Armond White Exposed: His Dumbest Reviews

Not really. He's especially wrong with Social Network. That movie is unironically a masterpiece

Is he, dare I say it, BASED?

On the Matrix:

>The sleek, film-noir imagery (based on green binary-code digits, a motif that predates David Fincher’s chromatics) achieves graphic-novel stylishness, but it doesn’t equal the deep mythos of Zack Snyder’sWatchmen,Man of Steel, andBatman v Superman.

What the fuck is wrong with this guy?

He’s right about every single one of those

>This has been the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises.

Based

None of these movies are “amazing classics” even if I enjoyed some of them they are hardly above reproach.
>ooh no he didn’t like the 3rd movie in a children’s talking toy franchise
Is that really a bizarre opinion?

>Resident Evil Afterlife (positive): If critics and fanboys weren’t suckers for simplistic nihilism and high-pressure marketing, Afterlife would be universally acclaimed as a visionary feat, superior to Inception and Avatar on every level.

>The House That Jack Built (positive): It works as satire by rubbing the audience’s face in the ugliness it enjoys. He dares a spiritual vision unlike other contemporary filmmakers — those secularists who regularly indulge guilt-free violence and self-justifying revenge

>Once Upon A Time in Hollywood (positive): Finally, Tarantino asks audiences to think about life -- not just the movies.

>Dragged Across Concrete (Positive): It presents a strangely naturalistic worldview. Instead of imagining how heartless -- or "cool" -- mankind can be, Zahler looks for hidden virtues in each situation, no matter how bizarre.

>Be Kind Rewind (positive): Be Kind Rewind explores the meaning of originality, but it's also a fable about art and social change.

>Role Models (positive): Role Models' sweeter, more mature perspective on manhood and people-hood avoids the Apatow curse.

>sorkin
Yeah...it’s obviously not a good movie

>Adventureland (positive): It adds appreciable humanity to the genre, improving the adolescent egotism inflected by Dazed and Confused and the vulgar excesses of Superbad

>Land of the Lost (positive): It sheds its TV-formula origins as a 1970s network series and becomes glib fun

>Bandslam (positive): The barely hyped Bandslam must settle for simply being the best American movie this summer

>A Serious Man (positive): The movie rejects the bland Jewishness of Judd Apatow films; it's similar to the black filmmakers' project in Next Day Air, in which social stereotypes get burlesqued, yet are used to reveal an essentially moral exercise

It's also worth noting he praised
>Mr. Deeds
>Bedtime Stories
>Pain and Gain
>Dawn of the Dead 2004
>28 Weeks Later (but hates 28 Days Later)

At this point, nobody has actually done an in depth review of his work which is why I'm exposing him. It's clear this is the work of a troll who wants fame. Imagine thinking Adam Sandler films are better than Up, Inception, and The Dark Knight. It's fucking ridiculous.

yep, I'm thinking he's based

holy shit was Armond the creator of the DULLEST copypasta?

Look up his sight and sound 2012 list. He has better taste than you for sure. Also imagine thinking that Inception and TDK are actually good. Are you braindead? I don't agree about everything with him but you picked very poor examples. He is right about Nolan, who is a terrible director. Armond is based.

Attached: armondwhite.jpg (250x375, 13K)

I like the one where he recommends Resident Evil: Afterlife over Inception. Paul Ws Anderson makes fucking fun trash.

>The Blind Side the perfect, God-sent antidote to Precious
based based based

What exactly is your issue here? He likes movies you dont?

This guy is posted on Yea Forums every day, and especially whenever a Marvel Movie is out

>ITT: OP is a hateful racist faggot trying his best to keep a brother down all because he doesn't follow mainstream NPC talking points regarding movies

>the work of a troll
fuck off with this shit. He’s been a critic for decades. Not appreciating your favorite redditcore flicks from the last decade isn’t “trolling,” and it’s honestly insane that you assume people who hold a differing opinion from are doing that. His favorite films are Lawrence of Arabia, Intolerance and Nashville. Really not controversial stuff.

Yeah, that's right

>At this point, nobody has actually done an in depth review of his work which is why I'm exposing him.
Seems a flimsy excuse. Also, where is your review?

>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T CRITICISE MY PIXAR DRIVEL AND CAPESHIT TRASH!! YOU'RE JUST A TROLL!! CONTRARIAN!!

