Here are five additional reviews of some epic, red-pill-only Hollywood movies, which shovel ample portions of mouth-watering truth directly at the viewer.
Unlike today’s SJW Hollywood garbage-fests, each of these top-drawer films reveals practical life lessons and winning strategies for men—especially when it comes to how they might best deal with women.
We get one truly scintillating lesson on that very subject, from Paul Newman’s alpha-male character, Hud Bannon, in the very first film that I review below. (“The only question I ever ask any woman is, ‘What time is your husband coming home’…”)
1. “Hud” (1963 – Paul Newman, Melvyn Douglas, Patricia Neal, Whit Bissell)
Hard-living Hud Bannon (played by Paul Newman) works long, arduous days in the hot Texas sun, while banging scores of hot, eager females by night; Melvyn Douglas is stoically perfect as Hud’s disapproving rancher-father, Homer, who holds a malevolent grudge against his oldest boy, based on a long-held grievance.
From a purely subtextual standpoint, this movie subtly describes how beta males greatly admire, and eventually grow to hate, top-rung alpha males. Newman’s brilliantly played Hud overpowers every woman in sight, while not really wanting any of them, and his obsessively jealous brother and father ultimately show their true colors by attempting to destroy Hud’s sense of self-worth, in an uncontrollable, envy-fueled rage—all while secretly wishing they were packing that special je ne sais quoi that Newman’s unapologetic alpha-male character is packing…
If you’re an alpha male, well, you already know how that one goes, and it’s something you simply have to accept, while learning how to deftly sidestep all seethingly jealous, beta-male obstacles.
Sparklingly acted and skillfully directed, you can’t go wrong by watching this unpolished gem of a film; it’s absolutely cram-packed with vital, red-pill truths. Based on the novel by Larry McMurtry.
2. “The Grifters” (1990 – Anjelica Huston, John Cusack, Annette Bening, Pat Hingle)
Another brief glimpse of red-pill reality here, as Hollywood lowers the veil and lets you take a quick peek at how things really go down in the big, bad world…
Grifter Annette Bening pays her landlord with sex; grifter John Cusack scams bartenders and other unsuspecting saps out of their hard-earned cash; and grifter Anjelica Huston rakes in huge profits for the local crime kingpin, Bobo Justus (played superbly by wily character actor Pat Hingle; note the sly, tongue-in-cheek last name of his character here), by dumping large sums of Mob money at horse tracks on nags running at high odds, in order to drop down the eventual payouts to the suckers.
Do human mothers sometimes eat their young? Hmm. That’s a really interesting question. Watch the final scene featuring Cusack and Huston, and you’ll have your answer; this is an intriguing film with slick plot twists, clever dialogue and killer direction, and you can’t go wrong by watching it at least once.
(Ever try passing a 10-dollar bill off as a hundred, while paying a cashier at a store? It actually works—but only if you know how to do it. Yes, this and other fine life lessons, most of them centered around taking exactly what you want from unsuspecting blue-pillers, are readily abundant in this highly informative, must-see, RPO film.)
3. “The Hidden Room” (aka “Obsession” – 1949 – Robert Newton, Sally Gray, Phil Brown)
A cucked husband keeps his wife’s lover chained up, within the hidden sub-basement of an outbuilding on his property, as he prepares to murder him and dispose of the body in a gruesomely novel way; this eyebrow-raising film has basically vanished from the late-night rerun scene on cable TV, probably due to its letter-perfect portrayal of a hot, upwardly mobile young woman who uses men for attention, sex and money and then discards them like yesterday’s outdated fashion statements.
This largely unknown film is a great primer for any open-minded male who is still teetering on the fence about going all-in and pledging his mind, body and spirit to red-pill concepts.
Do yourself a huge favor and take a hard look at this extremely revealing RPO film as soon as possible (that is, if the SJW censors haven’t completely buried it) and you’ll quickly learn some vital life lessons regarding the true nature of females—and how ultimately self-destructive and pointless it is to chase them.
Sally Gray sizzles as the hypergamous hottie, Storm Riordan, who knows exactly what she wants, and very ruthlessly (as well as very sweetly, without giving away a hint of her true motives) proceeds to take it, no matter who it might ultimately destroy.
4. “Bonnie and Clyde” (1967 – Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, Gene Hackman, Michael J. Pollard)
If you don’t instantly pop wood the moment you first lay eyes on the stunning Faye Dunaway, in this brilliant, Depression Era film’s opening sequence, you are either gay, impotent or dead. Because in my unapologetic opinion, Dunaway’s signature turn as bank-robbing Clyde Barrow’s impossibly gorgeous, pistol-packing sidekick, Bonnie Parker, has provided the manosphere with the most compellingly fuckable female character in the entire history of Hollywood cinema.
And if you think “In the Heat of the Night” deserved to win the 1967 Academy Award for Best Picture, over this undeniably superb RPO film (or the equally brilliant red-pill-only film from 1967, “Cool Hand Luke”, which I may be reviewing at a later date), you are a clueless, leftwing, brainwashed, SJW sock puppet—end of story.
Warren Beatty is flawless as the legendary Clyde Barrow, whose loyal gun moll sticks with him to the bitter end, largely due to her favorite gangster’s alpha-male arrogance and charm.
Gene Hackman is raucously affable as Clyde’s big brother Buck, and even the perennially miscast Gene Wilder gets big laughs in a brief but humorous sequence. Estelle Parsons won an Academy Award for best supporting actress in this film, and it was well-deserved, as she plays the role of Blanche—a whiny, shrieking, it’s-all-about-me, irreversibly damaged harpy—to absolute perfection.
5. “Heat” (1995 – Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Val Kilmer, Jon Voigt)
I dropped the ball and failed to include this excellent, red-pill-only film in my first group of movie reviews for ROK, which covered 10 films from the period spanning 1992-2004. Being a man who typically tries to rectify his mistakes—unless it’s a mistake that a woman, or some clueless, blue-pill male thinks I made—I will correct this egregious oversight right now.
I’m not normally a big Michael Mann fan, but this riveting, action-packed, tour-de-force film is about as slick as they come. From the opening bell, this stylishly crafted thriller grabs hold of the viewer and won’t let go, as we enter a fascinating subculture of alpha male criminals that takes whatever it wants—cash, power, and ultimately, any woman it desires—no matter the risks involved.
Robert De Niro (as master thief Neil McCauley) embodies the true physical and mental characteristics of an alpha male who is fully committed to going his own way—most especially if the suckers think it’s the wrong way—and Al Pacino deftly counters with his relentless, burned-out-cop-with-numerous-flaws portrayal of Police Lieutenant Vincent Hanna, as the two of them face off in a final gunslinger showdown that continues to propagate the same old tired, blue-pill crap that Hollywood unerringly propagates: namely, that the good guys always win.
