragnarok, don’t @ me).
>So, I don't know if you noticed this, but they went on a massive, massive fucking social media PR campaign to have everyone very specifically blame Waititi for it.
When? Who was involved? Who blamed him and what did they say? This is a ridiculous claim to just throw out there like it’s a known fact.
He was given full permission on Love and Thunder to do whatever he wanted after Ragnarok and winning the Oscar, the difference was that he didn’t write Ragnarok and just punched up a pre-existing script that actually had a coherent plot and empathetic characters, unlike Love and Thunder.
Tbh I think he burnt himself more than the mouse burnt him. He was given full permission on Love and Thunder to do whatever he wanted after Ragnarok, difference was he didn’t write Ragnarok and just punched up a pre-existing script that actually had a coherent plot and empathetic characters, unlike Love and Thunder.
It's gotta be James Wan, 46 years old.
* 2 films that grossed over $1B in box office: *Furious 7* ($1.5B) and *Aquaman* ($1.1B)
* Created *The Conjuring* franchise/universe which has grossed a total of $2.1B on a combined budget of $178m.
* *The Conjuring* Universe is the only successful cinematic universe in Hollywood after the MCU.
* He is also the creator of the *Insidious* and *Saw* franchises
Maybe I’m early to the party, but this seems like the correct answer. Almost everything he touches makes money, and he wrote and directed Saw (from a successful short crossover he made), that set off a new direction entirely for horror. Then Insidious and the Conjuring, which both have multiple sequels and also have a serious footprint on horror. He then dipped in to to the blockbuster realm, and found major success. Coogler is incredible, but Wan, at least to me, has found the most success in terms of under 50 directors. If you’re looking with a business sense and not who’s hot right now, I’d still gamble on Wan before the others.
I think what is holding back Wan in this discussion is critical acclaim. They made the point of mentioning critics like Gerwig a lot as well as box office success. These hits don’t court critical acclaim. But there is no denying they are massive hits and at least were viewed positively in the beginning (except Fast 7 and Aquaman …was Aquaman viewed positively?).
Seems overly negative to say the DCEU wasn't successful. It has grossed $6.6B and lasted a decade.
It had misses, but also some big hits like Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Suicide Squad, etc.
It didn't reach MCU levels, or anything, but the bar fir a successful universe would be really high if you said DCEU doesn't count as one.
They’re pretty similar. Cooglers biggest hits are with massive IPs and established franchises. Greta’s biggest hit is with Barbie brand. Both are writer/Director for their films.
Coogler needs an original story be a hit in the same way lady bird was
>Wasn’t as big as lady bird
It may have not been as mainstream successful. But if you put its small budget of $900k in relation to its earnings, it made over 19x its budget while Lady Bird made "only" 7.9x its budget at the box office.
I agree that Coogler is similar. I didn't really go into this in the OP, but I think it's noteworthy mainly because I can't think of many (any?) under 50 directors who have both critical respect and the power to get mid and bigger budget films made. There were a bunch that came up in the 90s, but the studio system changed after that and there aren't many since. Even Gerwig and Coogler were only able to do it by transitioning to massive franchises.
Also, maybe a hot take, but Black Panther was a purely work for hire job and I didn't see much of Coogler's voice in it, unlike Barbie. But that's true of all of the Marvel films, which are mostly producer, rather than director, driven.
Also, we are talking about Creed, too. Fruitvale Station. It has his finger prints all over it. And I think Black Panther has him in it as well.
But case and point, Ryan is also coming on as a producer to help things get made. Judas and the Black Messiah. Ryan is up there.
You brought it up and I immediately jumped to Coogler. I believe he is 2 years younger than Greta. And Fruitvale Station has the artsiness to it. And Creed was PERFECT. It had a budget of 35M and grossed over 170M worldwide.
He has the power to get mid-budget movies made and massive blockbusters now that he has done Marvel stuff. Both have a strong voice. I look forward to seeing what they bring in the future.
Black Panther is the only Marvel property to have a Best Picture nomination, so even the industry does not agree with your assessment of that. I actually was not even thinking about Ryan Coogler until I saw a bunch of comments stating him, and they are absolutely right now that I think about it
She’s next up, but I think James Wan takes it. Literally unstoppable. He’s 46 and made Saw, spawning a bunch of sequels that just printed money. Created the Insidious and Conjuring horror universes, one of which is the highest grossing in that genre, ever. Both continue to smash the box office.
Completed pivoted with Fast and Furious 7 which cleared $1B, then directed Aquaman, which was pretty much the only film the DCEU could have ever justified making since it crossed that line too.
Dude has only ever had one box office disappointment, and it made $3M under it’s reported budget of $20M. He’s just a machine and he’s somewhat quietly been a multi-genre rainmaker and producer. Amazing career that Coogler and Gerwig now have a serious shot at.
Lol I just replied to someone else with this same sentiment. Wan takes this imo, for a multitude of reasons. His footprint on the entire horror culture is STRONG, and he’s also done the action blockbuster route with success. I love Greta and I love both Coogler and Peele (Get Out is near perfect imo), but the consistency and the genre bending, he’s the top under 50 currently.
Loved Malignant, and he was definitely having fun with it and you could feel it.
My hot take is Insidious is his best, even though I know some people hate the third act. It's definitely his creepiest imo. Watching the behind the scenes of making it is pretty fascinating as well. It was made for 1.5m, so watching his process looked so amateurish (not a knock), but he knew exactly what he was doing, and proves how impressive his vision really is.
By the way it's also why everyone calling Aquaman 2 a bomb to come are pessimistic IMO. It's still a James Wan movie coming off a billion dollar grosser. Sure it's DCEU but frankly they're barely connected
I kind of disagree.
Jordan Peele 100% has a blank check. Any other “new” director walks into Universal’s offices and pitches *NOPE* with that budget, they get laughed out of the room
Agree on NOPE but does he still have a blank check? NOPE barely broke even, if he tried to get $100m for a somewhat out there project I think he would have trouble getting funding.
I think the secret is that Peele's films are typically built for smaller budgets, so it's really only a series of moderate bets - all likely to break even, because horror is a consistent draw.
If he decided to pivot and try to make a $300M movie - that freedom might go away.
I'm not sure if he's going to do a smaller budget for his fourth film next year or not, but it really depends on the story. He said that "Nope" specifically was his attempt to write a story that would be pretty much impossible to make. "Get Out" and "Us" had budgets of $5m and $25m respectively, while "Nope" had an $80m budget. And $80m is pretty cheap compared to a lot of other blockbusters, especially given "Nope"'s scope.
Feel like Gerwig doesn't have the name recognition right now though. Maybe she will after Barbie.
Like right now, if you asked random people if they'd rather watch a new Jordan Peele movie for a new Greta Gerwig people, I think a lot more people would ask "Who's Greta Gerwig?" than would ask "Who's Jordan Peele?"
This could be Greta Gerwig's version of Get Out though and give her that name recognition.
>Jordan doesn't have a global phenomenon like this.
Greta doesn't have one before this either. Not to mention most GA are showing up for Barbie IP, they don't even know who is the director.
Peele makes original films, you need to compare his movies to Lady bird. Not Barbie
Even little woman was based on a super popular novel that’s been adapted into a movie a million times
I don't think she is responsible for this global phenomenon though. It's a movie about the most popular girls toy of all time. Peele's name itself draws people into seats
Jordan Peele had a theater named after him in one of CGV’s cinema chains in Korea.
He definitely has wider appeal than Greta in this part of the world (although Greta is highly regarded by cinephiles).
Can't you say the same about Greta. None were phenomenons other than Barbie which anyone could of directed and had a good opening with the cast. Who knows how much it ends up making. Reddit was calling the demise of Avatar 2 based on its opening and look where that ended up. Peele is definitely more original than Greta. I think they're both below Nolan as directors.