Attached: 1547365788719.jpg (700x734, 80K)

>a brother down
nigger
t.sea monkey

lmao you cucks are all bark and not bite, bet you wouldn't say this shit to me IRL fucking white faggot

>Pain and Gain not being good
When will this fucking meme end?

>Dawn of the Dead 2004
>Pain and Gain
All good

Just goes to show you that he is one of the best critics

>Pain and Gain
>Dawn of the Dead 2004
>28 Weeks Later
I don't get it, these movies are often regarded as good, or at least not bad.

>Inception (Negative): Inception is the work of a “con artist”
“[Nolan’s] shapeless storytelling… throws audiences into artistic limbo—an “unconstructed dream space” like Toy Story 3—that leaves them bereft of art’s genuine purpose: a way of dealing with the real world.

>Iron Man 2 is “disposable junk”
exactly what critics and audiences deserve following the celebration of that awful, dung-hued first film.

>Shutter Island (negative): It is a perfect example of Hollywood excess: It demonstrates a once significant filmmaker decaying into a big budget, poorly-motivated hack.

>Edge of Darkness (positive): Gibson roots Craven in credible middle-aged fatigue as if to prove he's a truer artist than his haters claim.

>AVATAR (negative): The corniest movie ever made about the white man's need to lose his identity and assuage racial, political, sexual and historical guilt

>Rogue One (negative): This latest "origin story" features no storytelling development but simply repeats Star Wars formulae...Rogue One, a huckster's tale, confirms the Disney Corporation's routine indoctrination of its captive audience.

>Lady Bird (positive): Lady Bird is a sensible tribute to the spirit of Claudia Alta Taylor Johnson. . .The film's conflicts are surprisingly touching

>IT Chapter 1 (negative): It only seems like "fun" if you fall for King's obvious, contemptuous treatment of American innocence

I refuse to believe he really said "dullest franchise" about Harry Potter

those are valid takes, you can like a movie and still have criticisms about it

He's dishonest and Yea Forums like him because he makes fun of Marvel movies, but most here have no clue behind most of his reviews. He's just a troll trying to get famous.

>Inception (Negative): Inception is the work of a “con artist”
Holy fucking based

lol, its mediocre as fuck. Anyone who gets awed by basic cross cutting like the rowing scene with Grieg music is a pleb. Literally babbys first cross cut. And the acting is bad too, Jesse Eisenberg is terrible

/ourguy/ confirmed

He sounds based tbqh

Armond is the basedest faggot nigger ever, you only shout "troll!" at him because you can't refute his arguments and don't like his opinions. Dilate, seethe, 48% etc.

>UP
The movie runs out of steam with still 45 mins left. I liked the movie but it’s hardly a perfect film

he's the opposite of dishonest. he's the most honest critic around

rottentomatoes.com/critic/armond-white/movies?page=8

Scroll down and you'll see he actually said that. How do people not know this?

Review is a poor word choice, more like an examination of his work, so people can see he's a troll. You know he's a troll if he prefers Grown Ups over Inception. C'mon dude. Even on Bond films, he loved Quantum of Solace and Skyfall (which had so many continuity errors) but slammed Spectre and Casino Royale.

I understand some people will have some guilty pleasures, but he has proven he is a troll when he praises a film like Bandslam and Vox Lux over BR2049 and Fight Club and Pulp Fiction.

You honestly thought someone from Yea Forums was creative enough to come up with that line? Nope, it was stolen from Armond's review for that shitty pasta.

You have to be very dumb to narrow down his reviews to "like" or "dislike". I don't blame you, though, rotten tomatoes generation aren't used to more than one phrase reviews.

Literally every single example the OP makes, Armond is right. Hes the only one based enough to shit on capeshit, sequels and hollow big budget productions. He literally predicted the capeshit plague with his Ironman review and tried to convince other reviewers to pan it too. 15 years later we all see that he was correct as always.

Only a pleb would think his reviews of Nolan muh plot twist mediocrity, capeshit and soulless disney garbage are bad or "trolling".

Wrong. 28 Days Later is considered so much better than 28 Weeks Later (of course he hates 28 Days), and Dawn 2004 is shit compared to the original. Almost everyone agrees with this. Also, don't defend Bay lol He's one of the worst directors ever

>Chicken Little
How can he be so high IQ?

Based, he invented the best pasta on Yea Forums

Bandslam is super underrated. I'm with him on that one.

