Post: #1

Full disclosure - I'm 29 and had never seen this movie before tonight. While everyone remembers the restaurant scene- no one seems to talk about the rest of the movie.

The closest I could really describe the movie is that- if felt like a cinematic/movie version of Seinfeld. While the movie isn't amazing, it definitely deserves your attention and viewing if you never gave it a shot before. It's like a realistic version of "The Awful Truth" that came out a few years back. Same ideas, just 20+ years earlier.

The whole movie is actually on Youtube (in parts).
If you've never seen the movie, I suggest watching the first 3 parts (10 mins) to bring your interest level up





While the hair styles/clothing are really out of date - for a comedy 25+ years old- the humour has held up surprisingly well. While I know some people can complain here about the second half of the movie, considering his circumstances, it's hard not to understand Harry's actions.

I feel like a fool for avoiding this movie the whole time though.

Post: #2

Absolutely not. This film is feminist garbage at it's worst. This film set the standard for the romantic comedy genre and we've gotten nothing but filth from those types of movies ever since.

Basic characteristics.

Introductory scene shows attractive, but completely undesirable woman succeeding in a main dominated sphere. This convinces the audience, despite all evidence to the contrary, that she's a quality woman deserving of our respect, because she has a super important job.
Red-pill guy meets fucking stupid girl.
Guy finds fucking stupid girl annoying.
Fucking stupid girl thinks guy is a jerk. She want to get him out of her perfect life as quickly as possible.
Circumstances force them together.
Conversations take place and he learns to respect her views, bitchness, outspoken-ness and other unattractive traits.
She one-ups him on a number of occasions and general disrespects him as a human-being in front of others.
Red-pill guy realizes that NAWALT and that he's been wrong about women all along.
He uses a blowtorch and a pair of rusty scissors to cut of his balls and after sterilizing the wound, he places said balls in her purse.

Epilogue (not shown in film): The dude's daughters are whores and his sons are beta-bitches because he let an outspoken shrew with stupid ideas run the household.

Post: #3

(01-20-2016 11:50 PM)Suits Wrote:  -snip-
He uses a blowtorch and a pair of rusty scissors to cut of his balls and after sterilizing the wound, he places said balls in her purse.

Epilogue (not shown in film): The dude's daughters are whores and his sons are beta-bitches because he let an outspoken shrew with stupid ideas run the household.

Might as well just toss them in the garbage at that point.

Post: #4

(01-20-2016 11:57 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 11:50 PM)Suits Wrote:  -snip-
He uses a blowtorch and a pair of rusty scissors to cut of his balls and after sterilizing the wound, he places said balls in her purse.

Epilogue (not shown in film): The dude's daughters are whores and his sons are beta-bitches because he let an outspoken shrew with stupid ideas run the household.

Might as well just toss them in the garbage at that point.

I hear it's also a riot to run a dude's manhood through a garbage disposal.

Post: #5

Sharon's always been a stupid cunt, business as usual.

Post: #6

The scene below is oft referenced by aspiring feminists (the ones who are still in college or wasting their twenties in a corporate setting, pre-marriage, at which point they'll start letting a man pay for everything, having already proved their "independence").

It's used as "proof" of women's superiority by cunts who think that everything they see in a movie is the same as real life (when it suits their purposes).





Of course, us men know that women fucking suck in bed (not in the way you want them to) and can spot a stupid phony faking a good time from miles a way.

Also, note how this scene first equates a man's value to his ability to please women and then assures us that we are all worthless in bed.

Post: #7

There's a reason why this emotional smut porn is total chick crack.

Bitches love hooking up with bad boys. They prefer to do it having known him for as little time as possible, so that's why club hook ups are a reality.

Of course, you can't make a movie about women hooking up with bad boys they met 10 minutes earlier in the club, because

(1) it would be a very short movie
(2) it would expose how truly whorish, short-sighted and easily manipulated women are
(3) and in reality, women don't get to win when they hook up with a bad boy in the club.

Of course, bitches like to win and they like to pretend they always do (even though they rarely do better than eventually "settling" for a beta they aren't attracted to), so that's why these stupid cunt-fairy-tales always end with the aloof alpha getting locked down by some obnoxious bitch.

In reality, the plot would be a 15 minute pump and dump, so the romantic comedy was invented so that women could flick their clit in the theater while pretending that a woman would actually have zero interest in the ultra-alphas depicted in these movies.

