Armond White Calls Out Darren Aronofsky and Gawker Media

[SuperHeroMania]

Armond White sucks penises

Fact

[Perdomom]

am i the only one who likes this guy's reviews?

[JediJettson21]

Dear Armond White, STOP making a big deal out of great movies!

[MrBoBoTom]

It's not cause your black, it's because you are a massive arsehole.

[thejobloshow]

I wish to one day have Armond White's level of intellectual snobbery. I'll start a webzine called NO FUN ALLOWED.

[cobrastriesand]

@BatmanJunky1 Nailed it!

[iveywebb44]

for once, maybe the first time ever,armond white is actually correct here. he is a complete tool tho without any ability to appreciate quality films.

[seandampolo]

"Lost in Translation tells us nothing more profound than that Sofia Coppola’s pantyhose are squeezing her brain." - His 2003 review

Oh yeah, he's certainly a respectable critic..

[colouredbills]

stupid nigger is stupid

[ruthlessmadman]

So Armond White gives bad reviews to movies that people like? Boo hoo! Who gives a fuck about his or anyone's opinion?

[Kickthebaby01]

The Black Swan really is just a flashy Cronenberg knock off for people who aren't intuitive and can't understand subtlety.

[TXtab]

Trolling is a art, and an science.

[terratrema]

Armond White is an enjoyable read. Even if it's because I'm likely to disagree with him every single time.

[JCorreia96]

i dont usually insult people without stating what i think is wrong with their opinion,but that is unnecessary in this case,dont you agree?

so, dear sir, SHOVE A DILDO IN YOUR ASS AND DIE!!!

[monsterbot9]

armond would be a pretty cool guy, but he's a fucking idiot

[gamer46ful]

this guy has a shitty taste in movies he sucks at reviewing movies. He hated Harry Potter he hated Toy Story 3 but liked Transformers 2 and Confessions of a Shopaholic. He sucks

[orwellianson]

Armond White lacks originality and taste... He denounces people's passion for the fine arts and points fingers at those who disagree with him as uncultured or biased. He is a hack and a complete jerk who has an overdeveloped ego. Anyone who sides with his views is either an uneducated philistine, sheep, an idiot or all of the above.

[LeftHandCookie]

This guy is a brilliant troll.

[Darkearth123]

what i want to know is....why are we taking a man who shares the same name with a toothpaste seriously??

[orwellianson]

@Darkearth123 I doubt he even uses toothpaste...

[UphyXx]

@Darkearth123 Arm 'nd Hammer? Maxiwhite? Which one? :D

[Darkearth123]

@UphyXx you sir, made me lol XD

[LApatik]

wow, that guy is not very smart

[Keyser201]

A Troll and a turd. He cant tell a good film from a bad one. He also thinks that regurgitating a thesaurus over his keyboard makes for good writing.

[TheJabberwock]

childish name-calling

[TheJabberwock]

somebody on the internet told a lie?!

[AMember2]

The. Greatest. Movie. Critic. Of. All. Time.

[BoBTheEND]

So, according to Armond White, movies like Inception, Up, Toy Story, District 9, or Spirited Away (ie movies that critics love) are ruining the movie industry, while others like Norbit, Jackass 3-D, Land of the Lost and Bedtime Stories aren't?! Maybe its because they aren't inspired by the likes of Rashomon, Citizen Kane, Pyscho, or The Seven Samurai which (surprise!) he also hates.

[artdept2]

@JoJaDaRu Please give me an example that backs up the idea that Up "uins animation".

[JoJaDaRu]

@artdept2 Pixar is not about animation. Looeny Tunes and John K were about animation, Pixar is about story. At no point in Up does Pixar exploit what animation can offer them, characters have the same proportions throughout the entirety of the film, and the world is reasonably logical, contrast this with a Fleischer Bros Popeye or Bob Clamplet tune where you see the shape of each character changing to represent each emotion, the shape of each object changing to show the worlds desires.

[JoJaDaRu]

@artdept2 Up doesn't really excell at being an animated film, using the language that brilliant animators developed. Disney did this in the old days too. It's almost as if they're afraid of the possible juvinile appearance of some of these unique to animation abilities that really help the medium shine. Pixar represents this ideal today and makes people think that animated films have to be a certain way. Triplettes of Bellville is a good example of one that doesn't. Honestly though, I loved Up.

