Why Does Reddit and Ebert Hate Armond White?

He's just a dumb contrarian. He's essentially a clickbait article and Yea Forums parrots him to seem edgy.

>Ebert
fucking what
So some guys continue to review movies under his name or something? Fuck that

>he doesn't like my fave movies
>he a troll
Cringe
>he disagree with me
>grr agree with me or else you're a contrarian!
Cringe

It shouldn't be a surprise to you that shill critics will demonize any voice that goes against their NPC agendas. Around the Toy Story 3 era the Armond backlash struck me as pathetic fanboyism. Now it's clear that it's actually calculated social control.

>Is this why Yea Forums likes him because he's contrarian and a troll?
White is a bit of a troll, but he’s not a contrarian. He relishes how much his reviews piss off his enemies, but they come from sincerely held beliefs, not rote contrarianism. Modern movie reviewers have such a hive mind circlejerk going on that they can’t accept someone might disagree with them in good faith.

It's not just reddit, dude. There are a lot of articles written about him. They have even made lists of his most ridiculous reviews of all time.

This is the dude that made Man of Steel his movie of the year. Let's unpack that before we start to take his opinion seriously.

Attached: 1544734196451.jpg (1500x1000, 272K)

>Armond likes the Simpsons Movie
letterboxd.com/notarmondwhite/film/the-simpsons-movie/

No, Ebert called him a troll 10-15 years ago

Patrician tastes

Wow, I thought he was a meme but I think he is not, looks like a true patrician

>caring about film clickbait

Reddit is a state of mind my friend

sounds like they slam him because he doesn't review movies "in good faith" and instead does weird contrarian bullshit to garner attention for himself.

>TDK, Pulp Fiction, BR2049, Toy Story 3, Black Swan, Up
These films all have their technically good qualities but really they're all just trash artistically speaking. Is it really such an unthinkable thing that someone could prefer a Zack Snyder film to another cookie cooker pixar film?

Yes. Obey the Mouse.

Are you trying to make me read his reviews because these are patrician opinions

His website is still up and running with new reviews often, obviously written by living people.

>durr he disagree with me so he's just doing it for attention!!
Why even have critics if they all have to fall in line and have virtually identical opinions?

Reminder he gave a bad review to Goodfellas but still considers Taxi Driver to be a classic. How does that even make sense.

"Which is why, despite excellent acting and much memorable dialogue, Goodfellas is a chore to watch; two and a half hours of Scorsese demonstrating with stolid scandalousness, his inability to think his way out of the gangster genre conventions. The narrative has him by those busted balls—just as it has Kyle Smith. Like Henry's wife Karen, who at first finds the insularity and violence of the mafia uncomfortable, the viewer—or at least Smith—comes to see the life on display as not just acceptable, but the only way to live. Like the stream of interchangeable Peters and Paulis at Karen's wedding, the swaggering partiers in the film blur into a single macho bantam bray. Goodfellas is mediocre not because it's for guys, but because wiseguys and their victims are the only guys that it can imagine."

Tell me how this paragraph makes sense

To be fair, White did publicly say that Noah Baumbach should've been aborted.

I love Goodfellas but Goodfellas feels super amateurish compared to how masterful Taxi Driver feels

That's fucking based though. I loved when he called Steve McQueen a trash man too.

he rejects post-modernism, irony culture in favor of sincerity.

There are youtube videos made about him. But yes, R/movies talked about him and they almost unanimously agree he's a troll. reddit.com/r/movies/comments/75rnl5/what_is_the_worst_written_movie_review_youve_seen/

"I think Armond White's kind of a genius that way. There's a friend I know who also expertly does this with movie reviews - making nonsense sound entirely intelligible, and agreeable, on the outside."

"Armond White writes reviews so that they get brought to attention in places like this. He is one of the few reviewers i can actually name. If you go through his reviews, there is absolutely no way the controversy is not intentional. He get's a sense of how rational people feel about a movie, then he sets out to piss those people off, causing a whole lot of clicks. It works"

it's not about "falling in line" it's the fact that he's waiting until after the "norm" has been established then purposely going against the grain, and whether he himself actually dis/likes the movies has nothing to do with it.