Plot features are engineered so that the guy eventually begs to the bitch to be his and with that every woman is convinced that is she keeps being a bitch she can lock down a reformed alpha.

This smut should absolutely no be promoted here on the RVF. Media like this is hugely responsible for the stupid notions of grandeur floating around in most bitches' heads these days.

Protip: Flip the genders and these screenplays start to actually make more sense.

Post: #8

^ On point Suits. Truth be told.

Post: #9

(01-21-2016 12:16 AM)Suits Wrote:  The scene below is oft referenced by aspiring feminists (the ones who are still in college or wasting their twenties in a corporate setting, pre-marriage, at which point they'll start letting a man pay for everything, having already proved their "independence").

It's used as "proof" of women's superiority by cunts who think that everything they see in a movie is the same as real life (when it suits their purposes).





Of course, us men know that women fucking suck in bed (not in the way you want them to) and can spot a stupid phony faking a good time from miles a way.

Also, note how this scene first equates a man's value to his ability to please women and then assures us that we are all worthless in bed.

Meg Ryan's attitude reminds me of my first real, emotionally manipulative ex when I was clueless and probably closer to a gamma than anything else. (WB Meg Ryan at that age, and the girl she reminded me of was a freak in bed, for the reference). She was constantly trying to one-up and outbrain me. Wanted to lock me down hard and have kids when I was just getting into college. Dodged that bullet, broke up with her (she freaked and said that she's the one that dumps, not the men, hahahaha). Ended up getting married to her next boyfriend and started squirting kids out. Dealing with that got me out of gammatude and more into a hard beta, but it was a step up in the world.

Every now and then, I'll get bored with a one nighter or disappointed after yanking her clothes off and fake an orgasm or just stop because I don't want to be fucking this girl anymore. My enjoyment of having sex with a girl is very closely related with how much I want to be around her.

I forgot who, but someone once said "If women stopped getting orgasms, nothing would change. But, if men stopped getting orgasms, the world would come to an end." Or, how if men didn't receive the reward then they wouldn't bother inventing technology, building things, or taking care of women. Really wish I could remember who said that one.

Post: #10

Have to agree with Suits here 100%.

It's a pretty vapid, depressing little film. I can't decide which is more irritating: Billy Crystal's nonstop snark, or Meg Ryan's sickening American-girl entitlement mentality.

This social conditioning at its most subtle: the message is put out there that alpha-male traits and charisma don't pay off, and that if we only just surrender all our freedom and choices to the neurotic Americhick, everything will work out just right.

So Billy C. goes from confident, charismatic man to TV-remote turning beta bitch, consumed with one-itis.

Yayyyy.

Watching these two just makes one squirm.

(Oh, and I stand by my analysis.)

Post: #11

I remember a few things about this movie:

- Meg Ryan was very WB
- Meg Ryan turned herself from very WB to only WB with ball-gag, because she's a typical loud neurotic entitled American girl
- Carrie Fisher hit the Wall hard!
- Billy Crystal turned from a cool guy with his "men and women can never be friends" speech at the beginning to a snarky faggotty bitch by the end

Post: #12

I saw this movie years ago on a cinema date, and remember nothing about it.

philosophical_recovery ' Wrote:  Every now and then, I'll get bored with a one nighter or disappointed after yanking her clothes off and fake an orgasm or just stop because I don't want to be fucking this girl anymore. My enjoyment of having sex with a girl is very closely related with how much I want to be around her.

I've got above-average sexual stamina. (It's easy enough to cultivate if you're fit and have a disciplined mind, and there's more than enough books out there on the subject).

Yet I've been with a few girls who probably thought I was entirely average.

The difference being: I'd start having sex with them, and then they'd do or say something so repulsive, stupid, quasi-masculine or conceited that I'd be so turned off that I'd lose any more interest in having sex with them, particularly the marathon session a beautiful, feminine woman might inspire in me.

Women get VERY vindictive if you sexually reject them, so I learnt the easiest way to end things was to fake an orgasm. They're used to low stamina two pump chumps anyway. My vanity was less important than making a efficient, clean end to the situation.

Three basic rules:

1. Women think every man they meet - even ones way out of their league - would sleep with them in a heartbeat, even secretly.

2. Women think their pussies are magical pleasure palaces that we are lucky to access, and therefore completely override a male's ability to be repulsed by their personality, even before sex. (Back in the pre-SJW days, a loss of interest pre-sex was always coupled with an accusation of homosexuality by a woman).