[JoJaDaRu]

A fascinating critic with an interesting and unique take on every film he sees and really the world could use more like him.

The only negative is that an army of "please don't hate the movie's I love" losers troll him ad naseum because they just can't handle the fact that one movie critic disagrees with them. But there is no proof he's wrong. These films cannot be judged fairly until more time has passed.

[artdept2]

@JoJaDaRu Films can't be judged fairly, ever. Films are not like math, there is no right or wrong answer to whether you like them or if they are god or not. They are inherently subjective and because of that, "fairly", in the closest sense here, would imply either liking it personally or agreeing with everyone else who liked it.

People don't dislike Mr. White because he disagrees with them. They don't like him because of his incredibly pretentious (er, "contrarian") way of going about it.

[JoJaDaRu]

@artdept2 Art, to me, is objective. Not right away but eventually. Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises is objectively better then September's issue of Cosmopolitan. So I do think that art is not just a matter of opinion, there's more to it and time usually helps us to see it more clearly. I also don't think that Armond White is pretentious. He is not pretending at greater knowledge then he actually possess. He is writing about what he knows with knowledge to back it up. Contrarian?.. sometimes.

[artdept2]

@JoJaDaRu While I agree with the idea that some works stand out over time over other works, art is not always objective. The closest it gets is consensus, which Mr. White happens to disagree with a lot of the time (agrees with the Tomatometer but 54%, which is slightly more than "sometimes" contrarian). The question I have for him, though, is when does his reputation supersede his opinions? Did he actually hate Up in favor of Norbit? Or did he do that just to keep his image intact?

[JoJaDaRu]

@artdept2 He only does the contrarian thing with big films. His reviews on smaller films are much more honest. He has a grudge against hollywood and amateur criticism. With the proliferation of internet critics (anybody with a computer) I understand where he's coming from. But his reviews, honest or not, offer a unique way of seeing the film in question. That is always worth my time. Do I agree with him, no (except on Aronofsky) but I don't read to support my own views, I read to learn new ones.

[artdept2]

@JoJaDaRu Holding a grudge against Hollywood is no reason to claim that Noah Baumbach should have been aborted. While I agree that gathering diverse opinions is a fantastic thing (which the internet has largely rid of), there are plenty of ways that Mr. White could express his opinions without coming off as a jerk. Anyone with a computer who does not spend a fair amount of time reading his reviews will not think he is "unique" in a good way, but in a gigantic douche way. Maybe that's his thing.

[JoJaDaRu]

@artdept2 I don't think I ever read that review before. All the digs I've seen him take are minor little playful jabs, I'd have to read the context of this particular one to decide if it was actually mean spirited or if he was just having fun. Claiming someone should have been aborted sounds bad but I have to say I really doubt he meant that... but I suppose I'd have to read it first. Everything I've seen him do was no worse then the random evil shit film hipsters say about micheal bay.

[MrJimmyNapoleon]

Armond White seems to have a lot of apologists who are missing the point: it's not the fact that he is unpopular opinions, it's the fact and that's he a complete and utter ass about it.

He goes beyond constructive criticisms to slandering filmmakers, their fans, and other critics, the little belief system he's built contradicts itself in numerous places, and it's blatantly obvious that he's a troll.

[theloveshineatheist]

Aronofsky win!

[Keyser201]

White is something of a con-artist, the only reason anyone has ever heard of him is his insistance on giving good films bad reviews and vice versa. Look beneath the purple prose and what you often have are meaningless statements that usually don't even match the film he is reviewing, as though he were writing about a version of the film that only he has seen (District 9 review is best example). They read well, but look deeper, he's not really saying anything half the time!!

[jmln82]

This dickhead is a contrarian. He likes to incite debate but not over whether a movie is of quality or not, but rather over how much he can get under your skin. It's funny that he brags about someone reading a review from a free press newspaper. Also, he calls Aronofsky an asshole for saying he has no compassion. Well, calling him as asshole is proving his point and for the record, Mr. White, you rarely if ever tell the truth....

[40Pacino]

This guy did not like the Dark Knight, but loved Transformers 2 and Norbit. If I met Arronofsky on the street, I would thank him and kiss his feet for calling this prick out.