>i could just read his reviews and base my opinion of him off my own judgement
>or I could read articles judging a guy who judges movies and ask an anonymous saiwanese cat licking site for an opinion about someones opinion about a film critics opinion.
God I hate meta-commentary and all fags who read articles instead of just seeing and making their own judgements.

I think he's saying that Goodfellas sucks because the characters are all the same type of guy, which I disagree with, but I see the argument.

He's complaining that it is just a big WOP stereotype movie and that's all

>he has opinions and doesn't parrot the corporate pop culture narrative therefore he is a troll
Pop culture was a mistake

"National Review hired him. Which is fitting, intellectually dishonest garbage hiring intellectually dishonest garbage."

Apparently, rotten tomatoes said he couldn't be there anymore but then he switched to a new publication and now his reviews show up there. Interesting.

>he doesn't rush to do reviews so he's just trying to be different!!
Or maybe he just has a different opinion? Take off the tin foil hat bro

>Reminder he gave a bad review to Goodfellas but still considers Taxi Driver to be a classic. How does that even make sense
It makes perfect sense
Taxi Driver is flawless masterpiece
Goodfellas has serious pacing and other issues

Attached: 1551796334012.gif (607x609, 821K)

>contrarian shitposter defends a contrarian shitposting movie reviewer
big shock

>it's the fact that he's waiting until after the "norm" has been established then purposely going against the grain, and whether he himself actually dis/likes the movies has nothing to do with it.
That's NPC brainlet talk. Armond is very consistent with his film taste.

>caring about what any critic thinks
oh no no no

Attached: 1421201543571.gif (290x189, 1.04M)

>Armond is very consistent with his film taste.
yea, he consistently and conveniently happens to claim to like whatever the general public doesn't like, and vice versa. that's his entire shtick. he's made a career out of being a contrarian troll. you have to be a literal retard or a contrarian troll yourself to deny this.

>mindless consumer shits on one lone voice expressing his own opinion in a see of mindless reviewers
bigger shock

Sea* not see

>The Square
Are you implying that wasn't a good movie?

He's slightly demented, and a bit of an uncle tom

Cause he's patrish and reddit is plebe

Attached: SmartSelect_20190313-165656_Firefox Focus.jpg (1430x2311, 1.4M)

rottentomatoes.com/critic/armond-white/movies
You are so obviously parroting opinions that you saw on Reddit and mainstream news outlets that it’s embarrassing. Have you ever read one of his reviews for yourself?

I think you're deluding yourself if you think that the tastes of the general public have anything to do with what the critics listed on rotten tomatoes praise or shit on. Adam Sandler and Michael Bay films have more appeal with the public than the critic bait darlings than Armond shits on usually do.

there is factually nothing wrong with Adam Sandler movies. they fill the "feel good" niche better than most.

He even knows late period Godard is superior.

>justify these crazy ass reviews
Why? They don't need to be justified. They are reviews of movies, you child.

Justify why you think this question was even necessary.

He like films about gays and blacks that aren't shit though.

His books about Prince and Michael Jackson are must reads.

I never liked the guy because he’s trashed some of my fav movies BUT I do like that he is now trashing the sjw movies including Black Panther.
Fun fact, I friended him on FB. Seems like a cool guy

Milk BTFO

In 2019, with so many distractions like social media, video games, etc, etc.
I consider armond white a successful critic, not because i agree with him on everything, but because you know his name and look forward to his opinion.

He goes against the grain, maybe that movie everyone likes isnt so good?

If i were a critic i would be studying at the school of armond white because what else is criticism but professional shitposting?

Its not about whats popular, whats selling, how much Disney bribes you, or what the proles like.
Its about what the critic likes

So you're telling me there's nothing suspicious about the guy loving I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, Spanglish, and Bedtime Stories but then rails against Infinity War, The Hangover, Get Out, Toy Story 3, Inception

I don’t always agree with his reviews but I always enjoy reading them because he’s such a great writer.

>Dawn of the Dead remake
and?
are you some sort of fucking retard ?

>So you're telling me there's nothing suspicious about the guy disliking movies that I like and liking movies that I’ve never even seen?

