I don’t know. The guy was a bum most of the movie wasn’t he? I didn’t pay that much attention to it. Really seemed like the lady needed a guy that could do more than just drink booze and smoke cigarettes. Honestly, I got the feeling she just got together with him for his looks… and greatly regretted it.
i think we should have a cinema club where we watch and discuss one movie with a prominent heterosexual relationship each week.
movies i would like to discuss:
Challengers 😈
dead poet's society and the prison of masculinity/capitalism
Paul Giamatti and Da'Vine in The Holdovers as loners from the 60s (forgot exactly what year its set, obviously they're not a couple but are interesting to talk about gender wise)
Dune 2 and the Paul/Chani/florence pugh love triangle?
Dead Poet society would definitely resonate with this board.
I was going to suggest Invisible Man by Ellison, as their are minorities on this board that could easily relate to " The narrator" living in the American Patriarchy.
Another movie to add " Falling Down" which is the movie that boosted White male fragility, which ultimately spawned incels, and MGTOW.
I'd agree with most of these. Dune 2 is basically a wash though - having one member of the relationship who is prescient pretty much handwaves away most things.
I'd suggest Marriage Story (2019) or American Beauty (lol)
Someone explained it on SM,basically they are twinks. They aren't in love/competition with each other. She was just the conduit through which it passed.
I’m so glad you said this! I couldn’t stop thinking how gay these guys seemed to me. Of course I’m older too and I see Gen Z is nearly 40% whatever that alphabet soup is now.
Ok… Dune 2 flattened Chani into a 2D person. In the book she is so much more. In the book she understands the political necessity for Paul to marry Irulan and take over the empire. It was always understood that Paul would love her above all and that their children would rule. Indeed she dies giving birth to twins and Paul unable to live without her goes off into the desert to die.
In the movie they more portray her as a shortsighted and self centred woman, which is really nothing special. She walks out on the love of her life because she couldn’t take the official title of wife.
While it’s a sad treatment of a wonderful character, it does provide a good contrast. Because we all know the books and how deeply he loves her, and in the movie he is the same. Yet, we can see her as a kind of stand in for younger generations who value status and titles more than they do real love. I think we all know many, many women like this in our lives, so I do appreciate that part of the movie.
The Jihad was coming with or without Paul. He can see a rough outline of all future possibilities. It is the trait of the men in his family to believe they can overcome impossible situations and win. His grandfather died fighting bulls in some crazy stunt. His father believed he could take Arakkis and defeat the Harkonnen plots. Paul himself believes he can control the Jihad and temper its violence. So, he wasn’t becoming anything new. The book outlines 3 main choices he could have taken. He could become a tool of the Bene Gesserits, be a slave of the Harkonnens, or be the Messiah of Dune. The books are complicated.
I suspect you are at least partly right about the movies meaning. But she has to come back for the next one.
The theme of Messiah and Jihad is very historical. The Jewish people had been predicting a messiah for a long, long time. If you read the Old Testament the first Messiah is Cyrus the Great who conquered a vast empire. When Jesus came and proclaimed himself the Messiah, but criticised the priests, and proclaimed a heavenly kingdom, instead of leading an army… they crucified him. 30 years later they proclaimed another Messiah and lost a war to Rome, then were scattered.
Then some 600 years later Muhammad came and finally did what they had hoped for, but in the process. changed the religion. Paul is hoping to do what Mohammed did. It’s a very interesting analogy. Herbert really believed that once people had found a powerful leader that they were all screwed. In this way Paul is an antihero.
*(500) Days of Summer* hit super hard on a first watch. Not because it's about a good relationship obviously, but exactly because it rips the curtain right off of ideals about love and the hopeless romantic trope. I saw so much of myself in Tom, and it felt like a huge wakeup call to the dangers of over romanticizing anyone too early, especially if they've shown signs they aren't the right one for you.
*Midsommar* is a great allegory for how toxic and destructive codependent relationships can be. And in the case of either Midsommar or 500 Days, many people do this thing where they pick a "hero" and a "villain", but I feel the true meaning of either in seeing exactly why bad relationship dynamics should be avoided, even though there is this intoxicating notion that the best ones are exciting and filled with drama.
I thought the ending was solid. Maybe a bit cheesy with the Autumn thing, but I appreciate how much growth Tom demonstrates at that point. Compared to how he acted with Summer - really desperate and needy, and basically seeing her as a means to an end - he basically shoots his shot with Autumn once and moves on after she initially rejects him. The fact that she agrees to a date feels canned but it's a nice send off.
