White Ascends
Two days ago the legendary, famously cantankerous Armond White, film critic for the New York Press, was (a) re-elected as the 2009 chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle, and (b) also elected 2008 vice-chair. The Hollywood Reporter's Gregg Goldstein reported yesterday that the NYFCC will vote on the year's best Dec. 10 vote on 12.10, and that the awards ceremony will happen on 1.5.09.
When I think of White, I think of his uniform approvals of (to the best of my recollection) just about every Steven Spielberg film ever made, including "the excellent, excellent" Munich. I'm also reminded of White's attempt last year to dissuade the NYFCC from giving to give Sidney Lumet a Life Achievement Award, by way of an impassioned speech in front of the group.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 17, 2008 at 4:41 AM
comment #1
MartinBlank
says ...
Dude likes his Spielberg. Though the 'Berg has been so prolific he's had a lot of ups and downs. Even Kael swatted De Palma from time to time.
White also gave a glowing review to W.
Posted by MartinBlank
at October 17, 2008 5:33 AM
comment #2
actionman
says ...
This is fucking MYSTIFYING to me. The critical community in NY has re-upped a critic who CONTINUOUSLY states that the movie War, with Jet Li, is a masterpiece and something of serious merit. What the hell are they all smoking, and where can I get some? The guy fucking raved about Death Race and panned The Dark Knight. He praises What Happens in Vegas but hates Snow Angels. HE IS A JOKE.
His continued trashing of filmmakers like Lumet, Ridley Scott, Meirelles, Cuaron, is embarrassing and insulting to anyone who cares about quality filmmaking.
I read White's work so I can get a laugh every now and again. But this makes me sick. Truly sick. I normally am not interested in trashing people on blogs but White needs to be stopped. Seriously. It's getting a little out of hand.
Posted by actionman
at October 17, 2008 5:58 AM
comment #3
Rosebudsthesled
says ...
I've said it many times before and will say it one more time: the opening paragraph of Armond White's review of GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK disqualifies him from ever being taken seriously, when he ranks it among the most boring movies ever made about journalism and expose--a list which includes ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN, THE INSIDER and QUIZ SHOW.
Sidney Lumet is one of the best directors ever. Any man who doesn't appreciate the genius behind 12 ANGRY MEN, NETWORK, DOG DAY AFTERNOON, SERPICO and so many others is just asleep at the switch.
Posted by Rosebudsthesled
at October 17, 2008 6:18 AM
comment #4
JD
says ...
Jeff, you need to realize something: Munich was a very well-received film. It has a rating in the mid-70s on both Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes, it was nominated for several Oscars (including Best Picture), and it made $130 million worldwide with no stars in the cast. It's not your cup of tea, but it's not Ishtar either. You could think of dozens of far more baffling AW raves.
Posted by JD
at October 17, 2008 6:21 AM
comment #5
actionman
says ...
And let us not forget White's love for the movie Torque. Yeah. Torque. That was a great f'ing film right there.
Posted by actionman
at October 17, 2008 6:48 AM
comment #6
btwnproductions
says ...
It could just be that no one else wanted the responsibility. White's taste doesn't reflect/infect the group's choices. Then again, from year to year I don't remember what they are.
Posted by btwnproductions
at October 17, 2008 9:14 AM
comment #7
Sean
says ...
White has a consistent aesthetic -- he doesn't like middlebrowy realistic/senti-macho filmmakers such as Lumet, Redford and Mann, and he loves pop sensibilities such at those presumably displayed in Torque and War. Now, I haven't seen Torque and War and have a lot of love for Redford and Mann films, especially Quiz Show and The Insider, but I would rather have a world with White in it than one where it's such an absolute heresy that someone might prefer Death Race to Dark Knight.
Posted by Sean
at October 17, 2008 9:46 AM
comment #8
Sean
says ...
Also, White is correct about Spielberg.
Posted by Sean
at October 17, 2008 9:48 AM
comment #9
p.Vice
says ...
actionman, your dedication to mediocrity continues to stupefy me.
Posted by p.Vice
at October 17, 2008 10:00 AM
comment #10
lipranzer
says ...
"he doesn't like middlebrowy realistic/senti-macho filmmakers such as Lumet, Redford and Mann"
Except he gave a glowing review to LIONS FOR LAMBS - the only Iraq War-related movie he gave a positive review to besides HOME OF THE BRAVE. So no, he doesn't even have a consistent aesthetic. Which is why, as I've said before, I wait for the day when Steven Spielberg does a movie with Michelle Pfeiffer, and see what kind of knots he'll twist himself in.
Posted by lipranzer
at October 17, 2008 10:22 AM
comment #11
TheJeff
says ...
It seems like Jeff used to love White, saying, "He's immensely readable, fearless, provocative. Film criticism today would be in a much poorer and less observant state without him."
http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/04/curious_but_vit.php
In the comments of that thread, I wrote:
"Hmmm...I find him to be a pedantic asshole who strives to be contrary for its own sake. I'm kind of shocked that Jeff digs him. White is well-known as the biggest Spielberg apologist in the business. EVERY single film that Spielberg has directed during the past ten years (nine features) appears in White's top ten lists. Even The Terminal! His writing is occasionally provocative (as it appears, that is its sole purpose), but he easily has the worst taste in cinema of anyone writing in the English language. See here:
http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~ejohnson/critics/white.html "
Now White's Spielberg love is all Jeff can think of.
Posted by TheJeff
at October 17, 2008 4:57 PM
comment #12
Shox R4
says ...
Dare and the world always yields. lf it beats you sometimes, dare it again and again and it will succumb. Our shox shoes store online tell you one Meaningful words, I hope you can like it.By Nike Shox Qualify
Posted by Shox R4
at May 23, 2011 6:21 AM