He's neither a troll nor contrarian, he's just actually educated in film theory and will go against consensus when appropriate.

>prefer a Zack Snyder film

Name one reason except being a faggot.

I just wish someone could explain this Armond White meme. I genuinely don't understand how Yea Forums defends his reviews. It seems like Yea Forums likes him because Reddit hates him. Do you honestly think Yea Forums would like him if Reddit adored him?

Because he's a White male

Attached: Naamloos-2.png (350x350, 138K)

>TDK
capeshit
>Pulp Fiction
overrated, clearly not tarantino's best
>BR2049
unnecessary sequel, retreads old ground without really adding anything
>Toy Story 3
unnecessary sequel to an overrated franchise
>Black Swan
melodramatic schlock
>Up
melodramatic schlock

armond white always goes after overrated movies. that he praises bad movies just underlines his point that the movies he's criticizing aren't good enough to be considered above the rest of the dreck. i don't think he actually likes adam sandler movies and other shit, it's just that extra sting for people who don't question all the hype surrounding their favourite movies. it's not really true contrarianism, it's more like hyperbole for sake of exposing bias

Adam Sandler? Sincerity? Nigga hasn’t made a sincere movie since billy Madison and even saying that is a stretch

>Toy Story 3
perfect ending to a franchise

get over it

Armond is good because he gets you thinking on what really makes a film valid. Why is it such an unforgivable sin to give a bad review to a Paul Thomas Anderson film and instead praise a Paul WS Anderson film? Does There Will Be Blood really have so much to say or was I suckered in by a "classical" tone and a self importance. Why should a film like Pompei just be dismissed and laughed away? Is it not an example of appreciable technical skill? It will probably entertain a larger segment of the population than TWBB. How much of TWBB's appeal is locked up on being seen as respectable and cool? Who decides the factors that make a film real art?

Even if I like the film in question I like to see another angle and reexamine it in my mind. I've watched some genuinely good under the radar films from his annual better than list too.

He writes well thought out reviews and shows a wide working knowledge of the history cinema . Not sure what the question is
>bbbut this movie bad but he like it!
Okay??? Am I suppose to agree with everything a critic writes,???

just about every somewhat major review he does, he somehow manages to bring up politics.
For instance:
The Accountant: "In The Accountant, blatancy overtakes sincerity...absurdly convoluted, this film stays blatantly politically correct."
Suicide Squad: "Think metaphorically again, and see that Suicide Squad entangles post-Vietnam and post-9/11 notions about heroism and citizenship...Suicide Squad is The Dirty Dozen for millennial viewers (and voters), who think their patriotic moral conflict is new."
It seems as if there is even the faintest glimpse of liberal ideas in a movie, he poorly reviews it (not totally across the board, he did positively review Hidden Figures). Over half of his Fences review was analyzing the conservative elements.

Also, I feel like it needs to be said that he praised Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen for its visual style and panned Toy Story 3 for celebrating commercialism.

>Reminder he gave a bad review to Goodfellas but still considers Taxi Driver to be a classic.
I agree with this opinion but his review is mostly dumb shit. He is just a meme lord.

/pol/fags, everybody.

His explanations could fit any movie. He just says he hates it because in his opinion the movie expresses some phenomenon that he doesn't like.

>It seems like Yea Forums likes him because Reddit hates him.
that's exactly it. he's a contrarian and his fans are contrarians. it really is that simple.

>be black
>have a last name of white

If that's not contrarian I don't know what is.

It's subversive gangster nihilism, a very hollow and ugly movie.

Look through his review history. It was so bad that even Roger Ebert had no choice but to call him a troll

He literally has no consistent ideology. Can some user provide it if you can find it because the way most people see it, he just contradicts himself

goodfellas is overrated. it falls apart in the second half hard.

>Your Highness

was kino for a weed movie

He's right. Even a film like "Saw" (2004) is less exploitative and presents a more thorough investigation of axiomatic morality than what is found in for example "12 Years a Slave" (2013) or his previous films.

>appeal to authority fallacy

Go away reddit.