In reality it’s the bad guys who own everything, and Val Kilmer (as Chris Shiherlis) and Jon Voigt (as the ultra-cool Nate) convincingly portray two underworld crew members who firmly realize this fact while harboring not a single shred of doubt about the matter.
Be sure to check out the scene where De Niro’s character, angered at being strong-armed by greedy beta mortgage-banker Roger Van Zant (played by William Fichtner), strides directly up to the floor-to-ceiling windows of the unsuspecting simp’s hillside mansion, and blows him away. (No courts of law needed when you’re playing the game at this level. “Fuck you – pay me. No? Okay…)
This film is a must-see for every man who doesn’t think it’s wrong to act like a real man; non-stop action, brutally graphic violence, and deep-seated, red-pill truths abound.
Modern-day Hollywood’s perpetual bombardment of the human psyche, via its unending series of mind-numbing SJW films, can really get to a guy after a while. One surefire way to effectively fight back is to stop watching Tinsel Town’s current social-engineering bullshit.
Rent some of the RPO films listed above and start getting your mind right; it’s a war, and you’re either in it to win it, or you’re in it to get brainwashed. The choice, as always, is ultimately yours.
Read More: 10 Hollywood Films For Men That Leave Today’s SJW Movies In The Dust
Cool, thanks. I haven’t seen 1-3, and I love 4 & 5.
I put a clip from “Hud” into the comments…awesome film.
Most red pill quote I ever encountered in a movie: “Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.” From Heat (1995). Blew my mind when I heard Robert De Niro say it. But it is so true, and it is great advice. I think that was the first time I encountered true red pill wisdom.
Especially ironic as Deniro is blue pill af in real life and likened Trump to his character Travis Bickle from taxi driver.
Deniro was a blue pill cuck in Casino too
The Sharon Stone character was one of the most evil women you will ever see in a movie. Up there with the daughter in Mildred Pierce
She was the *perfect* representation of a gold-digging hypergamous bitch. Comes naturally to Stone, of course.
I’ve always had a feeling that actresses who are good at playing crazy cunts, are just being themselves…
I love the way Arnold handled her character in Total Recall.
Absolutely. But, assuming you knew nothing about her(and she had a killer smile like Stone) wouldnt you willingly walk into that buzzsaw? I know I would…
Nah. She’s gorgeous, but not my type. I only go for Latina brunettes.
Konseedah dhat a deevawse
Reminds me that there could be a female version of that old “Act Naturally” song.
Ha! As Arnold would say, “Jaarvarnarvaryaaaaaargh!”
Heh…
Speaking of De Niro, has he starred in anything decent lately? He must have hit rock bottom with “Dirty Grandpa”.
Apparently he, Joe Pesci, Al Pacino and Martin Scorsese have a new gangster film in the works. Definitely looking forward to that.
He’s also co-starring in a biographical film about boxer Roberto Duran. Hopefully that should be decent.
There was a diagram somewhere on the internet. Apparently they calculated the exact point at which DeNiro stopped acting, and started phoning it in for a check. I think it was 04.
Meet the parents
That’s even more ironic, since Travis Bickle was deranged and crazy, but he hated degeneracy and ended up being a force of virtue in this shitty world.
So true – “Heat” is chock-full of red-pill truths. “Hud” has just as many…especially about how to deal with women. I’ve never known a guy who didn’t go apeshit over that movie – same with “Heat”. Here’s a clip from “Hud”, where Newman’s character lays out some serious game. –
Ha ha. Awesome.
That scene! Remember when writers could make a movie feel like it all wasn’t forced “information” and “content”? Even a lot of the stuff that was considered fun pop corn flicks had a more genuine feel to it just a few decades ago.
What happened? Is the dumbing down complete?
Man, I hope it’s complete. But I have a feeling they are just getting started…
The only thing that could make that scene any better is if she was 21 yrs old. Newman was perfection there.
Agreed…she was a fucking good actress though.
Too bad she’s kind of old and bitterish. WNB.
Yeah. Great actress though. Newman probably wouldn’t have banged her for real on a bet…he was allegedly a major pussy hound.
I was blown away seeing it for the first time as well. I was probably 10 or something.
Most American men are taught to work hard, and make decisions that will make us happy. Make payments and accumulate debt for culturally assured things like the whole expensive college experience, and a brand new car, and eventual home ownership etc, because these things are good and make us happy, eventually, allegedly.
This is how a chump thinks. You can’t walk out on any of this. But he didn’t just go that far. He meant women (the mother of the character’s child whom he was speaking to) or anyone that you cannot abandon if necessary.
In writing it, he was trying to convey the risk v. reward mindset of an elite professional thief. Its doubtful that most of us here are interested in professional crime.
But you don’t have to be a thief to admire not thinking like a chump. Just putting a few essential hours of objective thought into deliberation can save you a lot of your most essential resource: time.
Another problem is the financial system (of course, all these problems are interrelated) where entitlement aka loans essentially drive up the cost of home ownership and other items due to greater supply of money. By normalizing a lifestyle where people buy which they cannot afford, the prices for people who try to live within their means becomes higher. If loans for high end cars, above entry level homes, etc. were banned, (other policies would need to be chamged of course) prices would crash. Affordable, non-morgaged homes would be the norm.
It sounds like great advice because it’s so foreign to men who’ve bought into the wife/kids/white picket fence mythology.
In practice, it’s not so great, at least not for an entire life.
Yeah, it’s an interestin quote, but let’s not forget that it is not ‘Robert De Niro’ saying it, but the character he plays.
Not just a character, but one based on a real person. Neil McCauley was a real Chicago thief who had coffee in a diner with the detective working his case, and who lived by the no attachments life discipline. He was interviewed extensively for Heats research.
Good list! Plenty of quality acting, subtleties, and character development.
One more: bro-up with “Hickey & Boggs” (1972).
“hot, upwardly mobile young woman who uses men for attention, sex and money and then discards them like yesterday’s outdated fashion statements.”
Sorry, but according to Max Read, this is not how sex works, and only a sad-sack self-abusing teen boy would believe so. I mean, how could they fuck anyone, way up there on their diamond-encrusted pedestals?
You read that in Read? I remember the article as “MATT. DAMON.” over and over.
Demolition man: meat-eating, gun loving, foul-mouthed alpha resurrected to deal with inner-city black criminal running amok in a Orwellian liberal paradise.