You don't find it strange that out of all those films listed, he only liked Lady Bird and a Mel Gibson film? Avatar, Inception, IT, Shutter Island are almost universally praised, dude

>You know he's a troll if he prefers Grown Ups over Inception. C'mon dude

Attached: 51927873-62F2-462D-993B-743228312A6B.png (785x1000, 254K)

Dunkey beat you to it, fag

Both films have positive scores on rottentomatoes.
Nope, because it's just criticism. I'm pretty sure there's more than just those sentences.

>NOOOOO YOU CANT JUST DISAGREE WITH THE MAINSTREAM OPINION! THESE FILMS ARE UNIVERSALLY PRAISED YOU HAVE TO LIKE THEM!

Armond used to be believable in his contrarian reviews but these days it does seem like he's aware and doing it on purpose.

I'd rather have more critics like Armond to be honest. People slated Ebert all the time for going against the grain as well. To be a good critic you have to be willing to give genuine opinions based on your own taste. That's what differentiates genuine criticism from simply regurgitating press releases and advertising movies on behalf of the studios.

The only movie review so far I disagree with is his iron man 1 review

this isn't deh

armond is called the king of Yea Forums for a reason

>read White review
>he understands cinema as an art form and can reference many classic movies

>read other RT critics
>IT WAS LE FUN !!!!!! Bing bing wahoo

Yeah I’ll take armond’s reviews more seriously . He gets too political sometimes but then again he writes for national review so that makes sense.
>bbbbut he’s a troll
According to RT he agrees with the average critical score over 80% of the time

He seems to be consistent with his opinions. I think people are too familiar with him as of now, to a point that someone could make a "Armond Bait" film.
I don't know, I think he's a reliable film critic, at least for american films. And he has criticized a lot of movies that I like, but you usually get recommendations from reading his reviews, and you don't really get that from elsewhere.

>slammed Spectre
sounds like a reasonable take to me

Spectre and Inception are terrible

Is armond white /ourguy/?

He's right about everything except Iron Man, and that is only good compared to other capeshit.

Lmfao, are you being serious?

>28 Weeks Later (but hates 28 Days Later)
that's a big :yikes:

Nooooo you can't criticize my sequels of cgi cartoons!!!!!!

Is OP lost? This isn’t R/eddit, bro
Imagine trying to “expose” someone for shitting on Iron Man 2 and fucking Rogue One lmfao
OP, we need a picture, man. What do you look like?

idk I thought it was one of the best comedies in a while, I haven't laughed as hard at a movie since the Rock was grilling those hands.

Pain and Gain was actually fun, perfect for Bay's crass annoying humor.

>Chicken Little is good animation
Armond confirmed to be a professional ruseman

I just don’t trust or respect niggers, in general.

IT, Avatar, and Shutter Island are not "reddit" movies, you idiot. Plus, Armond LIKES Lady Bird and Once Upon a Time In Hollywood so will you admit he's reddit and a feminist?

I used to hate on Armond for being an edgy nigger faggot contrarian but after I read more of his positive reviews I've leaned more towards judging him less for his contrarianism and more towards his lack of open-mindedness.

>IT is not a reddit movie
wew lad

>IT, Avatar, and Shutter Island are not "reddit" movies, you idiot

Pretty sure they are. Or if not reddit movies, then at the very least pleb movies.

>IT and Shutter Island aren’t Redditbait!!
Lmfao
>Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is somehow “feminist” and not certified Yea Forumscore
Wtf is this post?

>Imagine thinking Adam Sandler films are better than Up, Inception, and The Dark Knight. It's fucking ridiculous.

i liked Up but i can perfectly understand why someone hated it. At least a few Sandler movies are better than Inception and Dark knight. He's not a troll. Every time he praises or criticizes a movie he gives a very detailed article why he did that. I often disagree with him but there were so many movies everyone praised but Armond criticized and what he said was almost 100% my opinion about the movie.

he is high IQ, well read and has a vast knowledge about cinema and culture in general. You don't need to agree with him. It's not even always about what's bad/good. It's about what you like and don't like in movies and are you able to support it with strong arguments. He can. And because of that he's probably the best living movie critic, and i said that having different opinions than he has in like 80% of the cases.

saying he's bad because he didn't like movies you liked or movies that are widely accepted as good is simply dumb. And also insecure. fF you really think some movie is great, you wouldn't care about bad reviews that much.

