Based Armond White just BTFO'd Tarantino's Hateful Eight
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428923/hateful-eights-racial-insults?target=author&tid=1152026
SPANK BANK
P
A
N
K
B
A
N
K
>>64011191
>Armond White
>based
Found the reddit
>>64011191
>unironically thinking a nigger can say anything remotely resembling insightful film critique
Sure is tumblreddit in here.
>>64011099
>white
riiight
>>64011229
Agreed
>>64011228
Pleb, pls
>>64011228
upvoted
>>64011228
>>64011229
>>64011304
Vedditors have truly taken over
>>64011099
White is a contrarian and a shit critic who always brings politics to the table when discussing a film. H8ful 8 is probably shit but not for whatever reasons he brings up
Memes
>The Hateful Eight doesn’t aim for historical realism, just the movie-based, juvenile fantasies of brash frat boys and oily hipsters
Tarantino fans rekted
>>64011191
Enjoy guzzling that BBC cum, Bernie?
ARMOND WHITE IS SO CONTRARIAN
>>64011361
>contrarian
Literally kill yourself.
>>64011170
armond white is the official /tv/ critic
Where did dis nigga learn to write so eloquently?
>As always, QT is concerned only with expressing his antisocial impulse. The Hateful Eight doesn’t aim for historical realism, just the movie-based, juvenile fantasies of brash frat boys and oily hipsters. QT casts alter-ego Samuel L. Jackson as Major Marquis Warren, a black Civil War veteran turned bounty hunter who commandeers a group of white ne’er-do-wells who are snowbound at a Wyoming stagecoach stop, Minnie’s Haberdashery. Warren is in the socially inferior but morally superior position of rectifying and scaring his honky entourage: fellow bounty hunter John Ruth (Kurt Russell), prisoner Daisy (Jennifer Jason Leigh), and henchmen Jody (Channing Tatum), Joe Gage (Michael Madsen), and Bob (Demian Bichir), plus General Smithers (Bruce Dern) and Sheriff Mannix (Walton Goggins). Warren sets things straight like the black stud heroes from the Seventies blaxploitation films that the teenage Tarantino suckled on. But Warren’s revenge isn’t the film’s point; he simply ignites QT’s pandemonium. After an intermission, QT himself steps in as voice-over narrator to claim — and further entangle — the mass-murder plot.
How can one dindu be so based?
>>64011408
Only /tv/ can like a gay negro critic.
>>64011408
And /tv/ is also obsessed with BLACKED.com so what's your point?
>>64011099
Is Armond the greatest philosopher in the world? How can a man be so based
>open Armond review
>Ctrl+F "Obama"
>1 of 6 matches
>close Armond review
>>64011361
He liked sicario, tho
>>64011361
>White is a contrarian
Nice Reddit meme
>always brings politics to the table
I wonder why, maybe it's becauae political and cultural themes are ever present in film? No, that makes too much sense for you
>not for the reasons he brings up
You didnt even read the review you aspie
>>64011099
>listening to contrarian niggers who are only contrarian to get clicks on their articals
lol
>>64011099
hey reddit!
>>64011343
go back to cocksucking a literal faggotnigger
>Tarantino films are frat boy edgelord juvenile fantasies who think its cool and edgy to say nigger
>Tarantino is still a wannabe black man manchild
Brilliant
>>64011130
>How many youngsters will see Chris Pratt in Jurassic World and deposit his image in their spank bank?
>Jurassic World is neither good or bad enough to be camp — its predictable action scenes are limp enough to call “damp” — but Pratt’s He-Man image as dinosaur roustabout Owen is the kind that firms-up any man’s resolve.
>Pratt’s Owen wears a leather utility vest over a denim shirt cuffed at his elbow to expose his sinewy forearms. His torso is cinched into dark pants that puff slightly at the hips, roomy enough to contain his strong haunches.
>Pratt’s eyes are gentle, yet his stout-thewed crouch and voluptuous trapazoids overwhelm this formulaic movie — and Bryce Dallas Howard’s shrill, vapid Park supervisor. She’s unappealing as Owen’s love interest. Maybe a lesbian critic could try justifying her cold acting but who can say what hetero guys who see Jurassic World put into their spank banks? I bet it’s Owen.
http://www.out.com/armond-white/2015/6/10/jurassic-dreams-chris-pratt-haunts-fanboy-wet-dreams-spielbergs-dino
>>64011511
why does reddit have to make everything about interracial cuckoldry?