In all fairness, both could be said to be alpha. The Alpha good guy Spartan vs the Alpha bad guy Simon.
I always thought “Demolition Man” portrayed the days after total leftist takeover.
Leftists will never get that far. Eventually, something will usurp their aspirations of paradise.
M4rkyboy, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.
ha!
pipped me to the post, old chap
In Germany, you can actually get punished for insult. Heavily.
1 Credit is rather affordable in comparison. 🙂
I wonder how De Niro’s character in “Heat” would handle being punished for insult…
This is a different world. If you teleported his character into this time, he would fight at first and then the psychopathic sheep would just overwhelm him through sheer quantity, bind him to a bed, and force him to take meds. 🙂
You can only win a game if the environment is conducive to that. Like, you can expose some successful criminal and get through with it because despite their fear, the masses are basically on your side. But you are kinda fucked when not a single soul is on your side.
The most successful criminals run the world…which is ironic.
What a touchy race you’ve become! Satire is the best medicine for this type of humorless correctness that’s so prevalent in your nation’s psyche.
It is ironic indeed.
‘Criminal’ is not the word you use when the established thugs do it. ‘Criminals’ are always the opposition.
Not perfectly connected to your comment, but there is a peculiar style to a lot of German satire. I feel it is kind of a cute-ish … I don’t even have the words for it. I don’t know. Imagine two copulating potatoes with smiley faces. That’s how I see German humour.
They write their own rules regarding words you can use, and words you can’t use, once they come into power. Like we’re seeing all around us right now…
It has always been like that, tho. Most guys here don’t disagree with the power game. They just disagree with the particular arrangement of the laws inside that power game.
So Germans have no sense of humor, then? That’s really sad.
really? fines, jail time, or both??
I insulted a couple cops last year. Have to pay 5940 EUR.
If I don’t pay, I have to go to jail for two months or so.
But I think that when you do stuff like talk about Holocaust in an unacceptable way, you may even go to prison for quite a while.
insulted, or threatened? Or are they the same thing in your country?
Insulted. Called them “assholes”, “sheep” etc.
I also punched some cops, but that was a different incident that happened much later and was not connected.
“two copulating potatoes ”
You mean like Hillary and Merkel hooking up? Very bad mental image there.
Yeah, kinda like that. But they’d need to be bald and have to have faces like this:
http://orig06.deviantart.net/2812/f/2014/134/7/a/whistler_s_mother_s_edited_face__mr__bean__by_raileysxerilyasrx-d7ie38q.png
Holy snikes. That’s a lot of cash. Do they give you a payment plan? How bad are German prisons? Maybe the two months would be preferable.
I don’t know. I don’t care. I have a government helper assigned to me since I was in psychiatry. I basically let her take care of all the paperwork bullshit.
Yeah, the funny thing is: If I go to prison instead of paying, the government will end up paying ME. Think of it. Prison is basically a domicile where I get food and can sleep. Not very comfortable, but still a product that requires an investment.
Meanwhile, while I am in, I can have a friend take my welfare cash out of the bank and when I get back out, I will have saved two months worth of cash for food. 🙂
So basically they are saying: Either you pay us or we pay you!
I’d probably pay way more than 5940 Euro to avoid prison in the US, where I’d stand a good chance of being gang raped and possibly killed. On the other hand, if German prisons are humane then yeah, you should do the two months. Study, work out, collect your government cheese (welfare cash) and enjoy yourself when you get out.
They are currently “running it” into the ground. A system can tolerate some dishonesty, it cannot tolerate too much.
Movies like “heat” and “woof of wall street” are definitely cool. Economic collapse is what it looks like when too many of those types decide to run around.
I’d rather go to prison then spend the money on a couple of months holiday somewhere…fuck them.
Yep, I was kinda thinking the same. Besides, I kinda have prison on my ‘todo’ list. Girls love criminals, I hear!
I currently get paid close to 6k-8k bucks /a month doing an online job. If you are willing to do basic online jobs for 2-5 hrs every day from your living room and get good payment in the same time… Try this gig http://self36.com
vxcv523dsfds
A German prison I could handle…an American one?
It’s shit…and women don’t give a toss.
Some do. But that doesn’t mean that having been to prison automatically makes me more attractive, of cours.e
Most people in prison in England are total losers…junkies or brainless thugs mostly. …but at least there’s no rape.
Not all crims go to jail do they?
But the original reply was to – coughing thousands of Euros(for a bullshit offence) or 2 months in jail…2 months it would be for me.
For that kind of sentence you don’t go to prison in the U.S. You go to jail, probably a county lockup. Very clean. Very ordered. Inmates are in “pods” and guards can see everything except directly into your cell. No one has the opportunity to rape you.
How do I know? I was actually set up by a city attorney who falsely issued a warrant against me knowing it was bogus. I was pulled over for speeding and ended up spending the weekend in jail. The judge immediately released me ROR even though he was the one who issued to warrant on the false testimony of the city attorney. I had a lawyer who wanted me to sue everybody but I didn’t think he was a very good attorney and I didn’t want to end up in the city attorney’s sites again so I let it go.
But I did learn what jail was like.
Good to know.
A future not too far away
Kane, that future has already ARRIVED!
It’s called “Political Correctness.”
Also, driverless cars. That in itself is fucking scary.
UBER already planning to phase out their drivers…beta testing a Volvo driverless car right now…
beta testing….pun intended?
“What seems to be your boggle?”
Need TP.
Shit, god dammit, fuck, bastard…
It’s really kind of a comedy, though.
And the white alpha-male character had been subject to a pussification program by the government while the black criminal had seen his aptitude for thuggery enhanced by the gov’t.
That film, which was released in 1994, is so frighteningly prophetic. It was 20+ years ahead of its time.
It’s almost scary how right it is about modern American society.
Also, Sandra Bullock in her prime.
Do you know how to use the three seashells?
….
…
Lets go to taco bell.
Always bet on Black.
Will have to check out Hud.
Rocky 3 could go on this list. The first two Rocky’s not so much even though they are great films. Mr. T (Clubber Lang) wanted the title so bad he would do anything to get it. He was “hungry” for the belt and got it. Rocky had to reclaim his “hunger” and in the end took back his championship. Stallone probably had the best physique of any film in Rocky 3. Even though he was playing a character he still had to transform himself to fit the part.
The Rocky films each sort of portray a different aspect of a man’s life. Well…maybe not so much 4 and 5, but you get what I’m saying.
1) Rocky has nothing, and is nothing, but he gets a chance and makes it happen
2) Rocky finally wins one. Success and accolades flow.
3) Rocky gets complacent, is defeated, fears to lose what he has, reclaims his hunger, and wins it all.