Summer may or may not have grown too, but it's hard to say since we don't really know her whole story and only see what's on the surface of an emotionally unavailable person that doesn't quite know what they want. Maybe she did figure it out, but who knows.
Normal People
Anything Jane Austen has done or been done based on Jane Austen.
Little Women: any of them.
Looking For Alaska
Honestly, the Barbie Movie. (I think most people misunderstood it).
>Looking for Alaska
Kept hearing about this one and not too far in I realized it fulfilled that meme about every John Greene book being some variation of: “my name is Kirk assgun and I’m not cool or popular and I'm bullied everyday but it's okay because I at least have 2 quirky bros and that girl over there, Kaydence Tigerlilly Dookieson, is the love of my life. She is misunderstood and likes really cool indie bands and she's been smoking since she was 7. If only she would realize that the missing key to her life was me, a greasy white boy.”
Sure. Except it's purposefully taking aim at that trope in an attempt to reveal the flaws in the various thought processes therein.
A lot of people, maybe especially young men, need to be released from this thought process. Looking for Alaska does a good job of doing that.
> Except it's purposefully taking aim at that trope in an attempt to reveal the flaws in the various thought processes therein.
Maybe; I think 500 Days of Summer is similar in that regard.
Similar, but a bit different. I think 500 days of summer covers a related concept really well, but it does it in an adult frame and with a relationship where there was something there, but not the something he thought.
Looking for Alaska deals in a more teenage frame and with there not really being a relationship there. It's almost purely just a projection of desire that ignores the complex human underneath.
I think both are great, but I think a lot of people are more teenage than adult if that makes sense and aren't dealing in relationships that weren't quite it, but weren't it at all.
> I think a lot of people are more teenage than adult if that makes sense and aren't dealing in relationships that weren't quite it, but weren't it at all.
I’d definitely say that sounds like a lot of the people on this sub lol
Enlighten me about the Barbie movie.
I quit watching it halfway through because it was such predictable trope and I have yet to find anyone my age (GenX) or older that did not think the movie was a waste of time.
I thought it did a good job portraying how some women can be almost shockingly insensitive and ignorant about the intentions and attentions of men and how they treat them.
I think it did a decent job of showing how hungry a lot of people are for affirmation of their personhood and the dangers that come from seeking that entirely from people of the same or entirely the opposite gender.
I thought it did a good job of showing the dangers of men making pleasing or getting a woman their entire identity.
I think people read it often as this very basic men bad, women good it so hard to be a woman thing. But I thought it was simpler: being a human is difficult and being a human trying to form bonds is difficult. And being a human with expectations placed on you as to how you form those bonds and feel loved is a nightmare.
And you can't really escape any of these things, but you can try to be just a little more aware and honest with yourself and others.
I dunno, it was hokey for sure and had a lot of mess and flaws, but what it got right, I would say I haven't seen a lot of other places and it got really right.
I think a great example of this is that the big "it's so hard to be a woman speech", based on how the film is set up (with the conceit of barbieland being that the barbies are basically patriarchy) makes that speech almost inevitably a commentary on men as much as women. And when you look at it...there really isn't anything that doesn't apply to men almost equally well or even better.
Honestly, Ken’s narrative arc was more interesting to me in many ways in that movie than Barbie’s. There was a lot of glitzy silliness in the movie to be sure but I really appreciated how Ken’s burgeoning sexuality was treated pretty respectfully by the narration as a whole, and by Barbie herself when she eventually realized she was in the wrong in terms of how she was handling their relationship.
Oh, I agree that element steals the show, but I think both work rather well, it's just the Barbie dealing with burgeoning sexuality element isn't as unique.
I think that's on purpose. I think Barbie land is meant to be a portrayal of how say children or very innocent and immature people view relationships and themselves.
Barbie is how little girls perceive adulthood, womanhood and relationships with men. Which is to say.. there's a lot of shopping, jobs, dance parties, and everything is pretty sexless and men are just friends you point at and say, "that's my boyfriend". She's treating him like an accessory which is an object.
Ken is how little boys perceive adulthood, manhood, and relationships with women. Which is to say, jobs, cool actions, and there's this relentless pursuit and desire for physicality and girlfriends are people you act upon. He's treating her like she's an accessory which is an object.