>just about every somewhat major review he does, he somehow manages to bring up politics.
You could say that about the majority of critics these days. Armond is just in the minority since he's a conservative.

>i think mobie is overrated
>i think other mobie is underrated
Unironically retarded caring so much about what other people think about the dumb shit you enjoy. Armond is a troll subsisting on novelty and hateclicks. Think for yourself.

Attached: Nhe33u-Pl1.png (402x448, 53K)

I rate 3/10

>The Square, A Serious Man

there are great films, habibi

Daily reminder he called Christopher Nolan a con artist but love Snyder and Adam Sandler. Let that sink in

Nolan is unironically a con artist with his intellectual counterfeit cinema. Snyder makes some of the most sincere films around.

>Unironically retarded caring so much about what other people think about the dumb shit you enjoy.
retard can't read between the lines. by saying the movies are overrated i'm implying they're mediocre in and of themselves
>Armond is a troll subsisting on novelty and hateclicks.
why do you care so much about what armond thinks about the dumb shit you enjoy? is casting a doubtful glance on these sacred cows really that bad? is that all it takes to rile you up?

Most people don't like him because he doesn't like movies that they like.
But I would take a million Armond White's over a million fuckin' Peter Travers or whatever cookie cutter bullshit critic.
At least Armond is interesting. Most critics are fucking retarded and worse, boring.

The problem is he consistently rails against popular good movies but then likes films like Your Highness and Bedtime Stories

>implying it's not true

Roger Ebert was basically a troll with some of his opinions

How is that a problem?

Woah why do you dislike A Serious Man?

>consistently rails against popular good movies
Good in your opinion. Also the popularity of a film shouldn't factor into your enjoyment of it.

Also why is this a problem? Because it lowers the average of the film you like on some review aggregator? Why should you care about that?

Many people consider him the worst. Just look at the comments. This doesn't happen to any other critic

youtube.com/watch?v=WMbDPU1WJf8

>liking fomulaic Sandler movies
>liking BvS
>not corporate

>Jules et Jim

Attached: 1509045019019s.jpg (250x241, 9K)

he's right about everything

> Constantly gives bad reviews to good films
> Gives good review to Jack & Jill

Calling it: He's a troll.

A film with properties as big as Batman and Superman being used to build a connected franchise of movies is always going to be corporate, but within those confines I think Snyder put as much artistic vision in his film as he possibly could.

I wonder what he thinks about niggerfests like Beale Street or Moonfag.

>Worst movie critic
That's not TGWTG

Well, not enough. The film was a total failure on so many levels.

that's your opinion. other people have a different opinion.

Since mainstream film criticism is dominated by group thinking "geek culture" loving left wingers I find Armond's reviews pretty refreshing.

Can you entertain the idea that Transformers elevates a simple toy line in a way that Toy Story doesn't?

>he rejects post-modernism, irony culture in favor of sincerity.
No he has no consistent ideology. Please provide examples to back up your bullshit case. You know he enjoyed slamming TDK and Pulp Fiction and There Will Be Blood. Those are almost objectively good movies. How the fuck is Pineapple Express better?

No shit. But the consensus is of the opinion that this ranges from bad to mediocre, though.

because transformers revenge of the fallen is visually stunning.

because hes a nigger
theyll never admit it though. The racism is too internalized.

so you're literally just saying anyone who does not hold the majority opinion is wrong?

>In January 2014, White was expelled from the New York Film Critics Circle for allegedly heckling director Steve McQueen at an event for the film 12 Years a Slave.
What's his endgame?

It had some good aspects. I liked Affleck's Batman and visually it's on a whole other level to anything Marvel puts out. I'd take an interesting failure over something with zero vision that achieves mediocrity by taking the blandest possible route. BvS is a fascinating film and it'll be discussed for far longer than most blockbusters of this era.

I think Armond is important in highlighting subjectivity, because the opinions he holds seem so absurd on the surface, yet when you read the reviews they seem based in careful consideration and criticism.
I feel like his entire career is some sort of statement on the meaninglessness of art criticism and the value of personal experience and evaluation.

