And the review is in! No surprise, it's awful
share
I wasn't expecting it to get good reviews. It's a pro MRA documentary, of course it wasn't gonne get reviewed well. It's probably good though.
The legend of the dog faced woman.
MovieChat Forums > The Red Pill (2017) Discussion > And the review is in! No surprise, it's ...
Review from the same org that specifically denied her advertisement with them (instead she spent more $ and advertised with the new york times).
If an org is so biased that it refuses your ad, then it is obviously incapable of an impartial view. Cassies attempt to advertise with them was a masterstroke, since she effectively revealed their bias to the world for all to see.
For the voice, pretending to write an impartial review would be the most woeful example of a lack of journalistic integrity we've seen in quite some time.
So I did a search to try to find an article about this and all that turned up was an unsubstantiated post on reddit, which isn't a credible source. It might confirm your personal bias, so you believe it, but I don't. Anyone can claim anything on reddit.
As for bias, Cassie Jaye took money from the people who are the subject of her "documentary." That's ethically unsound. Of course, she also tried to trick people into thinking that she won an award at the Cannes film festival, like some charlatan.
I think the review is valid. It's what reviewers do. Nothing in your post seems to be grounded in reality, whereas the review is there for all to see. No conspiracy theory needed to explain it, just a bad movie. It happens.
"No contributors have any creative control of any kind over the film - that is in fact PROHIBITED by Kickstarter rules. The demand for creative control is what led to the Kickstarter in the first place - Cassie has refused to surrender that." - Janet Bloomfield
Cassie Jaye approached film producers for backing but was refused by them all because her film was not biased towards feminism. She wanted to make a fair and balanced film about the MRA movement. Had she pitched a feminist lense film or an MRA hit piece, she would've been swimming in money. Imho, Cassie Jaye kept her integrity and made the film she set out to make.
For the record, I have not yet seen the film nor am I an MRA, MGTOW or member of any sub group. I do, however, support equality for everyone.
Cassie Jaye approached film producers for backing but was refused by them all because her film was not biased towards feminism.
That makes as zero sense on moral and ethical grounds. Feminism is going to be the default value of anyone who has any kind of moral compass. That’s the equivalent of accusing someone of being biased towards decency.
She wanted to make a fair and balanced film about the MRA movement.
Not plausible in the slightest when the movie was funded by MRA idiots. Human psychology is so sensitive to biases that science needs double blind controls to prevent scientists from skewing data without being aware they are doing it. There’s no way a bloody “documentary” creator is somehow going to be immune.
I do, however, support equality for everyone.
If that’s true, and I really doubt it, then you should be proud to call yourself a feminist. share
You're not fooling anyone. we are embarrassed for you and your pain fueled resentment. You know damn well this movie isn't misogynistic, not are the majority of MRA's. Just stop being soo hateful and unable to look at other peoples perspective. this isn't about misogyny, but about misandry..but these days, talking about misandry is misogyny to people like you who are driving a wedge between men and women who should be unconditionally loving and supporting each other equally...But what do I know? I'm just a such a woman hating misogynist.
shareGuffaw! You only have to see the anger in your comments to see your true motives.
Back to your feminist hole now.
By the way - I saw this last night, and the theatre was full then, too.
@Faustus5
"Feminism is going to be the default value of anyone who has any kind of moral compass."
You are a textbook example of a zealot. Everyone else who finds fault with your world view is a bigot, huh?
Tell me, did you watch the documentary? If so, what is your response to the various issues it raised that are almost exclusively detrimental to men?
You are a textbook example of a zealot.
Actually, that is exactly what you are.
Everyone else who finds fault with your world view is a bigot, huh?
No, everyone who is not a feminist is a bigot. I don't care if they personally identify with the word, since propaganda from losers like you has made people who are essentially feminists to the core hesitant to identify with it as a label.
Feminism means, quoting from a dictionary, "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities". If you don't fully and enthusiastically endorse that belief, you are nothing but scum.