>It
r*ddit
>Avatar
very r*dd*t
>Shutter Island
holy fricking wife's son batman!

Avatar is most forgotten about movie ever in terms of how many people liked it and then completely forgot it existed not even a year later. It's like the film equivalent of Pokemon go or the macarena.

Those sound bites on Lady Bird and Adventureland are at least reasonable. Very odd that he complains about "vulgar excesses" and then has nice stuff to say about Adam Sandler, though.

>The sleek, film-noir imagery (based on green binary-code digits, a motif that predates David Fincher’s chromatics) achieves graphic-novel stylishness, but it doesn’t equal the deep mythos of Zack Snyder’sWatchmen,Man of Steel, andBatman v Superman

Review title is:
>"Is The Matrix the Conservative’s Star Wars?"
This article better have some strong ass arguments to support that hypothesis.

non argument

Pain and Gain was American dream kino what the fuck are you on about

based as fuck

>AVATAR (negative): The corniest movie ever made about the white man's need to lose his identity and assuage racial, political, sexual and historical guilt
I remember laughing my ass off in the theaters at how bad that movie was. Why the hell did the guy want to fuck a blue furry alien?

I meant Lady Bird is feminist and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is reddit. Learn to read

>

Attached: 1567857004318.jpg (400x396, 28K)

Is this a bait thread where you only quote his most based reviews?

I liked King's Speech. At least a unique film.

>The Dark Knight (negative review): The generation of consumers who swallow this pessimistic sentiment can’t see past the product to its debased morality. Instead, their excitement about The Dark Knight’s dread (that teenage thrall with subversion) inspires their fealty to product.

well, he's not wrong

No, he just panders to right wing films. That's why he loves Zahler and Synder and why he slams Aronofsky and Peele. There's no way you can convince me that Man of Steel is better than TDK.

Also, he never gave 1 good review for Tarantino (except maybe I think Reservoir Dogs) but then gives a glowing review for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, which just so happened to be a film that was called out for sexism and being anti-hippie and anti-drugs and against 60s liberalism. You think it's a coincidence that he just so happened to love that movie but slam Django Unchained? No, he's biased.

I wouldn't be surprised if he loves Joker because it pisses off muh liberals, but he had no problem ripping on TDK, even though both films are nihilistic and have a similar tone.

Lady Bird isn’t feminist, it’s a coming of age story that ends with its protagonist in church realizing the importance of family after being disillusioned with the temptation of libertine college culture. Did you even watch it?
If your only remaining argument is that a critic who has reviewed hundreds and hundreds of movies wrote a positive review about a Yea Forums beloved film that r/eddit likes but finds problematic, you should probably just accept that L, champ

Those movies were all shit though.

>universal praise
Form your own opinion, sheep brain retard

I gave an argument, dude. He has to be a troll if he hates virtually every Disney, Pixar, MCU, Oscar film. It's like he's pandering to those pseudo intellectuals who think they're brilliant cause they hate something popular.

I get people will have guilty pleasures or sometimes not like something popular. But you can't convince me that he's not a troll when he slams Interstellar and Birdman and Fight Club but praises Mr. fucking Deeds and that horrible Dawn of the Dead remake

Plus, he calls Apatow films bland Jewishness but then calls A Serious Man film of the year? Where's the consistency?

Michael Clayton was dull. Just a run of the mill thriller.

>another redditor triggered by Armond
lmao

>There's no way you can convince me that Man of Steel is better than TDK.

your attitude explains a lot. You have your own head so far up in the ass you can probably tickle your lungs with a tongue.

>I wouldn't be surprised if he loves Joker because it pisses off muh liberals, but he had no problem ripping on TDK, even though both films are nihilistic and have a similar tone.

you're also legitimately retarded

>I wouldn't be surprised if he loves Joker
it can go either way honestly
he is big on sincerity and wants movie to have positive, uplifting messages or at least be cautionary tales, and dislikes cynicism
if the movie glamourizes the violence and doesn't condemn the Joker's actions he will probably dislike it, much to the dismay of a huge chunk of Yea Forums

Are you even in disagreement that OUaTiH is easily a far better film than Django or are you just upset that he doesn’t toe the line
>No, he's biased
I truly, truly hope you are not suggesting that the general critical establishment isn’t OVERWHELMINGLY biased in the opposite direction - see, and concede that you cannot and will not defend, pic related - and merely standing apart from said establishment would make one seem right wing by comparison
Also, TDK is thinly-veiled apologia for Bush II, so you might need to rethink your take

Attached: 24FEA7A2-BD03-4E60-B908-0A88740E1106.jpg (987x1712, 337K)

>comparing Apatow to the Coens
kek are you stupid? Also Mr Deeds is based and kino

you have yet to prove how liking Dawn of the Dead (a film that has positive scores on both RT and imdb) is contrarian or trollike

>imagine having an opinion absolutely ridiculous!
People are only mad at this guy because he isn't a plantation nigger.

