GoneTrending

It’s been five long years since Marvel had to axe all their Netflix shows. Long before the brand’s interconnectedness clearly got too complicated for audiences, the streamer had a good thing going with a string of shows revolving around the gang known as the Defenders: Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron First. At least some of those shows’ side characters are coming back for the forthcoming revival Daredevil: Born Again, and it looks like maybe — or maybe not, who knows — one of them might be Jon Bernthal’s take on the Punisher.

Per IGN, Bernthal posted a semi-cryptic image on his Instagram account. It was the cover of a children’s book entitled One Batch, Two Batch, showing two bears, a father and child, the latter wielding a chocolate chip cookie with one bit out. Why would Benthal, a grown man, post this?

Real heads know. As IGN points out, One Batch, Two Batch is the children’s book Benthal’s Frank Castle reads to his daughter every night before she goes to sleep. That’s not all: The Punisher sometimes likes to quote a line from it — “One batch, two batch, penny and dime” — before he kills people. Imagine someone quoting a children’s book to you before they take you out.

This seems to confirm a rumor that was floated earlier this month, namely that Bernthal’s Punisher is back for Daredevil: Born Again. If that’s true, he’ll join some other Marvel Netflix show alumni, like Vincent D’Onofrio’s Wilison Fisk, aka Kingpin, and Wilson Bethel’s Poindexter, aka Bullseye. Thanks to set photos, it appears another big character may be back, too: Krysten Ritter’s Jessica Jones. Or maybe that won’t happen. Maybe neither of these things will happen.

Whatever the case, everyone will know for sure when Daredevil: Born Again hits Disney+ and Hulu sometime next year.

(Via IGN)

Justin Fields finds himself in no-man’s land as he gets set for his fourth year in the NFL. The former top-10 pick is almost assuredly on his way out of Chicago as they hold the No. 1 overall pick in April’s Draft and are widely expected to take Caleb Williams to be his replacement. However, the Bears are also going to take their time making that decision final, meaning Fields likely won’t get moved until much closer to (or during) the Draft.

That is an issue right now for Fields. The NFL is already an unforgiving place when it comes to providing opportunity. Teams don’t care about the extenuating circumstances that might’ve caused you to struggle, from coaching turnover to a lack of help on a roster. They just care that the production hasn’t measured up to expectations. Add in the desire to move quickly once free agency opens to fill your most important positions — something that is especially true at quarterback — and you end up with Fields sitting in limbo with fewer and fewer potential landing spots.

Fields, for his part, had the best season of his young career in 2023, completing 61.4 percent of his passes for 2,562 yards, 16 touchdowns, and nine interceptions while rushing for 657 yards and 4 TDS. However, the Bears were still a middling team at 5-8 with Fields starting, and while he took strides as a passer, there are still concerns about his willingness to let it rip and inconsistent production. There are games Fields looks like a potential high-end starter and others were he looks like a young quarterback still trying to adapt to the speed of the NFL game.

Entering his fourth year at 25 years old, there’s certainly still time for Fields to hit his full potential, but his biggest issue is he’s due to get paid next year. The going rate for a mid-tier starting quarterback in the NFL is $25 million (Jimmy Garoppolo, Geno Smith) to $35 million (Baker Mayfield, Jared Goff, Derek Carr). If teams aren’t sold on Fields being a lock to produce like that, they won’t want to give up a lot in a trade and be on the hook to pay him next year, because then you risk having spent decent draft capital on a one-year rental.

That’s why Fields now finds himself in a fairly precarious position as QB jobs dry up with free agency opening and the Draft looming. The Atlanta Falcons were seen as a snug fit for Fields, as he’s an Atlanta-area native, but they paid big money to bring in Kirk Cousins instead. The Steelers were also considered a potential landing spot for Fields, but chose to sign Russell Wilson on a cheap deal. The Vikings, who lost Cousins to the Falcons, quickly scooped up Sam Darnold as their apparent stop-gap quarterback until they can figure out a long-term option, whether that’s Darnold or someone they take in April. The Raiders, which signed Gardner Minshew, are in a similar spot.