Tell me, did you watch the documentary? If so, what is your response to the various issues it raised that are almost exclusively detrimental to men?
Of course I haven't. Hardly any has, and hardly anyone ever will. I frankly wouldn't devote one second of my life to any project funded by MRA bottom feeders. The chances of it actually presenting a balanced and objective analysis are next to zero.
As for MRA issues, a broken clock is right twice a day, and on that principle I'll grant that there may be a few trifling examples of legitimate points they have to raise. But mostly these organizations are by and for insecure, women-hating, utterly worthless morons. share
Feminism means, quoting from a dictionary, "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities"
Feminism is defined by the acts of feminists. To the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities I call being normal. share
Feminism is defined by the acts of feminists.
Real world feminists, not phantoms made up by idiotic, insecure men who see their privilege diminishing. share
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/01/why-we-should-close-womens-prisons-and-treat-their-crimes-more-fairly
Now go troll someone else. MRM gains movement despite feminist apologists like you, the movie was still made, and it is still being shown. And it will always be there in history, documenting what 'real world feminists' do.
MRM gains movement despite feminist apologists like you. . .
Evidence, please?
. . .the movie was still made, and it is still being shown.
Almost no one will ever see this movie or care about it since it is about a meaningless fringe "movement" that is and shall ever remain utterly powerless and impotent. share
Almost no one will ever see this movie or care about it since it is about a meaningless fringe "movement" that is and shall ever remain utterly powerless and impotent.
Not true. Saw the film last night in a theater that was nearly full. share
Not true. Saw the film last night in a theater that was nearly full.
If you really think this is an accurate measure of the movie's overall viewership, you are a sadly misinformed. share
Your presence here trying your best to troll is all the proof needed.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Btw, you should be very afraid trying to troll a woman's film. That's cyber violence.
Oh, it's SUCH A fringe movement that only affects half the worlds population.
So fringe! ;-)
the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities
So you cherry-picked the one dictionary definition by Merriam-Webster that worded it in such a way as to make it sound like actual equality for both genders. Good job. That's what (third wave) feminists want you to believe. The funny thing is, that definition by M-W has only recently been changed to what it says now, so that it better fits the feminist party line.
The problem is that since it was changed, the quote is missing some context. It doesn't mention the basis of the equality like other dictionary definitions do. Know what the rest of the dictionaries say?
noun: feminism
the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
synonyms: the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female emancipation, women's rights;
informal: women's lib
You know what NONE of them (including yours) make any mention of? The advocacy of men's rights. Feminism is strictly about women's rights, as compared to men's rights, about making women equal to men. An admirable goal indeed. One that was met a long time ago. Now women have superior rights, and going by the dictionary definition they should in fact be arguing to have their rights reduced, or arguing on behalf of making men equal to women.
But no, feminism is now a misogynistic entity, because you think that if a woman doesn't toe the party line she's obviously a weak-willed victim who isn't empowered enough to form her own opinions, and filled with internalized misogyny.
If you have any problem whatsoever with identifying as an egalitarian instead of a feminist, then YOU are the bigoted oppressive scum.
Tommy... how's the peeping? share
So you cherry-picked the one dictionary definition by Merriam-Webster that worded it in such a way as to make it sound like actual equality for both genders.
I picked the most popular definition according to Google. You obviously don't know what "cherry picking" means. And it doesn't just "sound" like equality. It is what the term means in reality.
The funny thing is, that definition by M-W has only recently been changed to what it says now, so that it better fits the feminist party line.
Ah, so you are a conspiracy theory spewing nutcase. Got it.
The word means what the dictionary says. Grow up and deal with it.
You know what NONE of them (including yours) make any mention of? The advocacy of men's rights.
Correct. Feminism has always been about the struggle for female equality since men have had all the power over the history of the human race and continue to enjoy advantages and privileges, though these are slowly being eroded--which of course drives the Neanderthals nuts.
An admirable goal indeed. One that was met a long time ago. Now women have superior rights. . .