4) YAY MURICA!
5) …I got nothin’, but there were a few half-decent quotes…
Rocky Balboa) Rocky teaches his son what it means to be a man, and also he fights again.
Creed) Rocky is a dying old man whose friends and loved ones have moved on, but he’s still passing on the wisdom he received.
I’d still rather watch Rocky 5 than most of the garbage I’ve sat through over the past few years.
You summed up the movies quite nicely.
Pappilon with steve mcqueen.
The original Thomas Crowne Affair too; was cool, and looked cool too
Now that’s a red pill movie. First time I saw it I recognized that Faye Dunaway gave him the shit tests of all shit tests and he passed. I didn’t know enough to call it that at the time but still.
My dad asked me to watch Papillon with him, years ago. It was a good un, though I don’t know about red-pill — it’s just a prison movie.
Maybe it is just my view on said movie, but I view it as depiction of male`s will to be free and independent on higher power.
Steve Mcqueen. Total cock master. Hung out with Keith Moon, drank like a fish and nailed quiff on a global scale.
I always tell people that Heat is the best crime movie ever.
“Don’t let yourself get attached to anything you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you feel the heat around the corner.”
Real men at the top of the crime world are always prepared to do that the guys I’ve been locked up with are the most decisive, masculine role models I have ever had I tried to absorb their good parts only, though.
…I’d rather not absorb anything from dudes in prison.
HEAT is a personal fav. The bank scene when it all goes wrong was well done… covering fire and move. To bad none of them followed any of the advice they were dispensing.
Marines use that scene during training to illustrate how to retreat under fire.
There’s some good films on this list but I wouldn’t look to Hollywood too much for role models. There are very few actors who aren’t self righteous, decadent hypocritical liberals off screen.
I don’t like any actors, I just like some characters they play. For example I love Fight Club, but Brad Pitt is the antithesis of what that movie is about.
I’d have to say a lot of Hitchcock’s movies are pretty red pill too. Hitch generally mistrusted women and knew about how treacherous they could be and men with or without the support of women are the heroes and villains in his movies.
BTW, Hud and the Hidden Room are gems.
A real classic Red Pill movie from the grimy north of England with a young Micheal Caine has to be Get Carter (1971). Great score too. “A man of few words and decisive action”.
The re-make was shit.
Watched that movie last week, really loved it. While the story was nothing worth talking about, Michael Caine’s character absolutely carried the entire movie. No way a movie like this could be made today.
The scene in Heat after the guys raid the bank is a classic. Watching them making their way down the street and shooting the shit out of the cops is a lesson in street combat bar none. Michael Mann also directed The Keep, which I think is a cult classic. It is so weird and eerie.
Michael Mann lost his touch as he created the snorefest that was 2009’s Public Enemies.
Yes, boring movie…..Depp never really lit my fire as an actor anyhoo….
Yeah, Collateral might’ve been his last good one. Miami Vice and Public Enemies have weird editing and pacing
Literally a lesson in street combat: military uses that scene for training
Heat was an incredible film. Loved De Niro’s quote about how you can’t be afraid to walk away from a woman if it comes down to it.
One of the biggest reasons Heat worked so well was that it was a remake. Mann’s style-over-substance way of doing things is often what destroys the pacing and narrative of even potentially decent films.
He made a version of Heat for TV in the 80’s or 90’s, and it was the exact same story. Once he had some big name actors who were interested in doing it, and a big enough budget, man. He really made a damn fine film.
The Insider is still my favorite Mann film though, its up there with Heat. His Last of the Mohicans adaption was better than the book, I am told. I really liked that. Thief and Manhunter are also good.
LA Takedown
Here’s the movie “Heat”, which you can watch for free below, courtesy of Daily Motion – the connectivity might be spotty unless you have DSL as your Internet connection (the commercial loads quickly, however, which I’m sure is a coincidence)…
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=heat+full+movie+imdb&&view=detail&mid=850564253836D6DCDDB2850564253836D6DCDDB2&FORM=VRDGAR
On youtube there are a series of clips with deleted scenes from the movie, that are interesting i you are a fan of the movie
The Judge Dredd remake was actually pretty good. The female sidekick is exposed to the realities of how harsh combat can be, and she’s not portrayed as a Kick-ass “tough chick”. She becomes familiar with an enemy who would have, treated her in a manor, that only female prisoners would be treated in. The movie ends in a Red-pill way, after she learns the truth about how terrible war-like environments can be. Also, Dredd is a total badass.
I’m sorry, but you’re completely wrong about Hud. That wasn’t the point of the movie, and Homer was not, in any sense, a beta male. He owned his own ranch, and if Hud didn’t want to follow his orders or live under his roof, he can leave. Nobody was going to stop him, least of all Homer.
Lonnie was not so much jealous of his Uncle Hud. In fact, nobody in this film was. Hud is a lout, a miserable excuse of a human being who only uses people for his own amusement. He is an unprincipled, unscrupulous, disloyal and dishonest lout. Remember it was his recommendation to buy those diseased cattle out of Mexico, and then schloff them off on the market, which could hurt countless more people. It was Hud who ruined that ranch, and then pulled it out from underneath his own father. But, he was the only other male in his prime that Lonnie could draw as an example from, and Hud showed Lonnie what a contemptible SOB he was.
Homer was sick of Hud because Hud got his oldest boy, Lonnie’s father, killed, and he never forgave him for that. After Lonnie tries to stick up for him, Homer explains that “little by little, the look of the country changes by the men we admire.” If you admire such a loathsome swine like Hud, do you not think that’s going to have some influence on your life and behavior?
After the movie came out, Paul Newman was disturbed to learn that there were teenagers, both boys and girls, putting his picture as Hud up in their rooms, because Hud was a villain.
thanks for this post; guess I need to re-watch that movie
I messed up and referred to Brandon De Willde’s character as Hud’s brother in my review – but as you pointed out, he was Hud’s nephew. I still believe the hurricane-force anger displayed by Hud’s nephew and father was the result of long-held, beta-male jealousy. If you’ve ever had betas blow up at you and try to fuck your life up, due to the fact you possess talents and skills they simply don’t have, you know what I mean there…if not…well…
I don’t see Homer’s blowing up at Hud a product of any kind of jealousy. I see it as anger at his complete irresponsibility. I can understand your perspective here, but Homer is not a beta, and he’s not jealous at Hud. He’s legitimately angry and sick of Hud because, as he said, Hud doesn’t give a damn. About anything, but himself. He’s rather narcissistic, and he only cares about what he thinks he can get.
