THE TRANNIES ARE SEETHING ABOUT THE NEW HORROR FILM WEAPONS (2025)

The trannies think the main villian of the movie Weapons (2025) is a representation of the whole grooming tranny community.

This letterboxd movie review has over 300 likes and counting.
https://letterboxd.com/miseryminister/film/weapons-2025/

>Two nightmares:

>1. Justine wanders down the darkened halls of Maybrook Elementary. In her classroom, she finds the seventeen students whose disappearance has so shaken the community. Their heads are down on their desks, rendering all of them anonymous silhouettes. Only one student raises his head to meet Justine’s gaze: Alex, the lone child who did not flee into the night. His grinning face is caked in garish, clownish make-up.

>>512613275 (OP)
>2. Gruff, masculine dad Archer pursues his son Matthew into a mirrored replica of their home, presided over by a giant floating AR-15. Eventually he finds the boy nestled under the Batman blanket in his bedroom. The child’s expression is blank. Nevertheless, Archer tearfully declares his grief for the boy’s loss. In a flash, however, we see that his son is no longer in the bed: he has been replaced by an old woman, wigged in gaudy orange, her howling countenance smeared with the same excessive make-up that plastered Alex’s features in the first dream.

>If Zach Cregger thought these scenes had anything to communicate in relation to school shootings, as that symbolic assault rifle would indicate, the idea is hopelessly muddled. There is nothing about the content of these dreams, nor the film’s scenario in general, that even remotely resembles a school shooting: “communal tragedy involving children” is about as specific as the parallel gets. Instead, the imagery Cregger has chosen—the invasion of safe, familiar spaces (the home, the classroom), monstrous femininity, and, most centrally, the corruption of children, laden with unnervingly sexual implications (the make-up, the stranger in the child’s bed)—directly recalls, intentionally or not, decades of conservative moral panic about children.

>Initially, the movie postures at commenting on this very phenomenon. The parents of the missing children, at a loss as to how to explain the disappearances, seek an external actor on which to vent their rage. The significantly more disturbing possibility—that the children might have chosen to do this for reasons that remain obscure—is unfathomable for them, because reactionaries cannot recognize children as autonomous agents. In the mob’s search for a scapegoat, they irrationally single out Justine. The comment on the ongoing persecution of teachers in this country is obvious enough.

>>512613319
>However, the film that follows conclusively proves that the mob of parents was, in fact, justified in its conspiratorial paranoia: it merely misidentified the target. Archer, who practically berated Justine at the PTA meeting, is rendered a figure of sympathy, simply a heartbroken dad in search of answers. The authorities fail to provide those answers, so he has to resort to investigating on his own. Public institutions like the police or the educational system are insufficient to protect or save children. Only the moral vigilance of parents, aided by extralegal efforts, will suffice.

>What we discover is that the perp is not the humble schoolteacher, but a hidden interloper in the idyllic suburban community, a “parasite” in fact, who takes advantage of trusting citizens’ charity in order to corrupt and control them. That figure is Gladys, Alex’s “aunt”. Her presence is distinguished, first and foremost, by a flamboyant performance of hyperfemininity. Her entrance to the school late in the film is met with bewildered stares from principal and secretary both: her unsightly orange wig, her vulgar make-up, and her outrageously campy outfit comprise a failed performance of “normal” femininity that immediately marks her out as Other. A predator unconvincingly disguised as a sweet old lady, she has first infiltrated Alex’s family unit (all of whom, significantly, are virtual strangers to her: danger remains essentially extrinsic to the family) in the interest of infiltrating the community as a whole. Her primary agenda: “weaponizing” the bodies of the missing children to rejuvenate her declining health and appearance.

>>512613367
>I hope these descriptions have already made clear most of what I find objectionable about the movie. Weapons reifies, in unambiguous terms, the same anxieties that underpin trans- and homophobic panics in contemporary America. In that respect, Weapons bears significant narrative and thematic similarities to Longlegs, which also thoughtlessly deployed signifiers of monstrous androgyny. But where Longlegs’ horrors were pastiched from its retro influences (the Satanic Panic, glam rock, Silence of the Lambs, etc.), Weapons leverages more generalized misogynistic tropes culled from witch lore (primarily the vanity of older women) while also uncritically exploiting the modern right’s pervasive paranoia about the lives of children outside the home, explicitly linked to the threat of queerness. That paranoia is currently prompting a wave of horrifying political repression in the United States. As an artist, Cregger’s response is simply: what if all that shit were real?*

>>512613275 (OP)
>>512613319
this thread is advertising
no one is mad, no one has even seen this shit yet
+ literal faggot nigger jew couple uses the same thumbnail as OP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EI2VFQ3o1_o&t=65s
i will not watch your movie
sage and kys