That leaves just a handful of options for Fields before he finds himself on the outside looking in, possibly having to go the Geno Smith route to find his footing in the league. Making life harder for Fields (and the reason he’s in this position in the first place) is the fact that this year’s Draft features four QBs many project to be top-12 picks. Williams, Drake Maye, Jayden Daniels, and J.J. McCarthy all could go in the top-10, meaning bad teams that would otherwise be in the mix for a QB on the trade market would rather choose to roll the dice on landing their QB of the future. That’s not because those four are locks to being better than Fields, but because if you get a QB on a rookie deal, it opens up your chances to build out a contender quickly around them by spending money elsewhere.

The only starting jobs currently available are:

• New England Patriots (No. 2 pick)
• Washington Commanders (No. 3 pick)
• Denver Broncos (No. 12 pick)

Any of those three teams could look to trade a second-round pick for Fields and use their first-round selection to give him some weaponry around him — the Pats or Commanders could theoretically use their top-3 picks to pair him with another ex-Buckeye star in receiver Marvin Harrison Jr. However, that seems unlikely because of the financial reasons laid out above and the fact that teams needing quarterbacks tend to take them as much out of fear as out of desire. Passing on a generational quarterback (see: the Bears and Patrick Mahomes) can haunt your franchise for years, and teams are absolutely terrified of that happening. Few will be ridiculed if Fields becomes a star elsewhere for passing on the chance to trade for him, but if Maye or Daniels were to pop somewhere else while Fields stalls out in New England or Washington, they would never hear the end of it.

Is that a thing teams should worry about when building their team? Probably not, but it certainly factors into the calculus. If those three teams all choose to make their quarterback addition through the Draft, the only real hope for Fields is to get traded somewhere he could get into a quarterback competition.

The Titans have a new coaching staff — would they want someone else in the building to compete with Will Levis this year? The Raiders could surprise everyone and trade for Fields to compete with recently-signed Minshew for the starting job, particularly if they don’t end up with a QB of the future at No. 13 overall (or trading up), but that seems unlikely. The Giants just signed Drew Lock to backup Daniel Jones, seemingly removing my favorite potential Fields landing spot from the board of options (I think Brian Daboll would be just about the ideal coach for Fields). Maybe the Saints look to bring in Fields to push Derek Carr now that Jameis Winston is gone, but that’d be a questionable use of resources in New Orleans.

As of now, it seems more likely that Fields is a high-profile backup somewhere next year rather than a starter. That likely sets his timeline back a few years before even getting a chance as a starter again, following the Smith/Darnold/Minshew playbook. That can get you a 1-year “prove it” deal, which can get you a long-term contract. For now, it seems Fields is the latest victim of the NFL’s unforgiving lack of patience, but all it will take is seizing the next opportunity when it arrives to change all of that.

The Oscars have come and gone once again, and they have been the topic of discussion for numerous reasons: Oppenheimer winning for most of its nominations, including Best Actor, Best Director, and Best Picture; Ryan Gosling’s unforgettable performance of “I’m Just Ken” from Barbie; John Cena wearing nothing but Birkenstocks and his birthday suit to present the Oscar for Best Costume Design; and in the biggest upset of the night, Emma Stone winning for Best Actress instead of Lily Gladstone. A smaller, but still notable, moment that had people talking was Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt presenting together to pay tribute to the community of stuntpersons whose hard and amazing work helps make films so incredibly entertaining to watch. Some viewers at home thought this would’ve been a perfect opportunity for the two of them to announce that The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences finally made it official, and introduce the new category of Best Stunt Choreography for the Oscars starting next year, along with Best Casting.

There have been many critics and cinephiles who have been clamoring for The Academy to lavish some praise and acknowledgment on the stunt community outside of the occasional speech and montage every few years. And there have been films that are perfect examples of why this should have become a reality by now. Films like the John Wick series (the staircase scene in Chapter 4 alone is proof of this), the Fast & Furious series, the Mission Impossible series, Bullet Train, The Woman King, Baby Driver (its writer-director, Edgar Wright, expressed his appreciation on Twitter for the film’s inclusion in the Oscars stunt montage, while also stating that more needs to be done), both volumes of Kill Bill, Everything Everywhere All at Once, and last but certainly not least, Mad Max: Fury Road.