Yes, you've already established your credentials as a deluded nutcase out of touch with reality. No need to rub it in.
If you have any problem whatsoever with identifying as an egalitarian instead of a feminist, then YOU are the bigoted oppressive scum.
I'm not buying your idiotic spin. I'm a feminist and an egalitarian both. But since I recognize reality, I know men still have privileges that need to be eroded. This is not to say that there aren't privileges women enjoy that men do not, but they are almost always trivial in comparison.
share
Nothing but ad hominem attacks. I suppose I really shouldn't be surprised.
Tommy... how's the peeping?
You're an ignorant and shameful creature. Men face a lot of problems and their not trivial. It's sad to know that nasty trolls like you exits. You're the reasons why male victims of rape and sexual assault don't come forward. You're a cancer of this society. You do not believe in equity rights if you ignore men's disadvantages. Go back to your troll hole.
shareYou're the reasons why male victims of rape and sexual assault don't come forward.
You MRA types come across looking like deluded lunatics when you post this stuff. You realize that, don't you? share
Ok, you're officially a troll. It's not worth responding to you and I urge everybody who was going to respond to reconsider.
shareClearly you never learned the meaning of the word "troll". People who disagree with you are not trolls. People who call others out on fact-free crazed conspiracy theory crap are not trolls. People who call others out for hysterical over-reaction are not trolls.
I'm not a troll. I'm just good at calling BS when I see it, and you MRA types have a well known and solidly established reputation for being purveyors of complete and utter BS.
Faustus has been a thorn on many different boards. Ignore him. He gave away his scrotum to the sisterhood a long time ago.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.
Feminism means, quoting from a dictionary, "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities"
(Would you mind defining racism for me?) LOL share
Feminism means, quoting from a dictionary, "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities".
Which would be relevant if third-wave feminism conformed to this definition, but it doesn't (although the first and second waves did). Twenty-five years ago I was a battered husband living with a binge alcoholic who regularly threatened my life and who was laughed at when I searched for help to regain my independence. Three subsequent lawyers told me to forget trying to gain custody of my infant daughter despite my ex-wife's violent behaviour and regular impaired driving since "judges never give custody to the father". If anything this attitude is even worse now. Advocating for men doesn't mean you are advocating against women. Any honest debater would acknowledge that, but you and your ilk are incapable of honest debate.
I'm sure you don't even have the honesty to actually watch the documentary before trashing it. share
Your personal anecdotes are not a scientific, objective measure of anything and therefore mean nothing to me.
shareAnd your dismissal of a real event supporting my argument which just happens to have happened to me personally tells me all I need to know about whether your position has any moral component, which it clearly doesn't.
There was more in my post than my anecdote, which I notice you didn't bother to respond to.
If that’s true, and I really doubt it, then you should be proud to call yourself a feminist
(Feminism owns the concept of equality about as much as Christianity owns the concept of morality. In short, they don't) LOL share
(Feminism owns the concept of equality about as much as Christianity owns the concept of morality. In short, they don't)
Your status as a complete ignoramus has been duly noted. share
(Ah, so you believe Christians own the concept of morality then?) LOL
share(Ah, so you believe Christians own the concept of morality then?) LOL
I don't even know what that means and, as a mindless troll, you don't, either.
I do know that as a raw historical fact, feminism has been a force for fighting against oppression and instantiating gender equality in the law. But facts are just troublesome obstacles for drooling morons. share
I don't even know what that means and, as a mindless troll, you don't, either
(Then maybe you should learn how to read, I can make it easier for you, if you wish) LOL
I do know that as a raw historical fact, feminism has been a force for fighting against oppression and instantiating gender equality in the law. But facts are just troublesome obstacles for drooling morons.
(And? What does that have to do with anything that I've said to you thus far?) LOL share
And? What does that have to do with anything that I've said to you thus far?
Of course what I wrote went right over your head.
