The Armond White Thread

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
tavernier
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:18 pm

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#76 Post by tavernier » Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:50 pm

Perhaps we should give Armond his own 'rediculous' thread: his review of Defiance may be the first ever to reference both Straub and Spielberg.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#77 Post by tavernier » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:35 am

Armond is at it again.

The opening paragraph of his Taken review is a doozy (although the whole review is a must-read):
If French producer - director Luc Besson worked in Hollywood, he’d have won his Irving G.Thalberg Award by now. That particular Oscar, presented to “creative producers whose bodies of work reflect a consistently high quality of motion picture production” previously went to Darryl F. Zanuck, David O. Selznick,Walt Disney, Arthur Freed, Cecil B. DeMille, William Wyler, Albert R. Broccoli, Steven Spielberg, Billy Wilder, George Lucas, Clint Eastwood and Dino De Laurentis and—hear me now—Besson is in their class. Over the past two decades, attentive moviegoers witnessed Besson refine and revolutionize the action film. Those who saw La Femme Nikita, The Professional, The Fifth Element, the Transporter series, Ong Bak, Unleashed, District B-13 and Revolver know it. His impact could also be seen in War, Crank and Hitman—all innovative, intelligent and sleek.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#78 Post by domino harvey » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:43 am

Oh my God, did we all forget to discuss his Better Than- 2008 List?
Who Else But Armond White wrote:Transporter 3 BETTER THAN The Dark Knight Olivier Megaton, Jason Statham and Luc Besson reinvent the action movie as kinetic art, but impressionable teenagers mistook Chris Nolan’s nihilistic graphic novel for kool fun.

Cadillac Records BETTER THAN Synecdoche, New York Darnell Martin treats Black American history as R&B and her sizzling cast (Jeffrey Wright, Beyoncé, Eamonn Walker, Columbus Short, Mos Def, Cedric the Entertainer) salutes pop music legends. Charlie Kaufman’s Actors Studio cast merely imitated Fellini’s 8 1/2 like amateurs.
And of course, his use of the word "abortionhorny" trumps all White witticisms that ever were and ever will be

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#79 Post by cdnchris » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:47 am

armond wrote: Hitman—all innovative, intelligent and sleek.
Say wha'?

Armond's an idiot, but I'm so going to see this movie. Liam Nesson + ass kicking = awesome

Plus this one line from Ebert's 2 1/2 star review sells me
ebert wrote:Headquarters also tells Mills he has 96 hours to rescue his daughter before she meets a fate worse than death, followed by death.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#80 Post by tavernier » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:54 am

The best line in Armond's idiotic "better than" column is this posted comment:
John Doe wrote: I am surprised Armond could take Spielberg's dick out of his mouth long enough to write this list.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#81 Post by swo17 » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:27 am

It's one thing to champion overlooked movies, or to, say, hate on Slumdog, but Armond is clearly just baiting people here.
Twilight BETTER THAN Let the Right One In
My brain tried to process this and just plain stopped working.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#82 Post by Antoine Doinel » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:17 pm

domino harvey wrote:Oh my God, did we all forget to discuss his Better Than- 2008 List?
The most shocking thing about that list is that Armond White likes Guy Maddin. Who knew?

User avatar
Jean-Luc Garbo
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
Contact:

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#83 Post by Jean-Luc Garbo » Sat Jan 31, 2009 7:20 pm

domino harvey wrote:Oh my God, did we all forget to discuss his Better Than- 2008 List?
Just the fact that he championed Indiana and Twilight on his list invalidates the whole thing. He needs to take a cue from John Waters' Artforum top tens.

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

Re: Fingers (Toback, 1977)

#84 Post by Barmy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:43 pm

Bump. Toback is one of America's greatest filmmakers. It's a shame that much of his early work is unavailable on DVD (although it is reputedly subpar).

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

Re: Fingers (Toback, 1977)

#85 Post by tavernier » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:12 pm

Barmy wrote:Toback is one of America's greatest filmmakers.
Armond, it really is you!