You keep harping on Dawn of the Dead, but that’s a well-regraded film with 75% critical approval. If anything, your position is the contrarian one

The point is that, he's only a critic. Why should we care? Why should be care so much as to make a ranking of critics, let alone designate one as the worst of them? Do we really need their opinions, can't we really just let them have theirs, and form ours?

Original Dawn is overrated and the remake was enjoyable (except for that retarded baby scene)

Either you make arguments against what he says in those reviews or you got nothing because appealing to authority (which for you apparently is represented by the majority) won't quite work as an argument

Hes a professional shitposter with a 160
IQ. He doesnt believe a single thing he says

Oh, I see now. It's not about the films at all. You've just invented a political angle and that's what's really got you so upset.

No, check RT, IMDB, Metacritic, or any YouTube review, you fucking retard. This isn't my opinion. IT's a fact. It's universally praised

>I gave an argument, dude.

no you didn't.

>He has to be a troll if he hates virtually every Disney, Pixar, MCU, Oscar film.

first of all, he doesn't. But even if he were that is still non argument. Is there an obligatory for movie critics to like movies that critical mass of critics liked? LMAOOOOO.

He always backs his opinions with detailed and deep articles.

>But you can't convince me that he's not a troll when he slams Interstellar

are you for real?

Dunkirk
>Preening for fanboys in 70mm, Nolan’s vast, clear views of dull-to-horrific killings, plus amped-up artillery sound effects, are no different from what he did in his Dark Knight trilogy. Like Michael Bay’s fantasy Pearl Harbor (1999), Dunkirk uses history as a pretext to show off the director’s fascination for calamity.

>It’s routine to describe battle films as “anti-war,” still, that misnomer doesn’t describe Dunkirk — the apolitical Nolan transforms the “anti-war” genre into his patented “life is cheap” genre. Each sequence that details the brutal tragedy of warfare is punishing yet remote. Men caught in numerous doom-laden catastrophes are presented IMAX-size for no other reason than shock, discomfort, and the awe of action-addicted filmgoers — adolescents who are temperamentally distanced from how those experiences shaped modern Western culture.

>Duty is depicted as futile, and despite parroting Churchill’s spiritual motivation against darkness, Nolan typically evokes nihilism without any follow-through. Dunkirk feels dispassionate; it caters to pampered Boomers who never fought for or believed in a war or military service.
Note the civilian armada approaching their countrymen: Each face is expressionless. Is this because Nolan rejects emotion, or does patriotic fervor embarrass him?

>Dunkirk has been made without wartime sympathy. That’s why the Churchill speech comes off as unconvincing and sappy. Nolan’s detached style mocks the populism that relates to average-grunt, working-joe service; it continues the attitude of Nineties indie filmmakers who chose cynicism over sentiment, anti-Western subversion over jingoism.

Attached: 1448830815047.jpg (406x422, 12K)

His point was to not care about universal praise or universal hate and to like movies you like.

Hes the Andy Kaufman of critics

this is so fucking dumb. why are people here trying to defend this

i had exact same thoughts about dunkirk but i couldn't word it properly. He's a fucking genius.

lmao

>The generation of consumers who swallow this pessimistic sentiment can’t see past the product to its debased morality. Instead, their excitement about The Dark Knight’s dread (that teenage thrall with subversion) inspires their fealty to product
this sounds like word soup from a thesaurus. what does "to product" even mean?

Adventureland is widely acclaimed. Why are you so fucking dumb contrarian?

Serious man is also widely acclaimed.

sorry you're not allowed to have that opinion here. you're only allowed to like adam sandler films here

Holy fuck did he just name the jew?!

It just seems that Armond appreciates positivity instead of negativity, "artistic merit" be damned. I rarely do agree with him but I can't even point out what I feel is wrong with all of his critiques, other than maybe he's a bit too closed off to anything outside of comfort zone. Still, I respect his opinion.