If The Academy is truly serious about acknowledging the stunt community with its own category at the Oscars (and it is admittedly a long and complicated process for a new category to be introduced), here are some upcoming films this year that look like they will be deserving of some nominations for their stunt performers.

Monkey Man

Dev Patel makes his directorial debut (and puts his black belt in tae kwon do to very good use) in this Jordan Peele-produced action film about a young man working in an underground fight club who decides to inflict revenge on his mother’s killers. From what has been shown in the trailer so far (especially the red-band trailer), Monkey Man looks to be a combo of John Wick, Oldboy, and even Bloodsport that will earn the film its R rating, and with fight choreography that will have audiences talking about it long after the closing credits.

Boy Kills World

Before we get to see whether or not he surpasses expectations with his lead role in the long-awaited remake of The Crow, Bill Skårsgard stars in this action film about a young boy who becomes deaf and mute after witnessing the murder of his loved ones by a corrupt and powerful family, and spends the rest of his childhood in rigorous martial arts training so he can seek his revenge as an adult. Skårsgard’s inner voice is provided by the legendary H. Jon Benjamin, so have fun deciding for yourself as to whether it is Sterling Archer or Bob Belcher who is providing the narration for this.

Road House

There have been some conflicting viewpoints seen in the press as to whether this should be released in theaters, or whether it should be released on Amazon Prime Video. Regardless of which viewpoint is truthful and correct, viewers will get to see this remake of the 1989 cult classic that starred the late, great Patrick Swayze, and blessed us with memorable quotes like “Pain don’t hurt,” and “I want you to be nice until it’s time to not be nice”. Gyllenhaal plays a former MMA fighter who is hired by a bar owner (Jessica Williams) to help clean up her newest place of business in the Florida Keys so that it no longer resembles a slaughterhouse, which leads to him butting heads with a ruthless and boisterous troublemaker played by UFC champion Conor McGregor.

Deadpool & Wolverine

The long-awaited sequel/introduction of The Merc with a Mouth to the Marvel Cinematic Universe is almost here, and this time, we get to see him cross paths with one of the best things to come out of Canada since maple syrup: Wolverine, the adamantium-clawed mutant who will be played once again by Hugh Jackman, despite the fact that we saw him perish in the 2017 film Logan. The Deadpool films have been well-known for their clever stunts and fight scenes, and seeing not just one, but two, superhuman characters who can take lots of punishment while they’re dishing it out, looks to promise even more.

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

The prequel to 2015’s Mad Max: Fury Road is centered on the origin story of Imperator Furiosa (played by Charlize Theron in Fury Road, and now played by Anya Taylor-Joy in this film), and how she became trapped in the nearly inescapable grasp of Immortan Joe and his War Boys. It already looks like it will be just as delightfully bonkers (or batshit, whichever works best) when it comes to the vehicular mayhem that is to be expected in any Mad Max tale, and much like Fury Road did upon its release, Furiosa is highly likely to inspire just as much noise from its viewers in asking/demanding The Academy to finally give the stunt community the praise and acknowledgment they all deserve.

The Fall Guy

The 1980s television series that starred Lee Majors as a stuntman who moonlights as a bounty hunter to track down criminals every week gets the big-screen treatment, with Ryan Gosling playing the role of stuntman Colt Seavers, and Emily Blunt as Jody, the action film director/ex-girlfriend of Colt who asks him to find the leading man for her mega-budgeted action film before it is shut down. This will be the second time Gosling plays a stuntman, though it’s safe to say that The Fall Guy will be a lot less gory and disturbing to watch than Drive. And if there’s any of these films that deserves an Oscar nod for Best Stunt Choreography, what better candidate than a film about a stuntperson doing what he does best to save the day?

Roku City used to be a safe and welcoming place filled with picturesque purple sunsets and nostalgia-fueled movie references. Now it’s just a glorified commercial. But this is how most cities evolve, so we shouldn’t be surprised. What is surprising is that the company is not very good at discouraging hackers from taking a quick vacation to Roku City, where they subsequently compromised nearly 15,000 accounts. Gotham sure looks like the preferred fictional city right about now.