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

Re: Fingers (James Toback, 1978)

#86 Post by Barmy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:21 pm

Does Armond like him? He seems like an anti-Spielberg to me. By the way a delicious documentary about JT is coming out on DVD

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

Re: Fingers (James Toback, 1978)

#87 Post by tavernier » Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:37 pm

Barmy wrote:Does Armond like him? He seems like an anti-Spielberg to me.
Here's AW's Top 10 from 2000:
1. George Washington (d: David Gordon Green)
2. L'Humanité (d: Bruno Dumont)
3. Time Regained (d: Raul Ruiz)
4. The House Of Mirth (d: Terence Davies)
5. Orphans (d: Peter Mullan)
6. Black And White (d: James Toback)
7. Mission To Mars (d: Brian De Palma)
8. The Little Thief (d: Erick Zonca)
9. Trixie (d: Alan Rudolph)
10. Pola X (d: Leos Carax)
Of course, there was no SS movie that year, so take it with a grain of salt.

User avatar
Barmy
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm

Re: Fingers (James Toback, 1978)

#88 Post by Barmy » Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:46 pm

Wow that's a good list. =P~

User avatar
Cash Flagg
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:15 pm

Re: Fingers (James Toback, 1978)

#89 Post by Cash Flagg » Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:00 pm

tavernier wrote: 7. Mission To Mars (d: Brian De Palma)
That wacky Armond is always good for a chuckle.


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

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#91 Post by tavernier » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:16 pm

Armond's at it again--"Coraline makes Wall-E look like shit!" (I'm paraphrasing.)

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#92 Post by knives » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:24 pm

Wasn't he supposed to be talking about Coraline? I'm actually surprised he liked it, the original story at least, doesn't seem like his cup of tea.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#93 Post by swo17 » Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:14 pm

Wow. He actually mentioned Wall-E seventeen times in that review.

My favorite part was when he namedropped Paranoid Park, There Will Be Blood, Chaplin, Stephen Chow, E.T., and A.I., all in a matter of three consecutive sentences, none of which were even brought up in reference to the film he was supposed to be reviewing, but rather to, you guessed it, Wall-E.

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

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#94 Post by tavernier » Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:18 pm

Welcome to the wonderful and wacky world of AW!

User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:59 pm
Location: Upstate NY

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#95 Post by Murdoch » Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:05 pm

The title of Armond's "review" alone puts it pretty far up there on the Armond-ridiculousness scale.

User avatar
Dylan
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:28 pm

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#96 Post by Dylan » Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:13 pm

Looking over it, he doesn't even spell Selick correctly.
Last edited by Dylan on Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
essrog
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:24 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minn.

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#97 Post by essrog » Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:16 pm

As much as I enjoy the takedowns of Armond on these boards, my new favorite is the comment by John Doe at the end of that review. The last line is the best.

EDIT: Jeff (rightly) quotes the entire comment two posts down
Last edited by essrog on Wed Feb 04, 2009 9:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#98 Post by domino harvey » Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:23 pm

John Doe consistently leaves good messages on Armond White's reviews

User avatar
Jeff
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#99 Post by Jeff » Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:32 pm

There are three John Doe comments now. I love the line about schoolkids seeing Finding Nemo out of a sense of duty, but this comment so thoroughly encapsulates White's character (or lack thereof) that I feel the need to quote it for posterity.
You are such a useless and worthless writer, Armond. Everything has to be either/or, doesn't it? You have to create battles where none exist because you're so obviously a complete sociopath, a misanthrope, desperate for attention, so weak and pitiful and cowardly that you're prone to lashing outwards contemptuously at phantom strawmen like "hipster critics" and the like. You even create critical bashings and the ignoring of films you decide to enjoy (I use "decide" intentionally here); you create the fiction that certain films are completely beloved and others completely hated, all merely as a means to tell people, "Dammit I'm the only one who knows the truth." Your sickness is the same that I've seen in conspiracy theorists and lonely old creeps, where you want to be on the outside standing in, passing judgment, your every opinion and turn of phrase an exercise in complete disingenuousness. Nothing you say has a basis in the reality or experience of watching a film and yet your critical dishonesty is transparent to everyone else and likely opaque to yourself. I worry about you.

User avatar
Jean-Luc Garbo
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
Contact:

Re: Coraline (Henry Selick, 2009)

#100 Post by Jean-Luc Garbo » Wed Feb 04, 2009 8:45 pm

That review is one too many bulls in a china shop. The first three paragraphs are alright, but the fourth totally goes haywire. The man has a point, but he so gracelessly steamrolls everything - and what is his fixation with Wall-E? - that the point in question is utterly negated. It's so polemical that it's hardly a proper review. Should you see it? Not see it? Who cares since it's not Wall-E! I feel almost dared not to go - and I've been telling friends and random goths in malls to see it. Doesn't this man have an editor?

Post Reply