Take how he only seems to go after married women. Why does he do that? If he’s such a stud, why bother with them? Because they’re easier, and he doesn’t have to provide a home or anything else for them. After all, that would mean he’d have to think about someone else for a change. Because he’s going after married women, he obviously doesn’t care about marriage and doesn’t consider it at all sacred. He doesn’t care about the husbands, certainly doesn’t care about the wives he’s sleeping with and the trouble they may have to deal with if they’re caught with him, or any pregnancies that may ensue, or any diseases he spreads.
He doesn’t care about Lonnie. He doesn’t care about the ranch beyond what it can give him. He doesn’t care about Homer. And he certainly didn’t care about Alma, who he was about to rape.
Hud says at the end of the film, “You know something Fantan? This world is so full of crap, a man’s gonna get into it sooner or later whether he’s careful or not.” The problem with Hud is that he never takes any effort to get out of the crap and clean himself off, or any effort to stay out of it. Just because some people wallow in filth doesn’t mean it’s okay. And he ends up alone at the end.
I agree with almost everything you wrote, especially your description of Hud…but the jealousy thing, that was building up in all the men around him for a long, long time. Let’s say you’re a guy who attracts a lot of pussy. Well, even your closest friends become ragingly jealous about it after a while. Hud was a reckless fool, but he pulled pussy like a rock star. Men get jealous of that. Big-time jealous. They’ll bad-mouth you to everybody, eventually. Which you just have to shake off, if you want to keep banging hot women.
That may be true for Hud’s contemporaries. but you really can’t say that about either Lonnie or Homer. Lonnie, initially, admired him and looked up to him, and may have wanted to be something like him (there are a few indications, such as when he’s sleeping in the raw and Alma comes in on him). What would Lonnie have to be jealous of, when he’s only 17 and he’s got his whole life ahead of him? Hud’s his reluctant mentor, who could teach him a thing or two about skirt-chasing. Homer certainly didn’t have any jealousy over Hud. What you’re seeing is legitimate outrage and contempt for the kind of trash Hud’s become, bearing his name. Maybe Lonnie’s right that Homer’s being a bit harsh on Hud, but, Homer’s right about him.
Maybe Homer didn’t love Hud as much as his mother did, but she died? I don’t know. But there’s only so much you can blame on parents. And Homer’s just way too old to worry about sex. There comes a point in your life when sex just doesn’t interest you the way it does in your teens and 20s.
The male jealousy thing is virtually endemic to heterosexual males, I truly do believe. Have you ever been out, and women start eyeing you as a possible fuck partner (they give you “the look”, which is telling you, “I’d fuck you”), whether they’re with another man or not. Hud’s character got that a lot, it’s fairly clear. I’m no Paul Newman, but I get that sort of shit from women all the time, as I’m sure do many other readers here at ROK. It’s flattering when you’re really young, but it’s a pain in the ass when you get older. I’ve had guys rush up to where their wife or girlfriend is sitting – say, at a bar – as I am in the process of walking past her, and they puff their chests out and glare and jump in between us as I’m moving past their vantage point. I’ve had guys challenge me to a fight because their wives or girlfriends were staring at me with avid interest (my usual reply is, “I’m not interested in your wife”, which usually works, because it lets them off the hook and they are usually glad of that). This sort of shit happens to me nearly every time I go out to a bar. I’ve even been around women who get drunk, while they are with their husbands or boyfriends, and they physically grab at me, right in front of their men. Another thing some women will do, if they’re attracted to you and their man is right there, is blush. That’s something they just can’t hide. And husbands and boyfriends go nuclear-bomb apeshit on their asses over that one. I’ll bet lolknee and GOJ have some stories about that kind of thing, as do other guys around here. All men are boilingly jealous of alpha pussy-pullers…I don’t think there are many exceptions to that rule, even when a man gets old. He still lusts after women in his heart, and wants their attention, on a primitive level. And he has that caveman mentality, at his core. He wants the hot women. He wants the guy who’s fucking it up for him, out of the picture. It all depends on your perspective, though, for sure.
A very good discussion you both had here. The internet at its best! I couldn’t chime in because I’ve never seen the movie and never wanted to. Still don’t after all this back and forth.
Hud strikes me as the kind of alpha all of us “unplugged betas” have despised our whole life. Not because we’re jealous, although there may be some of that. But because of the stupid destruction they leave in their wake. In many ways they are the greatest of thirsty simps because they think pulling pussy is the purpose of life! But when you’ve got a brain and a purpose to put it to you only need one woman in your life; to hear your dreams, to bear your children, to keep your home hearth lit and your bed warm at night. And maybe to bury you and mourn your passing, if you’re lucky.
The Red Pill taught me – actually reminded me – how a man MUST handle a woman, that if you don’t maintain your frame she’ll inflict her frame on you and totally fuck up your life.
I’m not sure if any of these movies teach that. I’ll have to think about it.
I agree with that…I don’t think banging every woman who throws their vagina at you is indicative of any alpha thought process. I think it’s no different than a chick who rides the cock carousel.
I thought the movie tracked the themes of the book pretty well, and to me it seemed to be a story of Lonnie’s disillusion. He idolizes Hud in the beginning, but discovers that behind his charisma he’s a psychopath who destroys everything he touches: marriages, the ranch household, Lonnie’s grandfather’s sanity, and eventually the ranch and Lonnie’s entire future.
As much as I love Heat, I dont get why you would think this a red pill movie.
DeNiro- lives by one rule, violates it, gets killed
Pacino- married to a basket-case wife, taking care of her basket-case daughter
Kilmer- wife cheats, guy she cheats with wrecks the entire crew, she sells out Kilmer, only to have a change of heart at the last second.
The Sizemore character was a family man, didnt need the money from that last heist, but still didnt listen to the DeNiro character when he was advised to walk away.
I agree. It’s an okay movie, but, I don’t admire any of the characters. They’re just thugs mostly and the Pacino character is a complete failure on many different levels.
So-so movie. Not my favorite. Had a few good parts. Other than that, it makes men look bad.
makes men look bad? The women in the movie are much, much worse.
I once knew a mortgage broker who owed me $10,000 but wouldn’t pay me. We had an agreement (in writing) and he was putting me off. I walked into his office, sat down across from his desk, turned his family photo around and looked at it (the photo was of him, his wife, and two daughters) and I said to him, “Nice family. Pay me my fucking money.” He wrote me a check about five seconds later, while his hands were shaking. That was a couple of years before “Heat” came out. I don’t think an entire film could be categorized as being exclusively red pill. Because films deal with human beings, and human beings are flawed – as you pointed out. But I think the overall message of the film is red pill – the richest guys are the baddest guys, the guys who are willing to do what the other guys aren’t. The mortgage banker in the film – that was depicting a hard-core, red-pill truth. I’ve worked with many of them and once they get rich, most of them get involved in the shadiest shit you can imagine. (Like the asshat who had a change of heart and paid me the 10 grand he owed me.) It all depends on how you look at it, I think…
Thats a helluva story!