The Hollywood Reporter revealed that 15,363 Roku accounts were compromised between December 28, 2023 and February 21, 2024. Filings in California and Maine indicate that hackers obtained login data from another source to try and purchase streaming subscriptions.

A company spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter:

Roku’s security team recently detected suspicious activity that indicated a limited number of Roku accounts were accessed by unauthorized actors using login credentials obtained from third-party sources (e.g., through data breaches of third-party services that are not related to Roku). In response, we took immediate steps to secure these accounts and are notifying affected customers. Roku is committed to maintaining our customers’ privacy and security, and we take this incident very seriously.

Bleeping Computer also reported that the stolen accounts were being sold for as little as $0.50 per account.

While it sounds scary, the company assured customers that the hackers did not gain access to “social security numbers, full payment account numbers, dates of birth, or other similar sensitive personal information requiring notification.” It seems like they really just wanted to log in to Hulu and see what Shogun is all about.

(Via The Hollywood Reporter)

The wait for Stranger Things season five just got even longer.

During a recent appearance on The Jonathan Ross Show, star Millie Bobby Brown revealed that there’s still many months of shooting remaining for the final season of the Netflix series. “We have nine months left,” she said, according to Screen Rant.

Bobby Brown declined to reveal any more details than that, however, because “I really like Netflix, I’d like to be employed by them for a really long time, because I sign a piece of paper that tells me I’m not allowed to say anything, and I think I owe it to them to keep my mouth shut… I know what happens to my character. I haven’t read the script because they are in the process of writing them. I think I read up to episode six… But like I said, I like working for Netflix, I’m going to be a good girl.”

Nine months from now is December 2024. Stranger Things requires lots of visual effects, so add another six or seven months, at least, for post-production work. That means fans of the show shouldn’t expect season five to premiere until summer 2025, at the absolute summer. By then, Finn Wolfhard will be [checks notes] 82 years old. It’ll be distracting seeing Mike with a long, white beard, but we’ll get used to it.

Until Stranger Things returns, you can watch Bobby Brown in Damsel.

(Via Screen Rant)

In a relatively short time, 39-year-old Swedish composer Ludwig Göransson has become a favorite of both hip-hop fans and geek fandoms online thanks to his expansive oeuvre. Since 2011, he’s garnered attention from the former for his production work alongside Childish Gambino, Kendrick Lamar, and more. Meanwhile, fans of sci-fi epics and superhero movies know him for his contributions to scores for massive multimedia franchises like the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Star Wars.

However, there’s one group that isn’t too happy with him this week: Gamers. A search for his name on social media outlets today would surface a roiling debate over Göransson’s comments on Sunday during his Oscars acceptance speech. After receiving the award for Best Original Score for Oppenhaimer (his second win after receiving one in 2018 for Black Panther), he thanked his parents “for giving me guitars and drum machines instead of video games.”

This has obviously riled the gaming community, who view themselves as oft-put-upon despite the gaming industry’s record worldwide profits and popularity. There’s probably a whole 2000-word article to be written about why they feel this way, but in general, they seem salty that Göransson appeared to deride their hobby in his thanks to his parents. Since I started off talking about hip-hop, there’s no better example to use here than the homie Mega Ran, a stalwart of the so-called “nerdcore” subgenre of rap, who called the comments “an unnecessary bit of shade.”

Over on Twitter, the discourse has gotten heated, with many gamers rightly pointing out that video games have featured or inspired some of the most recognizable music in pop culture, from the Mario theme to the chiptune subgenre that reproduces the 8- and 16-bit sounds of millennial nostalgia for original works.

Of course, there’s no speaking for Mr. Göransson either way, but whether he was legitimately putting games down or just joking about his parents’ refusal to let him have something many, many other ’90s kids begged their parents to have (many to no avail), one positive to take away from this whole kerfuffle is an appreciation of the wide range of musical styles in video game music. Maybe as a mea culpa, he can compose the music for a triple-A game or two, just to prove he can.