Your worthless stupid arse is now going on ignore. share
(Nah, you just said something that you somehow think applies to me even though I've never questioned the goals of feminism, just your implication that someone who is for equality is automatically a feminist as if they've got a patent on equality or something. But you couldn't comprehend that and have no real argument other than psychobabble, so you choose to put me on ignore because you're dumb and can't handle having your views questioned) LOL
shareThis is Faustus5 personal information and identity:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/brian-peterson-12951a70
Minneapolis, MinnesotaThis means the loser is in his late 40s/early 50s and spends his whole day posting trash in this board. If you need to find any extra information you can start at:
Printing
Education
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
Bachelor's degree, Philosophy
1986 – 1991
650 Third Ave South, Minneapolis, MN 55402or ask at the Cenveo office in Minnesota.
Found thanks to this: http://community.beliefnet.com/faustus5
You're welcome. share
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDxKBuSkoxY
Why don't you hear the truth from Cassie herself ^^. The attacks have been coming from feminists. The lies have been coming from feminists and the film was not funded by MRAs. It was self funded initially, with Kickstarter getting it over the line.
You've been presented with a factual statement about funding sources, yet still peddle the same lie that it was funded by MRAs. That tells me it is you and other feminists peddling the same lie that are lacking a moral compass rather than being the arbiters of morality
If she wanted to take the easy path and make money, she'd have taken cash from feminists, slammed the MRM, and got funding grants. The fact she went for the truth, despite the obstacles put in her way, tells me a lot about her integrity. It's not like her mind was changed in a short period, it was over a few years and she would have looked into studies and statistics to verify the statements made.
"As for bias, Cassie Jaye took money from the people who are the subject of her "documentary." That's ethically unsound."
So is the way that MRA's(I'm not one but know a few) is portrayed in the media. Addicting Info,(aka the answer to the question nobody asked: "What would Pravda been like if the Soviet Union had the internet?") accused them of celebrating the death of some girl at College without any proof that the people celebrating was MRA's. Also the "only men and mostly white men", even though the most prominent MRA is A WOMAN(Girl Writes What?). I'd call that biased and unethical. Unless your idea of unbiased is making them look like absolute dreck of humanity than well hey.
To me that's as unethical as trying to say all feminists are like Big Red or trigalypuff.
You are making the mistake of thinking you are more important than you actually are.
Oh and let's talk about unethical attitudes iamvox like the unethical(and illegal) moves that feminists have done against MRA meetings:
Blocking doorways(fire hazard)
Pulling fire alarm
Assaulting both verbally(you f**cking scuuummm!! Exact quote) and physically people attending meeting and even the police.
You are making the mistake of thinking you are more important than you actually are.
*beep* scum!!"
Idiots protesting Warren Farrell.
The same Warren Farrel that was a prominent 2nd wave feminist and on the board of directors for NOW multiple times.... but then he was attacked by the murderous,invisible,three-eyed,flying swamp demon known as The Patriarchy and was infected with a nasty case of Misogyny which of course has no known cure.
..or maybe he just realized they were going batsh*t insane and got the hell out.
One or the other.
If feminists can't even get along with people who share their label,they damn sure don't have any time for the evil menz.
she won an award at the Cannes film festival, like some charlatan.
Cannes is a breeding ground charlatans snot nosed charlatans
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. share
And here are three reviews that say otherwise:
http://theralphretort.com/theralphreview-the-red-pill-1009016/
http://cinesourcemagazine.com/index.php?/site/dschwartz_fa/the_red_pill_cassie_jayes_fall_down_the_rabbit_hole/
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/10/08/the-red-pill-cassie-jayes-movie-that-feminists-cant-afford-women-watching/
You feminist suckups can scream and cry all you like, your time is up. The truth is out and it's only going to get louder and harder to bury from here. You wanted a gender war, you've bloody well got one.
The post above yours says that the paper I linked to (the only review available, see Rotten Tomatoes) had a political axe to grind, so you link to political sites, two of which just seem to talk about feminism rather than the subject of the film, which is absolutely not feminism? Okay.