>You know he enjoyed slamming TDK and Pulp Fiction and There Will Be Blood. Those are almost objectively good movies. How the fuck is Pineapple Express better?

tdk pulp fiction and twbb are classic examples of post modern films, while pineapple express isn't.

Anyone who doesn't hold the opinion of the consensus is objectively a contrarian. Never mentioned right or wrong.

Monster House was Kino

A look inside Armond's retarded mind lol

Batman v Superman > Deadpool
Zack Snyder continues to find depth in pop myths, making comic-book archetypes reveal our souls. But Tim Miller’s Edgar Wright–lite comic-book sarcasm defies and denies serious fun.

Sully > Rogue One
Clint Eastwood celebrates true American heroism while reevaluating the cynical disbelief that has infected post-9/11 culture; Garth Edwards depicts the miasma of war as a dull Star Wars episode. An edifying entertainment for adults vs. ends-justifies-the-means propaganda for children of all ages.

Aferim! > Captain America: Civil War
Radu Jude’s profane Romanian folktale is also an epic satire (in majestic black-and-white) of how a debased culture rationalizes terrorism, pain, and inhumanity. Marvel attempts the same with its superhero franchise, trivializing the concept of “civil war” the same way Bernie Sanders trivializes the concept of “revolution.”

He's a literal retard, like the average polposting tourist in this board.

>Anyone who doesn't hold the opinion of the consensus is objectively a contrarian.
So what? Is there something wrong with that?

Contrarian implies you're making a decision to go against popular opinion. Having unpopular opinions isn't the same as being a contrarian.

He doesn't release his reviews at the same time?

those are all correct though

>TDK
>capeshit
wrong

except they're shallow and blatantly dishonest. you know he's a jew, you know the budget went to his friends pockets instead of making the movie good. it's the same movie over and over again
>peon is angry and does angry things

How are sterotypes bad? Adam Sandler movies have stereotypes but he loves that guy's movies to death

>by saying the movies are overrated i'm implying they're mediocre in and of themselves
The objectively greatest movie of all time can still be overrated. It is a meaningless word used by idiots who can't explain why they think a movie is bad so they just complain that other people like the movie too much.
>why do you care so much about what armond thinks
Literally just called him a troll and thereby implied that I don't care. Improve your comprehension.

>Deadpool, Rogue One, Civil War
All of these are very uninteresting movies. I don't see what's wrong with having a preference for BvS over Deadpool and I haven't seen Sully or Aferim but I'd fully believe they're better than Rouge One and Captain America.

The first ending to the first movie was the perfect ending. Toy Story 2 was complete shit and I knew that at 10 years old.

it looks like that black man is wearing a prison uniform and that's something you don't see every day

He agrees with the consensus 80% of the time

Where's the consistency? Nobody can answer this. He hates TDK, There Will Be Blood, Infinity War, Up, Toy Story 3 but loves Bedtime Stories, Dawn of the Dead remake and A Serious Man. Where's the consistency? lol

Deadpool , rogue one, cap America are all average flicks: not sure why thinking another movie is better than them is some how impossible

>It is a meaningless word used by idiots who can't explain why they think a movie is bad
kind of like the word "troll" then, which you keep using. you're just an inverse of armond white, no better

read his reviews and you'll see

You want me to explain to you what a troll is now? Jesus fucking christ. The absolute state of this board.

why do you keep bringing up a serious man like it's a contrarian opinion to like that movie. it was liked by most critics.

>A Serious Man
>a kino piece by the Coens
Who hates this movie? lmao the ending was brilliant

>You want me to explain to you what a troll is
Go on. Dare you.

You want me to explain to you what overrated means now? Jesus fucking christ. The absolute state of this board.

>Hates self important pretend art and juvenile fanboy pandering
>Praises sincerity and unabashed entertainment

Dawn Of The Dead and A Serious Man are both great movies in my opinion anyway so I think you're just baiting.

leftists get so flustered when they stumble upon opinions that run counter to their beliefs, is hilarious.

Armond judges films based on how well they fulfill their purpose. It would be idiotic to complain about the lack of artistic merit in an Adam Sandler film.

no, i'm not looking for any explanations from you. you can't think for yourself, why would i want more from you? just stick to pre-established conventions, definitions, opinions. don't think, just consume

Nope, it was shit. Like every Pixar movie since The Incredibles.