South By Southwest is happening right now, spanning this year from March 8 to 16. Things haven’t been perfect so far, though. Some artists have opted to pull out of their performances due to one of the festival’s sponsors. Now, SXSW has shared a statement after a hit-and-run in Austin resulted in a death.

SXSW’s statement reads, “We are deeply saddened to learn of the passing of an individual in downtown Austin following an auto-pedestrian accident shortly after 1:00am this morning. Our thoughts are with all affected by this tragic incident.”

As Fox 7 Austin reports, after 1 a.m. on March 12, two pedestrians were walking at the intersection of 7th Street and Red River and were hit by a vehicle, according to police. One of them died on the scene, while the other was taken to a hospital “with critical, life-threatening injuries.” The intersection has closed after the accident but had re-opened as of 5 a.m. Police are still looking for the driver.

The intersection where the hit-and-run took place is near participating SXSW venues like Elysium, The Creek And The Cave, and Flamingo Cantina, among others.

Meanwhile, Uproxx recently published a guide on the unofficial SXSW parties happening in Austin, so learn more about that here.

After a rough year in 2023, Marvel seemed to be turning a corner with the back-to-back trailers for Deadpool & Wolverine and X-Men ’97, a follow-up to the classic X-Men: The Animated Series. The cartoon sequel earned rave reactions on social media as Marvel fans were thrilled by the animation style that brought back memories of watching their favorite mutants on Saturday mornings.

With X-Men ’97 set to hit Disney+ this month, Marvel was about to make big on its new strategy of leaning into the X-Men to ward off superhero fatigue. However, the studio is now caught in another PR crisis following reports that Marvel has fired X-Men ’97 showrunner Beau DeMayo with only a week to go until the Hollywood premiere.

Via The Hollywood Reporter:

But early last week, Marvel and DeMayo suddenly parted ways. His company email was deactivated and cast and crew were informed he was no longer on the project. DeMayo’s Instagram account, once a source for X-Men updates, was deleted. No reason for the firing was given.

Marvel had no comment. DeMayo’s representatives did not return calls for comment and emails to the showrunner yielded no response.

As THR notes, “It is unusual for a top creative on a Marvel project to miss a premiere or cancel press plans last minute, even if they’ve been shuffled to the side.”

DeMayo had already lined up press to promote the first season of X-Men ’97 and was scheduled to attend the Hollywood premiere on March 13. He had also handed in drafts for the upcoming Blade movie starring Mahershala Ali. DeMayo will no longer be moving forward with any projects with Marvel after getting his start as a writer on Moon Knight in November 2021.

X-Men ’97 premieres March 20 on Disney+.

(Via The Hollywood Reporter)

You know the old saying: one Dune simply isn’t enough, Two Dunes is a crowd, and Three Dunes is a party. It’s in all of the high school textbooks!

Even though director Denis Villeneuve is still riding high on those sandworms of success of Dune: Part 2, he’s already got his eyes on the third installment, which has not even been announced yet.

Villeneuve has been “unofficially” moving forward with his idea for the threequel. “Dune Messiah – which, Dune 3, the title would be Dune Messiah – we’ll see the day when the screenplay will be ready and I want to make sure that there will be no compromise,” he told Comic Book. “It has to be tremendous. All is there to make the fantastic film, and I don’t want to mess it up.” There is still time for him to mess it up, but here is everything we know so far about the potential sequel. Hopefully, you saved that suggestive popcorn bucket. Or….not.

Cast

One of the biggest surprises with Dune: Part Two was Anya Taylor-Joy showing up as an older version of Paul’s sister Alia. Villeneuve himself was surprised that the secret was kept. “I was deeply happy with the fact that Anya accepted this challenge of playing a ghost and a secret,” he told EW. “I cannot believe that we kept the secret that long. It required so much work to keep that secret. Everybody signed with their blood.”

While Taylor-Joy has not been confirmed for the threequel, the director hopes to expand on Alia’s storyline, which would give her a larger part. “I love her [Taylor-Joy],” Villeneuve said, adding that he would also like Florence Pugh to return. “I would love to make Dune Messiah just to work with her and Florence more. Those actresses are so inspiring. They give me chills and the will to do another one.”