3. Women think all men are so overwhelmed by the pleasure their pussies offer that the male orgasm is inevitable, and, as such, the majority of them have no idea that men might even fake one, and even if they did, it would never be with them. I mean, they're THAT hot, and we're lucky to be in there, right?

I haven't had to fake one for years, since I stopped sleeping with Leftie Uni Chicks.

Quote:I forgot who, but someone once said "If women stopped getting orgasms, nothing would change. But, if men stopped getting orgasms, the world would come to an end."

Women are the sex who can orgasm doing abdominal exercises, and even with that incentive, most can't be bothered.

Post: #13

There's a reason why the OP (and many other red pill men) find this movie to be admirable and awesome: because today's culture is so extremely starved for any realistic scenes or red pill truths that even seeing a short glimmer in an old comedy makes them feel as if they had won the jackpot.

Therefore a simple explanation of why men and women can't be friends, even if it's trampled later in the movie, becomes something to be fetishized and coveted, no matter how bad the rest of the movie might suck. Put simply, it's like seeing an alien - you might hate it or love it, but either way you find it fascinating because you know it doesn't belong in your environment.

Post: #14

What I really dislike about women like Meg Ryan in the movie is just how fake their entire personality and persona is.

1.They use their mouths to talk about how big, bad and tough they are with them telling off their boss/coworkers in corporate world and how if if a 200lb LB aggressive man tried to take their designer purse off them they would wrestle it out of his hands and show him what it means to be a woman.

2. They talk about how big of freaks in bed they are, how men can't satisfy her and that she don't need no man.

3. They talk about how friendly they are and how many friends they have.

4. They talk about how kids would just make their life worse.

In reality we know how fake it is.

These women are scared little girls with infinite insecurities and hate for themselves. They know they are cunts with insufferable personalities but rationalize it away.

1. They know they aren't tough. Which is why they talk about so much. Everyone knows that a 1 time 2 hour class on self defense isn't going to defend you against and stronger and more aggressive opponent.

What they did to their boss and coworkers was just bitchiness trying to find someone to yell at because she didn't do her job and wanted to shift responsibility to someone else.

2. These girls are usually the most boring in bed. They either lay in one spot and make fake moan noises or they are over the top loud and moving in ways that just isn't enjoyable for either party. They really do this because they want to hide the fact they don't like getting pumped and dumped by guys they can't lock down so they fake wild and crazy sex on the first day to hook them. They don't seem to recognize its their shitty personalities that drive them away so they say I don't need no man.

3. They talk about how friendly they are and name drop all kinds of people that are just acquaintances. Everytime they do something with someone the whole world has to hear but really they are lonely as fuck and go home alone and eat a frozen chicken Alfredo dinner and cry over a tub of chocolate cookie dough ice cream.

4. They crave children deep down and know they could even possibly save her from being such a shallow, fake and empty bitch. Again they rationalize it away saying it would take away all that free time from netlixing and taking dick from men who barely even like fucking her anymore.

Post: #15

Damn Suits, good stuff!

Post: #16

And lets not forget how Meg Ryan fucked up her features before she hit the wall. Lips, cheeks and forehead all had work and she looked like every other surgery dreg.

Post: #17

--------------------------------------------------

Post: #18

(01-20-2016 11:50 PM)Suits Wrote:  Absolutely not. This film is feminist garbage at it's worst. This film set the standard for the romantic comedy genre and we've gotten nothing but filth from those types of movies ever since.

Basic characteristics.

Introductory scene shows attractive, but completely undesirable woman succeeding in a main dominated sphere. This convinces the audience, despite all evidence to the contrary, that she's a quality woman deserving of our respect, because she has a super important job.
Red-pill guy meets fucking stupid girl.
Guy finds fucking stupid girl annoying.
Fucking stupid girl thinks guy is a jerk. She want to get him out of her perfect life as quickly as possible.
Circumstances force them together.
Conversations take place and he learns to respect her views, bitchness, outspoken-ness and other unattractive traits.
She one-ups him on a number of occasions and general disrespects him as a human-being in front of others.
Red-pill guy realizes that NAWALT and that he's been wrong about women all along.
He uses a blowtorch and a pair of rusty scissors to cut of his balls and after sterilizing the wound, he places said balls in her purse.

Epilogue (not shown in film): The dude's daughters are whores and his sons are beta-bitches because he let an outspoken shrew with stupid ideas run the household.

