Latest
SMS Appointment RemindersDarrell Stern: Stop Being Invisible, Become UnmissableFree BooksJoe Rockey: Ghostwriting His BookHow to Turn Your Expertise Into a Book People Want to Read | The Expert MethodWhat’s New at The Writing King: Week of October 25, 2026Challenger Remembrance Day: The Engineer Who Wouldn’t SignJoel Salomon: The Truth About MoneyReddit Is Putting Up a Login Wall. Wikipedia Won’t Be Far Behind.Victoria Chemko: The Body Is the First TechnologySir Patrick Stewart: A TributeA Year in the Bank: ADHD, Face Blindness and the Freedom to Walk Out | The Impossible Puzzles Show, Episode 326A Yale Economist Says We Won’t Be Missed. He Forgot the Bread Line.Walter Koenig: A TributeAI Has Paid Off Outside Tech. Apollo Is Reading the Wrong Scoreboard.I Don’t Post Bad ARC Reviews. I Send the Author a Note.The Little Red Book of Stuff That Works!Your Kids Are Your Own FaultGrow a PairYou’re Broke Because You Want to BeIt’s Called Work for a Reason!No Time for TactShut Up, Stop Whining, and Get a LifeWilliam Bessette: AI Enablement and Child Welfare TechnologyFree Book Planning ToolsWhat’s New at The Writing King: Week of October 18, 2026Ghostwriting by the Numbers: Timelines, Word Counts and the First CallPromising Young Woman (2020) ReviewBillions for AI, Pennies for the Plumbing: AI Companies Should Pay to Keep PHP AlivePHP2Shell: AI Found a 22-Year-Old Crack Under Your Website in Two DaysPetrov Day: The Officer Who Didn’t Believe the ComputerKindle Unlimited Is Now Kindle+. AI Audiobooks Just Joined the BuffetMo Gawdat Says the AI Dystopia Starts in 2027. Read the List, Skip the DatesChina Is Using Bots to Fan the Data Center Backlash. The Backlash Is Still Real.The Society of Authors Signed an Ethical AI Charter, Then Ran From It in Eight DaysWhen to Quit Writing a Book: I’ve Abandoned Dozens, and I’d Do It AgainGetty Images Filed for Bankruptcy. Can You Prove You Licensed Your Book’s Images?Fluff Words: Cut Them From Your Prose, Keep Them in Your DialogueWhere Can Writers Learn Storytelling From Movies? Richard Lowe Publishes 1,226 Film and TV Reviews With Writing Craft NotesWhere Are the Independent Bookstores and Public Libraries Worth Visiting in Tampa Bay? Author Richard Lowe Profiles 44 of ThemWhat Should You Know Before Hiring a Ghostwriter? The Writing King Publishes 57 New Answers, Including What to Do When It Goes WrongWhere Can You Hear Founders and Executives Tell Their Own Stories? Richard Lowe’s Leaders and Their Stories Publishes Every Unscripted Interview With a Full TranscriptAuthor Richard Lowe Publishes Eight Volumes of Enemies of You, a Researched Series on the Forces Working Against Ordinary AmericansThe Jackal (1997) ReviewThe Day of the Jackal (2024) ReviewYour First Novel Is an Apprentice Piece: What Beta Readers and Editors Can’t FixWhen the Cloud Gets Bombed: What the AWS Data Center Strikes Teach About BackupsHuman-Written Book Labels Are Gatekeeping With a FeeThe Enshittification of Microsoft Office: Why I Switched to a Free CloneGlobal Encryption Day: The Padlock Every Writer Depends On

Barbarella (1968)

TL;DR: Barbarella (1968) rates 7 out of 10 on the rewatch scale. Barbarella is the late-1960s French-Italian science fiction sex comedy that became a cult artifact more for its visual identity than for its plot. Jane Fonda plays Barbarella, an astronaut in the year 40,000 sent to recover the scientist Durand-Durand, whose Positronic Ray weapon could threaten peaceful interstellar civilization.
Barbarella (1968)
7 / 10

Official trailer

Roger Vadim directed, and the film is based on Jean-Claude Forest’s French comic series of the same name. John Phillip Law plays Pygar, a blind angel. Anita Pallenberg plays the Great Tyrant, Milo O’Shea plays Durand-Durand, David Hemmings plays Dildano and Marcel Marceau plays Professor Ping. The film made approximately three million dollars on a nine million dollar budget and was a commercial failure. The cult following developed across the later decades. I have a soft spot for this ridiculous movie. The plot is barely there and plenty of it is silly, but every time it cuts to a new set I sit up in my chair. I can’t think of another science fiction film from its era that’s this much fun to simply look at.

Barbarella is a 1968 artifact. The sexual politics are aggressively of their period. The visual design is psychedelic. The plot is structurally a picaresque, with Barbarella moving between distinct adventures held loosely together by the search for Durand-Durand. The film’s reputation as a sex symbol vehicle for Jane Fonda is the dominant cultural memory. The reputation is partly accurate and partly the result of decades of selective marketing.

The Visual Identity

The production design by Mario Garbuglia is the film’s most distinctive element. Each set is a fully realized fantasy environment with its own visual logic. The fur-lined spaceship. The labyrinth of mutant biology. The Sogo nightclub. The orgasmatron. The crystal mountain. None of the sets look like anything else in mainstream science fiction of the period. The film commits to its aesthetic with the kind of resources Hollywood was rarely committing to genre work in 1968.

The sets are the reason I’d watch it again. That fur-lined spaceship alone is worth the price of admission, and Durand-Durand’s Excessive Machine is so gloriously over the top that I can’t keep a straight face.