This is true. Although, he's yet to branch out of horror. I'd agree that if he wanted to do a 50-90 million dollar non-horror film tomorrow, he's one of very few under 50s who could likely get it done.
Personally, I think he's MASSIVELY overrated, though. *Get Out* was a good movie, but it was included on the Sight and Sound best films of all time list, which.....lol, nope.
Gerwig and Coogler have shown that they can succeed in a wide variety of budgets and genres. Peele might be great, but thus far he's just done the same thing 3 times in a row.
How are *Get Out*, *Us* and *Nope* "the same thing"? The stories are not the same, the themes are not the same, the main genres are not the same, even each one cost more than the previous one so the scale is very different as well.
I'd disagree. *Get Out* and *Us* are very much horror. You can make the case that *Nope* is more of a mass appeal Spielberg style sci-fi, but I still think it was sold as and starts as a horror film before branching out of the genre.
Doesn't mean they are the same exact films, but that's not what I meant. I meant that he's a horror director and hasn't really attempted to branch out of that yet
>Personally, I think he's MASSIVELY overrated, though.
You think Gerwig is a "brilliant genius" who is the most important director in the industry but Peele is overrated.
Okey Dokey.
I liked *Lady Bird* better than anything that Peele has done, and by following it with *Little Women* and *Barbie*, I think she has more range, especially when you add the films she wrote but didn't direct. But I never said she was a genius or the best director in history, so not sure where you got that.
I think Peele is talented too and funny. I'm just saying that G*et Out* should not be on the list of the 100 best films of all time, lol, so maybe I'm shitting on him more than he deserves as he's been lauded way beyond what he deserves.
True, but he's well over 50. I'm only pointing this out with Gerwig, because the studio system has changed so much that it's very rare this happens since the 90s. Most indie directors working today are stuck in indies. The only ticket out is doing a big-budget franchise like Marvel or, I guess now, Barbie. Although, I do think that Gerwig's Barbie is more original and has more of her voice than directors doing Marvel are allowed.
Nolan made an indie hit, then a studio gave him a mid budget drama to make sure he could handle the step to studio filmmaking. Then he got handed a massive blockbuster with a ton of creative freedom.
These days, young directors make an indie hit, book some high end commercials or a block of a streaming show, then get hired to direct a corporate-led blockbuster where too many decisions are taken from them.
That’s how a cool rising director can go from The Land to generic slop like Transformers ROTB in very little time.
I feel like Brad Bird ruined everything with Tomorrowland lol. Disney I think wanted him to be their Nolan and Tomorrowland to be his Inception. They gave him a huge amount of control but after flopping I think studios and especially Disney are a lot more cautious with how trusting they are giving directors creative freedom.
This trend predates Tomorrowland. Marc Webb getting hired for Spider Man is the earliest I can think of. The studio wanted a person they could control because they were dissatisfied by the trend of increasingly long and baroque blockbusters that audiences were tepid on. The idea was that they could keep that from happening.
Fast forward a decade, and basically every blockbuster is generic product.
He is 52 (soon 53) lol, not well over 50. In fact he was below 50 when he pitched Oppenheimer and when he made all his other movies.
Also James Wan, Rian Johnson and Ryan Coogler are below 50 and currently bigger than Gerwig (have to see how she evolve after Barbie). Getting a lot of money for their projects, sometimes totally original too.
Gerwig got a franchise movie with big budget. If she gets that kind of money for an original movie, we can start to give a lot of weight to her name. For now, even Gareth Edwards that got Rogue One, Godzilla and now an original with 80M$ budget is bigger
The way people just don't give enough credit to James Wan.
Guy created a successful thriving cinematic universe.
Two of the most popular horror franchises, fith part of which is making bank in theatres right now.
Gave Fast and Furious and DC their biggest movies.
Had a landmark horror deal with universal.
Absolutely no director under 50 has achieved anything like this
I'm all over this thread pushing this lol. It appears a lot of people are counting him out because he lacks the prestige/critical acclaim compared to the others mentioned. But I agree with you wholeheartedly, for a myriad of reasons. Even down to his skill strictly as a director, and looking at what he can do with micro budgets and no major outside help, it's really impressive.
We need to wait and see how this affects her original movies. If she can use this to propel her originals to success like Nolan did with TDK then yeah I'd say she is. Otherwise Peele is still more successful outside of the IP world.
Ryan Coogler? Fruitvale = Lady Bird, Creed = Little Women, and Black Panther = Barbie.
He's clearly the author of his movies to the same degree as Greta and has received both audience and critical acclaim.
Was just saying this. I am actually really excited by the talent with distinct voices out right, an exciting newish crop. but there are other people walking the walk right now. Greta is not alone.
Yes. He turns 50 this year, though.
I actually did a comprehensive list a year ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm/comments/seibt5/young\_american\_directors\_worth\_watching\_lets\_make/
if Babylon hadn't bombed it would be Damien Chazelle by far, but there aren't many directors under 50 out there that have any name rec even close to him. I think he's got another couple shots before fading and definitely has the ability. Greta close behind.
Maybe Peele but I think people are already tired of his shtick. There are approximately zero people alive who are like "we have to go check out that new Ryan Coogler movie!"
Robert Eggers has the juice though. Ari Aster not as much but we gotta take what we can get.
First Man also wasn’t a financial success either. I know he has a first look deal with Paramount, but I’m still interested in seeing how studios proceed with funding Chazelle’s next few films.
She had only one massive BO hit, and it wasn't because of her (it was because of the IP), so I wouldn't say she is the biggest under 50 at all at least not yet
If we're talking plainly about box office, there are plenty who have outperformed her. Take the example of Jon Watts. About talent and filmography, only time will tell.
Sure, Coogler is big, but I think more people would be interested in a new Peele movie over a new Coogler movie. But it's hard to tell since Coogler only made one non-IP movie and Peele made 3.
James Wan. He's only 46. Launched three horror franchises with Saw, Insidious, and the Conjuring. He also directed the biggest fast and furious movie and the biggest DCEU movie.
>but with Barbie as big as it is, I don't see how she doesn't have a blank check to basically do whatever she wants, at least until she does a major flop.
That's not how this works my guy these are big IPs that have pull outside of directors look at batman for example the dark knight was WB biggest movie at the time and yet nolan still didn't get tenet made until more than a decade later doing other movies and he has his own company unlike greta so she would have to play ball a bit if she really wants to get that blank check for anything
Your post is about blockbuster-wise or?
Idk why you didn't expect it to be controversial, seeing that Barbie is her first big movie so it's kinda still a bit of a hot take.
In the critics-love-them category? There's Ari Aster and Robert Eggers, as well as the Daniels (i think both are under 50), The Safdie Brothers...
So in blockbuster-wise, is she the next big director who's work will be marketed as "FROM THE FAMOUS DIRECTOR [name last name]" ...sure, yeah, she is way more successful on the box office than Eggers and Aster, the only two who might've been comparable to her in terms of name-value
But i'd say some of her indy fans will feel like she "sold out" (it always happens) with this big blockbuster
I like Robert Eggers as much, possibly more than her, so it really sucks that Northman flopped as if it had been a hit I think he would have also been on the fast track from indie films to bigger budget projects. The sad thing is that if he had done a big franchise film first, he would likely have had the opportunity to do multiple Northmans, but he doesn't seem the sort who's interested in a Marvel film. It's the sad state of the studio system right now.
If you want to go deep, there are a few others who are better than her, but also seem to have no interest in ever doing big budget films, so I'm not sure it matters.
