IT'S FUCKING HAPPENING
- Home
- Board: /tv/ - Television & Film
- Reading: IT'S FUCKING HAPPENING
BASED ARMOND TEARS CIVIL WAR A NEW ASSHOLE
"IT'S TRASH" - Armond White
aptain America: Civil War confirms our national dumb-down. While the mainstream media pretzel themselves over the presidential primaries, Marvel Studios has steadily accomplished a rejiggering of the American public’s cultural and political consciousness. Civil War completes this devolution in its story of superhero combat where one faction of pop icons, led by Captain America/Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), faces off against another faction, headed by billionaire genius Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). As momentary adversaries, Captain America and Iron Man almost represent the schism that now divides American voters, politicians, and pundits. I say “almost,” because the film’s comic-book premise doesn’t inspire reflection upon the dire seriousness of our current ideological civil war. If anything proves the triviality of Hollywood’s comic-book franchises, it is this disregard of the class realities that truly separate Americans. Working-class poster boy Steve Rogers has no common cause with wealthy authoritarian Tony Stark; the superficial show of patriotism that binds them doesn’t erase the difference between the former’s grunt-worker sacrifice and the latter’s aristocratic expertise. It’s the ultimate sentimental cynicism when Captain America’s devotion to his dangerously conditioned childhood friend Bucky/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) — who represents war’s emotional cost — is used to evoke ambivalence toward the military, while Stark’s authority celebrates the Military (and Hollywood) Industrial Complex.
>>69178005
>Is it overreaching — or being humorless — to recognize and critique a piece of entertainment that takes America’s schism lightly? Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking? How did we get here?
>Since comics and graphic novels became popular as counterculture, adolescents have been encouraged to reduce mainstream politics to their own sentimentality. Thus, Marvel’s various superheroes appeal to teenage rebellion: Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Vision (Paul Bettany), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and the others personify juvenile sensibility. They remain trivial, even as their divisions play out in serial chase scenes, explosions, and technological butt-kicking. Each one’s predicament represents a denial of the moral complexities that come with maturity. Fear of growing up is implicit in both the devious terrorist plots of supervillain Zemo (Daniel Brühl), who harbors childhood dreams of vengeance, and the supercilious wit of Tony Stark, the George Soros/Steve Jobs–type to whom the superfreaks all feel indebted. (As Stark, Downey achieves the same promiscuous waste of talent as hammy British actors of old.
>>69178005
Despite the supergeeks’ arguing either against working for the restrictive capitalist government or for their own sense of doing right and correcting injustice, the fact is, nothing here has gravitas. Civil War is politics as adolescents misperceive social/global crisis. This has been going on for so long (ever since Hollywood realized the bounty to be had in cajoling comic-book culture’s ready audience; since, say, the 1978 Superman film, then 1989’s Batman) that, by now, the brainwashing is complete. The trivializing has grabbed such hold that when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.
>To praise Civil War as entertainment is to accept its puerile conflicts. This is the moral reduction that has happened to American youth culture in the wake of the generational dissents of the Vietnam War. Movies as violent as the Marvel flicks are not pacifist but are proof of anti-military sentiment — such as became evident in the confused Ferguson protestations about “militarized police,” a foolish, redundant term exploited by manipulative media outlets and politicians. Civil War furbishes aggression simply to excite viewers who are as programmed as poor Bucky.
>>69178005
>In a similar sense, Civil War exploits recent political trends such as Black Lives Matter. Black actress Alfre Woodard (whose portrayal of a comically psychotic wench was the only convincing characterization in 12 Years a Slave) appears as a grieving mother who blames Stark — standing in for the Military Industrial Complex — for the death of her child, a promising youth with a 3.6 grade-point average. Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.
>This pandering passes for political relevance among non-thinking viewers. So does the film’s multiracial superhero team, especially new inductee Chadwick Boseman (superb as Jackie Robinson in 42 and James Brown in Get On Up) as the offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance. Black comics fans are an immediate target of Marvel Studios’ exploitation. Note the scene where Black Widow, played by the white, ultra-sexy Johansson, is confronted by Black Panther’s aide, a Nubian queen with fore and aft protrusions and powerful swagger. She threatens Black Widow: “Move or you will be moved!”
>>69178005
>This patronization is consistent with Marvel Studios’ political infantilizing. The vigilante Avengers’ inability to avoid collateral casualties when fighting the bad guys raises the global body count. These blithe depictions of tragedies precipitate the film’s basic ideological quarrel, similar to that in the powerful Batman v Superman. Yet Civil War’s evaluation of this dilemma, of what’s at stake in American politics, is petulant and trite. Stark critiques the roguish Rogers: “Even when he’s wrong, he thinks he’s right. That makes him dangerous.” This tempts a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren–style American self-reproach, just as Sanders is the model for an early scene of Stark at MIT funding every student’s research proposal. It’s alarming — if not offensive — to see an entertainment film feed this fatuousness to juvenile moviegoers so as to shore up their political fancies.