Of course, we couldn’t have Dune without Paul, so it’s likely that Timothee Chalamet would return as Paul. While Paul’s mother, played by Rebecca Ferguson, does not appear in Dune Messiah, she could show up in Villeneuve’s adaptation.

Plot

The plot would follow the second novel in the series, Dune Messiah, which was published in 1969 and takes place 12 years after the events of the first book. Messiah follows Paul dealing with his unintended heroism and internal struggles after being named the “messiah” for the Freeman and marrying Princess Irulan.

“If I succeed in making a trilogy, that would be the dream,” Villeneuve has said. “Dune Messiah was written in reaction to the fact that people perceived Paul Atreides as a hero. Which is not what he wanted to do. My adaptation is closer to his idea that it’s actually a warning.”

Release Date

It will likely be a while until we head back to the sand. Villeneuve has said that he wants to take his time when it comes to the next film “I want to take the time to do it. And I think it would be healthy that I don’t go back necessarily in the desert right away, that I make a little detour, maybe,” he told Collider. “But honestly, I don’t know what my future is right now, which I love because I worked the past six years nonstop. It’s a blessing, but I need that. It would be nice to make sure that if we do Dune: Messiah, I want to make the best movie ever, so I want to just take my time.”

The first film took place over four months, but was delayed by COVID. The second film took roughly five months, though that release was also delayed due to the Hollywood Labor disputes. It could definitely be years until we see that sand again.

Trailer

Obviously, there is no trailer just yet. Instead, you can watch Timothee Chalamet’s long-lost audition:

Women are not mysteries. That argument has been made dozens of times to many well-meaning men complaining they simply can’t grasp the mechanics of existence when it comes to the fairer sex. They never seem to get it, instead complaining that our minds are enigmas, our emotions uncontrollable, our bodies ticking time bombs in need of more governance. We’re even jokingly told we hail from a different planet, as if our natures are so alien, that they chart separate elliptical paths.

Women are not mysteries, and nor should our bodies be.

Maybe that’s why films like Greta Gerwig’s Barbie and Yorgos Lanthimos’ Poor Things felt so revolutionary, so shocking when audiences saw them last year. One was a fuchsia-soaked existential crisis in commercial doll form, the other a steampunk feminist Frankenstein. But both, oddly enough, gave us a liberating depiction of the female body – its hungers, its flaws, its perfections, its power. In a medium like film, a woman’s body has rarely merited three-dimensional thought. It’s been a tool for pleasure, sure. A battleground, a punching bag, a seductive weapon, a maternal incubator, but rarely has it served as the main character of its own story. And yet, the body is what drives much of the discovery in both Gerwig’s and Lanthimos’ “coming of consciousness” films.

For Bella Baxter (Emma Stone) — a natural-order-flouting experiment conceived by a brilliant, tortured scientist who answers to the name God (Willem Dafoe) – that discovery begins, as Eve’s did, with an apple. With her childlike brain inhabiting the reanimated body of her dead mother, Bella spends the earlier parts of the dark comedy jerking and stumbling through a posh London mansion, breaking dishes, soiling herself, and wobbling her way to adulthood. When she uncovers the bliss of sexual pleasure via a flesh-covered fruit at her creator’s dinner table, she finds happiness. Her body is what informs her of a key aspect of human existence, something that becomes all the more confusing as she’s shamed and restricted from indulging in the masturbatory act again.

When she’s offered freedom by the soft-bellied cad, Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), Bella seizes her chance to question her body further, asking its limits as she “furiously jumps” – a phrase used to convey her naïve understanding of penetrative sex –her way across continents, sampling from an orgasmic buffet of positions and partners, much to the dismay of her original paramour. But Bella’s body doesn’t simply stop once it receives its carnal education. Her insatiable appetite expands, to Portuguese pastries rebelliously stuffed in her yawning mouth, to flailing limbs interpreting the strange, pulse-pounding sounds of a ballroom dance, to the flurry of words in philosophy books, to the social injustices wrought upon those deemed different or less than. In Poor Things, Bella’s body is both a sponge, absorbing the joys and horrors of life, and a tool she uses to dismantle the invisible, patriarchal shackles meant to “protect” and “save” her from her own debased nature.