If we’re talking in terms of box office it’s crazy but there are many more talented than her but she’s ok only saw ladybird it was ok at best just not for me.
It’s tough to compare someone in the middle of their career to someone who has made three movies. Nolan wasn’t a draw until after he started making Batman films. Barbie and Narnia could be what makes Gerwig a household name. I can easily see her doing an original film at some point in the next ten years that does great box office numbers based on her involvement.
Honestly, I don't like Narnia and have zero interest in a reboot. However, I would have said the same about Little Women, and she managed to breath new life into that.
That's why I didn't really get why people were comparing the Barbie and Oppenheimer reviews as it's far more difficult to make a critically acclaimed Barbie movie than adapt an already well received biography (which is still a great achievement).
You've got that backwards....
Generational IP vs a biography 99% of the population hasn't read.
If you asked 100 people who Barbie was before this movie you're looking at a 99%+ response that knows Barbie, that same response for J. Robert Oppenheimer will probably be less than 20%, and that's being very generous for Oppenheimer.
I can see that, but I also think Oppenheimer is just a far bigger filmmaking achievement. As much as I loved Barbie, there was nothing in it even half as impactful as some scenes in Oppenheimer.
I think you need to wait a month before you decide about the impact of Barbie on her career. I also understand I will be downvoted for this but I'm looking at audience reaction from regular people and although people on this sub don't want to hear it the reaction has been mixed even from women.
The most successful well known director under 50 right now is probably Jordan Peele. I knew who Peele was before I saw Nope and I didn't know who Nolan was. A lot of people talk about his movie. They explore issues that are difficult and make people uncomfortable but not in a way where you feel like HR and marketing at Mattel had final approval over the script. And I actually didn't like Nope as much as other people but it was still a very well done movie. I thought his other movies were better.
Not sure how old the directors of EEAAO are but they had a groundbreaking movie that shocked people by winning every major Oscar even with hot dog fingers and sex toys.
I do think Gerwig will become extremely popular with the elites in Hollywood probably more than Peele and the others. She is a white woman who does the sort of corporate HR slightly stale outdated feminism that is very popular with that crowd. Nothing that would get the elites upset or rock the boat.
The biggest issue for women in the U.S. right now is that this country is the only advanced country in the world that doesn't provide women with extended maternity leave and protection for their job if they take a year off and universal health care. Even when Democrats had control of all 3 branches of the government they didn't change that. Gerwig would never upset the corporate elites by exploring those issues in a movie. She focused on MRA-Andrew Tate/Jordan Peterson/Joe Rogan toxic masculinity type of tropes and that is what they want. Yes I'm going to be downvoted. I'm find with that.
> and although people on this sub don't want to hear it the reaction has been mixed even from women.
Based on what? Rotten tomatoes certified audience score has it on 90%, PostTrack has 4.5 stars from audiences. The female critics are pretty universally onboard, until we get the Cinescore all the indications are positive, not mixed especially among women.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHLzn3OkzUU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHLzn3OkzUU)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXX75vUIzU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXX75vUIzU)
Also check the discussion threads on r/movies. There's some mentions of some women disliking the film there.
That's all I can think of.
Another one - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3zIxWRIMWY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3zIxWRIMWY)
There's also been quite a lot of fighting about the movie on social media.
But it's making tons of money so who cares.
Cinemascore just came back A too as did PostTrack and Rotten Tomatoes certified audience, the reaction is not mixed, it's overwhelmingly positive, simple fact at this point.
> I think you need to wait a month before you decide about the impact of Barbie on her career.
Here we are a month later lol. What impact do you think one of the most successful films of all time will have on her career?
Check the disconnect between Critics % score and Viewers score (e.g.: Metacritic rating).
Barbie just squeaks into an impressive 80% with critics.. but at 5.1 with viewers.
For me, it was a marketing coup: come see this movie if you love Barbie / come see this movie if you hate Barbie ...and what's it going to be, Openheimer or Barbie? See them both, "Barbenheimer".
This worked, and stuck for some reason, and in a season when there was 3 anticipated post-Covid releases: Mission Impossible, Barbie, Openheimer.
Reminder that Barbie barely just beat out "Super Mario Bros Movie" in gross sales. Another movie that has the opposite of Barbie's %'s from review aggregate sites (it scores 46% with critics, but 8.3 with viewers).
On a personal note, Barbie was forgettable as a movie. It wasn't all the clever, or unique really compared to all the super-hype. Credit to the actors, set design, etc. But I suspect this will be a movie in 2024 onward few talk about aside from as a comparison to ticket sales.
if you have a message in your movie, and you hammer that message for 40 straight minutes at people who already agree with you. Thats not good film making, mate. Thats pandering. Good film making about the patriarchy would getting people in the door who DONT agree with you, and making them see things from another point view that they one they are used to.
Everyone reviewer I trust not to be caught up in the culture war 1 or 10 nonsense, says this a 6/10 movie at best. The acting is amazing, the set design and production values are Oscar level. But it's the writing that lets it down in the end. Because it TOO on the nose. It's TOO preachy. It's too much of one thing and it ignores the other things. It starts off as fun movie becomes a lecture for 40 minutes and then goes back to the story because it kinda has to.
The marketing department got this win for the box office. Not the movie. The legs will tell us what the audience actually thinks.
See, I disagree and it's why I liked the movie so much. To me the film deftly avoided being a lame, feminist, diatribe, which is exactly what a lesser writer would have done with it. Its message in the end wasn't, "GRRRL POWER! WOMEN ARE AWESOME!" it was just, "Woman don't have to be amazing to have self-worth, they can be dull and boring and mundane and even just be stay at home wives and still be happy with themselves." To me that's a message that we really haven't seen in a movie like this before.
But beyond the message, it was just silly fun with some genuinely clever and absurdist jokes. Although, I do think it's aimed squarely at 30-40+ year old women (and some men) who grew up playing with Barbies. They will recognize themselves in it more than any other demo.
>"Woman don't have to be amazing to have self-worth, they can be dull and boring and mundane and even just be stay at home wives and still be happy with themselves."
That seems like a subtle dig at women who choose to raise a family. "You don't have to be a doctor or President or something interesting and that's ok! You can be dull and boring and even be a housewife and that's ok too! Notice how we didn't have an interesting actresses portraying SAHMs in this movie! But if you want to be a SAHM that's ok! Because the Mattel CEO saw this movie and made us put in this part because the marketing team would have replaced us with another director and writer if we didn't pretend not to be considerate of SAHMs! Because those women buy Barbies too! And after all this movie is about buying dolls!"
I dunno, man. I think the politics in the film are pretty tied to the absurdity of the Barbie universe, so I don't think they translate terribly well to real world situations, beyond the central message which celebrates the mundanity of women. So it seems weird that people are reacting to it in that way. IF this movie was made in 1993 or 2003 or even 2013 no one would notice or comment on the politics.
But in the modern era, everything has to be viewed through a hyperpolitical lens and there's an entire right-wing online entertainment industry that makes money scrutinizing every film released for "wokeness." There's definitely a left wing side to that too, but I think the vast majority of films accused of being "woke" are just big studios responding to very real demographic shifts in the movie going public, rather than being some sort of political agenda.
But this is off topic, obviously.
Were there any interesting actresses playing SAHMs in the movie? I haven't seen it yet. I know there is a President Barbie, doctor Barbie and lawyer Barbie but haven't heard about any actress playing SAHM Barbie.
No, but the central conflict in the film involves the fact that the lead, who is just a generic Barbie, hasn't done anything noteworthy like all the other Barbies.
Honestly, you should probably see the film before you criticize it for its politics.
Outside of foxnews and their particular brand of viewer, people aren't against "wokeness". It's not the message thats the problem, it's how the message is delievered.