Ebert also does this, yet they have vastly different views lmao

You want me to explain to you what blacked is now? Jesus fucking christ. The absolute state of ur mum.

ebert was more of a hack than even armond

All correct and sound criticisms.

How?

Ebert is dead bro

I'm saying that it doesn't fit in with the other random movies he loved. Plus, why is The Square so good but not Pulp Fiction or TDK. Memes aside, how do u explain it

>we need more diversity
>a gay black man doesn't like our billion dollar corporate franchise? IMPEACH!

You don't have to like him but to write him off as a mere contrarian is little brain as af.

He answers fans all the time on Twitter

Ebert was the kind of person who focused on how a movie made him feel versus how he expected to feel going in. White focuses primarily on more technical aspects like direction style, and he has a particular obesssion for cinematography where well designed scenes make him overlook shit actors.

So how is Milk propaganda and bad for gays but he likes the message in I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry

why are underage twitter niggers so afraid to write 'as fuck' on the internet?
do they think the internet police will get them?

based

i endorse this product or service

I haven't seen the ones you are mad about him liking but Infinity War, The Hangover, Get Out, and Inception are all literal trash.

How is Armond so based? I can't name another film critic even half as cool as he is.

Attached: armond chucky.png (921x806, 890K)

He shat on Get Out? lmao if so, is he /ourguy/?

>anyone with differing opinions is a contrarian troll
>think like the hive or else
Fuck off, Armond is easily the best film critic currently alive.

His position seems to literally be whatever the mainstream consensus, isn't. Almost every time.

not really

>"""even""" Roger Ebert

ABLOOBLOO CONAN IS FASCIST BECAUSE A BLACK MAN GETS HIS HEAD CUT OFF

BLUE VELVET IS BAD BECAUSE IT EXPLOITS ISABELLA ROSSELLINI'S BODY

Why are you purposely slandering him? Anyone can scroll through his reviews on rotten tomatoes and see that this isn’t true. He generally gives poor reviews to popular blockbusters because guess what: he cares about film and blockbusters are usually schlock.

>So how is Milk propaganda and bad for gays
that wasn't his issue with milk at all

What? If you read any White review he mostly talks about politics.

You judge a comedy whether it is funny. Most Adam Sandler movies are not funny unless you are young or immature.

He didn’t like Pineapple Express he just compared t favorably to Judd Apatow’s other work. He really, REALLY doesn’t like Apatow and Rogen.

he's an entertaining writer, film reviews are a worthless artform anyway

How does that make it bad?

all arts are worthless
what the hell do you think art means?
it means 'white people are bored so we did something'

Based Armond is the only critic worth reading

Is he not going to review alita?

>That time Rian Johnson live tweeted Armond White at an award dinner
twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/158028308611735553

Side note, google has gotten so bad I could only find a broken link to an image of this screencap.
I had to specifically use the tv archive for it.

Attached: ArmondWhiteRianJohnson.png (673x6577, 1.72M)

kek

He's not a meme, but he is a faggot. I for one enjoy his ornate language.

That's troll behavior. It's almost objectively proven that TDK and Infinity War are better films than the fucking Green Hornet and Your Highness and Watchmen lol

Because the "mainstream critics" may as well all be the same person with the same predefined opinion

>It's almost objectively proven that TDK and Infinity War are better films than the fucking Green Hornet and Your Highness and Watchmen lol
ok buddy, you're fucking retarded.

I'm saying his likes aren't consistent. He likes A Serious Man and Pineapple Express and Bedtime Stories. How? lol

>White focuses primarily on more technical aspects like direction style, and he has a particular obesssion for cinematography where well designed scenes make him overlook shit actors.
So he's autistic as fuck. No wonder contrarians like him so much.

Rian is such a little snake posting all of that shit while I bet he was being totally polite to Armond in person.