The costumes by Jacques Fonteray and Paco Rabanne are part of the film’s lasting image. Barbarella’s outfits across the runtime are individually memorable enough that some have become iconic on their own. The film’s costume design has influenced fashion shoots, music videos, and later science fiction productions for over fifty years.

For Writers

A strong visual identity can outlast a film’s plot, performances, and politics. Barbarella has been a cultural reference for decades despite the script being uneven and the politics being dated. The reason is that the production design is unforgettable. The lesson is that visual specificity has unusual durability in cultural memory. People remember images more vividly than dialogue. Films that commit to distinctive visuals can survive aging on every other dimension.

The Sexual Politics

Its plot builds around Barbarella having sexual encounters with different beings in different environments. It plays the encounters as comedy, adventure, and occasionally drama. The film argues that future humanity has evolved beyond the need for guilt or restraint around sex. It delivers the argument through Barbarella’s willingness to engage with any partner who offers and her general lack of distress regardless of circumstances.

The sexual politics are aggressively 1968, in ways that have aged poorly and in ways that have aged interestingly.

The film is exploitative in its presentation of Jane Fonda’s body, and that part makes me wince; the camera ogles her in ways that feel cheap. It also argues for a sexual openness that was radical for the period, and it’s too odd a film to be written off as plain misogyny. I find the openness more interesting than the leering, but the leering costs it.

For Writers

Politics in fiction usually ages worse than craft. Barbarella’s specific sexual politics are visibly 1968 in ways that later viewers find dated. The visual design and production craft aren’t dated in the same way. The lesson is that taking strong positions on contemporary controversies guarantees the work will date. Taking strong positions on craft will let the work outlast its politics. The political dimensions of any work are usually the part that needs the most retranslation across decades.

Jane Fonda

Jane Fonda was thirty during filming. She had been a major star since the early 1960s.

The role required her to be physically uninhibited in ways that would have damaged most American actresses’ careers in 1968. Fonda took the role and still built a career that ranks among the most respected of her generation. That’s partly her cultural moment and partly her own creative choices.

The performance is mostly committed. Fonda plays Barbarella as innocent instead of as a sexual sophisticate. The character responds to her partners’ interest with the polite friendliness she’d offer anyone. The reading is more interesting than the film’s marketing suggested. Fonda has spoken in interviews about her ambivalence about the film and her late-career discomfort with its objectification of her body. The discomfort is reasonable. The performance is still valuable.

I’m on Fonda’s side the whole way. Playing Barbarella as a polite innocent is a smart call, and it turns scenes that could have been a leer into a comedy of manners in outer space. I laugh with her far more than at her.

For Writers

A performer who commits to a problematic role can transcend the role’s limitations in ways the script alone couldn’t. Jane Fonda’s Barbarella is more interesting than the script’s Barbarella because Fonda plays the character with real innocence instead of calculated provocation. The lesson is that performance is part of the writing. A weak script with a strong performer can produce material the script alone wouldn’t have generated. The performer’s choices are creative decisions equal in importance to the writer’s.

Craft Note

The zero-gravity opening title sequence is the film’s strongest individual passage. Jane Fonda strips out of her spacesuit while floating against an abstract psychedelic background, the camera tracking her with sustained interest. The sequence runs about three minutes and establishes the film’s pop-art tone before any dialogue arrives. The opening is a textbook case of how to set tonal expectations through a single confidently staged sequence. Audiences know exactly what kind of film they’re about to watch.

Does Barbarella still hold up?

7/10. I enjoy Barbarella a great deal, and I still can’t call it a good movie in the ordinary sense. The script wanders, the adventures run together, and the camera’s leering at Fonda is the kind of thing I’d have cut. What justifies the 7 is the design: Garbuglia’s sets and those costumes are so specific and so confident that a hundred later works have borrowed from them. Watch it as a gorgeous, dated, slightly embarrassing time capsule.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Barbarella a sex film?
The film is sexual in tone and content but not graphic by modern standards. The R-rated 1968 content would be PG-13 in 2026.
Does Barbarella have a good plot?
The plot is structurally weak. The film is episodic with loose connective tissue. The visuals are the reason to watch.
Did Jane Fonda regret Barbarella?
She’s expressed mixed feelings about it across the decades. The film is part of her cultural identity in ways she hasn’t always welcomed.
Is Duran Duran named after Barbarella?
Yes. The 1980s British band Duran Duran took their name from Milo O’Shea’s character Durand-Durand. The band’s frequent science fiction imagery owes a debt to the film.
Is there a Barbarella remake?
A remake has been discussed for decades. As of 2026, no production has materialized. Various directors have been attached to potential remakes over the years.
Who is Roger Vadim?
French director. And God Created Woman (1956), Blood and Roses (1960), Barbarella (1968). Married to Brigitte Bardot, Annette Stroyberg and Jane Fonda, among others. His career was considerably defined by directing his romantic partners.
Is Barbarella (1968) worth watching?
Yes, with awareness of its historical context. The visual design alone justifies the viewing.

Sources

About the Author
Richard Lowe, professional ghostwriter

Richard Lowe is a professional ghostwriter and author with 113+ books authored and 54+ ghostwritten. Before writing full time he spent 33 years in enterprise technology, including 20 years as Director of Computer Operations and Technical Services at Trader Joe's. He writes nonfiction, fiction and memoir, and works with executives and experts on books that build authority.

More about Richard Lowe →

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of Richard Lowe and are based on personal experience and research. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional legal, financial, accounting, or business advice. Always consult with qualified professionals before making important business or legal decisions. Richard Lowe is not a lawyer, accountant, or licensed professional advisor, and this content does not establish any professional relationship.