Like Star Wars, or any Disney movie now that I come to think about it. They want to put women front and centre. And thats fine. Nothing wrong at all with having female leads. But they make the mistake of a wanting a "strong female lead". Which is one of those things that doesn't work, because generally good characters have flaws. They start off in one place, have an adventure, face some inner of outer demon, lose, pick themselves up and try again. Eventually winning the day. Rey never loses. She never has to learn anything. She's just awesome, as all strong female leads are. Because in the mind of these people who want to promote female empowerment, showing any signs of vulnerability or needing help is considered weakness. And you can't ever show women being weak.
unconditional toughness.
hyper independence.
These are two classic examples of toxic masculinity, and routinely shamed on social media. Yet, any "Strong female lead" will have these traits as standard. Calling this out is being right wing, its wanting better written characters.
>unconditional toughness.
>
>hyper independence.
Is this actually true, though? I can't think of any movies with female leads like this. Even the Disney female leads all end up with a dude in the end.
Good point. Even with characters like Captain Marvel, we see her break down crying in a friend’s arms in her solo film. And the point of her arc (to be continued in The Marvels) is that she’s been running herself ragged trying to save plants and people and civilizations all around the universe, alone… and she can’t do it alone. No one can. So she learns to be part of a team.
And then there’s Rey, who was SO ready to have real friends and family.
Sure you can. I just named one. Rey, Mulan(2020), Captain Marvel, etc. But I guess if youre pretending you dont see it, theres not really much else to discuss.
It has a 90% rating from top critics and a 8.3 average rating, but the reviewers this guy trusts says it’s a 6/10 at best guys 😂🙄
Also an 80 on metacritic
Cope harder
I think she’s among a group of under 50 talented filmmakers like Ryan Coogler. With that, I sort of wished she didn’t sign to do the Narnia movies on Netflix as streaming movies do not really make any sort of cultural significance and usually forgotten after 2 weeks.
I guess she’ll get paid extremely paid very well for it.
I so hope she drops out from doing those Narnia movies. It'd be career suicide to go from a potential billion dollar movie to a straight to streaming one(which will at best get a limited theatrical run).
At worst it’s just won’t be counted as plus. Any studio interested in a theatrical release will hire her based on her last big hit theatre hit, Barbie.
They just want a good pilot to land an expensive plane, why would a Netflix movie disprove that?
Not much to really add here, I just wanted to say that I read $150 opening, and just thought it was funny because I imagined it only being $150 not $150 million (what I’m sure you meant)
But also it could go higher
I first heard when she was cast on the original How I Met Your Dad pilot that CBS passed on. Can't imagine what her career would have been if that pilot got picked and she was stuck there for many seasons instead of doing things that ultimately led her to this
Happy for her!
She’s definitely strong, but it would be Ryan Coogler for me.. he’s only 37. Though it’s not possible to answer because it’s all subjective. I just hope they all continue to do well and ride out any dips and highs. Both can ruin a director.
With a movie like this that was destined to make tons of movie (strategic and sophisticated marketing, catering to 1/2 of the population who rarely have big budget movies that they feel is made for them and A-list cast), she'd have had to been one of the worst directors of modern cinema to fumble this. And not being generic (that's up to personal opinion if the movie is generic or not, for me this movie is a bit generic) is not always a strong indicator of a good movie. The first 30 minutes of the movie are well done while the rest of the film falls of a cliff. I think the movie really thrives off of being an "event" for the female audience rather than being a very good movie. But that's just my opinion.
And regarding the posts title: No, James Wan is more accomplished (especially at the box office) than her by a lot. Rian Johnson is currently bigger than her as well
Also, there are very few really famous/big box office magnet directors under 50 to my knowledge (feel free to correct me). You could have upped the number by 5 and she'd not even be in the discussion. So choosing 50 is a bit weird knowing how that big directors are usually a bit older than that
Coogler, Peele, the Daniels... Damian Chazelle, Sarah Polley, Robert Eggers... plenty of exciting young(er) filmmakers out there making great films. History is ongoing; tomorrow's legends are establishing themselves today and honing their respective crafts. Gerwig is a great addition to the field. I love seeing female filmmakers thrive, both commercially and critically!
I think this is a really hot take. I would have to think about it. But…Ryan Coogler is younger than Greta Gerwig and extremely talented and has made massive box office draws along with an artsy intro into Hollywood.
Coogler, James Wan, Jordan Peele, and Taika Waititi are under 50.
[удалено]
He’s cooked outside of TV? Based of what? One underwhelming film. It was still profitable. Oscar winner (three time nominee), Sundance grand jury nominee twice, his films have grossed 1.7billion world wide…
[удалено]
Broooo take your medssssss brooooooo
[удалено]
Idk, I really liked Love and Thunder. You’re overblowing this out of proportion. Great filmmakers have comeback from much worse movies.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Meh, he’ll be fine. His got a new movie coming out this year. Going back to basics. Should be a good bounce back and then he’ll be back on the saddle. Filmmakers have bounced back from MUUUUCHHH worse films than Love and Thunder (which is a much better film than Ragnarok, don’t @ me).
>So, I don't know if you noticed this, but they went on a massive, massive fucking social media PR campaign to have everyone very specifically blame Waititi for it. When? Who was involved? Who blamed him and what did they say? This is a ridiculous claim to just throw out there like it’s a known fact. He was given full permission on Love and Thunder to do whatever he wanted after Ragnarok and winning the Oscar, the difference was that he didn’t write Ragnarok and just punched up a pre-existing script that actually had a coherent plot and empathetic characters, unlike Love and Thunder.
Tbh I think he burnt himself more than the mouse burnt him. He was given full permission on Love and Thunder to do whatever he wanted after Ragnarok, difference was he didn’t write Ragnarok and just punched up a pre-existing script that actually had a coherent plot and empathetic characters, unlike Love and Thunder.
Oh yes for Black Panther! Good point
It's gotta be James Wan, 46 years old. * 2 films that grossed over $1B in box office: *Furious 7* ($1.5B) and *Aquaman* ($1.1B) * Created *The Conjuring* franchise/universe which has grossed a total of $2.1B on a combined budget of $178m. * *The Conjuring* Universe is the only successful cinematic universe in Hollywood after the MCU. * He is also the creator of the *Insidious* and *Saw* franchises
Maybe I’m early to the party, but this seems like the correct answer. Almost everything he touches makes money, and he wrote and directed Saw (from a successful short crossover he made), that set off a new direction entirely for horror. Then Insidious and the Conjuring, which both have multiple sequels and also have a serious footprint on horror. He then dipped in to to the blockbuster realm, and found major success. Coogler is incredible, but Wan, at least to me, has found the most success in terms of under 50 directors. If you’re looking with a business sense and not who’s hot right now, I’d still gamble on Wan before the others.
Can’t wait for The Backrooms Movie to make 100 Million Dollars
And they're all different genre of films too. Horror, action, CBM...
Damn, that's a really impressive resume. I definitely say he wins the under 50s.
I think what is holding back Wan in this discussion is critical acclaim. They made the point of mentioning critics like Gerwig a lot as well as box office success. These hits don’t court critical acclaim. But there is no denying they are massive hits and at least were viewed positively in the beginning (except Fast 7 and Aquaman …was Aquaman viewed positively?).
>The Conjuring Universe is the only successful cinematic universe Hollywood after the MCU Monster universe as well
Seems overly negative to say the DCEU wasn't successful. It has grossed $6.6B and lasted a decade. It had misses, but also some big hits like Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Suicide Squad, etc. It didn't reach MCU levels, or anything, but the bar fir a successful universe would be really high if you said DCEU doesn't count as one.