If they aren’t going to give it to you, sometimes you have to take it. That prick thought he was a country club god. It’s bizarre. Once a guy makes a certain amount of money, it fucks with his head and he thinks he can do anything to anybody.
Indeed. Just like every guy thinks they have Tyson knockout power.
…
You just have to give them a decent dose of reality to shock them back into acting decent.
Exactly. I looked at it like playing poker. It was a major bluff. No way would I hurt his family, obviously. But it worked.
That proves the author’s point. They are all doing okay except for Pacino at the beginning. All the heist guys do as you say and end up getting fucked over, Pacino stops what he’s doing and is the only one to come out better.
Chances are Pacino’s wife wasn’t a basket case when he fell in love with her and got married. Women are much more prone to change post marriage than men imo. Now he escapes domestic life & their bs/drama, by spending most of his time relishing in the drama of catching bad guys. He didn’t change to keep his wife happy.
DeNiro broke his rule, but it was not over love for that new woman in his life, but revenge on Wayne Gross (rp for me). It was clear sailing to freedom and a hasty reckless last minute move. He could have had a contract taken out on him after he made it to NZ, though not the same level of satisfaction as pulling the trigger himself.
Kilmer – yeah his wife was cheating, but so was he. He was the only one in the end to has his freedom & his loot. Despite not being a proper husband/father, his wife came good for him in the end. When you make your life/career/needs/wants/fun the No.1 priority in your life (alpha advice) the emotionally neglected wife is prone to be charmed by pua artists.
Sizemore – the family man who didn’t need the money, but the excitement from pulling off heists was his antidote to suburban domestic life (not bp). He should of walked away but he was not coerced or pressured into the job or did it to buy a bigger house to keep the missus happy.
Love that movie, but wished it went against hollywood ‘crime doesn’t pay’ convention and had DeNiro escaping.and having to leave his gf sitting in the car.
Anyone in Salt Lake City UT?
Not I. Why, is something going down?
Here’s a clip from “The Grifters”; I imagine Bobo Justus doesn’t get many false-rape accusations made against him – not to mention many divorce-rape bitches who come gunning to fleece him…
“Angry Birds”…the most subtly-subversive animated movie, stripping away all falsehood of mass immigration agenda… U.S.A. government failing the citizens…manipulative, greedy elites…and masculine nationalism that saves the day (and year, and century… ) 🙂
It deserves its own article, actually…. 🙂
P.s. Voice acting is also acting. 😉
P.p.s. And, by Dis..bad piggies are GREEN!…;))))
I was very pleasantly surprised with Angry Birds. I guess they figured nobody would really care what their movie was about, so they let loose some serious social commentary.
I’m enjoying these articles (and the resulting discussion) immensely. It makes me think a bit about movies that unintentionally contain certain truths…
Suicide Squad is about how a guy lets his oneitis ruin everything, so he needs a bunch of villains with bombs in their heads to fix it. (Joker also has oneitis in this film, and it should have killed him)…
Moulin Rouge is about how oneitis and beta behaviors ruin lives…and it’s supposed to be a heartwarming romance film…
Frozen had all but zero truth in it, but the borderline-impossible face-heel turn of the prince makes no sense to anyone, and that in itself is truth…
Yeah, there could be a handful of articles in this premise.
I totally agree. You know that disclaimer that you see at the end of most films. “Any similarity between persons living or dead is not intended, and is solely a coincidence”, or words to that effect. Bullshit. All writers draw from their own experience. And some of them slide red-pill truth into films, and the SJW monitors allow it, because they know that most people will never believe that whatever it is they are depicting might be true.
If you think of it, a lot of today’s movies, even the thrillers and actioners, are based on ridiculous premises, psychologically. It’s all somehow about ‘the big love’ or ‘the big hero’ or ‘the big revenge’. Child stuff.
I very much liked this scene from Clear and Present Danger:
The main character (hero), Jack, confronts the ‘evil guy’ with something. He is rather self-righteous about it and it almost appears a bit comical and narcissistic. And the other guy finalyl retorts with: ‘The world is grey, Jack’
Indeed, it is. There are no heroes.
But I can imagine that most viewers would interpret this scene quite differently, maybe see it as some form of evidence that ‘moral relativism is bad’ or whatever.
Indoctrination wants us to love those who selflessly defend ‘the law’, never questioning whether the law makes sense in the first place. Jack is such a hero.
https://youtu.be/WE2_MGqVFJg?list=PL_heV-8t-RuxnzZ2zaL0Kex1HOyH1Qt1v
It’s like Doctor George’s (Richard Wilmark) the evil character’s speech to Sue in the 1978 movie, Coma.
CBA to watch the whole thing, but yeah, nice suggestive editing to make her look like the pure-hearted innocent victim and him like the evil manipulatory predator.
On the other hand, he really is expressing weird ideas here.
Another thing: Have you ever heard a real person in real life give dramatic speeches like that?
Nope. It’s a curious fact isn’t it, that even under the right circumstances the majority of people in “real life” are completely ineffective and passionless when it comes to making a speech from their convictions? Perhaps, it’s because most folks have very few convictions that resonate with them deeply, we only see this in movies and books.
I think the more accurate observation would be that people in real life are not actors. Imagine someone speaking exactly like that to you. You would probably consider it weird and out-of-place. Too artificial. Too dramatic and theatrical. Too much like you are not even there. The whole situation would feel unreal.
I feel the same way about presidential speeches and well elaborated presentations. It always feels kinda fake to me. Machiavellian if you will. It does not seem like real passion. It seems like … rehearsed passion. Or … how an alien without human emotions would imitate passion in the most effective way possible.
Maybe that’s it. If it is TOO effective, it does not feel real to me. Not human. Because it obviously is more about making an impression on you than to express the self organically and honestly. It is the difference between a sales pitch and a friend who tells you about something he likes.
It’s the ancient rub between authenticity and passion. We foolishly often believe that passionate behavior is the gold-standard for all authentic behaviors, but as someone like Kierkegaard shrewdly noted in his analysis of Shakespeare, passions can be faked for the meanest and most base motivations. Women are masters at this type of shadow boxing which always puts men on the back foot.