>>512613396
>This argument about the film’s ideological implications doesn’t even touch its more immediately evident failures, mainly that it is mind-numbingly tedious. I have no idea what anyone is talking about describing this movie as “fun”. The pointlessly recursive structure takes the longest possible route to an exceedingly conventional end, accomplishing little save clarifying how X person wound up in X place, the mechanics of the witch’s rituals, and other uninteresting particulars. The dullest detour involves two consecutive chapters about a cop and the homeless youth he harasses, a bafflingly ill-considered plotline. The cop, Paul, is portrayed as worn down by his nagging, hysterical wife; the homeless youth, James, is a contemptuously painted object of comic relief. At two points, Paul is penetrated by James’ needles, prompting instant, verbalized panic on Paul’s part about the possibility of AIDS. The imagery of puncture and drawn blood is a visual rhyme with both Gladys’ ritual and the self-inflicted wounds on the faces of Alex’s parents. The film thus links Gladys’ sorcery of social contagion to the transmission of AIDS. (Somehow, despite myself, I have circled back to discussing those pesky ideological implications. It’s almost as if they’re an unavoidable consequence of the film’s narrative!)

>>512613423
>In the end, the witch is torn to pieces by her victims and the parents are reunited with their children. There is no relief, of course, because the biggest fear of all is that once an outsider has touched your child, he or she will never be the same. In the final shot, we track in on Matthew’s hollowed out eyes, slung over his protective father’s shoulder. The meaning might as well be framed in scare quotes: IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE!

>*A word about coding. Neither Longlegs nor Gladys “are trans/gay”: this claim has no textual support, and it’s not one I am making here. Instead, I am arguing that both characters draw on a visual and symbolic language tied to trans-/homophobic stereotyping: in a word, that they are “coded”. I would hope it’d be unnecessary to clarify this, but since I’ve previously been accused of believing in stereotypes for identifying them, I thought it best to spell

Looks gross. You can keep this one to yourself, Yandex. I shan't be watching this filth.

The zoomers hate it too.

>>512613275 (OP)
So yeah this sounds like some psychobullshit The Cell type movie with floating rifles and troons... nah I don't want to watch this slop none of this interests me.
I'm sure all of this is very deep and esoteric to someone but not me. To me it's "give a Jew psychedelics, you get this weird mildly disturbing shit and in the confusion debate the supposed deep meanings of every nuance." Nah forget all that.

>>512613275 (OP)
Explain why all of Hollywood is so aggressively in the bag for this movie and its director?

Weapons doesn't push a Leftist agenda, instead it meekly uses imagery to satiate both the left and the right, the left by briefly showing an AR-15 as a cryptic symbol in a dream and by briefly depicting "witch hunt" hysteria in public schools, the right with the conspiratorial premise of child abduction that safely veers into King slop but wraps it in a villain with a tranny visage, hence why OP is shilling it.

Weapons is just a retread of Longlegs in nearly every way but it's suburb mystery setting is more palatable and accessible to normies who wanna gasp and clap and escape the reality that Israel has violently murdered and tortured exponentially more children than some Pennywise Tranny Granny.

F for that comedian guy fell off his balcony. Hollywood and "critics" are way too glazing of this movie almost like it's an /x/ish seance ritual.

>>512613275 (OP)

>>512613478
Tbf though Weapons was heavily promoted as being about a conspiracy, and most expected this to be related to MK Ultra type brainwashing or a more complex cabal, not some witch on a pension who snatches hair. What's ironic is that a lot of normies wanted a Pizzagate spiderweb with a boogyman component.

>>512613275 (OP)
I am? I mean it's the first time I heard about this movie and don't really plan to watch it because I refuse to watch horrors

>>512613396
>>512613452
>Weapons bears significant narrative and thematic similarities to Longlegs, which also thoughtlessly deployed signifiers of monstrous androgyny.

>both characters draw on a visual and symbolic language tied to trans-/homophobic stereotyping
Which came first, Baphomet or trannies? Are trannies therefore Baphomet-coded?

>>512615892
this movie is all about witch craft and using the life force of small children for energy/eternal youth imo... theres a lot of stories in mexico about witches similar to how they were depicted in this film... using hair/personal items for spell and xexes... holly wood knows these ancient secrets, but the average viewer is clueless to what they are really watching on screen

>>512613275 (OP)
god, its going to be funny to watch both sides of the retardsphere go hard on trying to make something out of a fun, stupid, well crafted piece of popcorn shit. its about as political as an episode of taskmaster

>>512613275 (OP)
WOW BASED BASED BASED
We should all on /pol/ go watch this movie right away to own the trannies! Lets do it bros.

Don't look up which company made the movie, and don't look up their early life and stuff. Just go watch the movie with friends to own the jews and trannies and leftists and stuff.

niggers i aint reading all this goy slop

>>512613275 (OP)
Nobody is mad, and nobody is seething. This is retarded advertising to lemming retards.
It is the same as nobody was mad about the American Eagle ads either, until faggots were told that "the other side" were mad about it, who then continue the cycle.

we get cunny and tight young bussy and you don't

seethe bitch

There is a market for this. Let's make movies about them but more specific and obvious.

>>512617154
Film is great propaganda. Don't dismiss the whole technique along with their nonsense. You could turn the population reactionary with film if you wanted. Still won't see this since trust is still not there. But I will encourage it and more of it. Trannies are actually great horror material imho.

You lost, tranny!

>>512613319
This is not Armond White. Disregarded.