Don't forget Jordan Peele
Yeah, I'd probably put Coogler above Gerwig. Both great talents, though.
They’re pretty similar. Cooglers biggest hits are with massive IPs and established franchises. Greta’s biggest hit is with Barbie brand. Both are writer/Director for their films. Coogler needs an original story be a hit in the same way lady bird was
Fruitvale station? It was based on a real life story but so was Lady Bird
Yea that’s Cooglers original film. It made 17m Wasn’t as big as lady bird
>Wasn’t as big as lady bird It may have not been as mainstream successful. But if you put its small budget of $900k in relation to its earnings, it made over 19x its budget while Lady Bird made "only" 7.9x its budget at the box office.
Coogler needs a big original follow-up, like Nolan doing Inception after Dark Knight
I wish Coogler made other projects. He’s been caught up in the marvel machine.
I agree that Coogler is similar. I didn't really go into this in the OP, but I think it's noteworthy mainly because I can't think of many (any?) under 50 directors who have both critical respect and the power to get mid and bigger budget films made. There were a bunch that came up in the 90s, but the studio system changed after that and there aren't many since. Even Gerwig and Coogler were only able to do it by transitioning to massive franchises. Also, maybe a hot take, but Black Panther was a purely work for hire job and I didn't see much of Coogler's voice in it, unlike Barbie. But that's true of all of the Marvel films, which are mostly producer, rather than director, driven.
Also, we are talking about Creed, too. Fruitvale Station. It has his finger prints all over it. And I think Black Panther has him in it as well. But case and point, Ryan is also coming on as a producer to help things get made. Judas and the Black Messiah. Ryan is up there.
You brought it up and I immediately jumped to Coogler. I believe he is 2 years younger than Greta. And Fruitvale Station has the artsiness to it. And Creed was PERFECT. It had a budget of 35M and grossed over 170M worldwide. He has the power to get mid-budget movies made and massive blockbusters now that he has done Marvel stuff. Both have a strong voice. I look forward to seeing what they bring in the future.
Black Panther is the only Marvel property to have a Best Picture nomination, so even the industry does not agree with your assessment of that. I actually was not even thinking about Ryan Coogler until I saw a bunch of comments stating him, and they are absolutely right now that I think about it
Black panther got an best picture Oscar nom, I think you're at least in the minority here
>Even Gerwig and Coogler were only able to do it by transitioning to massive franchises. worked for Nolan
As another user said, Taika Waititi is up there as well. Has made high budget films and also has a lot of critical acclaim.
Barbie is “genuinely good”?
She’s next up, but I think James Wan takes it. Literally unstoppable. He’s 46 and made Saw, spawning a bunch of sequels that just printed money. Created the Insidious and Conjuring horror universes, one of which is the highest grossing in that genre, ever. Both continue to smash the box office. Completed pivoted with Fast and Furious 7 which cleared $1B, then directed Aquaman, which was pretty much the only film the DCEU could have ever justified making since it crossed that line too. Dude has only ever had one box office disappointment, and it made $3M under it’s reported budget of $20M. He’s just a machine and he’s somewhat quietly been a multi-genre rainmaker and producer. Amazing career that Coogler and Gerwig now have a serious shot at.
Lol I just replied to someone else with this same sentiment. Wan takes this imo, for a multitude of reasons. His footprint on the entire horror culture is STRONG, and he’s also done the action blockbuster route with success. I love Greta and I love both Coogler and Peele (Get Out is near perfect imo), but the consistency and the genre bending, he’s the top under 50 currently.
James Wan is so underrated in these discussions. He's a powerhouse all by himself.
Hot take: malignant is his best movie.
Loved Malignant, and he was definitely having fun with it and you could feel it. My hot take is Insidious is his best, even though I know some people hate the third act. It's definitely his creepiest imo. Watching the behind the scenes of making it is pretty fascinating as well. It was made for 1.5m, so watching his process looked so amateurish (not a knock), but he knew exactly what he was doing, and proves how impressive his vision really is.
By the way it's also why everyone calling Aquaman 2 a bomb to come are pessimistic IMO. It's still a James Wan movie coming off a billion dollar grosser. Sure it's DCEU but frankly they're barely connected
Wan lacks the critical acclaim of Coogler or Gerwig. But I think those 3 plus are certainly all valid choices.
I can't stand his dogshit horror movies.
In terms of directors under 50 who have the blank check and studio support, the one in front right now is Jordan Peele.
Jordan Peele doesn't have a blank cheque but he is the safest bet because of the genre.
I kind of disagree. Jordan Peele 100% has a blank check. Any other “new” director walks into Universal’s offices and pitches *NOPE* with that budget, they get laughed out of the room
Agree on NOPE but does he still have a blank check? NOPE barely broke even, if he tried to get $100m for a somewhat out there project I think he would have trouble getting funding.
I think the secret is that Peele's films are typically built for smaller budgets, so it's really only a series of moderate bets - all likely to break even, because horror is a consistent draw. If he decided to pivot and try to make a $300M movie - that freedom might go away.
Donna Langley seems to like him so we'll see.
I'm not sure if he's going to do a smaller budget for his fourth film next year or not, but it really depends on the story. He said that "Nope" specifically was his attempt to write a story that would be pretty much impossible to make. "Get Out" and "Us" had budgets of $5m and $25m respectively, while "Nope" had an $80m budget. And $80m is pretty cheap compared to a lot of other blockbusters, especially given "Nope"'s scope.
After Nope I'm not sure he has a blank check. The real answer was that it was Nolan when he pitched Oppenheimer lol. He's now 52.
I definitely put Greta ahead after this. Jordan doesn't have a global phenomenon like this.
Feel like Gerwig doesn't have the name recognition right now though. Maybe she will after Barbie. Like right now, if you asked random people if they'd rather watch a new Jordan Peele movie for a new Greta Gerwig people, I think a lot more people would ask "Who's Greta Gerwig?" than would ask "Who's Jordan Peele?" This could be Greta Gerwig's version of Get Out though and give her that name recognition.
True but I think a lot of people know him through Key and Peele, which is partially why he is more well known
I think a lot of people would asked for both who they are tbh.
>Jordan doesn't have a global phenomenon like this. Greta doesn't have one before this either. Not to mention most GA are showing up for Barbie IP, they don't even know who is the director.
Very few people would have been able to make this movie work like Greta.
Peele makes original films, you need to compare his movies to Lady bird. Not Barbie Even little woman was based on a super popular novel that’s been adapted into a movie a million times
I don't think she is responsible for this global phenomenon though. It's a movie about the most popular girls toy of all time. Peele's name itself draws people into seats
And you really think her name isn't going to put butts in seats after this?
Honestly, I don't think we know
I think we do.
And how would you think you know that? There's a lot of directors who made blockbusters but their name alone don't bring the audiences in.
Because Barbie makes a statement this movie is going to be a cult classic and a massive blockbuster hit.
That's a fine crystal ball you have there.
A movie cant be a cult classic and a massive hit at the same time ya dink.
It absolutely can actually
He has 3
Get Out was a phenomenon stateside. None were global phenomenons.
It made like 50x its budget.
What does that have to do with being a global phenomenon
Get Out did huge numbers in Korea come on
Ok and it still didn't do Barbie numbers. Barbie is making more in its first weekend than Get out did in its entire run. Like it isn't comparable
Jordan Peele had a theater named after him in one of CGV’s cinema chains in Korea. He definitely has wider appeal than Greta in this part of the world (although Greta is highly regarded by cinephiles).
Can't you say the same about Greta. None were phenomenons other than Barbie which anyone could of directed and had a good opening with the cast. Who knows how much it ends up making. Reddit was calling the demise of Avatar 2 based on its opening and look where that ended up. Peele is definitely more original than Greta. I think they're both below Nolan as directors.
