I saw there was an interest in red pill films here. So I thought I'd give a little review of a couple. These aren't necessarily the most redpill or best, I chose them because they might be ones which have passed many of us by in the ocean of mediocrity. Yet share key concepts such as infanticide (in the form of destroying the younger generation out of greed).

Trigger Warning This review contains slut-shaming, fat-shaming, shame-shaming and most unforgivably of all, spoilers. Feel free to disagree with what I write in here as I'm not pretending what I'm writing is 100% correct and I suspect you find some of it offensive.

The films I'm primarily looking at are "The Graduate (1967)" and "What's Eating Gilbert Grape (1993)"

Hollywood for the most part has supplied us with an almost uninterrupted conveyor belt of blue pill cinema. Whereas men in cinema unapologetically portrayed as scum, there has always been a movement to make women unrealistic pillars of strength, vibrancy, femininity and masculinity. The result has been decades of horrible films. Just like good comedy and good writing, good cinema has always focused on the dregs of society, not the Appalaches.

But what about James Bond? He is not the archetypal red piller? Idealistically yes but cinematically, he's the most boring, witless teenagers wet dream. The only reason he holds up on the screen is because he's constantly attacked by rich mysterious characters that are massively interesting. Take Ernst Stavro Blowfeld for example, a criminal genius that made his money on the stock market, won the war for the allies, started his own underground space program, wasn't even seen in most of the films despite Bond fighting against his SPECTRE henchmen. He has all kinds of quirks and flaws, a lover of animals and a ruthless killer. All bond does is dodge bullets and draw to straight-flushes.

But I digress...What's ironic about RP cinema is that women, even feminists absolutely love it. And often 'stars' are born out of RP films. Just like RP men, what they want and what they say they want are two completely different things.

Take for instance, The Graduate's Mrs Robinson. Charles Webb (author) absolutely nails female manipulation right between the eyes. Ben, the male protagonist would likely have grown up listening to the philosophies of the Beat Generation and around the time of shooting would have Timothy Leary "turn on, tune in and drop out" message echoed on the radio. A guy that is close to dropping out, he is being pulled from all sides, his father, his fathers friend and Mrs Robinson. The central theme of this story (and what's eating gilbert grape) is Ben growing up and starting to learn to make choices for himself and not by other people (primarily post-wall women). Mrs Robinson is one of films greatest characters, she is a villain but not in the sense of a white cat and electric chairs, she uses her femininity (shock horror, female privilege) to get what she wants. She has all the materialistic qualities anyone could ask for but with the wall fast approaching, her selfish nature turns against the next generation (Just like Dickens Miss Havisham) and tries to ruin the lives of Ben and her own daughter Elaine.

The theme of destroying the next generation is one of histories key components even though no one talks about it. Governments running up trillion dollar debts are all purely because in the hearts of those that support such things is because they secretly hate those younger than themselves.

But I digress yet again...

Similarly in What's eating Gilbert Grape, you have several strong female characters which take on various forms of ugly women. It's set in a small hick-town where everyone knows everyone and gossip is rife. Betty Carver, a very similar character to Mrs Robinson, in all the manipulation and vitriol of her but to an even greater extent. In a bid to destroy the next generation before hitting the wall, she manages to destroy the life of her husband, her children's lives in an attempt to get to Gilbert Grape and Becky (Gilberts 18 year old girlfriend). Then Hamstering ensues when she goes around the town acting like she's been victimised by the other town residents who disapprove of her actions.

Another female character is Gilberts mother, who is massively obese. She hasn't left the house in years and Gilbert is her primary carer. Again this plays off the same issue of the older generation destroying the younger when really their roll should be empowerment. Because she is grotesquely obese, when she dies, instead of having a funeral, they decide to burn the house down. I believe the destruction of the house symbolises the death of prosperity accumulated during their time of abundance (symbolised by her gluttony). When she died, she took everything else down with her.

Gilbert was in a very similar situation that Ben was (and most men of that age for that matter). For the reason of previous generations plundering of wealth, his generation is facing a bleak outlook with no real prospects of wealth and happiness, just different vampiric forces pulling him in different directions. With the only way to look for prosperity is to steal from the generation below (continuing the cycle).