The Armond White Thread

Discuss films of the 21st century including current cinema, current filmmakers, and film festivals.
Post Reply
Message
Author
David Ehrenstein
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
Contact:

Armond White is a pretentious twit and a pompous idiot

#1 Post by David Ehrenstein » Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:15 pm

Armond is a pretentious twit, perpetually running for HNIC. I had my fill of that sort of charlatan in high school.

46 years ago.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#2 Post by tavernier » Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:50 pm

From Armond's anti-PTA rant:
It's strange to watch a confidently-made film by a director who doesn't know what he's doing.
The same applies to Armond's reviews.

David Ehrenstein
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
Contact:

#3 Post by David Ehrenstein » Thu Jan 03, 2008 8:38 pm

Armond White is a pompous idiot. There is no reason top pay so much as the slightest attention to anything he writes.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#4 Post by HerrSchreck » Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:11 pm

White made such an incredible public asshole out of himself on that recent Lumet on B4 The Devil... piece, that each year on the anniversary of the publication of that fucking interview, the NY & LA Film Critics Assoc memberships should individually and en masse fedex hundreds of actual uhm, squishy devices manufactured for moistening away that Not So Fresh Feeling (with his face glued onto on side of them, the article in a cartoon bubble on the other) to his mailbox.

Image plus Image = not THAT much postage...
Last edited by HerrSchreck on Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

#5 Post by John Cope » Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:11 pm

"Pompous" is in the eye of the beholder. What some call arrogant others would call assured, confident even.

As to his points, they may be and probably are hard to entirely justify but I'm personally drawn back to his writings because, despite his willful contrarianism, he seems to genuinely care about neglected aspects of the medium--what they used to call its humanist potential. I, too, weary of his blinkered partisanship but I'm also well aware of the fact that we all share that kind of fidelity to something to some degree and we all very rarely grasp how over-reaching a tendency that can be. Nuanced argument is obviously important and his is sometimes almost incoherent. Still, when it is not, and especially when he speaks for an unfashionable moral position (what I like is that he is so unhesitant about holding to unfashionable positions--what others dislike is that he is proud to do so), I pay attention, because to deeply value different things from the standard norm is attractive to me. This is especially true when those things mean so much to their advocate and are (in the case of compassion and human sympathy) so sadly undervalued by a culture obsessed with nihilistic self-hatred guised as supposed realism.

David Ehrenstein
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
Contact:

#6 Post by David Ehrenstein » Fri Jan 04, 2008 12:11 am

John Cope wrote:"Pompous" is in the eye of the beholder. What some call arrogant others would call assured, confident even.
Who are these "others"? Where do they live? And most important of all, what drugs are they taking?
despite his willful contrarianism, he seems to genuinely care about neglected aspects of the medium--what they used to call its humanist potential.
"Contrarian" is just another name for asshole. See also Christopher Hitchens.
"Nuanced argument is obviously important and his is sometimes almost incoherent."
Sometimes?

Invariably!
"This is especially true when those things mean so much to their advocate and are (in the case of compassion and human sympathy) so sadly undervalued by a culture obsessed with nihilistic self-hatred guised as supposed realism.
Nihilistic self-hatred guised as supposed realism, thy name is Armond White.

User avatar
margot
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:36 am
Location: nyc

#7 Post by margot » Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:49 pm

Armond White is an in real life troll.

Slothrop
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:43 pm

#8 Post by Slothrop » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:46 am

Raoul Duke wrote:Armond White is an in real life troll.
Worst critic in America.

A couple reasons why I can't stand Armond.

Anything ever made by Steven Spielberg: "absolute masterpiece--one of the greatest accomplishments in the history of human civilization." Anything ever made by Brian De Palma: "Jesus Christ himself directed this picture."

With his infantile, "left-wing" critiques of "liberalism," White is less provocateur than useful idiot for the Right. This clown thinks that embracing Bill O'Reilly's talking points about Hollywood "libruls" is some kind of radical gesture. Gag me.

Every fucking movie with this guy is either absolute garbage or a masterpiece. There is no in-between. Either this guy's bi-polar or no one is.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#9 Post by tavernier » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:47 am

Actually, Armond hates the new de Palma flick because it's liberal Hollywood garbage on Iraq, rather than right-wing Bush-loving talking points.

David Ehrenstein
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
Contact:

#10 Post by David Ehrenstein » Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:55 am

"Christianity-bashing field day"
Now that's what I call a "money quote"! What we need are MORE Christianity-bashing field days -- especially in light of Mike Huckabee's stated intent of altering the constitution to make this a "Christian Nation."

Slothrop
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 8:43 pm

#11 Post by Slothrop » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:04 am

I wonder if he's as much of loon in real life as he is in his writing.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#12 Post by tavernier » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:07 am

He is.

If you're in New York, you can see him do his video thing tomorrow night at Lincoln Center:
Program 14: Pop Video Artists and Hollywood Influence
Series: Dance on Camera Festival 2008 Runtime: 90

Armond White, film and pop-culture critic, traces dance — back to the future — from the soundstage to the street.