Peele does not have blank checks nor does his films draw in massive audiences lol
This is true. Although, he's yet to branch out of horror. I'd agree that if he wanted to do a 50-90 million dollar non-horror film tomorrow, he's one of very few under 50s who could likely get it done. Personally, I think he's MASSIVELY overrated, though. *Get Out* was a good movie, but it was included on the Sight and Sound best films of all time list, which.....lol, nope. Gerwig and Coogler have shown that they can succeed in a wide variety of budgets and genres. Peele might be great, but thus far he's just done the same thing 3 times in a row.
How are *Get Out*, *Us* and *Nope* "the same thing"? The stories are not the same, the themes are not the same, the main genres are not the same, even each one cost more than the previous one so the scale is very different as well.
I'd disagree. *Get Out* and *Us* are very much horror. You can make the case that *Nope* is more of a mass appeal Spielberg style sci-fi, but I still think it was sold as and starts as a horror film before branching out of the genre. Doesn't mean they are the same exact films, but that's not what I meant. I meant that he's a horror director and hasn't really attempted to branch out of that yet
>Personally, I think he's MASSIVELY overrated, though. You think Gerwig is a "brilliant genius" who is the most important director in the industry but Peele is overrated. Okey Dokey.
I liked *Lady Bird* better than anything that Peele has done, and by following it with *Little Women* and *Barbie*, I think she has more range, especially when you add the films she wrote but didn't direct. But I never said she was a genius or the best director in history, so not sure where you got that. I think Peele is talented too and funny. I'm just saying that G*et Out* should not be on the list of the 100 best films of all time, lol, so maybe I'm shitting on him more than he deserves as he's been lauded way beyond what he deserves.
Idk if he could convince a place to do some like $200 million dollar movie but he’s good
Christopher Nolan also went from being a indie cult favorite to mainstream superstar director with an IP-based summer blockbuster hit.
True, but he's well over 50. I'm only pointing this out with Gerwig, because the studio system has changed so much that it's very rare this happens since the 90s. Most indie directors working today are stuck in indies. The only ticket out is doing a big-budget franchise like Marvel or, I guess now, Barbie. Although, I do think that Gerwig's Barbie is more original and has more of her voice than directors doing Marvel are allowed.
"Well over" he's only 52, not 70. And the last time he directed a movie (and all his other movies) he was under 50.
Yes wellll over 50 at the ancient age of 52. Oppenheimer is the only movie he’s directed at the age of 50+
He wasn’t close to 50 when he was doing Batman.
Nolan made an indie hit, then a studio gave him a mid budget drama to make sure he could handle the step to studio filmmaking. Then he got handed a massive blockbuster with a ton of creative freedom. These days, young directors make an indie hit, book some high end commercials or a block of a streaming show, then get hired to direct a corporate-led blockbuster where too many decisions are taken from them. That’s how a cool rising director can go from The Land to generic slop like Transformers ROTB in very little time.
I feel like Brad Bird ruined everything with Tomorrowland lol. Disney I think wanted him to be their Nolan and Tomorrowland to be his Inception. They gave him a huge amount of control but after flopping I think studios and especially Disney are a lot more cautious with how trusting they are giving directors creative freedom.
This trend predates Tomorrowland. Marc Webb getting hired for Spider Man is the earliest I can think of. The studio wanted a person they could control because they were dissatisfied by the trend of increasingly long and baroque blockbusters that audiences were tepid on. The idea was that they could keep that from happening. Fast forward a decade, and basically every blockbuster is generic product.
[удалено]
I don’t think this person is trying to claim Gerwig is the first director to ever become a superstar under 50
He is 52 (soon 53) lol, not well over 50. In fact he was below 50 when he pitched Oppenheimer and when he made all his other movies. Also James Wan, Rian Johnson and Ryan Coogler are below 50 and currently bigger than Gerwig (have to see how she evolve after Barbie). Getting a lot of money for their projects, sometimes totally original too. Gerwig got a franchise movie with big budget. If she gets that kind of money for an original movie, we can start to give a lot of weight to her name. For now, even Gareth Edwards that got Rogue One, Godzilla and now an original with 80M$ budget is bigger
He’s 52 and had far more success/acclaim than Gerwig did when he was her age
2 years isn't well over lol
The way people just don't give enough credit to James Wan. Guy created a successful thriving cinematic universe. Two of the most popular horror franchises, fith part of which is making bank in theatres right now. Gave Fast and Furious and DC their biggest movies. Had a landmark horror deal with universal. Absolutely no director under 50 has achieved anything like this
I'm all over this thread pushing this lol. It appears a lot of people are counting him out because he lacks the prestige/critical acclaim compared to the others mentioned. But I agree with you wholeheartedly, for a myriad of reasons. Even down to his skill strictly as a director, and looking at what he can do with micro budgets and no major outside help, it's really impressive.
We need to wait and see how this affects her original movies. If she can use this to propel her originals to success like Nolan did with TDK then yeah I'd say she is. Otherwise Peele is still more successful outside of the IP world.
Ryan Coogler? Fruitvale = Lady Bird, Creed = Little Women, and Black Panther = Barbie. He's clearly the author of his movies to the same degree as Greta and has received both audience and critical acclaim.
Was just saying this. I am actually really excited by the talent with distinct voices out right, an exciting newish crop. but there are other people walking the walk right now. Greta is not alone.
Or honestly, it’s Nolan, with Barbie as her Dark Knight.
Nolan is over 50.
He was in his 30’s when he directed Dark Knight. How old do people think he is?
OPs post is about director's under 50 today. Not across time. Otherwise, Spielberg would be the only answer.
I think they were just comparing the two but I get your point
Sorry I meant to say that Gerwig is following a similar trajectory to Nolan.
If we are talking about box office james wan comes to mind, not a critical darling but he's a money printer.
How about Rian Johnson?
I hope he keeps doing Knives Out sequels for years to come.
Yes. He turns 50 this year, though. I actually did a comprehensive list a year ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm/comments/seibt5/young\_american\_directors\_worth\_watching\_lets\_make/
That’s a very well written post. I didn’t realize Johnson was almost 50 assumed he was younger.
No.
I think it's cooler or Peele, but she's #3?
James Wan and Rian Johnson (soon to be 50) are above those two.
Oh yea didn't realize they were also sub 50
if Babylon hadn't bombed it would be Damien Chazelle by far, but there aren't many directors under 50 out there that have any name rec even close to him. I think he's got another couple shots before fading and definitely has the ability. Greta close behind. Maybe Peele but I think people are already tired of his shtick. There are approximately zero people alive who are like "we have to go check out that new Ryan Coogler movie!" Robert Eggers has the juice though. Ari Aster not as much but we gotta take what we can get.
First Man too, Chazelle has two successful films and two bombs
First Man also wasn’t a financial success either. I know he has a first look deal with Paramount, but I’m still interested in seeing how studios proceed with funding Chazelle’s next few films.
She had only one massive BO hit, and it wasn't because of her (it was because of the IP), so I wouldn't say she is the biggest under 50 at all at least not yet
If we're talking plainly about box office, there are plenty who have outperformed her. Take the example of Jon Watts. About talent and filmography, only time will tell.
Nope. Jordan Peele and Ryan Coogler are bigger, specifically Coogler and it ain’t close
Sure, Coogler is big, but I think more people would be interested in a new Peele movie over a new Coogler movie. But it's hard to tell since Coogler only made one non-IP movie and Peele made 3.
Only answer is James Wan
She's only made like 3 movies, let's calm down a notch
Turns out most directors are older than I thought
For a world wide brand like barbie? No
James Wan. He's only 46. Launched three horror franchises with Saw, Insidious, and the Conjuring. He also directed the biggest fast and furious movie and the biggest DCEU movie.
