another maniacal Armond White review, this time "Fahrenheit 9/11"

I have no idea how ppl know that AW doesn't actually like Transformers.

same way we know moon landing wasn't real

"real" as in it actually happened or "real" as in it was all a front to check out the Transformers wreckage on the other side of the moon?

Well there's certainly nothing racially offensive in those Transformers movies!

yea Optimus Prime is totally sporting Latin Kings colors

well actually no that'd be Bumblebee

for some reason i find julianna margulies a total babe w/ straight hair but not w/ curly hair. and usually i like curly haired chicks

― max, Friday, January 21, 2011 12:21 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

same here, my wife has curly hair, but i never gave JM a second look until when she was on scrubs and i was like woah

I have no idea how ppl know that AW doesn't actually like Transformers.

― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 22 January 2011 15:02 (5 hours ago)

you mean Transformers II, of course, because somehow he didn't like the first one but felt the second was good. Which is completely ridiculous and unbelievable.

Well there's certainly nothing racially offensive in those Transformers movies!

― Telephoneface (Adam Bruneau), Saturday, January 22, 2011 4:29 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

Pretty sure Armond loves racially offensive movies, considering his positive review for Norbit.

Armond wd make a fine ST villain, if JJ Abrams is lurking

― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Friday, 21 January 2011 18:07 (Yesterday)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/sexymollusk/armondwhite090223_250copy.jpg

but really, what do you guys think of his liking 35 Rhums but not White Material? (same as me actually)

He couldn't find a connection in White Material he could manipulate into a diss of Social Network or Greenberg.

have no problem with him liking 35 rhums whatsoever, it's a great movie

AW liking good movies here and there is totally a blind chicken finding some corn

Armond the maverick quite likes Your Highness (tho it's no Gentlemen Broncos), but he gets off a good shot at the Arthur remake:

No wonder Arthur’s mother (Geraldine James) warns, “As the coffee-colored gentleman who runs this country said: It’s time to put childish things behind us.” Actually, someone else said that first.

http://www.nypress.com/article-22281-inner-geeks.html

Digging through some old Spin magazines and read about Armond's role in Public Enemy's Professor Griff row. He called Griff's dismissal "the most terrible example of sellout I have witnessed in my lifetime" and called Chuck D "another bought, whipped slave." Good to see that offensive, misguided hyperbole is not limited to his movie reviews.

I just realized I had no idea how he sounded in person

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBxruT4LEaA

Dude should be stroking a cat

If you watch that, he complains that everyone lied about the last NY Film Critics Circle Awards. Then describes the exact same anecdote I recall reading (Aaronofsky made some crack, White responded "that's ok, he reads my articles, so he knows the truth") and says everyone else lied about it, without saying what THEY erroneously reported.

also...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWrjJZR6PfE

again, "they lied...they lied" never saying what the "lie" was - double checked Lisa Schwarzbaum's piece and...yeah, i still don't know what the lie was, other than the suggestion that Armond wasn't awesome: http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/01/11/armond-white-darren-aronofsky-nyfcc-awards/

Digging through some old Spin magazines and read about Armond's role in Public Enemy's Professor Griff row. He called Griff's dismissal "the most terrible example of sellout I have witnessed in my lifetime" and called Chuck D "another bought, whipped slave." Good to see that offensive, misguided hyperbole is not limited to his movie reviews.

I finished Jeff Chang's hip-hop book last week and the quotes are even more delicious in context.

I didn't bother noting that he loved The Beaver.

He did win me over in the '90s for rightly labeling The Silence of the Lambs "feminist claptrap."

god forbid hollywood claptrap is feminist

not really to his point

AW finds Trollhunter "genuinely sophisticated":

http://www.nypress.com/article-22514-bridging-the-legend.html

he's also found a title for his autobiography

Larry Crowne, is the humanist opposite to Hollywood’s self-congratulatory snark.
Larry Crowne’s lack of cynicism requires an audience that doesn’t hate itself.

I was surprised by his negative review of Transformers 3, but reading that I just said to myself, "of course."

gotta remember that he loved TF2, so the most challopy thing for him to say is that part 3 lost the magic of the second one.

The specter of Cranston’s Bad Husband recalls Dede the pimp in Jean Renoir’s 1931 La Chienne

Yes, and Transformers 3 has been getting some relatively ok reviews so he had to go the other way

I actually like Armond White's reviews. I don't always agree with them, and they can be hastily written, but I find them frequently insightful.

"Bay’s ongoing premise—good guy Autobots battle bad guy Decepticons—isn’t just boyhood army play writ large; it charts the distance our culture has traveled during the past decade. By avoiding contemplation about the emotional nature of its clanging, morphing, warring creatures—or even why the combat is never, ever decisive—Bay and executive producer Steven Spielberg accommodate the insensitivity that characterizes post-9/11 culture."

"ongoing premise"

"contemplation about"

ugh that review

Bay’s fantasy of mankind’s upheaval is certainly about dynamism, yet not much else. (Would the Futurists approve of such decadence?) Still, critics and fanboys should demand more—that he dig deeper. The smallest narrative link between Chicago’s decimation and a single character’s caring about it would make this sequence magnificent, not just spectacular. (A curious line of dialogue describing “a visual and therefore visceral betrayal” is oddly apt.) Scenes where robots destroy cities apparently uninhabited by people—a bloodless Armageddon—either excavates Chicago’s secret moral corruption (perhaps a timely private fantasy of Rod Blagojevich?) or else is just another tentpole time-killer, as stupid as Inception or Avatar.

i mean does no one even bother editing him? this paragraph is a total mess

i know its the ny press but jeez

i had to read it 3 times lol

i mean its insulting grammatically, stylistically, intellectually

every single sentence needs a big red question mark next to it

Would the Futurists approve of such decadence?

would they indeed

michael bay already had to go through being called hitler by megan fox so it seems kind of mean for armond white to call him a futurist

Scenes where robots destroy cities apparently uninhabited by people—a bloodless Armageddon—either excavates Chicago’s secret moral corruption (perhaps a timely private fantasy of Rod Blagojevich?) or else is just another tentpole time-killer, as stupid as Inception or Avatar.

this may be the worst sentence armond white has ever written. aside from the subject-verb agreement problem, its like, armond, hi, you are the critic, you are supposed to tell me if this movie means something, or nothing

Bunch of fanboy bros sitting around thinkin "wish Bay's fantasy of mankind's upheaval was about more than just dynamism tbh"

oh wait, haha, he does tell me that the movie means nothing:

"In Dark of the Moon, Bay’s machines mean nothing."

Bunch of fanboy bros sitting around thinkin "wish Bay's fantasy of mankind's upheaval was about more than just dynamism tbh"

― polyphonic, Sunday, July 3, 2011 10:49 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lold at this btw. lets go to aicn and comment "Man, I loved Transformers 3 but I couldn't help but wonder... would the futurists approve of this decadence?"

a disapproving Umberto Boccioni watching Transformers 3

http://www.italiamia.com/art/UmbertoBoccioni.jpg

"what decadence"

said it in the transformers thread but this guy's terrible grammar and completely incoherent self-contradictory prose is way more damning and indicative of a nonfunctional mind than anything he's ever said about norbit

excavates Chicago’s secret moral corruption

man this is such classic armond

This guy's non-functioning binaries and constant K-Lo-esque begging for sympathy is way more damaging than his beret.

what is "secret" about chicago's moral corruption anyway?