>>64011511
/v/edditors have become so clever!
Go swallow broken glass you faggot
>>64011482
>being a contrarian on /tv/ to get (You)'s
It's like poetry
>>64011099
>>64011130
>>64011170
>>64011191
>>64011228
>>64011229
>>64011238
>>64011304
>>64011331
>>64011335
>>64011343
>>64011343
>>64011361
>>64011371
>>64011371
>>64011373
>>64011379
>>64011402
>>64011402
>>64011407
>>64011408
>>64011408
>>64011413
>>64011421
>>64011427
>>64011429
>>64011451
>>64011455
>>64011466
>>64011470
>>64011482
>>64011507
>>64011511
>>64011545
>>64011558
>>64011559
hey there, reddit!
>>64011407
>>64011470
"Armond Allen White is a New York City-based film and music critic known for his provocative and idiosyncratic film criticism, which some have characterized as contrarian."
Literally the first thing that comes up when you google him, it's not a meme, it's his gimmick. If he generally agreed with the rest of the critics he'd be relatively unknown, it's not like he's a great critic.
>I wonder why, maybe it's becauae political and cultural themes are ever present in film? No, that makes too much sense for you
He does that for every film
>You didnt even read the review you aspie
No shit, great reading comprehension. I've read one White review too many in my life.
>>64011558
How can anyone hate this man?
He literally is never wrong
>>64011617
Way to be a contrarian
>The Hateful Eight indulges the most heinous racist fantasies, climaxing in SamJack’s parody of Abraham Lincoln’s largesse, plus a flashback of black phallic domination addressed to Dern’s Confederate general. This scene’s pretense of emasculating two generations of white manliness is a private joke derived from blaxploitation’s get-whitey convention. But it seems that Tarantino himself has probably not quite figured it out. So, instead of writing characters with emotional complexity, he mangles narrative structure while twisting the American vernacular.
Quenthack on suicide watch.
>>64011361
>meaningful response
back to reddit
>>64011647
You should like me then
>>64011655
upvoted
>>64011673
>this contrarian response
>>64011421
>summarises the plot
>BASED SO BASED
what? why do you choose this passage to show us how based the critic is?
>>64011617
>literally the first thing
So fucking what? That means absolutely nothing. That's not even cited. All it means is butthurt aspies like you call him contrarian because he shits on yiur pseudo-intellectual trash. Youre 100% butthurt and nothing else
>he does that for every film
Its like you didnt read anything i said
>no shit
So you're making a criticism without having even analyzing the evidence?
Get fucking help, bro
>>64011715
>summarises the plot
You might actually be retarded.
>>64011655
>that post
>meaningful
>also implying reddit is anythng more than youtube comments
>All this was to be expected from QT’s fashionable degenerate habits. But it’s especially dismaying that the dialogue-driven Tarantino doesn’t rise to the fanboy challenge he set himself by filming The Hateful Eight on 70mm celluloid, as if reviving cinema’s original aesthetic. QT has never been a visually accomplished filmmaker like Ford, Sam Peckinpah, or Sergio Leone, and his close-ups and shallow focus (particularly the undistinguished wintry exterior vistas and the scenes of foreground convulsions while the background is blurred) only recall cheap B-movies.
Was this man ever wrong?
>>64011721
>he shits on yiur pseudo-intellectual trash.
Baseless assumption. Gimme a few examples on what you consider being that. I wanna see if you're worth the replies
>>64011099
Can he be stopped?
>>64011762
As always, QT is concerned only with expressing his antisocial impulse. The Hateful Eight doesn’t aim for historical realism, just the movie-based, juvenile fantasies of brash frat boys and oily hipsters. like the black stud heroes from the Seventies blaxploitation films that the teenage Tarantino suckled on. But Warren’s revenge isn’t the film’s point; he simply ignites QT’s pandemonium.
i've cut the dvd blurb, here's what you should have included in your post
>>64011840
>Baseless assumption
Your criticism alone warrants it. It's a very safe assumption
>Gimme a few examples
This has nothing to do with our discussion. You're just throwing a red herring to distract from the fact you just got BTFO and have absolutely no argument
For christ's sake you didn't even read his review and yet criticize it
>>64011861
also there's no real substance in this so it's not a good example of this critic being based
just trying to help you make your 4chan posting more useful
>Armond White
>is black
>>64011940
>also there's no real substance in this
t. valuable online film buff who uses letterbox
You're just culturally autistic as well as mentally autistic, it's quite simple. You don't understand what you're reading because you're intellectually stunted and fear the unknown
Your post basically proves it wasn't a summary of the plot
You're a fucking moron, I actually pity how stupid you are
Holy shit, I'm actually getting 2nd hand embarrassment from your stupidity
>>64011913
>Your criticism alone warrants it. It's a very safe assumption
All i'm saying is that i don't like White because he's too political, how can you know what films i like?