Based Armond "Honorary" White

He is right.

>Imagine thinking Adam Sandler films are better than Up, Inception, and The Dark Knight
If it's like Click or something then yeah it's actually better than all of those, but that's not hard

>A Serious Man (positive):
>Pain and Gain
>28 Weeks Later (but hates 28 Days Later)

all good

Critics judge movies one at a time, not in relation to all other movies they have ever reviewed.

He also hates the MCU, which is about as conservative as you can be, while still having mass appeal.

Tarentino is a shit director who just tries to be as edgy as possible.
>muh foot fetish
>muh racial revenge porn

Adam Sandler films aren't very creative or technically proficient. I don't care how sincere Sandler is, his films aren't funny or entertaining. Maybe if Armond White thought Christopher Nolan was a nice "positive" guy, and TDK had a happy positive film maybe he would have given it a friendlier review. Who knows?

I don't know, The Waterboy never fails to make me laugh.

>Dunkirk feels dispassionate; it caters to pampered Boomers who never fought for or believed in a war or military service.

Wow

this level of cope is so ridiculous i'm starting to think you're trolling

It has a 6.8 on IMDB and people never talk about it. It's a forgotten comedy, whereas, comedies such as The Hangover and Knocked Up are still talked about

Yes, but he criticized Apatow because of his Jewish films but gives the Coen's a free pass when they make a WHOLE damn film about a Jew? lmao

>Imagine thinking Adam Sandler films are better than Up, Inception, and The Dark Knight.
I can believe it. Nolan's films are always failures on so many levels that he incarnates the word "speciousness".

Probably because A Serious Man is more similar to Saramago's take on Catholicism and Apatow's just the usual practices of the stereotype.

Sorry, if you hate "nihilistic" or "dark" films, you snowflake. The whole world isn't an Adam Sandler film. We NEED films that are dark, not just happy shallow shit

>all that shit
>opens the thread with Toy Story
wew lad, hope you keep making these threads in the future

>It has a 6.8 on IMDB and people never talk about it.

why should he care about that writing a review?

>The movie rejects the bland Jewishness of Judd Apatow films

that's what he wrote. You're legitimately impaired. You can't even read lmaoo

youtube.com/watch?v=ihpe07LoOx0

still ridiculous

You might not be able to read

OH NO ARMOND WHITE IS MAKING ME THINK FOR MYSELF NOOOOOOOOOOO

Those are all spot on

You say this while so many of his reviews come down to “it was fun”

Being contrarian isn’t thinking for yourself

>Armond hater
>states the movie-taste-equivalent to “he’s a white male!” (He likes THIS movie guys, c’mon!!!)
room temp iq

>The movie rejects the bland Jewishness of Judd Apatow films;
BASED

FUCK JUDD APATOW AND HIS SHITTY REDDIT COMEDIES
ESPECIALLY SUPERBAD

>>Inception (Negative): Inception is the work of a “con artist”

Attached: 1544419995909.gif (304x226, 2.03M)

did you hate dawn of the dead because of the preacher scene where he condemns fags and abortion? be honest
you sound like a reddit kind of guy with liberal views

Why does he hate Nolan so much?

No, he criticized Apatow's shallowness and postmodern aesthetic in his shitty stoner flicks. Armond hates postmodern.

literally everyone who isn't a normie pleb hates nolan.

Redpilled and accurate. The Matrix was surface level.

You can't argue taste, don't understand the problem people have with his reviews

Pain and Gain is legit one of the best dark comedies of the decade

nigger every comedy and horror film has an average of a 6.8 on imdb

Snyderfags are a fucking cult

these are all based

Attached: 1568736689006.jpg (400x400, 30K)

Role Models is legit one of the most underrated comedies of the 2000s

>The movie rejects the bland Jewishness of Judd Apatow films
so this is the line that did him in

Attached: 1568601379123.jpg (646x595, 42K)

>The film’s one good scene has Thor (Chris Hemsworth) traveling back to the day his mother Frigga (Rene Russo) dies; he’s unable to change fate but gets a last chance to re-experience womblike love. It rips off Spielberg’s A.I., and Marvel fans probably won’t recognize that it also rips off Thornton Wilder’s Our Town — that’s part of the MCU cultural cheat. Spielberg’s and Wilder’s larger issues are eclipsed by Frigga’s flattery: “Everyone fails at who they’re supposed to be. The measure of a hero is how they succeed at being who they are.” She rings the Millennial psychobabble bell. Fans are permitted to go forward and pre-order their Toy Story 4 tickets with no other sense of responsibility.

