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

free armond

Zack Snyder’s powerful visionary re-imagining of the spiritual potential in comix trounces Alfonso Cuaron’s second-rate Kubrick-DePalma rip-off.

right is wrong, up is down, dogs are cats

lol what does that insult even mean
― Hungry4Ass, Tuesday, January 7, 2014 1:44 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think it means that white is accusing mcqueen of being an uncle tom. or low-class. or both, somehow. pretty hateful either/both ways.

what happens when you veer into unintentional self-parody and just stay on that road for years and years? when do people start ignoring you? or are we doomed to play this out forever?

btw if you type "armond white" into Google, it autofills "troll" afterward

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/01/13/armond-white-kicked-out-of-ny-critics/

Gee, that's certainly not going to fuel his schtick any.

(Armond tosses out provocations like grenades and eats acclaimed films for breakfast)

an editor let this sentence in?

It's a parenthetical

you don't say

I guess this would all be considered a win-win, really.

I saw 12 Years yesterday and consider Armond's accusations of slavery porn to be among the most clueless he's ever uttered. He's not a critic, he's a shameless, attention-craving charlatan who's found the best way to get what he wants with the least effort.

what does he want, tell me

oh attention. well that's bad then

for its own sake, its not very worthwhile.

you'd think he'd like porn

because...

he's Christian

Note his dropping of the names Michael Lucas and Wakefield Poole into his reviews.

link?

he likes a fair amount of brainless pop music, cuz he's gay

how nice

nice day all day on the nice board

because...

― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Monday, January 13, 2014 11:12 PM (27 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

because he enjoys the films of Paul WS Anderson

link?

― a group of dadfucker types (Matt P), Monday, January 13, 2014 6:19 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

From his ridiculous rant against the Palm D'Or re: Blue is the Warmest Color:

The Festival circuit is notoriously gullible and 2013 moviegoers may never have seen stuff like this, not even Radley Metzger’s Therese and Isabelle or Jake Deckard’s Men in the Sand) but at best they’ll be shocked, not enlightened, bored not edified.

(ok, so my memory failed me a bit--he's not referencing Wakefield Poole directly, but rather a recent remake of Poole's 70s gay porn film Men in the Sand. Still...)

A Google search didn't turn up his reference to Michael Lucas, and I can't remember which review it occurred in (probably something from the NY Press days), but as far as I can recall, it was a similar kind of comparison.

oic he's got a catholic block

toting up the religious bigots itt

on the Armond story and other hot-take 'controversies'

http://blog.sundancenow.com/weekly-columns/bombast-124

http://cityarts.info/2014/02/11/p-c-ping-pong/

The film tours pre-Feminist oppression and indicts Catholic Church restrictions before arriving at its predetermined destination: a harangue on sexual tolerance regarding Philomena’s gay son which includes the mushiest, most calculating AIDS exploitation since Brokeback Mountain.

!!?

Brokeback Mountain exploits AIDS by having a gay guy be a victim of a homophobic murder in the 1970s, duh!

That said, Philomena does sound insufferable. The church and Republicans are homophobic? You're shitting me!

he should have just coined "AIDSploitation" otherwise really what's the point?

Okay, why didn't any of you tell me that Armond has a column in Out magazine now?

Anyway, I may be misreading this review but if I get the gist, it's that the 300 sequel is good because it has hot men and abs: http://www.out.com/entertainment/armond-white/2014/03/16/zack-snyder-re-invents-epic-erotic-300-rise-empire

"Most adventure movies offer fleeting thrills, Snyder’s 300 series combines an emotional surge with a chubby that keeps you ready for more."

The spiky and smooth neck hairs are as textured as the different sets of aureole and bulgy nipples that—through 3D imagery—seem touchable.

genuinely feel this could be a rejuvenative direction for him. rex reed should do it too.

news to me! defensible standard for such a film imho

xp

LOL, I actually only just today found out Armond was in OUT myself. I can only hope this strong editorial guidance helps him achieve lucidity. This particular review (and the one for Long Day Closes) make more sense than almost anything he's written in the last decade.

Not serving as your own editor will do that.

Her black eyes and dark heart recall the great Irene Pappas’s Helen of Troy in The Trojan Women, yet she wields a sword with slo-mo vaginal power.

gorgeous men enflamed by their emotions

emotive men engorged by their flaming

Best thing he's written in years.

The spiky and smooth neck hairs are as textured as the different sets of aureole and bulgy nipples that—through 3D imagery—seem touchable.

it's like armond's dirrrty cousin, raymond white.

i smell a sitcom

identical cousins, one a pugnacious, self-deluded critic for a prestigious daily (ok, we can take a little license) who is a lightning rod of controversy, the other a randy, hedonistic gossip columnist for a LGBT magazine.

wow I had totally forgotten Armond White took Public Enemy to task for "caving" to the white media over the Prof Griff/anti-semitism flap

"With this attitude, Chuck D isn't good for anything except recording mindless, pointless confections. This is the first tough fight Public Enemy has had to face and they've crumbled like chalk."

never change bro

http://www.indiewire.com/survey/top-films-of-2014-so-far/best-film/armond-white

01. 300: Rise of an Empire
02. Blended
03. Dormant Beauty
04. Jimmy P.
05. Journey to the West: Conquering the Demons
06. The LEGO Movie
07. Maladies
08. Palo Alto
09. Rob the Mob
10. Young and Beautiful (Jeune et jolie)

Mildly disappointed he didn't go all-in with a vote toward God's Not Dead or Heaven Is For Real.

we agree on #10 at least. Glad to see he and his National Review masters align on The LEGO Movie and capitalism.

I'm guessing 05 isn't the Tsai Ming-liang one...

LEGO Movie is p great

All this comes through in a time-shifting narrative no less complicated than Faulkner or an Alain Resnais art movie, yet dared by director Tate Taylor and screenwriters Jez and John-Henry Butterworth. They cohere Brown’s personality contrasts through the counterpoint of grueling personal experience. It seems jumpy and fatuous at first — and the opening scene of an elderly Brown’s rifle-toting eccentricity is appallingly misjudged, mixing toilet humor and orneriness — but eventually the film parallels Brown’s own staccato, percussive orchestrations.

Taylor, who directed The Help (and so I expected the worst), grasps the enormity of his subject with both hands, telling an individual and a cultural history at once. This was a risky project during the Obama era, especially following what Harvey Weinstein named Hollywood’s “Obama Effect” (seen in patronizing films from The Butler to 12 Years a Slave that sought to rationalize black history as a long-gone prelude to triumph). Taylor’s The Help seemed part of that specious movement, but Get on Up has a more rigorous, inflected narrative — not as fine as Cadillac Records, but superior to Ray and more exuberant than both.