love

Author Topic: The Dead Horse  (Read 12872 times)

Totoro

  • Guest
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2014, 03:47:17 AM »
Never understood why Armond White wasn't fired years ago.

Totoro

  • Guest
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #11 on: January 07, 2014, 03:52:11 AM »
He's a troll, a contrarian, who often spends his reviews talking more about the general critical praise for a film and how he is rallying against it than the film itself. His behavior at the show is unacceptable and, if filmspotting had an awards broadcast like NYFCC, similar behavior would be grounds for a permanent ban.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #12 on: January 07, 2014, 10:57:03 AM »
Armond White is a great critic and a tremendous writer. I disagree with him pretty much all the time, but he takes a lot of flack just for not liking the films everyone else likes. He's entitled to his opinion, one that he almost always backs up with well reasoned arguments and examples. That doesn't excuse his heckling, truth be told from everything I've seen Armond is not a good person. But, that doesn't mean he's not a great critic, and last I checked the beauty of film was that people can have different opinions, there is no right or wrong when it comes to the quality of a film. I wish more people would take that to heart and let Armond have his opinion and not feel the need to constantly bash him just because he likes/dislikes different films than the majority do.

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17864
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #13 on: January 07, 2014, 11:17:49 AM »
I can write a scathing review for any one of my favorite movies.  I even thought the other day it would be fun to do just as an exercise.  You can see the good and bad in everything, it's just a matter of which perspective you take.  Yes, White backs it up.  That's why he gets more attention than some random blogger who writes "This sucks, zero stars".  There comes a point, however, when someone is seeing only the bad in things that are widely liked and only the good in things that are widely disliked, that you have to wonder if that person is simply being a contrarian just to get the attention.  You start to question if "his opinion" is his honest reaction, or would be his honest reaction if he didn't approach movies with an eye towards being contrarian.

On the other hand, if White is genuinely getting people to examine their feelings about what makes a movie "good" or "bad", then he's a positive force.  I kind of doubt that's his intention, but if that's happening, then more power to him.

verbALs

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9446
  • Snort Life-DOR
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #14 on: January 07, 2014, 11:23:28 AM »

The gist of arguments as I understood them was that it was torture porn, not very representative slavery and that Steve McQueen had not right to make a film that is about American history and culture and that he should stick his country.  Plus it was trying to be a lot of "art stuff" but he didn't earn to be called an Artist

All of which are perfectly valid-sounding criticisms.

Really? Oh dear.


.....Really?
I used to encourage everyone I knew to make art; I don't do that so much anymore. - Banksy

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 12075
  • "The life we build, we never stop creating.”
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #15 on: January 07, 2014, 11:40:06 AM »
Sense and Sensibility (1995) would have never been made. :(

don s.

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2025
  • You had me at "Hello, here's $50."
    • my movie collection
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #16 on: January 07, 2014, 01:24:50 PM »

The gist of arguments as I understood them was that it was torture porn, not very representative slavery and that Steve McQueen had not right to make a film that is about American history and culture and that he should stick his country.  Plus it was trying to be a lot of "art stuff" but he didn't earn to be called an Artist

All of which are perfectly valid-sounding criticisms.

Really? Oh dear.


.....Really?

Valid-sounding. I think the item you boldfaced is nonsense, but Armond White's entitled to make that part of his critical aesthetic if he wants.
My TV ain't HD / that's too real

Teal | Green | Lime Green | Orange | Red

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #17 on: January 07, 2014, 02:45:30 PM »
MartinTeller said it best. I sometimes read his arguments and they often read as well thought out, but the points he attempts to make don't work for me because they're so easy to disagree with. I don't know at what point they become less valid on that basis. For example…

Quote
"Toy Story 3 is so besotted with brand names and product-placement that it stops being about the innocent pleasures of imagination—the usefulness of toys—and strictly celebrates consumerism."

Is it Pixar's fault that their films are so widely-loved? Would it have been smarter for the studio to use a "no merchandise" policy? That gets into the issue of is Disney releasing the toys strictly to make money or do they also want everyone to have the opportunity to own a Woody and Buzz of their own? I have seen films that appear to exist solely to sell merchandise. My disagreement with Armond White is that the Toy Story films NEVER stop being about the pleasure of imagination any more than they stop being about the pleasure of animation. Does that make his argument invalid? No, but I believe he's just pulling this argument out of the air.

Does Steve McQueen have no right to make a film that is about American history and culture and that he should stick his country? I guess you can feel that way, but it sure would put severe limitations on the melting pot of world cinema. I would hate to imagine only a Moroccan director being allowed to make Casablanca or Steven Spielberg not being allowed to make Schindler's List because he's from the USA. This statement sure does invalidate most of Ang Lee's career.

Armond White's is entitled to make that part of his critical aesthetic, but he really does just throw these word grenades out there with little if any support and I think it's unfortunate that he's given a credentials and a platform to spread such hatred.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #18 on: January 07, 2014, 02:58:49 PM »
What you just quoted shows plenty of support, and so do his views in general. He always supports what he says, but for whatever reason he's always required to provide more and more support. Then when he provides that support he gets attacked for being negative or for simply being a contrarian. He's entitled to his opinion, and he presents said opinion in a well thought manner with more than enough reasoning and explanation to make said opinion valid. People can disagree with his opinion, I know I do, but it doesn't make his opinion any less valid.

And I'm sorry, but claiming that he doesn't support his opinions is blatantly false. Dislike him for whatever reasons you want, but claiming he doesn't support the opinions you disagree with is disingenuous to the extreme.

Melvil

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9977
  • Eek
Re: Re: Movie Buzz
« Reply #19 on: January 07, 2014, 05:25:24 PM »
The more exposure I have to Armond White the harder it is to be charitable towards him. It's his attitude, not his opinions, that make him unbearable.

He always supports what he says, but for whatever reason he's always required to provide more and more support. Then when he provides that support he gets attacked for being negative or for simply being a contrarian.

It's because he so often relies on equally unpopular perspectives (as forgone conclusions) to support his original unpopular position. If you fully buy into the the world as seen by Armond White then I suppose he does a good job supporting his positions.