Attached: 1545134173952.png (258x544, 118K)

>>Be Kind Rewind (positive)
Good

>The Social Network: (negative review) Like one of those fake-smart, middlebrow TV shows, the speciousness of The Social Network is disguised by topicality. It’s really a movie excusing Hollywood ruthlessness.

This guy well articulated exactly how I feel. I'm going to have to check him out.

Why do zoomers think talking about jews is controversial?

kek

reminds me of that C.S. Lewis quote reddit manchildren like to reference so much

>oh no he doesn't like this boring kids movie or this reductive big studio product that has nothing interesting to say, he's such a bad dumb meaniehead!
>what's that? He likes a chinese art movie? I never heard of it because i only watch popcorn movies so it must be bad!

That guy got canned at SNL for categorizing Apatow as a "white faggot comic" which is manifestly spot-on.

Imagine being unironically homophobic and against women. I remember back in 2005 Yea Forums used to make fun of Christians, conservatives, and pro life gun nuts. I guess that's what happens when a bunch of kiddos find the internet

Nothing wrong with postmodernism lol things can't always stay the same. Sometimes change is good, moron

>I remember back in 2005 Yea Forums used to make fun of Christians, conservatives, and pro life gun nuts.
never happened

Yea Forums has always made fun of everyone and still does. Stop being a faggot

what a faggot

Armond White flips a coin and it's totally based.

He's the author of the first half, which shits on the films. The second half, which shits on the books, is written by Harold Bloom (Yea Forums's Armond, but much more respected and renowned in the real world). goodreads.com/review/show/1530857
Of course, the obligatory image that goes with each posting of the copypasta and all of its variants are made by Anons.

>h-he doesnt like three of the greatest films ever made!
>BR2049
>Fight Club
>Pulp Fiction
The basedboy meme is real. People unironically believe these films are three of the greatest of all time holy moly can i get a cringeoli

Attached: CDC8218C-EBEB-4472-BB22-44C5DE82BE1E.jpg (1080x1020, 72K)

The Dark Knight is clearly neo-conservative Bush-era propaganda, yet Armond hates it.

If he has any biases they arent political in nature.

>continuity error
imagine actually having such a bugman mind that you genuinely believe shit like this matters in the slightest

those are all manly, patrician films though
being a contrarian doesn't disqualify you from being a soiboi, my feminine friend

>>AVATAR (negative): The corniest movie ever made about the white man's need to lose his identity and assuage racial, political, sexual and historical guilt
racist and bigoted much?

>hates Iron Man because its too serious
>loves BvS
???

Dismissing a corny "just be yourself" line as psychobabble implies some measure of obfuscation, which is clearly not the case. Everyone in the theater understood the expression, so I am left questioning the critics intention from such a remark.

"Anti-war" isn't a misnomer simply because a film includes war; there are different ways to approach the material and anti-war is referencing the depiction of the subject, not the subject itself. This isn't even that subtle, so I would surmise this observation as likely disingenuous.

>art’s genuine purpose: a way of dealing with the real world.

I sincerely hope most people don't share this view of art. It is sad that a person would believe that all of art is primarily in service of the despondent to find coping methods.

Absolutely fucking based and redpilled. Armond and Scaruffi are only film critics I care about..

Armond isn't a contrarian. Hes just a crackhead and god knows what he sees when he watches a movie. I was convinced of that when I read his Silence review. This dude is on drugs and so of course tv psychos with their atypical neurochemistry flock to their crackhead lord.

It’s literally almost impossible to finish due to how garbage it is.

The “just be yourself” line is psychobabble though.

It’s self-important fluff, a stock line only serviceable as egotistical masturbation for the character of Thor

“Be yourself” means nothing to the audience except “Thor is awesome. Thor is Thor. When Thor is Thor he is awesome.”
Self important sentiments like these take a bludgeon to character development and reduces characters to barely living action figures and the audience to mind-numbed sheep, fattened with self-help taglines to the slaughter of shallow cinematic purgatory.

So the line is emblematic of a much larger problem with the film and films that preceded it.