>fact you just got BTFO
Is /b/ in here right now?
>For christ's sake you didn't even read his review and yet criticize it
I wasn't criticizing his Tarantino review, i was talking about him, and all the other ones i've read
>>64011950
The ultimate contrarian
Sure stinks like new in here.
>>64012033
He can't help it, he was literally born that way
>>64012051
Even more so now
>>64012001
>t. valuable online film buff who uses letterbox
>You're just culturally autistic as well as mentally autistic, it's quite simple. You don't understand what you're reading because you're intellectually stunted and fear the unknown
what are you talking about?
explain how 'tarantino is btfo' or whatever you want to say by the content of your quote?
>reading Based Armond shit all over hacks like Tarantino and Spike Lee
>absolutely beautiful
pick dos
>>64011099
>Implying I'm going to read all of that
Sum that shit up in 10 words or less
>>64012095
>what are you talking about?
You're utterly hopeless
Just watch your Nolan, Fincher, and Tarantino and suck your thumb, everything will be alright
>explain how "Tarantino is BTFO" or whatever you want to say
What? Go to sleep, it's way past your bed time
>everyone on Armond's nuts for bashing TFA
>bashes H8ful too
wew lad
>>64011099
Holy shit Armond can't stop
Based Arnold
He is literally calling out blacks for racism in this
You are all so fucking deluded
>>64012191
I hated that guy so fucking much in Phoenix Wright
>>64012253
hello reddit
>>64011373
Oh God, hurtful hurtful truth
>>64012191
armond the wonder nigger strikes again
>>64011099
Man, these kinds of self-important critics are irritating as hell.
>>64012253
These people don't even read his shit, they just like that he shits on popular flicks. He's obsessed with race relations and social issues and these retards praise him for one-liners.
>>64012293
Salutations, Reddit!
>>64012373
>he is obsessed with race relations and social issues
Maybe it's because the Hateful Eight embodies these sort of themes? Is that too much thinking for you to do?
>>64012253
>didn't read his straight out of compton review
He is the bridge between whites and blacks. That's why his last name is White.
>>64012423
Read literally any other review of his, fucking redditor. It's in every one, he always makes a political review, rather than a cinematic one.
>>64012381
Bonjour, le reddit!
>>64012191
There are only 6 star wars films, 14 games(Lego isn't included fuck you) and Gennady's clone wars is the only TV show. Everything else is fake bullshit.
And yes I am counting the prequels as part of that 6,expecting movies made in the 70's(literally the Golden age of sci-fi movies) to be recaptured and carried on with the same soul and feeling in the modern Era is just downright laughable and childish. Hateful 8 was good until he added Jackson and decided to go full cuck for Yankee trator cunts and killing a guy because he fought for the south.
>>64011099
Thank you for the blogviral.
Enjoy the money you will make from all the"clicks".
>>64011421
>QT casts alter-ego Samuel L. Jackson
>like the black stud heroes from the Seventies blaxploitation films that the teenage Tarantino suckled on
top lel does he browse /tv/? Of course not this place is too intellectually bankrupt for based Armond
>>64012566
>Hateful 8 was good
no it wasn't, especially because Armond said it wasnt
get outta here faggot
I just read his SW review. Holy shit, is this guy ever wrong?
>>64012491
How hilarious, you literally don't have understanding of art, AT ALL
Back to /v/ kid and call it a day, take the L
>>64012491
>making a policital commentary on a movie with politics
Say it ain't so.
>you can only judge cinematography, no judging of the precious story or dialogue allowed!
Okay then.
Seriously I don't even like Armond and I do believe he is a contrarian but hating him just bacause he is black is stupid, this guy is very critic to the black comunity and SJW causes, he even sounds "racists" against blacks sometimes but is not racism, is the truth no one wants to hear
>>64012558
مرحبا ، رديت
It's hard to take /tv/ seriously when they take Half in the Bag as legitimate film criticism
>Armond White
>he's black
>>64012673
>muh pole
You're just as stupid as they are.