Some of the greatest pop musicians have also been dancers who blaze new trails, following previous, deeply admired footsteps. Certainly, pop music originates dance styles and trends ~ but this innovation is also a form of cultural development and curatorship. Armond White, one of the first culture writers to take music videos seriously and a perennial programmer at the Film Society of Lincoln Center's Video Scanners Festival, surveys how Hollywood musical choreographers inspired new generations of disciplined and eye-dazzling pop dancers.

Focusing on the era-defining music videos of Michael Jackson and Janet Jackson, White turns his sophisticated eye to how these pop video artists preserve the dance tradition while creating new ways of moving, grooving and art-making. He’ll discuss how Michael Jackson’s cultural impact preserves cultural continuity through the way this phenomenal artist uses dance and film for powerful personal expression.

Co-presented by Scanners: The New York Video Festival.

Armond White is film critic for New York Press and author of "The Resistance: Ten Years of Pop CUlture That Shook the World and Rebel for the Hell of It: The Art-Life of Tupac Shakur." White's music video programs, a popular part the Film Society of Lincoln Center's annual Scanners video series, have been invited to festivals around the world.

Playlist

Jam — Dir. Michael Jackson and David Kellogg (Choreography: Jackson)

Prologue (West Side Story) — Dir. Robert Wise and Jerome Robbins (Choreography: Robbins)

Beat It — Dir. Bob Giraldi (Choreography: Jackson)

Mein Herr (Cabaret) — Dir. Bob Fosse (Choreography: Fosse) What Have You For Me Lately? — Dir. Piers Ashworth (Choreography: Abdul)

Geechy Dan (Stormy Weather) — Dir. Andrew Stone (Choreography: Calloway)

Alright — Dir. Julien Temple (Choreography: Jackson)

The Girl Hunt Ballet (The Band Wagon) — Dir. Vincente Minnelli (Choreography: Kidd)

Smooth Criminal — Dir. Colin Chilvers (Choreography: Jackson)

Title Number (Singin’ in the Rain) — Dir. Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen (Choreography: Kelly)

Black or White — Dir. John Landis (Choreography: Jackson)

David Ehrenstein
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:30 pm
Contact:

#13 Post by David Ehrenstein » Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:09 am

See? Michael Jackson IS Gene Kelly.

Shoot me now.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#14 Post by miless » Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:34 pm

Marcel Gioberti wrote:This forum has too many Ebert-lites parading its threads. To be honest, it could use a few Armond Whites. At least he says something.
what? that mainstream cinema is the pinnacle of 'filmic' art?

User avatar
Marcel Gioberti
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:55 pm
Location: Torino, Italy

#15 Post by Marcel Gioberti » Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:39 pm

Sure, why not?

User avatar
Andre Jurieu
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)

#16 Post by Andre Jurieu » Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:54 pm

Marcel Gioberti wrote:This forum has too many Ebert-lites parading its threads. To be honest, it could use a few Armond Whites. At least he says something.
I always thought Armond White just kept saying the same thing over and over again. He's interesting occasionally, but he just seems to be recycling the same points every week.

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

#17 Post by david hare » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:26 pm

Andre he's only interesting if you think eating dogshit is interesting.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Not PETA approved
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

#18 Post by Mr Sausage » Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:34 pm

Andre Jurieu wrote:
Marcel Gioberti wrote:This forum has too many Ebert-lites parading its threads. To be honest, it could use a few Armond Whites. At least he says something.
I always thought Armond White just kept saying the same thing over and over again. He's interesting occasionally, but he just seems to be recycling the same points every week.
I always got the sense that he would be much happier in this world if all films were propaganda for his chosen politics.

User avatar
arsonfilms
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

#19 Post by arsonfilms » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:17 pm

I get a little nervous now when we start calling people out... I'm going to have nightmares tonight about White joining forces with Feng to take over the culture section of the New York Times just to spite us all.

User avatar
david hare
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:01 pm
Location: WellyYeller

#20 Post by david hare » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:23 pm

Well you could always not read it. And you would never have to put up with Maureen Dowd again!

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#21 Post by tavernier » Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:38 pm

...or Manohla Dargis. But that's for another thread.

User avatar
Antoine Doinel
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Contact:

#22 Post by Antoine Doinel » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:37 pm

I like Mahnola though I miss her Q&A column she did while she has in L.A.

But God, do I wish Elvis Mitchell was writing regularly again.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#23 Post by tavernier » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:38 pm

Antoine Doinel wrote:But God, do I wish Elvis Mitchell was writing regularly again.
:shock:

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#24 Post by domino harvey » Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:49 pm

His year-end lists are amazing-- I mean, we should have seen the Norbit-rave coming after he actually listed Mr. 3000 and Nacho Libre as some of the best films of the year.

User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

#25 Post by tavernier » Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:32 pm

Armond White's 1998 Best List wrote:08. Out of Sight (Steven Spielberg)
Somehow I missed this Spielberg opus.

Post Reply