Could it be fear? Or is this personal somehow? Hurt some feelings? I know some people with liberal views are just as closeminded as the conservetives on the other side. Unless it is a life and death choice then there is room for differing opinions. Guess not.
That's just silly. I've read that guys reviews more than a few times. Sure his opinions almost always are different than mine, but it's always a good read. It's entertaining, and fairly often is enough to make me challenge my own opinions. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean he shouldn't be heard. What kind of closed-minded thinking is that?
Its good to have things to fight about though! I tend to LIKE the provocateur! ( Not an idiot "TROLL",....but an intellectual gauntlet tosser is a gift from god!) Uhm,...on current,....lets make that God,..god,.."The Gods", Fate,..Predestination,....or "chaos theory",...........perhaps even "NOTHING but shit happens,....but some shit can at least get you high". I think "Loki" or "Coyote" or "Monkey" work for what I appreciate.
"Bay’s post-nuclear version of Hoffman’s The Nutcracker stirs emotion from our pop culture, industrial experience then connects to ancient spiritual myths (like Kingdom of the Crystal Skull). It’s too much the production of industrialization to be considered magic, yet Bay’s sheer fascination with seeing is impressively communicated.
In the history of motion pictures, Bay has created the best canted angles—ever. The world looms behind a human protagonist with the enormity of life itself. (My favorite: a windblown Megan Fox facing the audience as a jet fighter slowly, majestically glides behind/above her). Bay already has a signature: the up-tilted 360-degree spin (gleefully parodied in Hot Fuzz). Here, he flashes it whenever Sam kisses his girlfriend."
That's funny shit. anyone who can read that without laughing is a turd. Ironic or not Armond White is a funny fucker. Personally I think he has most people totally duped. He knows a lot about movies and there's no way to assault his critiques without making yourself look bad. He's just having fun with & exploring the paradoxes of the written word. If that's being a "troll" then I guess we can add Swift, Joyce, Pynchon, and others to the ranks of trolls as well. losers!
I have a hypothesis:
In people's minds, critics are the "great deciders" in what's good and not. So, naturally, a critic doesn't like something you do, that means you know absolutely nothing concerning the field the thing in question falls under. One thing people absolutely can not stand is being wrong. So now, when a critic doesn't like something you do, it means either the critics didn't "understand" the thing in question, or the critic is stupid.
I know i've already said this but having two columns, one labeled 'bad' and the other 'good' bears no relation to Armond White's reviews - he actually has interesting things to say; about art, the politics of a film etc., so it makes no sense to group them into bad or good - that's for critics who get paid to do puff pieces for the studios.
But who really does know anything about movies? Eye of the beholder and all. A critic is merely expressing his/her perception of what he/she saw. Even an inexperienced child can sometimes point out something that the "experts" overlooked.
So how much does a critic get paid? Where can I aply for the job? When will he have his things out of my office what kind of car will ya'll be giveing me and do I bring my own chair or will Ya'll be supplying me with one? Ohh Yea I say ban him or fire him which ever I need his job.
There is no good reason to ban someone because his/her views do not run with the majority. Kids, it is a movie review site, not the Board of Brain Surgery. Lighten up and let this guy have his say!!!! I rarely agree with movie reviews anyway.
if they ban a guy cause of his views on a site that looks at every ones critiques on a film then they need to shut that site down no reason to have a bunch of whinny ppl wanting to kick out 1 guy,and i agree with deathmetalbrian...
i agree that banning a critic based on having a different view is absurd. but if these two list of films are to be believed (the films he has liked and disliked), then i don't know how this person got a job in the first place.
another critic who has apposing views with the mainstream is ray carney. you can read mr. carney go on and on how films like 'the godfather' and '2001' are simply contrived entertainment that have little to do with real human experience. however, while ray may not like these gems he does like other films like those of john casavettes, mike leigh, tom noonan, harmony korine, etc. and altough i agree that these filmmakers make much more real seeming films than stanley kubrick or coppola, i still like their films. armond white has no such solid ground to stand on. like i said, if these two lists of films are to be believed than mofo is just pissing people off. seriously, if you don't like 4 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, all the real girls, the assassination of jesse james, there will be blood, etc. than you better come correct with the films you do champion.
i did not sign the petition though because i don't want to be the one to get this guy fired... i mean, i don't go to rotten tomatoes for film gnosis... they can have this lemon.
i hear what you're saying trelk - as for that list - i think the fact that the guy who assembled the list created two columns - one labeled 'good', the other labeled 'bad' speaks volumes. even though i disagree with white's criticism all the time i'm always intrigued by his views - and to put them into such simplistic categories doesn't make sense.