This is why Armond is based. There's no smiles and polite handshakes while mocking people with tweets. I'd take open heckling any day.

it's not autism to give a pass to sexy actors just because they're attractive.
get your words straight, just say "he values things that i don't because he's smarter than me"

Holy shit did that really happen?
>handing Alexander Payne his valet ticket
How can one man be so based

>viral marketing
the thread

He doesnt critic movie for the quality but more for the purpose of the movie.

He did tweet it, I'm surprised they're still up since I recall Rian deleting a ton of his tweets after the problems guardians of the galaxy guy had.
It could be fiction though, if it is it's the best thing Rian has written.

This. OP is like a market researchers dossier on everything Yea Forums hates. There is no way he can be a real person.

Explain post modern films. Maybe I'm just retarded. Idk what that even means

>white people
All people use art as a pleasant distraction. Especially isolated tribes making idols/masks or whatever as they have a huge surplus of free time. Don't associate everything with white people you headcase.

Oh and don't forget that he is a literal homosexual that writes for LGBT magazines

Because it doesn't belong with fucking BEDTIME STORIES, you jackass. The movies he loves are random as fuck

What movie did I say before those 2? Bedtime Stories. This is my point. How can you like that group of weird unrelated films but trash TDK and BR2049. Hell, he liked Rise of the Planet of the Apes but then trashed Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. I don't get it

I think its like a self aware, disillusioned, insincere style. Like marvel's "yep im wearing tights" *winks at camera* schtick vs alita getting all caught up in her passions and wanting to do the right thing.

I'm a centrist. I'm not a cuckservative and I didn't vote for Hillary

>black
>homo
>still hates Moonlight

If you cherry picked from the likes/dislikes of any person you could come up with any number of cominations of movies that would seem completely unrelated.

They hate him because he goes against the zeitgeist.

Attached: lamecity.png (500x700, 417K)

I think he is a troll and I still think that's ok. Ebert and the rest hate him because he doesn't take this as "seriously" as they do. He doesn't see being a critic as an important cosmopolitan, technocratic tastemaker molding uncultured public opinion towards progress. He literally screws with that. I think he is a valuable voice that serves to shake up self-righteous critical narratives about contemporary film and art. And he's smart enough that it unnerves them

>Now that the Harry Potter series is over, maybe the truth can be realized: This has been the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises.

Absolutely based

Why? what's wrong with Rogan and apatow? They're pretty funny imo

He's a gay nigger that has the absolute worst taste in film. He's the literal definition of a contrarian. Anyone who takes him seriously has a sub 100 IQ. The man is a blowhard who cares more about writing his shit thoughts out on paper than actually reviewing a movie.

He has a talent whereby he can watch a movie and immediately know what every other critic is going to think and say about it. He is able to strip that down instantly and disassemble the "approved" opinion before it's even solidified. Armond white says more about the critics than he does about the movies, and that's ok. Valuable, even. But they hate him for it

His hatred of Moonlight is because he thinks it's exploitative.

I also thought his review of Black Panther was on point. Honestly when it comes to most popular movies I think he just shits on trends and rewards movies that tries to do something different. One of the common complaints I see him bring up for Marvel movies is how many of the characters have daddy issues as central plot devices.

>he's a contrarian, and that's a good thing!

Attached: 13627281697863926361.jpg (360x360, 19K)

>he says what everyone else says, and that's a good thing!
dumb frogposter

Attached: 1394549675118.jpg (400x405, 38K)

Armond is the king 'round ere, so best watch your step partner.

>strawmanning because you can't defend your love of a gay nigger contrarian

Attached: 185818643878247826316.jpg (306x306, 9K)

Sometimes a troll is worthwhile. Imagine this place if nobody ever trolled

i see you don't know what strawmanning is. i literally love a man who doesn't know what words mean, literally

>LOL I DON'T KNOW WHAT STRAWMANNING IS SO I'M JUST GONNA PROJECT ONTO THIS GUY AND CLAIM HE DOESN'T KNOW
I guess liking a retarded gay nigger fits your intelligence level.

niggerlover BTFO

But you don't know what strawmanning is. I insulted you and what you said, I didn't make up a version of you in my head and attack that. Idiot. You're so fucking stupid.

Not him but he never said endorsing what the consensus endorses is a good thing. That's the strawman you created.