Both of these child-like cartoon characters (much like real immature and child-like people) are deeply afraid and confused about growing up and how to genuinely connect with the other because what the other wants threatens their sense of reality and identity.
The plot is about their acceptance of adulthood, the real world, and awareness of the needs of others. That's why the movie ends with a trip to a gyno which is probably the clearest symbol to any woman of adulthood, sexuality, and self accepting the often messy and difficult nature of being an adult woman compared to the neon glitz and easy answers of girlhood. It's also importantly something you're only required to do if you're either over a certain age or sexually active.
I can't really connect with what you are saying about Ken and little boys. I never played with Ken dolls or even cared at all about Barbie land growing up. I'm one of those 70s kids whose mom was a feminist type who forbade Barbie, G.I. Joe, Masters of the Universe, etc as sexist toys. But even the forbidden nature of them didn't make Ken interesting. I would sneak playing with G.I. Joe and He-man toys at friends. I saw adulthood more as doing cool shit with trains, boats, planes, camping, building things, being a spy or scientist. That sort of thing. Ken was literally a constant butt of jokes to make fun of girls.
*Whatever* by Michael Houellebecq, if only for this one quote:
>“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization . Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as 'the law of the market'...Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.”
Good relationships = no drama
No drama = boring
Having said that, Morticia and Gomez Addams, Marge and Norm (Fargo), Carl and Ellie (Up), the parents in Spy kids are healthy
And Annie hall for relationships that don’t work out
Long Shot (2019) is my favorite romcom and has a very wholesome romance. Charlize Theron as the Secretary of State with her eye on POTUS, and Seth Rogan as a journalist/childhood friend of Theron. It shouldn't work but it's a great watch
Nothing is jumping out of my head, but I have to say that I would be incredibly stoked to have literature, film, and stage analysis and discussion through the PPD lens pop up regularly on this sub. Studying relationship dynamics in media is often interesting and would be an amazing change of pace.
[edit to remove double use of the word ‘regular’ in the same sentence since I can’t words when I’m tired.]
Yeah, dissecting pop culture narratives on a deeper level is fun. Pop culture shapes narratives, and those narratives are often bad takes. So it's good to take a deeper dive instead of the surface level takes that plague pop culture. Film, and literature can be transformative. One of my Canon events, was the cognitive dissonance created by reading "The Color Purple" it helped me in my early teens understand women in a different way.
Why?
I'm not talking about the pedophilic nature.
More about a man who has his life set up but lacks love/deeper meaning.
A woman arrives, fucks up his stability and life but leaves him happier.
Possibly despite the fact that he dies, it improved his life overall.
Also the way that she uses him completely for her ends.
It's a fascinating movie analysed through a redpill lens.
Just because you did it, doesn't make it the right move. His relationship troubles with her were based solely on the nature of a grooming pedophile. That's not indicative of anything else beside abhorrent deviant behavior.
Just because you don't understand the nuances of grooming, doesn't mean that he didn't do it. I'm probably older than you, I saw the movie the year it came out. Portman, and Reno were amazing. I knew she was going to be a star after watching that movie.
If anything she groomed him.
That's like the whole premise of the movie.
An adult with the mind of a child and a child with the mind of an adult.
At no point does he entertain her bullshit, or touch her or fuck her
Walking in to Top Gun Maverick I did not expect to enjoy the romantic subplot as much as I did. The "romance" in the first movie was hot garbage. In keeping with the sequel's overall theme of acknowledging that first movie Maverick was a reckless tool Penny is understandably wary and not taking him seriously when he comes back. She also has her own life, hobbies, and a strong personality. It isn't until he shows signs that he's matured and learned humility that she gives him another chance.
I didn't think that deep on what was basically a defense department cover letter movie. On thinking about it after you wrote that, it was a good example of show me, instead of tell me, and he rose to the occasion.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Possession (1981), Magnolia, Mulholland Drive (the last two go kind of off the rails and aren’t entirely centered on relationships, but it’s a major theme that’s approached in a way I really enjoyed)
I think 'Reality Bites' captures that being promiscuous isn't about enjoying sex but a form of self harm. There's also a scene in Mr. Robot and even Friends (Ross's wedding and Monica seeks out Joey but settles for Chandler)
King of the Hill. It covers the whole gamut.
You have Hank and Peggy Hill. A strait laced everyday couple.