[starcraft108]

darren aronofsky is a far better man than this priiiiiiiiiiick

[TheThing88]

Y'know what, I think White's movie reviews are utterly bizarre and I rarely agree with him on it. Despite that, the guy always comes across in interviews as an intelligent and articulate person and yes, he does have a point: you don't use an awards ceremony as a podium for taking a shot at somebody, especially if the person you're taking a shot at is your host. It's petty, it's impolite, and you'd think somebody like Darren Aronofsky would be able to take criticism.

[benzinator11]

@TheThing88 that's because the guy is essentially a genius. He knows everything about every film from every nation and every era and phase of films... like were talkin shit that no one else knows. So he uses this vast array of knowledge of film history in order to praise films that don't deserve it and trash film that instead deserve praise. He's a troll, but his type of trolling requires like 8 years of college classes, lol

[TheThing88]

@benzinator11 Y'know what, I don't actually believe the trolling thing, i think he genuinely believes everything he says. And that's the scariest part of it - the man has an obviously tremendous amount of brain power and he uses it to talk utter tripe. Black Swan demonstrates "ethnic denial," Sucker Punch is "bloody without menstrual awareness," Norbit's hairdo is a "halo of blackness"? The things this man comes out with... *shudder*

[indiemen]

he's very sexual and i love it

[fede018]

he's older than i thought

[123rockfan]

@fede018

Yeah the picture on Rotten tomatoes looks 20 years old.

[fede018]

@123rockfan lol, that's the image that we all have of him

[MrBoBoTom]

Awsome troll.

[sedeyus]

Come on people. He's putting us on. This guy's like a modern-day Andy Kaufman.

[filmguy450]

White, The AV Club actually posted about your response, but none of that matters. You have no idea what are saying, and you hate just to hate.

[HELLOPEOPLEPEOPLEHI]

I kind of expected him to talk like Clancy Brown. Dissapionting.

[tforbes3]

Oh shaboody will you ever win?

[dickhalloran]

ARMOND is one of the few interesting critics out there, one of the few alternative voices against this white barrage of pseudomasterpieces,... like 'pixar' 'social network' 'black swan'... I dont always agree with him but whenever I am seeing all this new crappy films hailed as a masterpiece, I go huh? and White is usually there in the same corner

[ronniepage]

@dickhalloran really? are you really being serious?!

[filmguy450]

@dickhalloran You have no idea how utterly sad you make me- If he had actual opinions, and wasn't biased, and was able to rationalize his reasonings for liking/ not liking something, awesome. But he has yet to be able to, and all his reviews are more about Coca-Cola's monoploly in the 1950s, or about how X movie is better than the movie he's reviewing. For a great example of this, see his "Black Swan" review, which is maybe mentioned every third paragraph, because he spends so much time saying..

[filmguy450]

@dickhalloran ... that Kayne West's movie was better, and it also had ballet in it, so the two must be connected. He never acutally broke down and discussed his issues with "Black Swan" and simply stated that "Runaway" (I believe that is the title) is simply better, because he said it is. He does this sort of thing all the time, and it gets old fast. In every paragraph of his "Coraline" review, he just bashes "Wall-E", instead of talking about the movie he should. That's why we all hate him.

[RogueRotting360]

@filmguy450 You hate him because he compares and contrasts films, whether long or short?

[filmguy450]

@RogueRotting360 No. I hate him because that is all he does, and calls it a review, which it is not. Saying, X movie is better than Y movie, is simply stating your opinion, and nothing is wrong with that. However, when it's your job to deconstruct why something did or didn't work for you, but you simply spend the entire time saying that X was better than Y, but never bother to go into the cinematogprahy or acting, and then bring up things that have nothing to do with anything...

[filmguy450]

@filmguy450 ... a la his "Hellboy 2: The Golden Army" review, in which he talks about the Ting-Tings song 'That's Not My Name', but never makes it apply to what he is discussing, then he failed at his job. Seeing as how that's all he does, he is not a critic- he does not critique, whatsoever. Referencing back to his "Black Swan" review, the problem is, it's meant to be about that movie, "Black Swan", but it ends up being about the Kanye one, in which case, it's no longer a compare and contrart..

[filmguy450]

@filmguy450 ... (*contrast not contrart*)... as it's simply talking about two movies at one time, neither be given full attention and both suffering for it. In his "Coraline" review, he mentions "Wall-E" in every paragraph, why does he need to point out his hatred for that film so much? It's no longer going oh hey, this one did that better, but it's now, oh hey, I hate that one. Outside of that, his elitism makes him a pompus and arrogant man, which makes him even more grating. Just because...