Gerwig’s treatment of the body is less salacious and more subtle. The concept of death, the idea that the body may one day die, is what sparks Barbie’s (Margot Robbie) transition from blissful ignorance to a sobering reality. When gravity grips her perfectly arched feet, her matriarchal utopia is thrown into chaos. She experiences physical pain, perhaps for the first time, as she tries to contort her disgustingly flat appendages into her beloved heels. She begins finding imperfections in her form – her breath that stinks, her hair that knots, her thighs that carry fat deposits called cellulite. Gerwig uses a glossed-over form of body horror to push Barbie out of her comfort zone, dropping her in Venice Beach in a brightly-colored leotard that pulls the leering, objective focus of men. It’s here – with her body on display, being consumed for other’s entertainment and enjoyment – that Barbie begins to suspect the real world is not a perfect mirror for the safe, nurturing environment she’s cultivated in Barbie Land.

“I feel kind of ill at ease, like I don’t know the word for it but I’m…conscious, but it’s…myself that I’m conscious of,” Barbie innocently tells Ken (Ryan Gosling) to which he enthusiastically replies, “I’m not getting any of that. I feel what can only be described as admired but not ogled. And there’s no undertone of violence.”

“Mine very much has an undertone of violence,” Barbie clarifies.

It’s a darkly comedic moment, one meant to land more with female viewers than anyone else. The threat of bodily harm is one that hounds every woman. It can dictate our daily habits – from how late we stay out at night to what we carry in our bags to who we accept help from. Our bodies are constantly judged – if not by others, then by ourselves. Did I cover up too much? Did I not cover up enough? Did I send some kind of signal? Did I not pay enough attention? Did the way I look, speak, or act somehow invite that dangerous attention? It’s maddeningly unfair, a woman’s reality, which is why it feels so cathartic to laugh at Barbie’s naivete in this scene. Here’s a gorgeous woman learning, for the first time, that her beauty doesn’t just belong to her as her himbo sidekick skates merrily along, completely oblivious and all too happy to reap the rewards of their reversal of circumstance.

That communal relief of being seen is what helps the film’s final scene – Barbie’s first trip to the gynecologist – land so perfectly. Despite being controversial among some swaths of audiences and critics, Barbie’s never more relatable to female viewers than when she excitedly arrives for her appointment, believing it to be a wondrous right of passage. She’ll learn the uncomfortable truth soon enough, but again, it’s the body and how womanhood means constantly learning about it, taking care of it, listening to it, and accepting it, that pushes Barbie to take this next life step.

Connecting with the body is what empowers both Barbie and Bella in their respective journeys. Bella’s stint at a Parisian brothel helps her to understand power dynamics as she fights for her right to say yes and when during her many sexual encounters. She discovers what pleases her, what doesn’t, and most importantly, why that knowledge is so threatening to men like Duncan and her estranged “husband,” a man eager to rob her of bits of her anatomy to better control her. Without a clitoris, without pleasure, perhaps she will shrink herself, but Bella’s body has already realized it’s not simply sex that makes her happy – it’s freedom. To choose, to hunger, to consume, to taste, to feel, to experience. And while her anatomy acts as a key to unlocking the larger world, Barbie’s evolution from artificial to organic teaches her about herself – her desires, her abilities, and her purpose.

In demystifying the female body, Gerwig and Lanthimos buck a troubling cinematic trend – one that’s sterilized some of the messier parts of being human. Movies and TV shows are constantly being criticized for sporting too much sex, superfluous nudity, or for putting bodies on display. Some do so needlessly, warranting that pushback. But if we ignore the body – especially the female body – in stories meant to confront stereotypes and challenge societal conventions, we lose a key element of womanhood. Worse, we relegate the female body to something unknowable, devaluing it, and making it easier to misunderstand, misdiagnose, and misuse.

Both Barbie and Poor Things know that there’s power in the female body. It’s time we own it.