It’s like as you describe those presidential speeches that are primed for applauses at the right moment, it’s that fake unreal sense combined with the sense that you’re being willingly manipulated- it’s exactly the same set up with women I’ve known on occasions who use these fake emotions to ensnare you in their game.
But, generally what you say about Richard Wilmark’s character and what would our reactions be to someone who spoke to us in this manner be? It depends, I’ve been taken aback a few times (not many) in my life by someone that I knew who seemed to temporarily break from their normal persona. One’s natural reaction is shock, but, also disbelieve, but not because what you’ve witnessed is unreal, but rather, because it’s so odd and strange, which makes what transpired compellingly real when it occurs to you. People use the phrase that the person was “acting out of character” which goes back to the manner in which we do, almost subliminally, view reality in dramatical ways. I think this whole area is very poorly understood by psychology which describes these breaks as aberrations from reality, which it smugly thinks it has neatly defined by its own theories.
I think it can be well explained with the fact that we usually hide a big part of our nature in public social settings. Outwardly, we display the harmless friendly nice face. Underneath await us depths we mostly aren’t even aware of.
“indeed, it is. There are no heroes.”
How can you be so sure there are no heroes? You come across as a bit comical and narcissistic yourself with that comment. Makes one feel as if he’s sitting in a baptist church.
I understand what you’re saying, but you say it so absolutely, that it makes one feel as if he is listening to a new sermon on the mount.
Blessed are the believers in no heroes, for they will inherent the ether.
For example, I do believe in heroes, so by your very definition; I’m childish, that I’m a dabbler in “child stuff.” Doesn’t sound like you’re waking in any grey truth whatsoever.
Just playing the devils advocate here, I mean no harm. Always enjoy your comments, even if I don’t often agree.
Oh, I don’t mean to preach. Surely, one can have strong feelings about a person who has done something good for you. But in the end, the amount of idealization encountered in modern media is unhealthy in my eyes. I think that the strength of the emotion towards ‘heroism’ is rooted somewhere in early childhood when perhaps daddy wasn’t very forthcoming with attention and love and said ‘you must earn respect’ etc. Or, to give a more contemporary example, take the single mother who makes herself out to be an incredible heroine for doing the stupid thing of raising boys on her own. The ‘heroism’ thing is mostly an emotional attachment to some sort of idea and it clouds the judgment and objective observation of reality, which is why I dislike it. I just hate bullshit. Not to say I never fall for it myself.
Am I a bit arrogant and narcissistic sometimes? Yes, I would say I am. But I would, at this point, hate nothing more than a bunch of followers who shout ‘Hail Tom’. A horrendous thought!
Then again, my personal perspective in this case is that I am simply annoyed of the whole personality worship and the ‘ideal man’ propaganda, as it was also typical in the Nazi time.
Not bringing up Nazis because I think they were super evil, but to show that the perspective on such a thing can change dramatically in the public eye. What we consider heroic is simply what we are told is ‘good’.
Another perspective on why I find it ridiculous: You see your superhero in the movie slay villains over villains. Thousands of them.
Do you ever stop and wonder: Wait. Who were those thousands of individuals he slayed? Were they simply ‘evil’? Did they deserve the harsh and uncompromising judgment of the hero? Is the world really that black-and-white? What if I realize that in real life I am not the ‘hero’, but one of the ‘villains’? Does that mean I have to hate myself because I am evil? Or does it just mean that I have different values than most people, without being ‘better’ or ‘worse’? Stuff to chew on.
No harm done. Thanks.
I agree with that, mostly. Today’s version of heroism, as it is usually defined, is vacuous to say the least. But I think the concept of the hero, in the traditional sense, is a good thing. And it seems to be something the moderns attack, because it does look up to authority, which I don’t see as a bad thing necessarily. A son needs a father to look up to, as a grown man needs something bigger than himself to look up to. Equality denies authority, and heroes, because that means someone is above you.
Things to think about for sure. I had a good father though, so maybe that helps me, don’t know about you.
But yes, when I comes to armies and soldiers fighting for the “cause” I totally agree, the cause is most often not black and white. Just is.
I think that in its purest form, the hero’s journey is a very personal one that has nothing to do with authority etc. I think authority is basically the projection of one’s self-determination onto another, it thus becoming alien-determination. An external locus of control. The disdain for authority is something I share with the liberal movement, you could say. Although, ironically, I would say that liberals are really just using equality as a pretense to justify extreme authoritarianism. They are not about ‘I treat everyone equally’, but about ‘I want to never ever be treated worse than someone else’.
I had no father. I suppose it shapes my views regarding this in a strong manner.
By the way, Jon Anthony has a kind of Hero’s Journey article series on his blog. I quite liked it.
Yes. But would one’s internal locus ever be started without first having it pushed by the external? Hard to say. Perhaps most of us were born to be zombies or slaves in the end, it seems the sheep always like a sheppard
Baa Baa!
I will have to take a look at that blog, thanks.
Take a look at Dialectic of Enlightenment from the Frankfurt writers. You might like some of it, it’s practically a deconstruction of the western hero mythos, you might like, I hated it:) Too much Marxism nonsense for my taste, but it has some interesting points.
The title sounds terrible, but I’ll put it on my maybe-to-read list.
Heh, That’s a good idea. It’s a cluster fuck of a title for sure, as is the whole book for that matter.
VERY much looking forward to your Cool Hand Luke review sir.
Nice of you to let me know that, good sir – and thanks. (I’m assuming that online name of yours, was slyly configured by switching the first letters of two other words…nice.) FYI…assuming ROK publishes it, I’ve already worked up my next set of movie reviews, one of which is indeed a review of “Cool Hand Luke”, and I’ll be submitting it here in a day or three…
No problem chief! I’ll be looking out for it. And you’re right about the name. I was going to go with Chuck Fildren, but I’m neither a priest or a muslim.
Ouch. I wonder what kind of shit a muslim priest might get up to…
hope you are including High Noon starring Gary Cooper.
It’s on my long-term list, amigo…
Heat is an excellent movie. Everything Michael Mann creates is gold.
I loved Heat and Collateral. …can you recommend any other good Michael Mann films?
Manhunter
Miami Vice
His last flick, Blackhat, is to be avoided. It stars Thor as the BEST HACKER IN THE WORLD. a tall blonde, good looking hacker? who also knows how to fight?
I actually watched and enjoyed Miami Vice. I also saw Blackhat; that movie was so ridiculously boring. Never heard of Manhunter though, I’ll check it out.
Thief, starring James Caan (1981). Caan plays a retired safecracker, but the Mafia have other plans for him….definitely a man’s movie.
imdb.com/title/tt0083190/
His remake of Last of the Mohicans was excellent.