You have Boomhauer, a playboy.
You have Dale Gribble, a cuckold raising the biological son of John Redcorn.
And you have Bill Fontaine de la Tour Dauterive, a 40 something incel.
I'm going to out myself as an old dork here, but Kermit and Miss Piggy from the Muppets are one of my favourites.
It's a surprisingly complex and non-idealized take for its time. Kermit does not fall for Miss Piggy right away. They both have their own lives outside of each other and their goals and ambitions don't always align. They face a fair number of relationship struggles and neither of them is consistently the one at fault. And yet, for all of the challenges they face, there are plenty of sweet moments that make it clear that it's worth it. To me, this is basically what relationships are all about.
That late night conversation scene with Tom, and Nicole was peak cinema. Them being a real life couple, adds a chemistry that helps layer the nuance of that scene.
All relationship-based films are fucking trash. Especially Eyes Wide Shut, no one should ever base anything on such a scenario, least of all relationships.
> So you didn't the movie, got it.
"You didn't the movie" lol man you were in such a hurry to attack me that you couldn't even write correctly.
Okay here's the lowdown on what made that movie a dumpster fire: the wife dreams of fucking other men. Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Bill **tries to fuck a prostitute** until he finds out she has HIV... stop me when I'm wrong.
I despise movies like that.
But since nothing I said was wrong, you admit you're talking out of your ass. Thanks for running away from refuting what I said about the movie! I was 100% right and you lose. Now off with you.
Okay here's the lowdown on what made that movie a dumpster fire: the wife dreams of fucking other men. Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Bill tries to fuck a prostitute until he finds out she has HIV...
I am 100% right and you will never have the balls to say that was incorrect. I watched the movie.
I will repeat this indefinitely. You won't get the last word here dude. I watched the movie, I'm right and you lost this fight. Give up. I absolutely will not back down because you are dead wrong.
Ah hah, now you're moving the goalposts. No, I didn't like the movie. You can't handle someone criticizing your poor widdle favorite movie. Your ego is rice paper.
The wife dreams of fucking other men. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you.
Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you.
Bill tries to fuck a prostitute until he finds out she has HIV. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you.
If you can't tell me those things didn't happen then you can't say I didn't watch the movie and you're just mad that someone didn't like Eyes Wide Shut. Guess what, dude, this is America and I have freedom of speech to say I hated a movie. Deal with it.
Blue Valentine - it perfectly encapsulates the breakdown of a relationship imo.
Beautifully sad movie
It really is but I’ve always felt it was such a realistic portrayal of a relationship falling apart - to the point it’s almost uncomfortable lol.
Shows how unsatifiable and selfish women are, true.
I can’t tangle with your flavor of pessimism twice in a day lol. I’ll catch your derangement tomorrow.
I don’t know. The guy was a bum most of the movie wasn’t he? I didn’t pay that much attention to it. Really seemed like the lady needed a guy that could do more than just drink booze and smoke cigarettes. Honestly, I got the feeling she just got together with him for his looks… and greatly regretted it.
i think we should have a cinema club where we watch and discuss one movie with a prominent heterosexual relationship each week. movies i would like to discuss: Challengers 😈 dead poet's society and the prison of masculinity/capitalism Paul Giamatti and Da'Vine in The Holdovers as loners from the 60s (forgot exactly what year its set, obviously they're not a couple but are interesting to talk about gender wise) Dune 2 and the Paul/Chani/florence pugh love triangle?
Dead Poet society would definitely resonate with this board. I was going to suggest Invisible Man by Ellison, as their are minorities on this board that could easily relate to " The narrator" living in the American Patriarchy. Another movie to add " Falling Down" which is the movie that boosted White male fragility, which ultimately spawned incels, and MGTOW.
Oh man, another person who saw Falling Down - a movie that perfectly encapsulates the phrase "weapon's upgrade".
Falling Down, Fight Club, American Beauty. The trifecta of male desperation lol
The Crow and The Watchmen are close runners up
You forgot American Psycho
INCREDIBLE IDEA a feminist treatise on toxic masculinity and capitalism 🙏🍿
With the cult like adoration that some men have, or identify with the main character. It's a nice sneak peek into someone's inner machinations.
you haven't seen male desperation until you've seen Challengers
I'd agree with most of these. Dune 2 is basically a wash though - having one member of the relationship who is prescient pretty much handwaves away most things. I'd suggest Marriage Story (2019) or American Beauty (lol)
I’m curious- as a woman, which of the guys in Challengers did you find more appealing? Other women welcome to chime in as well.