>>64012653
Thanks for explaining it to me then, senpai. I'm sure you know more about it than me, because you say so.
>>64012659
Enjoy your political and social ramblings on every review you read, i guess some people are into that.
Does this mean Hateful Eight posting is no longer allowed on /tv/?
>>64012710
/tv/ doesn't like RLM
it's the /v/eddit crossposters that shill it endlessly
>>64011228
>>64011229
How in the hell did that guys pot get deleted but these guys didn't?
>>64012710
>film criticism
Are you the type of /v/irgin that complains that Yahtzee is a bad reviewer? It's two blokes sitting around discussing a movie using barely over entry-level intellectual repartees. It's not legitimate film criticism.
>>64012832
>We love you really
>we
/tv/ is /pol/
That moment when Armond White was correct about Star Wars.
http://www.nypress.com/a-darth-is-born/
>When it comes to visualizing fantasy landscapes in a matter-of-fact way, few rivals can touch him, and his knack for balancing menace, mayhem, slapstick and sentiment within a single sequence rivals Hitchcock, Spielberg and Kurosawa. Yet his set pieces often do little to advance his stories and themes. (Consider the pod race in The Phantom Menace—one of the most intricately imagined action scenes ever filmed, yet barely relevant to the plot; for that matter, consider Sith's opening starship battle, which seems to go on for days.) With actors, he's King Midas in reverse, and his dialogue ranges from competent to cruddy. The mix of A+ technique and C- dramaturgy is nearly unique in American cinema; Lucas is the directorial equivalent of a prophesied sci-fi man-child who can levitate whole cities but can't master a knife and fork. Sith is an infuriating, electrifying movie—a savant's masterpiece.
>>64012773
>thanks for explaining it to me then senpai
Explain what? You didn't ask for any explanation? You made a claim that he didn't talk about anything cinematic and that social issues didn't matter? Where's your explanation for these claims?
I'm sure you're a hefty film buff who knows much about film, from the likes of Inception, Heat, Taxi Driver, Fight Club, the list goes on.
I'm sure you know more about art than an actual accredited film critic from the school of Andrew Sarris
He talks about "cinematic" things plenty, these aren't the only elements to a film however, it's quite simple.
>>64012253
not everyone here is a leftist m8
>>64012914
>Unfortunately, he's still George Lucas, a director who achieves the impossible while botching the basics.
>>64012856
Yet apparently /v/irgins such as yourself do take it seriously while simultaneously calling Armond a hack
Retards such as yourself and many others around the internet take these amateurs seriously and parrot their awful criticism and manchild cultural attitudes
You're doing nothing to prove me otherwise by giving them carte blanche
>>64012843
Fuck off wog, this board isn't your personal hugbox
>>64012181
seriously half this stuff is lost on me
i don't understand your specialist niche tv insults i rarely come here
explain how the critic is 'based' in the passage you posted from his review
he doesn't say anything based
>>64012885
Nigger, pls.
>>64012327
Translation: He's too smart for me and should be spoonfeeding me basic stuff to further brainwash me, I am a sheep
>>64012924
>from the likes of Inception, Heat, Taxi Driver, Fight Club, the list goes on.
Lel, another cunt making baseless assumptions.
I wasn't saying that the social aspects don't matter, i'm saying that most of the time he prioritizes it and neglects the cinematic side itself. I guess that's fine for people that just wanna use films as an accessory that goes along with their politics and standing on social issues.
>>64013036
>half this stuff is lost on me
I'm not surprised, you're quite stupid. You don't seem to understand anything about film.
>explain how the critic is based
I didn't say that, someone else did, I agree though because I agree with his points and find them to perfectly embodies Tarantino
Is that really so hard to understand? Can you not fathom a differing opinion that doesn't conform to your hugbox?
I've liked him on facebook, takes alot for me to like something but he's just so damn good.
>>64012740
>reddit frog
>posts on 4chan
>>64011099
Absolute madman. Can't wait to see his better than list for this year.
>>64013171
>i don't know wot he's saying, but he's criticising tarantino so he most be based. UPBOAT! :^) YAY!
>>64013092
>making baseless assumptions
Hardly.
>I wasn't saying that the social aspects don't matter
But you pretty much implied it, so
>I'm saying that most of the time he priortizes it
Probably because it's extremely important
>neglects the cinematic side
Like what? Directing, acting, etc.? Not really at all. Plus every film is different, it can't all be boiled down to the same formula.
