Is Armond truly one of the best movie critics or is he just a

>>84440153
Contrarian. Most of his reviews are just bitching about politics. Also lmao at him quoting Godard on his Twitter when he rants about all the political ideologies that Godard's movies are about.

One of the last "Roger Ebert" era film critiquers.
hes not a critic nor is he a reviewer.
check yourself before you post about a legend.

He's the black bull /tv/ needs but not the one it deserves

>>84440153
How does he only have 5000 followers?

Caring about critics?


>>84440210
God you must be disgusting to look at you effeminate pustule

File: 14482916495949493165274949505049372659492916261.jpg (461KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 2048x1365px

>>84440153
>Its an Armond thread

>>84440502
*queefs so loud the house blows down*

Love the guy. He's hilarious.

>>84440153
>godard quote
>last tango in paris
Truly great taste. I pity the plebs on this board who think otherwise.

I think he's a guy that loves films because he can talk and write about them in a way that makes people more willing to hear him out when really it's all just under the guise of a "review" when really he just wants to voice some of his thoughts on modern culture.

>>84440358
Leave you fucking /v/eddit swine

>>84440153
Lost all respect when he actually liked Wonder Woman

he's usually right though.

>>84440153
Depends on the review. Toy Story 3 is one of his most infamous ones and I'm not sure if he was even paying attention to the movie. At the very least, he's more fun to read than just about any of his contemporaries.

>>84442710
Wow, is this what it's like when someone honestly thinks their opinions are facts? You post on /pol/, don't you? Deluded psycho.

he's our generation's kael, and he isn't a contrarian either. i don't even agree with his politics half the time but he's pretty much always right

>>84442770
Was he the one that got death threats for giving toy story 3 a negative review?

He is the pioneer of reviews that bitch about politics rather than talk about the fucking movies. He literally ruined everything.

Wtf he's actually lost followers since this post was made

>>84442885
Yep.

>>84442814
are you stepping up to your superior, post 2014 /tv/ poster who is more likely not even authentic to the board?

File: critic.jpg (22KB, 300x279px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x279px

He gave Get Out a rotten review, he truly is /ourguy/

File: IMG_0670.gif (230KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 320x180px

>>84440153
The thing is the film critic is a personal view based upon definite knowledge on film. One cane never get the perfect score on the popular voting cuz there is always somebody doesn't like how a particular critic sees things. YES, I don't think he is a one of the best one out there who can tell why the way he thinks in the certain ways.

thing is, even when he is wrong he´s still right

he's kind of a shithead but he's authentic, that makes him better than most people.

I don't know but the man fucking loves him some Spielberg.

File: armond-white-troll.jpg (9KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 200x200px

>>84442981
>100 Fresh rating

*blocks your path*

>>84443162
Spielberg is the ultimate pleb filter, he has a dud once in a while but his catalog is impeccable. The big criticism is that he has happy endings, I mean for fuck's sake.

>>84440309
I would wager that >80% of those followers have visited 4chan and that >60% are regular 4chan users.

>>84440358
>cant handle the truth armond is spitting

do the world a favor and blow your fucking brains out

the world has enough plebs as is

>>84442967
why?

>>84443246
I agree but Armond tends to be too forgiving when it comes to Spielberg's stuff. Contrast that with his seemingly ridiculous hatred for Noah Baumbach.

>>84443162
Maybe I've misjudged the man.

>>84442885

him and chris (christina) chans brother

>>84443326
He ruined Toy Story 3's 100% status and claimed that Small Soldiers is a better movie.

People go crazy at him for liking things they don't like or vice versa. amazing how people cannot deal with someone having different opinions to them.

and he isn't a contrarian since he has given really popular films a high rating like most recently baby driver and he also has given mostly hated films negative reviews many times as well.
he literally just watches a film and makes his review. i bet he doesn't look at any internet buzz surrounding a movie, doesn't look at the general consensus from other critics. he just watches the movie with an open mind and no outside influence. like everyone should but no one does anymore unfortunately .

>>84443213
The butthurt articles written after his rating were pure kino.

>>84444093
>amazing how people cannot deal with someone having different opinions to them.
Man, that's something I've been trying to come to terms with these past few years. Feels like people are becoming more and more unhinged when they hear an opinion they don't like.

>>84440309
most people who like armond white don't have a twitter account

>>84442875
do you think his jack and jill review was right? he gives positive reviews to a lot of real crap...