Anyway, I can find people online who say that the earth is flat. Legitimate reviewers only, please. So far, Rotten Tomatoes has exactly one review for the film, the one I linked. Waiting for more, but I'm thinking that the film doesn't merit more attention. A bad film is a bad film, whatever the subject.
Except you didn't link an RT review, you linked Village Voice, which is hardly an unbiased, apolitical source.
Since you're that delusional that you can't even keep track of what you link to, I'm not wasting any more time on you. Another pathetic cuck goes on my ignore list.
Oh I totally misinterpreted your OP. I thought you meant "No surprise it's awful" as in, no surprise the reviewer gave an awful review because it's a film about the MRM. I thought it was meant ironically.
sharehad a political axe to grind, so you link to political sites
And how would you classify the political bias of Village Voice?
I'm thinking that the film doesn't merit more attention
I'm thinking that a film that is being actively suppressed by special interests is not likely to get many reviews since not many are getting a chance to see it. Funny how that works. share
You wanted a gender war, you've bloody well got one.
This "war" will consist of little else than know-nothing idiots like you making harmless, meaningless posts on the internet and other know nothing idiots making "documentaries" that no one watches.
Which means feminism has won. The spectacle of your impotent frustration is music to my ears. share
That review came out before the movie opened. Either the author saw an illegal copy or he wrote a hit piece before seeing the movie and it was published too early.
Either way I can't give his criticism any weight.
Ummm, do you not know how movie reviewing works? Didn't you ever see the old Siskel and Ebert show? They actually shot a half hour show, reviewing films that were coming out that week, films that *gasp* the general public hadn't seen yet.
In Friday papers all across the nation are reviews of films that are opening that exact same day.
Seriously, what world do you live in that you don't know that reviewers can get copies of films (sent to them by the studios because they want the reviews) so they can review them and, hopefully, drum up business for the opening weekend box office?
This is a movie site, yeah? It's shocking that people don't know this at a movie site.
Actually major movies don't send copies to reviewers, unless they are Academy members. They do private screenings. Otherwise there would be illegal copies flooding the internet before a film's release. I'm sure you knew that though, because you are so smart.
Obviously small filmmakers like Cassie Jaye won't be able to afford to do that.
I'm not sure YOU know how movie reviews work.
Hint: reviewers don't get advance copies unless they are Academy members.
Fool.
At the bottom of the review it says it was written with the help of David Futrelle, the guy who once send the movie's director vaguely threatening emails and falsely accused her of lying about winning awards for her films.
[deleted]
Reviews from people incplicated in said documentary are never going to be good. its like a murderer giving thumbs up to his judge for telling him to go to an electric chair.
------------------------------------------------
The spirit of abysmal despair
And "a" review is in. Which means a single reviewer doesn't like it.
I listened to a podcast (Dirty Sexy Monogamy) which features a feminist, Gigi Engle her partner Mike Fishbein.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/we-took-the-red-pill/id1157219493?i=1000376439747&mt=2
What you hear is how thought provoking the film was for both of them. And then it gets political with her coming back to with feminist cliche's about the patriarchy and men.
I will say I wonder whether Mike is now having second thoughts about Gigi after listening to the podcast.
There's enough in the film to make it interesting, even for those who have concluded before seeing it that MRAs are all mouth breathers who live in their mom's basement.
[deleted]
And Karen Straughan did a three video commentary on this podcast exposing Gigi for the lying, nasty, narcissistic piece of *beep* she really is. I'd really love to see Karen hand Gigi her ass in real time.
shareOh, gee. Perhaps you can tell us what other respected periodicals with integrity have to say. Maybe Jezebel or Mary Sue?
Feminists will hate this movie because it exposes the maggots of the movement more than anything else. Cue the crappy feminists coming out saying this movie is awful, also cue the normal feminists coming out with the No True Scotsman fallacy to dismiss the former.
Sadly, or not so sadly, "feminism" in the west means "idiot with no grasp on reality," at best!