Criticism is discussion, it's not a Rotten Tomato fresh or rotten review, it's discussion. You do not understand these basic principles
The themes of the movie are incredibly important to their structure. You're nothing but butthurt that he shits on your films and deconstructs them to make you seem juvenile. It must hurt but it is true nonetheless.
>>64013238
Nice Reddit sensibilities, Reddit.
>>64012914
>Lucas is the directorial equivalent of a prophesied sci-fi man-child who can levitate whole cities but can't master a knife and fork
I'm dying. how does he come up with this shit?
Guys I think I'm too /stupid/ to understand everything Armond writes. Is that normal? Does it get easier?
>>64013360
Yes, once you understand the flow of his work you can parse it pretty easily.
>>64013238
I've read many of his reviews. He's an excellent writer, incredibly elequent and he's so on point. I don't agree with all of them, but they're still good reads.
Also, he's the only person who makes redditors go "fucking nigger", which is hilarious. He rustles people so.
>>64013240
>Probably because it's extremely important
>Analyzing the social aspects of every film is extremely important
Jesus christ, you really do you use film as an accessory.
>The themes of the movie are incredibly important to their structure. You're nothing but butthurt that he shits on your films and deconstructs them to make you seem juvenile.
I've never read enough reviews of him to find one that i disagree with, i just can't fathom how everything needs to be politically analyzed, art isn't primarily political.
>>64013471
>you really do use film as an accessory
You really know absolutely nothing about art, it's actually fucking hilarious. This is like me telling a child that Santa doesn't exist. You are so deluded and stupid. Let's just ignore the fact you made a link that pick my movies that fit my alleged political agenda because I said cultural and social aspects are important in film. You actually think filmmakers themselves don't use film as an accessory for a political theme and have absolutely no intention or agenda whatsoever, that they all just focus on plot, acting, visuals, and absolutely nothing else.
You're so fucking stupid. I'm literally laughing at you right now
>I've never read enough reviews of him to find one that I disagree with
What????
>I just can't fathom how everything needs to be politically analyzed
It doesn't, but most do. The fact you can't fathom this only further proves my assumptions you don't know what you're talking about.
It's more cultural than political. Which is a base of art
He doesn't discount the cinematic aspects at all. But if you saw a movie that so overtly represented cultural themes, is it not relevant to write about it? Especially when it shadows over everything else?
>>64013687
>You actually think filmmakers themselves don't use film as an accessory for a political theme and have absolutely no intention or agenda whatsoever, that they all just focus on plot, acting, visuals, and absolutely nothing else.
The agenda and political ideas behind a film are 80% of the time not worthy of study. It's always the same ones and they're very in-your-face, it's not like you're an intellectual for recognizing them there. If it's not a film that's deliberately focused on it, it's probably not even worth mentioning it.
>You're so fucking stupid. I'm literally laughing at you right now
*tips*
>What????
The ones i read i usually agree with, i just hate the way he's overly political.
>>64013275
>i'll call him reddit, to throw him off the scent that i come from there.
Fail.
>>64013961
You need to stop worrying about what other people do on an anonymous image board.
>>64013238
holy shit dat butthurt
>>64013894
>The agenda and political ideas behind a film are 80% of the time not worthy of study
Oh god. Why am I even bothering with you?
>The ones i read I usually agree with
Still not sure what you're saying there
>>64013961
>I'll call HIM reddit, to throw him off my scent that browse there
Better luck next time
>>64014063
>i-i-i-i-i'm not from reddit, h-h-h-h-honestly. why won't you believe me guise?
>>64014131
>Oh god. Why am I even bothering with you?
I don't know, why? Since you can't even seem to understand what i'm saying. Either read again or ask a better question, how can i get more explicit than "The ones i read I usually agree with"
>>64014173
>i'll do a double bluff, t-t-t-t-that'll work right? guise right? come on guise i need support!
>>64014295
nigger
>>64014295
Trying too hard, outsider.
>>64014199
I go on reddit sometimes. My favourite sub-reddits include:
r/Skincareaddiction
r/cringe
r/livestreamfails
r/malefashionadvice
r/TrueFilm
>>64011558
This is 100% correct
Le bromances haha is just a joke lmao
>>64012856
and yet they take it very seriously when people disagree with their views like they when made fun of the people not agreeing with their opinions about Boyhood
Best Armonds review coming through:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/422527/straight-outta-compton-review-armond-white
>The year’s most mindless movie, Straight Outta Compton pretends that N.W.A. had political ambition when, in fact, they acted out of a wild sense that they could profiteer through “rebellion.” It’s a distressingly timely film, made for an era that can’t tell the difference between the NAACP, the Black Panthers, and media-infatuated teenagers. It is N.W.A.’s warped non-politics that started today’s widespread endorsement of black lawbreakers as political idols.