>white people criticizing black critic
I'm pretty sure this is racist somehow or another.. . . I dunno anymore. Fuck this gay earth.

he's just a low iq retard who has mastered a certain writing style that makes him appear smart to other retards. and because he's black he gets trotted out by conservatives and contrarians.

That isn't what psychobabble means.

Daily reminder that he is 100% patrician and reddit SEETHES when he btfos their "high brow" hollywood schlock

Attached: ourguy.jpg (1080x1696, 983K)

Armond didnt say it was psychobabble but that it rings the millennial psychobabble bell. He means it's prepostrous doublethink from the generation that brought you validation of mental illnesses.

What would have been a better piece of dialogue than "just be yourself"???

Deep. Was it actually THE greatest line of all time?

He has a Master of Fine Arts from Columbia, whereas you’re a NEET with erectile dysfunction. I don’t think anyone cares that you’re stupid and defensive enough to call him a “contrarian”

truly /our guy/ together with scott mendelson (who writes satire)

Trent Reznor was unironically responsible for a huge amount of the quality of that movie though

>master
>of fine arts
>black affirmative action recipient
lol

Found the estronaut^

He likes Adventureland? Fucking based. That movie is severely underrated.

This this most based post in the history of Yea Forums
God bless that nigger

>the dullest franchise
>no way he said this.jpg
>look it up
>it's real
/ourguy/

Attached: 1567767766874.jpg (888x894, 68K)

The fact that he liked The House That Jack Built so much is very interesting to me. It had divisive but not awful reviews, and I thought it was quite good.

Attached: cute_marisa_eating_spaghetti.jpg (450x500, 35K)

>holy fricking wife's son batman!

Attached: 1360532706968.gif (320x190, 1.99M)

Even with Affirmative Action, getting into an Ivy League school requires more intelligence than the modal NEET shrieking at Armand for not upvoting a Toy Story sequel will ever possess

Yeah, maybe armond is a bad critic. OR, maybe he's right, and hollywood is fucking trash, and there hasn't been a good movie in decades.

Maybe for him to be responsible and act like a king, guiding his people instead of being a drunk fatass

Zoomers are far more open to commenting on their true nature than every other age group combined.

How is the line doublethink? It isn't at odds with any conflicting belief also held by the character, as far as I am aware. If it is the case, I apologize in advance.

From common parlance, I interpreted "ringing the millennial psychobabble bell" as something along the lines of she used psychological jargon without precise meaning and in doing so elicited a positive Pavlovian reaction from millennials. I would assume your interpretation is idiosyncratic.

On a related note, such misuse of the word "doublethink" could be considered psychobabble.

>How is the line doublethink

It's not doublethink. The person you're replying to doesn't know what doublethink is, and is using it as a buzzword.

Armond White Joker review when?

holy fucking shit this guy is based as fuck

Attached: 1567779523500.jpg (612x612, 32K)

Holy Fucking Shit.
Are all of his reviews this based and hilarious?

Holy fucking based

Attached: 2A67B854-0418-422E-83AE-F56B69C31B73.png (900x900, 442K)

I unironically think that Armond is the best critic working nowadays

im thinking hes based

Attached: 1567197295485.png (776x776, 838K)

>The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing.
>This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its insecurities about heritage, social prestige, and empowerment. So Marvel’s new, instant blockbuster Black Panther appeals to adolescent fantasies about birthright and ethnic invincibility — dishing up the routine super-heroics of T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman), a black version of Batman who fights crime dressed as a panther. He’s a recent addition to the Marvel Avengers series and the new king of Wakanda, a fictitious African nation devised by two of Marvel’s pseudo–social scientists, writer Stan Lee and illustrator Jack Kirby.
>The Black Panther film and its hype are inseparable.
>What motivates their methods of racial exploitation are confirmed by this week’s Time magazine: Its cover features Boseman, Black Panther’s star, handsomely replacing Time’s infamously racist, darkened O. J. cover, to prove that the publication has abandoned journalism to become a social-justice-warrior pamphlet. Combining youth and black exploitation is an effective propaganda tactic when audiences don’t recognize how they’re being manipulated; they’re simply flattered by it.

Based Tucker making lefties seethe with minimum tv runtime

pain & gain is good
not sure why you hate bay so much bro
he shat out a diamond right here

Armond is at his best and most honest when calling out pandering black movies - Precious, Straight Outta Compton, Black Panther, etc

His 13th review was actually great

nationalreview.com/2016/10/13th-documentary-politically-correct-dull-cowardly/