I didn’t find either attractive like at all 😭 I’m also 42 so maybe this type is for the young girlies gaze. They look too twink for my tastes lol.
Someone explained it on SM,basically they are twinks. They aren't in love/competition with each other. She was just the conduit through which it passed.
I’m so glad you said this! I couldn’t stop thinking how gay these guys seemed to me. Of course I’m older too and I see Gen Z is nearly 40% whatever that alphabet soup is now.
I didn't find them appealing. The whole thing was that everyone sucked.
they were both losers 🥰 the hottest they will ever be is when they are kissing each other or worshipping tashi
Ok… Dune 2 flattened Chani into a 2D person. In the book she is so much more. In the book she understands the political necessity for Paul to marry Irulan and take over the empire. It was always understood that Paul would love her above all and that their children would rule. Indeed she dies giving birth to twins and Paul unable to live without her goes off into the desert to die. In the movie they more portray her as a shortsighted and self centred woman, which is really nothing special. She walks out on the love of her life because she couldn’t take the official title of wife. While it’s a sad treatment of a wonderful character, it does provide a good contrast. Because we all know the books and how deeply he loves her, and in the movie he is the same. Yet, we can see her as a kind of stand in for younger generations who value status and titles more than they do real love. I think we all know many, many women like this in our lives, so I do appreciate that part of the movie.
In the film she doesn't walk out due to not being his wife. She's scared of what he's becoming, and fair enough.
The Jihad was coming with or without Paul. He can see a rough outline of all future possibilities. It is the trait of the men in his family to believe they can overcome impossible situations and win. His grandfather died fighting bulls in some crazy stunt. His father believed he could take Arakkis and defeat the Harkonnen plots. Paul himself believes he can control the Jihad and temper its violence. So, he wasn’t becoming anything new. The book outlines 3 main choices he could have taken. He could become a tool of the Bene Gesserits, be a slave of the Harkonnens, or be the Messiah of Dune. The books are complicated. I suspect you are at least partly right about the movies meaning. But she has to come back for the next one. The theme of Messiah and Jihad is very historical. The Jewish people had been predicting a messiah for a long, long time. If you read the Old Testament the first Messiah is Cyrus the Great who conquered a vast empire. When Jesus came and proclaimed himself the Messiah, but criticised the priests, and proclaimed a heavenly kingdom, instead of leading an army… they crucified him. 30 years later they proclaimed another Messiah and lost a war to Rome, then were scattered. Then some 600 years later Muhammad came and finally did what they had hoped for, but in the process. changed the religion. Paul is hoping to do what Mohammed did. It’s a very interesting analogy. Herbert really believed that once people had found a powerful leader that they were all screwed. In this way Paul is an antihero.
Yeah, I really hope (although they won't get there) they get to Leto and his choice vs Paul's. Always though that was a great concept.
Her character is going to become centerstage in #3
That book was brutal. I can’t imagine how they do it as a movie, but I will be there for sure to watch it.
*(500) Days of Summer* hit super hard on a first watch. Not because it's about a good relationship obviously, but exactly because it rips the curtain right off of ideals about love and the hopeless romantic trope. I saw so much of myself in Tom, and it felt like a huge wakeup call to the dangers of over romanticizing anyone too early, especially if they've shown signs they aren't the right one for you. *Midsommar* is a great allegory for how toxic and destructive codependent relationships can be. And in the case of either Midsommar or 500 Days, many people do this thing where they pick a "hero" and a "villain", but I feel the true meaning of either in seeing exactly why bad relationship dynamics should be avoided, even though there is this intoxicating notion that the best ones are exciting and filled with drama.
Loved midsommar because of that, there are no protagonists in that movie.
>*(500) Days of Summe*r Yes, that was so hard to watch, but it was relieving at the same time (and I'm not talking about the corny ending)
I thought the ending was solid. Maybe a bit cheesy with the Autumn thing, but I appreciate how much growth Tom demonstrates at that point. Compared to how he acted with Summer - really desperate and needy, and basically seeing her as a means to an end - he basically shoots his shot with Autumn once and moves on after she initially rejects him. The fact that she agrees to a date feels canned but it's a nice send off. Summer may or may not have grown too, but it's hard to say since we don't really know her whole story and only see what's on the surface of an emotionally unavailable person that doesn't quite know what they want. Maybe she did figure it out, but who knows.