>>64014229
>Since you can't seem to understand what I'm saying
I just don't understand your "I don't read enough of his reviews to find one I disagree with"
What does that even mean?
Everything else I understand perfectly. I understand that you are clearly way in over your head in this argument
It's pretty clear that what you said does not match up to anything else you've previously said
>>64014242
>I've got him now!!! Right in my Reddit tendrils, hahaha!!!
Black man here,
Armond is 100% correct. Django was much better and I think QT has really fallen off (and Jackson too).It's a black male thing
>>64014605
> I understand that you are clearly way in over your head in this argument
>It's pretty clear that what you said does not match up to anything else you've previously said
Good job explaining why
>I don't read enough of his reviews to find one I disagree with
This means that if i read more reviews of his, then i would find some that i disagree with. This means that i agree with most of his reviews. This means that i don't disagree with what he's saying. It means he's too political for my taste as i think that politics should take the backseat when discussing art. I can't be any clearer than that.
>>64014808
>Good job explaining why
I did. It doesn't match up to anything.
What you're saying is basically you don't read many of his reviews and if you did you'd find more that you'd disagree with. And despite the fact you don't actually disagree with what he writes, you don't find it relevant despite it all pertaining to the themes of the film?
You're bonkers.
>I think that politics should take the backseat
Even though it's so blatantly present within film?
The better word here is culture because that's what he's actually discussing, and that is a pillar of art
He's not talking about budget allocations, how to deal with ISIS, or what promoting legislation. He's talking about cultural issues. Politics would imply something more judicial and legislative
>>64015061
>What you're saying is basically you don't read many of his reviews and if you did you'd find more that you'd disagree with.
Correct
>And despite the fact you don't actually disagree with what he writes, you don't find it relevant despite it all pertaining to the themes of the film?
Most of the time it's not, and it's not pertinent to the themes of the film, that's why i say he's overly political
>He's talking about cultural issues.
It's another word for the same thing. He's making, most of the time, irrelevant analysis of things that shouldn't even be considered relevant to the film.
>>64015341
>Correct
That's quite logically retarded, you get that don't you?
>Most of the time it's not
How would you even know? You don't even read a lot of his reviews?
>and it's not pertinent to the themes of the film
Now you're just being a contrarian. Overly political does not mean not pertinent
>It's another word for the same thing
So culture doesn't matter towards art? The fuck outta here
>He's making most of the time, irrelevant analysis of things that shouldn't even be considered relevant to the film
t. IMDB film buff
You're still stuck in the AV Club way of criticism. You have many ways to go.
>>64011099
>macro aggression
DROPPED
R
O
P
P
E
D
>>64015466
>That's quite logically retarded, you get that don't you?
I don't, can you explain?
>How would you even know? You don't even read a lot of his reviews?
In most of what i've read it wasn't, that's why i dropped him
>Now you're just being a contrarian. Overly political does not mean not pertinent
It's not as pertinent as he makes it out to be
>So culture doesn't matter towards art?
It does, but not the way he talks about it, blowing everything out of proportion.
>t. IMDB film buff
Don't use it
>AV Club way of criticism
Never heard of it, but since we're doing ad homs, White appeals to mra's on their first year of a sociology course that think they have an educated opinion on art while not knowing the first thing about aesthetics
>>64015466
He agrees with the content of the reviews, but he doesn't necessarily think that content is what a critic should focus on in all cases of their criticism. I'll make an analogy since it's much easier to understand the concrete than the abstract.
Say you're looking for a new, bigger dildo to ram up your asshole. You're looking at a few and decide to read the reviews for some insight. One review's main point is that the dildo is not worth buying because the designer chose to color it blue rather than the classic black. While you agree that blue is not the optimal color for this dildo and black would better suit it, you believe there are more important criteria dildos should be evaluated on such as the material and construction. Not every dildo, mind you, but this one in specific.
It's really not that hard to understand.
>>64015923
Beautiful analogy mate, thanks
>>64011099
Those bootlicking fascists crying about Tarantino attending a police protest