Heat is the best fucking movie ever. EVER.
Collateral by Michael Mann should also be on this list.
I don’t know if Collateral could be considered Red Pill. It is more of a Hitchcock themed movie, with the every-man caught up in a storm of circumstances. Vincent is a force of nature and the Jamie Fox character is a loser that somehow finds it in him to do what needs to be done, even though he only succeeds by accident. However, Collateral is one of my favorite films and I do enjoy Michael Mann’s films.
Even better is The Insider by the same director. It’s like Heat, except even more mature.
I’m still partial to McClintock, a more sedate John Wayne western where he Tames the Shrew.
It’s not action-packed, cynical or pretentious but it gets the point across. It also rags on the federal government.
Next time somebody tries to screw you over….
Heat is one of my favorite movies, but there are a couple things that bother me about it. The first is McCauley allowing Waingro in on the bearer bonds heist, but that’s acceptable because it’s like the McGuffin that sets up the rest of the movie. The second thing that bothers me is that scene you linked. Why give Van Zant a warning?
Here’s the bank-robbery scene, and the subsequent shootout scene, from “Heat”…
One thing all movies have in common is, that shit ain’t real life. If it was,nobody would watch it.
If you want to learn how to act,how to be, or how to live life you sure as hell don’t need to learn it from the movies.
I enjoyed watching Hud however, Hud was a bum who rode on his fathers coat tails and without his father the only thing he would have been “pulling” would have been handouts.
Have you seen a picture of the real Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker?
The guys from Heat would have wound up like the two cats with automatic weapons in the California bank robbery in the late 90s, they never spent a dime of that money and probably were not knocking down poontang by the bushel.
Hud wavered between alpha and beta. His father swiped aside his success by simply saying, women liked anything dangerous. And ultimately his largest criticism was that a mans value is in building something-which was something Hud was unwilling to do.
I think all men are a combination of alpha and beta. We live in a dual world. We’re constantly pinned down somewhere, between opposite extremes. Hot/cold, good/bad, smart/dumb, healthy/sick, etc. Hud never broke frame. He drove away in his convertible. Doubtless, to go to some other town and bang prolific numbers of hot women and get backstabbed by jealous betas. That’s just what betas do. Hud was a douche, but he was an alpha in terms of his sexuality – and more importantly, in the eyes of females. He had serious game and looks. He used them to his full advantage. But an alpha in terms of discernment, or overall talent? No. Strictly bottom-rung. Which means he was an alpha in terms of his pussy-pulling abilities. But that’s pretty much it. Think about it – who is the perfect alpha? Nobody. We’re all frail. We all die eventually. We live in a world of duality and we are what we are – at any given moment. In Hollywood movies, there’s a devious subtextual element at play in virtually all films. Especially the notion that a man (and a woman) must strive to do the right thing – whatever that is. And whatever it actually is, it’s exactly what the elite want us to believe it is. What they program us to believe. All while they don’t follow the recipe themselves, while controlling us from on high in the process. “And we’ll be right back, after these messages, on radio station KROK – if you’re listening to this commentary, you just know it’s a crock…” See, I try hard not to take myself too seriously. I don’t want to be liked and admired. That “respect” thing, that most men covet, was hatched in a think-tank to fill up the private prisons and the world’s battlefields. Maybe I’ll expand on that one at another time, if I don’t get permanently blinded by my flapping lips…
All American Red Pill films must be in the US National Film Registry. No excuses.
I’ll nominate “The Big Sleep”.
Synchronicity, man…I’m having acid flashbacks. I just finished a review of this film, which I’ll post at a later date, if ROK gives me the thumbs-up…
A lesser known recent movie is ‘Notes on a Scandal’ (2006). It’s like a UK version of ‘Risky Business’ only it involves an alpha kid who gets what he wants. She’s his art teacher. She actually has a past as a classy escort but this isn’t revealed until the end. Cate Blanchett resembles Rebecca DeMornay as well. The kid runs impressive game on her and nails her. Then he runs dread game and nails her again. And repeats. She’s trying to turn her new leaf as a married mother and juggle forgetting her past and this movie goes all the way down the rabbit hole revealing the true nature of women and their hamstering. The kid remains a confident player to the end. It’s an open playbook lesson for all sides if you haven’t seen this one already.
It’s kind of the Lolita legend flipped and musical groups have glamorized the storyline.
One red pill spike comes near the end when the old crone calls out the woman’s husband for being a ‘cuckold all along’.
High Plains Drifter. Theres no more red pill film than that.
Saw Hell or High Water tonight — good depiction of male friendships.
The relatively new modern movie ”Gone Girl” (2014) is a great movie and I recommend watching it. Idk if its simp and bluepull (at least in the end…) but it made me think of MGTOW and red/blue pill a lot. It’s crazy. its cool to see that a movie still can say;women are/can be crazy. It shows how fcked up a woman can be!!
I am surprised that you failed to include Rambo and Conan the Barbarian (original one) where badass Stallone and Arnold kick serious ass!
The Hidden Room is in the public domain and can be viewed here:
https://archive.org/details/Obsession1949TheHiddenRoom
Since you mentioned Michael Mann, I highly recommend James Caan in “Thief”. It’s a gritty hiest drama that bridges the gap between 70s and early 80s American cinema with serious performances from a great cast. That joke of a movie “Drive” brazenly steals a lot from this gem.
I second “Thief”. Caan was great in it. A very hardcore red pill film.
“Drive” sucked. Gossling is talentless and I’m beyond sick of looking at Bryan Cranston.
Add: “Gran Torino” by Clint Eastwood… “The Searchers” with John Wayne
What about “Pale Rider” with Clint?
It literally has the “Beta Bux, Alpha Fux” system on full display.
Clint’s “High Plains Drifter-style” alpha male character saves the day and the “leading lady” tells him that she’s going to marry the feckless beta because he’ll provide for her but, before she ties the knot, she wants to know what it’s like to be with a real man and thus gets schlonged by Clint.
“If you don’t instantly pop wood the moment you first lay eyes on the
stunning Faye Dunaway, in this brilliant, Depression Era film’s opening
sequence, you are either gay, impotent or dead.”
She’s definitely pretty, but you may be overselling her here.
“Little by little, the look of the country changes because of the men we admire”
that quote hit like a hammer
Michael Mann’s Thief(1981) with James Caan is top notch as well…couldn’t-give-a-fuck safe cracker(security firms claimed the film was a how-to manual) takes it to the end. Haven’t come across the Hidden Room before(Robert Newton is great) trying to download it now.