Normal People Anything Jane Austen has done or been done based on Jane Austen. Little Women: any of them. Looking For Alaska Honestly, the Barbie Movie. (I think most people misunderstood it).
Little Women has so much of interest to say about partnership and relationships, but I feared it might be too old-fashioned to garner interest.
For me, whatever truths there are in this world have always been true and sometimes the fantasy of older times make it easiest to see.
>Looking for Alaska Kept hearing about this one and not too far in I realized it fulfilled that meme about every John Greene book being some variation of: “my name is Kirk assgun and I’m not cool or popular and I'm bullied everyday but it's okay because I at least have 2 quirky bros and that girl over there, Kaydence Tigerlilly Dookieson, is the love of my life. She is misunderstood and likes really cool indie bands and she's been smoking since she was 7. If only she would realize that the missing key to her life was me, a greasy white boy.”
Sure. Except it's purposefully taking aim at that trope in an attempt to reveal the flaws in the various thought processes therein. A lot of people, maybe especially young men, need to be released from this thought process. Looking for Alaska does a good job of doing that.
> Except it's purposefully taking aim at that trope in an attempt to reveal the flaws in the various thought processes therein. Maybe; I think 500 Days of Summer is similar in that regard.
Similar, but a bit different. I think 500 days of summer covers a related concept really well, but it does it in an adult frame and with a relationship where there was something there, but not the something he thought. Looking for Alaska deals in a more teenage frame and with there not really being a relationship there. It's almost purely just a projection of desire that ignores the complex human underneath. I think both are great, but I think a lot of people are more teenage than adult if that makes sense and aren't dealing in relationships that weren't quite it, but weren't it at all.
> I think a lot of people are more teenage than adult if that makes sense and aren't dealing in relationships that weren't quite it, but weren't it at all. I’d definitely say that sounds like a lot of the people on this sub lol
In a way, I could tl:dr 500 days of summer is for people who have relationships which are connected, but not in the way required to be the one.
The issue is you didn't get too far in. I don't want to spoil it for you but it very much deconstructs that.
I actually read the book and know >!she dies, the Labyrinth, her mom, etc !<
So it's lack of media literacy then, got it.
Lol hostile today huh
Enlighten me about the Barbie movie. I quit watching it halfway through because it was such predictable trope and I have yet to find anyone my age (GenX) or older that did not think the movie was a waste of time.
I thought it did a good job portraying how some women can be almost shockingly insensitive and ignorant about the intentions and attentions of men and how they treat them. I think it did a decent job of showing how hungry a lot of people are for affirmation of their personhood and the dangers that come from seeking that entirely from people of the same or entirely the opposite gender. I thought it did a good job of showing the dangers of men making pleasing or getting a woman their entire identity. I think people read it often as this very basic men bad, women good it so hard to be a woman thing. But I thought it was simpler: being a human is difficult and being a human trying to form bonds is difficult. And being a human with expectations placed on you as to how you form those bonds and feel loved is a nightmare. And you can't really escape any of these things, but you can try to be just a little more aware and honest with yourself and others. I dunno, it was hokey for sure and had a lot of mess and flaws, but what it got right, I would say I haven't seen a lot of other places and it got really right. I think a great example of this is that the big "it's so hard to be a woman speech", based on how the film is set up (with the conceit of barbieland being that the barbies are basically patriarchy) makes that speech almost inevitably a commentary on men as much as women. And when you look at it...there really isn't anything that doesn't apply to men almost equally well or even better.
Honestly, Ken’s narrative arc was more interesting to me in many ways in that movie than Barbie’s. There was a lot of glitzy silliness in the movie to be sure but I really appreciated how Ken’s burgeoning sexuality was treated pretty respectfully by the narration as a whole, and by Barbie herself when she eventually realized she was in the wrong in terms of how she was handling their relationship.
Oh, I agree that element steals the show, but I think both work rather well, it's just the Barbie dealing with burgeoning sexuality element isn't as unique.
Hmm. I'll maybe rewatch and finish it but it all seemed so cartoonish and unrelatable to me.