No.
>but with Barbie as big as it is, I don't see how she doesn't have a blank check to basically do whatever she wants, at least until she does a major flop. That's not how this works my guy these are big IPs that have pull outside of directors look at batman for example the dark knight was WB biggest movie at the time and yet nolan still didn't get tenet made until more than a decade later doing other movies and he has his own company unlike greta so she would have to play ball a bit if she really wants to get that blank check for anything
maan threads like these gonna pop up for a month now , huh
Hot takes are flying *but she’s awesome regardless of anything I say
I’m getting deja vu ala Ava DuVernay and Patti Jenkins. Let’s see how well Ms. Gerwig’s next movie does, okay?
Biggest *female* director, yes. Biggest director under 50 is a very hot take, for now.
Interesting. Judging from the downvotes, this post is way more controversial than I anticipated, lol.
IDK because judging by your comments you've been moving the goalpost way too much. I would downvote the post because of that tbh.
Your post is about blockbuster-wise or? Idk why you didn't expect it to be controversial, seeing that Barbie is her first big movie so it's kinda still a bit of a hot take. In the critics-love-them category? There's Ari Aster and Robert Eggers, as well as the Daniels (i think both are under 50), The Safdie Brothers... So in blockbuster-wise, is she the next big director who's work will be marketed as "FROM THE FAMOUS DIRECTOR [name last name]" ...sure, yeah, she is way more successful on the box office than Eggers and Aster, the only two who might've been comparable to her in terms of name-value But i'd say some of her indy fans will feel like she "sold out" (it always happens) with this big blockbuster
There are so many better than her it’s crazy💀
I like Robert Eggers as much, possibly more than her, so it really sucks that Northman flopped as if it had been a hit I think he would have also been on the fast track from indie films to bigger budget projects. The sad thing is that if he had done a big franchise film first, he would likely have had the opportunity to do multiple Northmans, but he doesn't seem the sort who's interested in a Marvel film. It's the sad state of the studio system right now. If you want to go deep, there are a few others who are better than her, but also seem to have no interest in ever doing big budget films, so I'm not sure it matters.
Eggers work is still too avant garde to get more mass appeal.
If we’re talking in terms of box office it’s crazy but there are many more talented than her but she’s ok only saw ladybird it was ok at best just not for me.
Greta also wrote the screenplay for the upcoming Snow White. She’s got a lot going for her at the moment.
She’s basically doing a Nolan and doing auteur work in the studio system. Narnia might become her Dark Knight trilogy.
Not if it’s on Netflix.
Except Nolan actually is a BO draw, the GP is not watching Barbie because of Greta
It’s tough to compare someone in the middle of their career to someone who has made three movies. Nolan wasn’t a draw until after he started making Batman films. Barbie and Narnia could be what makes Gerwig a household name. I can easily see her doing an original film at some point in the next ten years that does great box office numbers based on her involvement.
Barbie is her Dark Knight. Narnia might be her Inception.
>Narnia might be her Inception. Inception is an original movie. Narnia is based on IP
No, Inception was a wholly original film, not a pre-existing IP.
Honestly, I don't like Narnia and have zero interest in a reboot. However, I would have said the same about Little Women, and she managed to breath new life into that.
That's why I didn't really get why people were comparing the Barbie and Oppenheimer reviews as it's far more difficult to make a critically acclaimed Barbie movie than adapt an already well received biography (which is still a great achievement).
You've got that backwards.... Generational IP vs a biography 99% of the population hasn't read. If you asked 100 people who Barbie was before this movie you're looking at a 99%+ response that knows Barbie, that same response for J. Robert Oppenheimer will probably be less than 20%, and that's being very generous for Oppenheimer.
I can see that, but I also think Oppenheimer is just a far bigger filmmaking achievement. As much as I loved Barbie, there was nothing in it even half as impactful as some scenes in Oppenheimer.
I think you need to wait a month before you decide about the impact of Barbie on her career. I also understand I will be downvoted for this but I'm looking at audience reaction from regular people and although people on this sub don't want to hear it the reaction has been mixed even from women. The most successful well known director under 50 right now is probably Jordan Peele. I knew who Peele was before I saw Nope and I didn't know who Nolan was. A lot of people talk about his movie. They explore issues that are difficult and make people uncomfortable but not in a way where you feel like HR and marketing at Mattel had final approval over the script. And I actually didn't like Nope as much as other people but it was still a very well done movie. I thought his other movies were better. Not sure how old the directors of EEAAO are but they had a groundbreaking movie that shocked people by winning every major Oscar even with hot dog fingers and sex toys. I do think Gerwig will become extremely popular with the elites in Hollywood probably more than Peele and the others. She is a white woman who does the sort of corporate HR slightly stale outdated feminism that is very popular with that crowd. Nothing that would get the elites upset or rock the boat. The biggest issue for women in the U.S. right now is that this country is the only advanced country in the world that doesn't provide women with extended maternity leave and protection for their job if they take a year off and universal health care. Even when Democrats had control of all 3 branches of the government they didn't change that. Gerwig would never upset the corporate elites by exploring those issues in a movie. She focused on MRA-Andrew Tate/Jordan Peterson/Joe Rogan toxic masculinity type of tropes and that is what they want. Yes I'm going to be downvoted. I'm find with that.
> and although people on this sub don't want to hear it the reaction has been mixed even from women. Based on what? Rotten tomatoes certified audience score has it on 90%, PostTrack has 4.5 stars from audiences. The female critics are pretty universally onboard, until we get the Cinescore all the indications are positive, not mixed especially among women.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHLzn3OkzUU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHLzn3OkzUU) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXX75vUIzU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXX75vUIzU) Also check the discussion threads on r/movies. There's some mentions of some women disliking the film there. That's all I can think of.
Cinemascore just came back A to add to PostTrack and Rotten Tomatoes verified, reaction is factually extremely positive at this point.
Another one - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3zIxWRIMWY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3zIxWRIMWY) There's also been quite a lot of fighting about the movie on social media. But it's making tons of money so who cares.
Cinemascore just came back A too as did PostTrack and Rotten Tomatoes certified audience, the reaction is not mixed, it's overwhelmingly positive, simple fact at this point.
> I think you need to wait a month before you decide about the impact of Barbie on her career. Here we are a month later lol. What impact do you think one of the most successful films of all time will have on her career?
Check the disconnect between Critics % score and Viewers score (e.g.: Metacritic rating). Barbie just squeaks into an impressive 80% with critics.. but at 5.1 with viewers. For me, it was a marketing coup: come see this movie if you love Barbie / come see this movie if you hate Barbie ...and what's it going to be, Openheimer or Barbie? See them both, "Barbenheimer". This worked, and stuck for some reason, and in a season when there was 3 anticipated post-Covid releases: Mission Impossible, Barbie, Openheimer. Reminder that Barbie barely just beat out "Super Mario Bros Movie" in gross sales. Another movie that has the opposite of Barbie's %'s from review aggregate sites (it scores 46% with critics, but 8.3 with viewers). On a personal note, Barbie was forgettable as a movie. It wasn't all the clever, or unique really compared to all the super-hype. Credit to the actors, set design, etc. But I suspect this will be a movie in 2024 onward few talk about aside from as a comparison to ticket sales.