[filmguy450]

@filmguy450 ... I, or other film buffs, did not attend a school to learn how to write about movies, does not make our opinions any less valid. A lot of what once could only be found out by going to such a school is now online, or very readily available by authors whom did go to such places and decided to share what they learned. He can't accept the fact that someone that didn't go to college might know as much film history as he does, and believes them to be inferior, which is wrong, period.

[RogueRotting360]

@filmguy450 "but never bother to go into the cinematogprahy or acting"

He does. For instance he berated Ryan Gosling performance in Blue Valentine, but praised Michelle Williams's (barely though). And frequently mentions (in a positive light) Rodger Deakins's cinematography.

Either way, no film should be reviewed in a vacuum, purely on its own terms and free of comparisons. Otherwise there's no point of reference. And for the most part, his parallels DO make sense. 

[filmguy450]

@RogueRotting360 No, they do not. Yes, you need some point of reference, but to bring up a different movie in every paragraph to simply state that this one does it better, is not critquing, it's strictly compare and contrasting, but he never goes into enough detail for it to be that either.

I read his "Blue Valentine" review, and he mentions not liking Gosling, and enjoying Williams, to be sure, but that's not going into either- that's simply saying, they were fine. He never explains why...

[filmguy450]

@filmguy450 ... he does/ doesn't like that, and focuses on some of the most minute details of any film, and has on occassion, simply stated that a certain movie is not his style, so he didn't like it- that is a failure of the worst kind. He's predetrimined the kind of movies he'll like before actually seeing them, that's so far gone in the opposite direction of what an acutal critic should be, it's almost as if he's satrizing one, but for all his posturing and usage of big words...

[filmguy450]

@filmguy450 ... he's just not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. Also, his accusations of racism toward Schwarzbaum and Hoberman is hilarious, at best, as he (quite often) really, really loves some of the most stereotypical and racist movies in recent memories; ie "Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen" and "Norbit".

He's a troll, and I am beginning to think you might be one too.

[RogueRotting360]

@filmguy450 He explain why he likes/dislikes the performances fairly clearly in the final paragraph. Read it.

I'd also argue his comparisons to The Catherine Reel and Jersey Shaw are more than detailed enough, for the relative length of the review. Yes, on occasion he name drops and trashes a film with little explanation, but most of the comparisons are clear, logical, and related to the aspect/s of the film he's critiquing.

[ItchyBarracuda]

Wow. You can just see how much of a pompous prick he is by his demeanor and facial gestures, let alone the tone of his voice. There's a known disorder for what this man suffers. Narcissistic Personality Disorder. He fits all the symptoms to a tee.

We don't hate you because you're black. In fact I couldn't care less about your skin color. We live in the 21st century where the racial divide has mostly been abolished. We hate you because you're a douchebag.

[dpellego]

hey Armond...wheres your proof? Are the critics actually declining blacks from their group...or are there no black critics other than yourself? Are they supposed to post items in the paper saying we need black critics so we dont appear racist? Give us proof or shut the fuck up

[Hazmat81]

Armond White is racist against good taste.

[BoxxyfanSC]

Masterful troll is masterful.

[MrFlipWilson]

The only thing "out of control" is this cockgobbler's ego.

[JayP80Geno]

I understand that everyone has their own opinions, especially when it comes to art such as film, but this guy is just ridiculous. I feel that he tries WAY to hard to separate himself from other critics by bashing great films and original directors like Darren Aronofsky and Christopher Nolan. How do you dislike films such as Black Swan, Toy Story 3 and Blue Valentine but call a movie like Grown Ups "cheerful and surprisingly heartfelt"? He's a smart guy, don't get me wrong, just has bad tastes...

[JayP80Geno]

it's kind of like having an English professor that hates Shakespeare but loves Stephenie Meyer. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

[MaybeYesNo90]

@JayP80Geno Or a teacher who hates school and teaching. Or a cook who hates food. Or an artist who hates art. A squid who doesn't like being a squid. The list goes on. All that is certain, is that Armond is a troll, I mean, seriously, he really does fit the definition of 'troll.'

[JayP80Geno]

@MaybeYesNo90 hahaha, pretty much.