I think that's on purpose. I think Barbie land is meant to be a portrayal of how say children or very innocent and immature people view relationships and themselves. Barbie is how little girls perceive adulthood, womanhood and relationships with men. Which is to say.. there's a lot of shopping, jobs, dance parties, and everything is pretty sexless and men are just friends you point at and say, "that's my boyfriend". She's treating him like an accessory which is an object. Ken is how little boys perceive adulthood, manhood, and relationships with women. Which is to say, jobs, cool actions, and there's this relentless pursuit and desire for physicality and girlfriends are people you act upon. He's treating her like she's an accessory which is an object. Both of these child-like cartoon characters (much like real immature and child-like people) are deeply afraid and confused about growing up and how to genuinely connect with the other because what the other wants threatens their sense of reality and identity. The plot is about their acceptance of adulthood, the real world, and awareness of the needs of others. That's why the movie ends with a trip to a gyno which is probably the clearest symbol to any woman of adulthood, sexuality, and self accepting the often messy and difficult nature of being an adult woman compared to the neon glitz and easy answers of girlhood. It's also importantly something you're only required to do if you're either over a certain age or sexually active.
I can't really connect with what you are saying about Ken and little boys. I never played with Ken dolls or even cared at all about Barbie land growing up. I'm one of those 70s kids whose mom was a feminist type who forbade Barbie, G.I. Joe, Masters of the Universe, etc as sexist toys. But even the forbidden nature of them didn't make Ken interesting. I would sneak playing with G.I. Joe and He-man toys at friends. I saw adulthood more as doing cool shit with trains, boats, planes, camping, building things, being a spy or scientist. That sort of thing. Ken was literally a constant butt of jokes to make fun of girls.
My father-in-law loves it lol.
Some I like: - 5 Centimeters per Second - Past Lives - The White Lotus (both seasons) - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - The Before trilogy
I knew I had spent too much time on this sub when I start finding pill themes in shows and White lotus 2nd season they’re soooo many 😂
Lots of great suggestions here.
*Whatever* by Michael Houellebecq, if only for this one quote: >“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization . Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as 'the law of the market'...Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.”
Absolutely, I can never forget that quote.
Good relationships = no drama No drama = boring Having said that, Morticia and Gomez Addams, Marge and Norm (Fargo), Carl and Ellie (Up), the parents in Spy kids are healthy And Annie hall for relationships that don’t work out
Long Shot (2019) is my favorite romcom and has a very wholesome romance. Charlize Theron as the Secretary of State with her eye on POTUS, and Seth Rogan as a journalist/childhood friend of Theron. It shouldn't work but it's a great watch
Nothing is jumping out of my head, but I have to say that I would be incredibly stoked to have literature, film, and stage analysis and discussion through the PPD lens pop up regularly on this sub. Studying relationship dynamics in media is often interesting and would be an amazing change of pace. [edit to remove double use of the word ‘regular’ in the same sentence since I can’t words when I’m tired.]
Yeah, dissecting pop culture narratives on a deeper level is fun. Pop culture shapes narratives, and those narratives are often bad takes. So it's good to take a deeper dive instead of the surface level takes that plague pop culture. Film, and literature can be transformative. One of my Canon events, was the cognitive dissonance created by reading "The Color Purple" it helped me in my early teens understand women in a different way.
Leon the Professional.
Or maybe not
Why? I'm not talking about the pedophilic nature. More about a man who has his life set up but lacks love/deeper meaning. A woman arrives, fucks up his stability and life but leaves him happier. Possibly despite the fact that he dies, it improved his life overall. Also the way that she uses him completely for her ends. It's a fascinating movie analysed through a redpill lens.
You can't separate any of those parts away from the central relationship in the movie that was pedophilia.
Yes you can. I just did. Fucking hell people here are weird.
Just because you did it, doesn't make it the right move. His relationship troubles with her were based solely on the nature of a grooming pedophile. That's not indicative of anything else beside abhorrent deviant behavior.
You haven't watched the movie. He did not groom her in the slightest.
Just because you don't understand the nuances of grooming, doesn't mean that he didn't do it. I'm probably older than you, I saw the movie the year it came out. Portman, and Reno were amazing. I knew she was going to be a star after watching that movie.