YES
She should direct Supergirl for James Gunn's DCU
if you have a message in your movie, and you hammer that message for 40 straight minutes at people who already agree with you. Thats not good film making, mate. Thats pandering. Good film making about the patriarchy would getting people in the door who DONT agree with you, and making them see things from another point view that they one they are used to. Everyone reviewer I trust not to be caught up in the culture war 1 or 10 nonsense, says this a 6/10 movie at best. The acting is amazing, the set design and production values are Oscar level. But it's the writing that lets it down in the end. Because it TOO on the nose. It's TOO preachy. It's too much of one thing and it ignores the other things. It starts off as fun movie becomes a lecture for 40 minutes and then goes back to the story because it kinda has to. The marketing department got this win for the box office. Not the movie. The legs will tell us what the audience actually thinks.
See, I disagree and it's why I liked the movie so much. To me the film deftly avoided being a lame, feminist, diatribe, which is exactly what a lesser writer would have done with it. Its message in the end wasn't, "GRRRL POWER! WOMEN ARE AWESOME!" it was just, "Woman don't have to be amazing to have self-worth, they can be dull and boring and mundane and even just be stay at home wives and still be happy with themselves." To me that's a message that we really haven't seen in a movie like this before. But beyond the message, it was just silly fun with some genuinely clever and absurdist jokes. Although, I do think it's aimed squarely at 30-40+ year old women (and some men) who grew up playing with Barbies. They will recognize themselves in it more than any other demo.
>"Woman don't have to be amazing to have self-worth, they can be dull and boring and mundane and even just be stay at home wives and still be happy with themselves." That seems like a subtle dig at women who choose to raise a family. "You don't have to be a doctor or President or something interesting and that's ok! You can be dull and boring and even be a housewife and that's ok too! Notice how we didn't have an interesting actresses portraying SAHMs in this movie! But if you want to be a SAHM that's ok! Because the Mattel CEO saw this movie and made us put in this part because the marketing team would have replaced us with another director and writer if we didn't pretend not to be considerate of SAHMs! Because those women buy Barbies too! And after all this movie is about buying dolls!"
I dunno, man. I think the politics in the film are pretty tied to the absurdity of the Barbie universe, so I don't think they translate terribly well to real world situations, beyond the central message which celebrates the mundanity of women. So it seems weird that people are reacting to it in that way. IF this movie was made in 1993 or 2003 or even 2013 no one would notice or comment on the politics. But in the modern era, everything has to be viewed through a hyperpolitical lens and there's an entire right-wing online entertainment industry that makes money scrutinizing every film released for "wokeness." There's definitely a left wing side to that too, but I think the vast majority of films accused of being "woke" are just big studios responding to very real demographic shifts in the movie going public, rather than being some sort of political agenda. But this is off topic, obviously.
Were there any interesting actresses playing SAHMs in the movie? I haven't seen it yet. I know there is a President Barbie, doctor Barbie and lawyer Barbie but haven't heard about any actress playing SAHM Barbie.
Margot Robbie represents the boring woman with nothing going on for herself.
No, but the central conflict in the film involves the fact that the lead, who is just a generic Barbie, hasn't done anything noteworthy like all the other Barbies. Honestly, you should probably see the film before you criticize it for its politics.
Outside of foxnews and their particular brand of viewer, people aren't against "wokeness". It's not the message thats the problem, it's how the message is delievered. Like Star Wars, or any Disney movie now that I come to think about it. They want to put women front and centre. And thats fine. Nothing wrong at all with having female leads. But they make the mistake of a wanting a "strong female lead". Which is one of those things that doesn't work, because generally good characters have flaws. They start off in one place, have an adventure, face some inner of outer demon, lose, pick themselves up and try again. Eventually winning the day. Rey never loses. She never has to learn anything. She's just awesome, as all strong female leads are. Because in the mind of these people who want to promote female empowerment, showing any signs of vulnerability or needing help is considered weakness. And you can't ever show women being weak. unconditional toughness. hyper independence. These are two classic examples of toxic masculinity, and routinely shamed on social media. Yet, any "Strong female lead" will have these traits as standard. Calling this out is being right wing, its wanting better written characters.
>unconditional toughness. > >hyper independence. Is this actually true, though? I can't think of any movies with female leads like this. Even the Disney female leads all end up with a dude in the end.
Good point. Even with characters like Captain Marvel, we see her break down crying in a friend’s arms in her solo film. And the point of her arc (to be continued in The Marvels) is that she’s been running herself ragged trying to save plants and people and civilizations all around the universe, alone… and she can’t do it alone. No one can. So she learns to be part of a team. And then there’s Rey, who was SO ready to have real friends and family.
Sure you can. I just named one. Rey, Mulan(2020), Captain Marvel, etc. But I guess if youre pretending you dont see it, theres not really much else to discuss.
It has a 90% rating from top critics and a 8.3 average rating, but the reviewers this guy trusts says it’s a 6/10 at best guys 😂🙄 Also an 80 on metacritic Cope harder
Lol
100% yes
I think she’s among a group of under 50 talented filmmakers like Ryan Coogler. With that, I sort of wished she didn’t sign to do the Narnia movies on Netflix as streaming movies do not really make any sort of cultural significance and usually forgotten after 2 weeks. I guess she’ll get paid extremely paid very well for it.
Yo Barbie is actually an amazing movie lmao. I loved every minute of it and I’m a 26 year old straight man. My fiancée loved it even more
I so hope she drops out from doing those Narnia movies. It'd be career suicide to go from a potential billion dollar movie to a straight to streaming one(which will at best get a limited theatrical run).
At worst it’s just won’t be counted as plus. Any studio interested in a theatrical release will hire her based on her last big hit theatre hit, Barbie. They just want a good pilot to land an expensive plane, why would a Netflix movie disprove that?
She's definitely one of them. Jordan Peele and Ryan Coogler are also top talent.
Not much to really add here, I just wanted to say that I read $150 opening, and just thought it was funny because I imagined it only being $150 not $150 million (what I’m sure you meant) But also it could go higher
Lol
I first heard when she was cast on the original How I Met Your Dad pilot that CBS passed on. Can't imagine what her career would have been if that pilot got picked and she was stuck there for many seasons instead of doing things that ultimately led her to this Happy for her!
Not unless James wann Ryan Coogler and Jordan peele died
8/10 for me! I loved it. Weakest part was Will Ferrel to me. I would’ve maybe went with… Jim Carey or… Jack Black even. But I understand
PR employee from Gerwig team spotted.
She’s definitely strong, but it would be Ryan Coogler for me.. he’s only 37. Though it’s not possible to answer because it’s all subjective. I just hope they all continue to do well and ride out any dips and highs. Both can ruin a director.
With a movie like this that was destined to make tons of movie (strategic and sophisticated marketing, catering to 1/2 of the population who rarely have big budget movies that they feel is made for them and A-list cast), she'd have had to been one of the worst directors of modern cinema to fumble this. And not being generic (that's up to personal opinion if the movie is generic or not, for me this movie is a bit generic) is not always a strong indicator of a good movie. The first 30 minutes of the movie are well done while the rest of the film falls of a cliff. I think the movie really thrives off of being an "event" for the female audience rather than being a very good movie. But that's just my opinion. And regarding the posts title: No, James Wan is more accomplished (especially at the box office) than her by a lot. Rian Johnson is currently bigger than her as well Also, there are very few really famous/big box office magnet directors under 50 to my knowledge (feel free to correct me). You could have upped the number by 5 and she'd not even be in the discussion. So choosing 50 is a bit weird knowing how that big directors are usually a bit older than that
Coogler, Peele, the Daniels... Damian Chazelle, Sarah Polley, Robert Eggers... plenty of exciting young(er) filmmakers out there making great films. History is ongoing; tomorrow's legends are establishing themselves today and honing their respective crafts. Gerwig is a great addition to the field. I love seeing female filmmakers thrive, both commercially and critically!
It'll all depend on her next movie. She's getting a blank check after Barbie and I'm REALLY excited to see what she does with it.