>>84444189
Exactly. it's deep insecurity. if someone dislikes a movie i like i don't really give a fuck, i've made my opinion why does some strangers opinion impact mine?
it's crazy how people need other people to validate their own tastes.

>nigger
>gay
>/tv/ loves him

hmmmm

>>84444189
it's not about opinions they don't like, it's about opinions that go against the mob, metacriticism enabled that awareness. a similar thing happened with "classic" rock

>>84444482
And the even bigger problem with that is companies can manipulate areas on the internet to make a certain film seem loved or hated even if it is not in reality but they will actually convince people to believe and create a hive mind.

>>84440153
He is a contrarian fuck and troll, that said he has a pretty cool wrting style, leagues ahead most of the idiots, he is one of them make no mistake, get free moneys for watching shitty flicks.

>>84444705
this plus the very old-fashioned critic payola system. people who refuse to promote hollywood crap simply can't find work anymore

He gave Jack & Jill a good review, what do you think?

>>84440153
I think his reviews are hit and miss but when his right he usually hits the mark.
Though comparing how his old reviews to his new ones, I feel like his gotten cynical over the years.

Also his review of Byzantium is pretty good.

>>84444922
You need to understand the man doesn't perceive film as you and i do. he isn't simply won over by explosions and quips. he looks at it from a different point of view and deconstructs a films entire meaning, ideology, influences and it's impact on society.

one of the all time great critics.

>>84440153
Regardless of his views, he has a savage wit when it comes to tearing apart films.

>>84445057
>i feel like he's gotten cynical over the years
i don't blame him

>>84445124
This desu, his Jack and Jill review was how I finally came to terms with being a pleb.

Armond thread! Time for college aged wannabes to inform us how a professional film critic has sustained career of over 30 years by just saying the opposite of what popular opinion says.

>>84442710

He's an honest to god DCEU famboy. He like Suicide Squad, for Petes sake.

>>84444399
It's almost like we judge people on their character and only use racial or homophobic slurs against shitty people.

>>84446048
Suicide Squad was perfectly watchable.

>>84440153
Any review of a Tarantino's movie by Armond is a must read.
>>84440309
He's probably forced to have twitter by contract. It's pretty common between journalists.

>>84440153
>armond white
>black

Bravo.

>Nacho Libre is number 5 on Armond's best movies of 2006
What's his end game?

>>84446588

It wasn't as far as big Hollywood productions go it doesn't get much worse.

>>84440153
His description sounds like it's from a 20 year old girls account

>>84442995
What the fuck are you even trying to say?

>>84444093
To me it really does seem like he's somebody who's easily affected by popular consensus. Like, we've all resented a movie for getting more attention than it really deserved right? I liked Fury Road fine, but it did not deserve to become a meme that people spammed on facebook because it achieved a sort of cultural currency.

And vice versa. I didn't love Warcraft by any means, certainly a movie I wouldn't watch unless people I was with wanted to see it. But it was honestly no worse than most Marvel movies, so I don't understand why it received such negative review relative to whatever shit superhero movies came out the same year.

It's easy for your perception of something to get tainted by the culture surrounding it, but when he acts superior to everybody, shits on great movies because of some political issue he projected onto it, and gives Transformers 2 a glowing review, I think it's safe to say that intentionally or not he's resisting the consensus. It's an ego thing.

>>84440358
>effeminate pustule
that makes no sense..what are you talking about? his mammaries?

>>84443162
Well why the fuck wouldnt he? Spielberg is one of the greatest filmmakers ever for so many reasons. Herzog, Hitchcock, Godard, Truffaut (among many others) have said that they admire Spielberg and his films.

>>84440153
He is with out a doubt the dullest critic in the history of movie critics. Seriously, each episode following the boy reviewer and his pals from Rotten Tomatoes as they watch assorted movies has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the reviews’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of insight, all to make films unmagical, to make cinema seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Armond vetoed the idea of Ebert writing the reviews; he made sure the critiquing would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody? Just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for his conservatism. The Armond White movie reviews might be anti-Muslim (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Cole Smithey in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the recommendations are good though r-right
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the reviews were terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time Harry Potter came up, the critic wrote instead that the franchise was "dull."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Armond's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that he has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving analysis by the same Doug Walker. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Armond White at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to watch the Nostalgia Critic." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Armond White" you are, in fact, trained to watch the Nostalgia Critic.