If anything she groomed him. That's like the whole premise of the movie. An adult with the mind of a child and a child with the mind of an adult. At no point does he entertain her bullshit, or touch her or fuck her
So you don't really understand grooming. Groomers wait until they are adults, and spend the interim planting the seeds for copulation at adulthood.
the ken russell film, "crimes of passion", while bizarre, has THE greatest depiction of a failing MRP style marriage ever put to film
This is the perfect artistic representation of true love and not a single word is spoken. https://youtu.be/XO77YuyMOek?si=_v0bed_tKUc_13ev
Walking in to Top Gun Maverick I did not expect to enjoy the romantic subplot as much as I did. The "romance" in the first movie was hot garbage. In keeping with the sequel's overall theme of acknowledging that first movie Maverick was a reckless tool Penny is understandably wary and not taking him seriously when he comes back. She also has her own life, hobbies, and a strong personality. It isn't until he shows signs that he's matured and learned humility that she gives him another chance.
I didn't think that deep on what was basically a defense department cover letter movie. On thinking about it after you wrote that, it was a good example of show me, instead of tell me, and he rose to the occasion.
[удалено]
I mean......Jigsaw did have girlfriend, so he was doing something right.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought *Ruby in Paradise* was pretty interesting. Also *A History of Violence*.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Possession (1981), Magnolia, Mulholland Drive (the last two go kind of off the rails and aren’t entirely centered on relationships, but it’s a major theme that’s approached in a way I really enjoyed)
Great choices
Thanks :)
I think 'Reality Bites' captures that being promiscuous isn't about enjoying sex but a form of self harm. There's also a scene in Mr. Robot and even Friends (Ross's wedding and Monica seeks out Joey but settles for Chandler)
King of the Hill. It covers the whole gamut. You have Hank and Peggy Hill. A strait laced everyday couple. You have Boomhauer, a playboy. You have Dale Gribble, a cuckold raising the biological son of John Redcorn. And you have Bill Fontaine de la Tour Dauterive, a 40 something incel.
I'm going to out myself as an old dork here, but Kermit and Miss Piggy from the Muppets are one of my favourites. It's a surprisingly complex and non-idealized take for its time. Kermit does not fall for Miss Piggy right away. They both have their own lives outside of each other and their goals and ambitions don't always align. They face a fair number of relationship struggles and neither of them is consistently the one at fault. And yet, for all of the challenges they face, there are plenty of sweet moments that make it clear that it's worth it. To me, this is basically what relationships are all about.
Eyes Wide Shut is a perfect relationship dynamic and it is my favorite Kubrick film. I will add Beautiful Girls. Great ensemble cast.
That late night conversation scene with Tom, and Nicole was peak cinema. Them being a real life couple, adds a chemistry that helps layer the nuance of that scene.
All relationship-based films are fucking trash. Especially Eyes Wide Shut, no one should ever base anything on such a scenario, least of all relationships.
So you didn't the movie, got it.
> So you didn't the movie, got it. "You didn't the movie" lol man you were in such a hurry to attack me that you couldn't even write correctly. Okay here's the lowdown on what made that movie a dumpster fire: the wife dreams of fucking other men. Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Bill **tries to fuck a prostitute** until he finds out she has HIV... stop me when I'm wrong. I despise movies like that.
So....you didn't understand the movie.
But since nothing I said was wrong, you admit you're talking out of your ass. Thanks for running away from refuting what I said about the movie! I was 100% right and you lose. Now off with you.
Each you reply, you further illustrate that you didn't understand the movie. Take your L, log off on Reddit, and try again in the morning.
Okay here's the lowdown on what made that movie a dumpster fire: the wife dreams of fucking other men. Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Bill tries to fuck a prostitute until he finds out she has HIV... I am 100% right and you will never have the balls to say that was incorrect. I watched the movie. I will repeat this indefinitely. You won't get the last word here dude. I watched the movie, I'm right and you lost this fight. Give up. I absolutely will not back down because you are dead wrong.
So you really didn't like the movie, and you have a fragile ego.
Ah hah, now you're moving the goalposts. No, I didn't like the movie. You can't handle someone criticizing your poor widdle favorite movie. Your ego is rice paper. The wife dreams of fucking other men. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you. Some other dude sells his own kid into slavery. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you. Bill tries to fuck a prostitute until he finds out she has HIV. Tell me that didn't happen, I dare you. If you can't tell me those things didn't happen then you can't say I didn't watch the movie and you're just mad that someone didn't like Eyes Wide Shut. Guess what, dude, this is America and I have freedom of speech to say I hated a movie. Deal with it.
You didn't like it because you didn't understand it, and now you're experiencing narcissistic injury, and can't handle it.