>be you
>typical pleb /tv/edditor
>shit on Armond for being contrarian
>look at review for Brooklyn
>97% RT
>Armond likes it
>w-wait h-he didn't like muh shitty Transformer flicks h-he's a c-contrarian
Yeah.
Get bent.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426663/nihilism-vs-faith-and-hope-armond-white
>>69260169
>one review makes all his other clickbaity horseshit contrarianism ok
yeah nah
>Armond is a contrarian
When will this shitty meme die? By definition he literally isn't
>>69260259
Found the pleb redditor who was deprived of oxygen at birth
>>69260386
I know. That was sorta the point of the thread.
>>69260169
He does like Transformers.
Armond is a conservative viewing all films through a political lens which is why he gets mistaken for a contrarian
>>69260386
>When will this shitty meme die? By definition he literally isn't
That depends entirely on the mean % agreement with the tomatometer and how big each standard deviation is. If he's an outlier then yes he's contrarian.
>>69260169
>Worshiping the opinion of someone else
Why?
>>69260169
Armond White is the only mainstream reviewer worth a damn, those two dead kikes are one of the worst things to happen to how normies perceive cinema.
Love Armond threads.
So many people get triggered.
>>69260630
>>Worshiping the opinion of someone else
Not at all. It's nice to consider is all.
On the flipside
>being so triggered by the opinion of someone else
Why? Because those peons are slime.
>>69260640
I like the SF Chronicle guys alright. I don't agree with them a whole lot, but their reviews are actually somewhat considered and they tend to avoid >feels
>>69260640
>those two dead kikes
Who?
>>69261434
Egbert and Raper?
>>69261703
Only one was a kike and no one cared about him
Post your favorite Armond reviews.
"Toy Story 3 is so besotted with brand names and product-placement that it stops being about the innocent pleasures of imagination -- the usefulness of toys -- and strictly celebrates consumerism. " ‐ New York Press
>>69262931
>“Steve O’s Super Cocktail Bungee routine in a feces-filled port-a-john utilizes distance and trajectory in a way that recalls the great waterslide joke in Norbit (and should help rehabilitate that wonderful film’s unfair reputation).”
>>69260169
>didn't like muh shitty Transformer flicks
what?
nobody likes them
>>69263074
I like the 4th one.
>>69260386
but your pic shows that he is
>>69260169
>snyderlard losing whatever is left of his mind after watching B5S
This is quite the spectacle.
>>69263196
If he follows the consensus more than he goes against it then he LITERALLY is not a contrarian
>>69260169
him and bret easton ellis(when he talks about movies) are the only reviewers who actually analyze a film through what the message of the film was and what the director intended it to be. instead of describing a scene and telling readers how it made them feel.
>>69262931
>Avatar
>"The corniest movie ever made about the white man's need to lose his identity and assuage racial, political, sexual and historical guilt."
>Star Wars 7
>The Force Awakens is a bread-and-circuses carnival (disguised as “The Rapture,” a young videomaker told me) that is intended to keep millennial audiences docile. Maybe that explains the film’s unavoidable sell and both the media’s and the public’s desperate genuflection. Love of Star Wars is not love of cinema, just consumerist habit.
>Boyhood
>Can a hipster be banal? Yes
off the top of my head
>>69263240
Except he doesn't and his reviews aren't usually listed towards the tomato score.
>>69263263
More like he validates your hipster idiocy by making well written yet purposefully satirical reviews, you being one of the few dumb fucks who takes them at face value.
I'm sure you also use the onion as your primary news source.
>>69263488
where the fuck did that hostility come from lol
>>69260386
You stupid faggot. He was kicked off Rotten Tomatoes and only recently began appearing again in certain instances. He was kicked off because his reviews turned into blithering nonsense. He got bad at his method of trolling, and honed it to be better. He's still not a real critic.
>>69263488
t. Proud Redditor
>>69263240
half of the time he is against the consensus. that pretty contrarian
Maybe he is and maybe he isn't a contrarian, but the thing is he's a good critic, he argues for what he says using what the movie gives him. Whether you take that as satire or not is your problem, but the fact is he's a good critic because he's good at getting his points across.
I think the very fact that he makes people wonder 'is this guy serious?' is useful because it makes readers really think about the movie themselves, it's like a weird Socratic method of criticism.
>>69263488
>onion as your primary news source
>>69260169
Of course Armond would like Brooklyn. Ideologically, the film perfectly aligns with his perspective.
>>69263607
Rotten Tomatoes stopped posting his reviews because he switched jobs. They've reinstated him now that he's at another paper.
Stop pushing this fallacy that Rotten Tomatoes has some of agenda. It doesn't care about the quality of reviews, it simply collects them and collates them
>>69260386
I sort of feel like Armond isn't "contrarian" so much as he can find some good stuff in "bad films" that everyone dumps on
Or that even movies that everyone loves aren't perfect
He's against the hive mind
>>69263488
>le armond white is satire maymay
please tell me which of the reviews I quoted can be called satire. all of them analyze what the directors intent of them film was and the cultural implications of the film.
>>69260169
>republican gay nigger
no thanks
>>69263719
thats just contrarian. If a movie is bad, it is bad. You dont have to go out of your way to find a cherry in the turd to make the movie seem better as it is
>>69263676
I'm not sure that necessarily makes him good at critically evaluating films.
>>69263676
this
Right or wrong, he's always interesting. Although constantly approaching movies with a staunch right-wing perspective can be grating sometimes. I can understand why he's pretty niche
>>69263719
He's actually pretty consistent in the sort of films he likes and the sort of films he doesn't like. He's not actively contrarian, he just sees film in a really unique way, artistically and politically
>>69263488
Too real for this board dude.
>>69263607
You have incorrect information.
>>69263719
>He's against the hive mind
THAT'S CONTRARIAN YOU DUMB NIGGER
>>69263719
It's not just that he finds "the good stuff in bad films" It's that he actively gives bad films positive reviews for ridiculous, nonsensical reasons.
What do Armond's peers think of him?
>>69263786
More like no more is as bad as everyone says (usually)
And movies that everyone loves aren't usually above criticism
>>69263910
>Nonsensical
Clickbait.
>>69263910
case in point
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br_xKDSevV4
is there a single picture of this guy not looking like Harry from the Hendersons?
>>69260640
Shit anon, I was thinking the same thing, is it really just Armond, nobody really analyzes movies like he does, and even if I disagree with him, he actually critics a film for more than just superficial mistakes, like plotholes.
All the review I see
>Look I'm such a reviewer I can point out plotholes
>just like cinemasins
>>69260169
>every armond hating pleb ITT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGyCZJNP1EI
>>69263719
He finds good stuff in bad films and claims it makes them good films. Likewise, he finds bad stuff in good films and claims it makes them bad films.
He's weird.
>>69264139
>plothole
>superficial mistake
Snyder please fuck off.
>>69264051
>mfw Adam Sandler in drag is more attractive than Bruce Jenner
Hahaha, the world is a fucking joke sometimes.
>>69264164
this immaturity is really what film criticism has devolved into, when I was a kid I used to think people who say smart stuff were just being pretentious, but then I realized that some people aren't spouting glib nonsense.
>>69264267
>Oh my gosh gee golly gee, can somebody explain how Lex found out Superman was Clark Kent that was such a plot hole
>gee wizz can't you just spell it out for me like my Disney films?
>>69264267
Not even him, but
>I can't suspend my disbelief
>I watch movies for the plot
Really bro? It's [CURRENT YEAR]