Post: #19

Yep, this flick was the beginning of the "rom com" genre. I remember when it came out; women were gushing.

Three positives about the movie:

1. No smartphone/computer addicted zombies, obviously.
2. Meg "Duckface" Ryan was at her peak and Carrie "Jabba, Jr." Fisher was still bangable.
3. Zero fatties, shaved heads, piercings, tats, etc.

That time period, the late 80s/early 90s was good - great compared to today.

Post: #20

Robreke, I think you meant

Post: #21

AnonymousBosch:

"If women stopped getting orgasms, nothing would change. But, if men stopped getting orgasms, the world would come to an end."

GOLD !

Post: #22

(01-21-2016 08:56 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Robreke, I think you meant

^yeah, yours is the 'before' shot. Mine's the 'after'

Post: #23

(01-20-2016 11:50 PM)Suits Wrote:  Absolutely not. This film is feminist garbage at it's worst. This film set the standard for the romantic comedy genre and we've gotten nothing but filth from those types of movies ever since.

(01-21-2016 12:03 AM)Suits Wrote:  I hear it's also a riot to run a dude's manhood through a garbage disposal.

(01-21-2016 12:31 AM)Suits Wrote:  This smut should absolutely no be promoted here on the RVF. Media like this is hugely responsible for the stupid notions of grandeur floating around in most bitches' heads these days.

Jokes aside....I totally agree with Suits 100%.
Someone needed to do a total smackdown of this alpha to beta cuck "classic" bullshit movie and the entire feminist indoctrinated film & media industry.
Well done Suits !

Post: #24

(01-21-2016 09:53 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  Jokes aside....I totally agree with Suits 100%.
Someone needed to do a total smackdown of this alpha to beta cuck "classic" bullshit movie and the entire feminist indoctrinated film & media industry.

Whilst amusing, I'm more surprised that, apparently, this twenty-seven year old film that was only a minor success at the time is still considered relevant. This is like me delivering a withering smackdown of 'David and Lisa' in 1989, which was a moderate hit at the time.

Girl's toxic attitudes are being shaped by Beyoncé, Girl Power Feminism Light and Academia, not some ancient Meg Ryan movie.

The Top 10 grossing films for that year:

1. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade Paramount Pictures / Lucasfilm $474,171,806
2. Batman Warner Bros. / PolyGram $411,348,924
3. Back to the Future Part II Universal Pictures $331,950,002
4. Look Who's Talking TriStar Pictures $296,999,813
5. Dead Poets Society Touchstone Pictures $235,860,116
6. Lethal Weapon 2 Warner Bros. $227,853,986
7. Honey, I Shrunk the Kids Walt Disney Pictures $222,724,172
8. Ghostbusters II Columbia Pictures $215,394,738
9. The Little Mermaid Walt Disney Pictures $184,155,863
10. Born on the Fourth of July Universal Pictures $161,001,698

I can't remember the last time I heard anyone mentioned a good half of those films or more, and they made a lot more than the modest $93 million return of WHMS.

Post: #25

(01-21-2016 02:47 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  Whilst amusing, I'm more surprised that, apparently, this twenty-seven year old film that was only a minor success at the time is still considered relevant. This is like me delivering a withering smackdown of 'David and Lisa' in 1989, which was a moderate hit at the time.

Girl's toxic attitudes are being shaped by Beyoncé, Girl Power Feminism Light and Academia, not some ancient Meg Ryan movie.

It may not be that relevant now, but what "When Harry Met Sally" did was start a serious and dangerous trend in a genre of movies which brainwashed a generation of women (and blue pill men) in the 1990s. Films about relationships between men and women are still being made in this style today because of the success of this film 27 years ago.

"Pretty Woman" which came out a year later in 1990 was equally as toxic.
It's painful to watch captain save-a-hoe Richard Gere (and the hotel manager) get oneitis for a hooker with no redeeming qualities as a woman either in terms of her looks or personality. I recently re-watched it after more than a decade with a red pill mindset and I was just nauseated. I didn't realize at the time how bad it was.

Richard Gere's business partner (who is portrayed as the villain in the movie) is actually the only sensible person in that film concerned that this oneitis will destroy the company. This was a film that glamorized prostitution, beta providing, and white knighting in a way that it had never been before.

Films like this did more damage to women's behavior and thinking in one evening, then 10 years of politicians pushing for "gender equality".