He also writes kino reviews

He is a contrarian and a troll. He is the more articulate equivalent to calling everything you don't like "reddit", son you can feel special about yourself. He provides that feeling to his readers, who desperately need to feel validated

Incorrect

Nah he's actually a good critic. You should unironically head back to the site where you can downvote "wrong" or "troll" opinions like Armond's

So he's Yea Forums: the critic? lmao

That's a shitty defense, the man has absurd reasons for disliking films and you're either mentally ill or trolling if you take this fucker's bullshit seriously

>Adam Sandler's comedies are better than [literally anything]

Attached: images (91).jpg (250x241, 8K)

He's a great critic. It's like he not only critiques the film, but also how critiques how other critics review films. It's fucking masterful. He calls them out on their bullshit and bullshit film making. Oscar bait even tho its a good movie? He calls that shit out. Praise the Armond

>you're mentally ill for liking different movies
Jesus dude chill

I dislike your post because your punctuation sucks.

>he liked Rise of the Planet of the Apes but then trashed Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. I don't get it.

Did you watch both movies? They're quite different, so it's easy to see why someone would prefer one to the other. I preferred Rise as well, it was a genuinely new take on the Apes films, Dawn was like a drab version of Avatar.

He judges movies on what they are trying to achieve and if they fail or succeed when trying to achieve it.

I didn't say he was a good judge.

>I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
They need to reboot this as "I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Sneed" as a matter of national, if not global urgency.

the thing is though most other critics aren't reviewing movies "in good faith" anymore either. Now movies can be garbage but if they either push/promote the correct SJW bullshit and go "woke" and/or are produced by Disney critics throw all the praise at it.

>somehow manages to bring up politics
You mean like 99% of movie critics these days?
Except Armond is like one of only a handful of critics who are right-wing (him and Kyle Smith... those seem to be the only big names).

Every other critic has beliefs and biases comparable to a pink-haired demi-gendered tumblrina.

"progressives" are sickened / horrified by gays and blacks speaking their mind, both at once is too much

Also anyone else think Ebert was blinded by his own politics?

Seemed like he greatly overhyped movies that dealt with social justice with a heavy hand (ex: Mississippi Burning) even if they weren't good.

the real question, i think, is has armond white ever been wrong? gentlemen, please be precise and thorough in your replies.

No, I'm also a contrarian, like most people here. But people in this thread seem to denying that for some reason. They reject the idea that he's contrarian because they see it as an insult to him. THEY are the ones who see contrarianism as a negative, not me.

I actually do not understand the mindset of the average film viewer. The critics you are talking about are the film equivalent of your roasties favourite pop song on the radio. Like is it that incomprehensible that someone would not like UP or Dunkirk? Reading his reviews he actually makes sense unlike the sycophantic film nerd culture that buys action figures and has adults indulging their infantile minds with another Marvel retread.

You see? That's the only criticism you can come up with: "it's bad because it's popular". How is that NOT contrarianism?

Can you explain how TS2 was shit ?

Wtf he's based

If you can't interpret a paragraph then how am I to expect you to interpret film? All you have to do is muster enough brain power to accept that people view films on a different level than you do.

He likes Adam Sandler for being Adam Sandler. He's not shy about that opinion. Adam Sandler is his guilty pleasure.

And all you have to do is realize that there's nothing wrong with being a contrarian troll. Why are you acting so insecure on his behalf to defend him from "insults" which aren't insults at all?

I don't understand the compulsion to label the man a contrarian. The term is used to write off his honest opinion just because you disagree with it.

I hate him because he praises trash only a literal retard could enjoy

Attached: jonahhex.jpg (268x402, 35K)

Imagine unironically defending the opinions of a legit contrarian.

Please make sure your posts are relevant to the topic of the thread or post that you reply to.

LONG LIVE THE KING
LONG MAY HE REIGN
LONG LIVE THE KING

Attached: armond.jpg (300x279, 19K)

kek

Casino is vastly superior
To Goodfellas

yes, he was also a catholic and niggress lover so any movie that shilled catholicism or niggers automatically got a positive review from him

there will be blood fucking sucks dick
armond is based