>No wonder Civil War’s big blow-out — half the superheroes pointlessly battling the other half in a Leipzig airport — becomes repetitious and calamitous. It’s the most pointless, decadent scene of the year so far. Directing team Anthony and Joe Russo work by-the-numbers, staging blurry, undecipherable action and rounding up extraneous Marvel characters Ant Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider Man (Tom Holland) for comic relief. It’s rebooting on top of rebooting simply because fanboys love a reboot; that’s how pathetically indoctrinated we’ve become. The Russos’ Iron Man versus Captain America competition appeals to comics fans’ sophomoric cynicism, but the head-banging among invincible beings amounts to nothing; it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.
>>69178005
Marvel Studios shows no appreciation of what “civil war” actually means. At least the Wachowski siblings were genuinely implicated in the race/sex struggles of The Matrix (1999), but here, the Russos’ imitation of the Wachowskis’ diversity carnival doesn’t work; it’s not heartfelt theorizing, just exploitation. Without Zack Snyder’s visual wit, Marvel’s tedious, hackneyed formula costs this film’s political allegory its metaphorical heft. And a generation of filmgoers, now accustomed to comic-book pettiness, will lack the proper moral outrage. They’re ill equipped to realize how Civil War’s quasi-politics cheer our current state of incivility as a thrill ride. When everybody’s vengeful this is the trash we get.
Is this the death of Marvel and the rise of DCKino?
DELETE THIS!!!
>>69178005
HOW CAN A SINGLE HUMAN BEING BE SO BASED???
It's amazing how some people still don't know Armond "The Contrarian" White.
THE KING HAS SPOKEN
>>69178005
MARVEL FAGS WILL NEVER RECOVER
DC = CONFIRMED KINOGRAPHY
Okay, "Almond". We'll take your review into consideration.
Kek, I got to give him credit for doing what he does. He's pretty based.
what
Based Armond does it again, fuckin A. How has he resisted Disney Dollars?
It's over my Marvel bros the King has spoken...
I used to be a Marvelfag, but now I'm a #DCruzMissile
>>69178005
rev up those evanses people
DISNEY, BURY ALL FUTURE MARVEL FILMS. ITS OVER. FINISHED. CONSIDER THIS MERCY.
BREAKING: Affleck signs onto executive produce and oversee the Justice League kinos confirming quality artistry and cinéma for years to come.
>>69178271
Say what you will about contrarianism, but White clearly puts actual thought into his reviews and makes valid criticisms. Obviously when there's a hivemind-like predisposed decision about a movie, if one tries to be independently critical about it they run the risk of simply becoming contrarian and denying that movie's positive aspects. But we need people who are willing to stand against the current of accepted popular opinion and point out flaws where nobody else wants to see them. Interesting that he gave BvS a good review. I haven't seen either new capeshit and don't plan on it, but neither looked good.
>>69178957
Same. I was going to see CW, seeing as everyone was praising it like their life depended on it, but now I think I'll pass.
Maybe one day I'll see both BvS and CW and make comparisons.
This kills the Marvel.
>>69178877
Holy shit source?
>>69178005
No mention of Trump at all?
>>69178957
>>69179004
Thanks for stopping by a thread discussing the movies to share that information. What's it like having nothing better to do with the Internet your parents pay for.
>>69179014
http://deadline.com/2016/05/ben-affleck-justice-league-executive-producer-zack-snyder-warner-bros-chris-terrio-1201750654/
>a nigger AND a literal faggot
Opinion discarded.
>talks about BLM
>credible
This review isn't contrarian at all. He's went overboard many times, but this is rather accurate.
>>69178005
>class realities that truly separate Americans
so without reading the rest of this bullshit, hes mad because the movie didnt talk about the poor dindus and didnt show tony handing out reparations to blacks in the hood and captain america getting them out of prison?
>>69178005
I went to watch super heroes punch each other not give a shit about politics. All that black lady crying about her dindo that was a good boy is made me laugh.
>>69179412
I hope Based Bin Afleki will kill this motherfucker with the help of a suicide bomber dressed like Robin so all you Evansposters will be gone
>>69179444
hi Ben
>>69178005
How can one man be so based?
How does he do it?
He doesn't critique the quality of the film making. He critiques what the film stands for. That should be apparent to anybody who has read his reviews, and yet I still feel it is lost on many.
>National Review
>Supports republican candidates
>backed by Time Warner
Why do you think he shits on every Disney production guys?
>>69179593
Armond confirmed for shill.
I cant tell if you guys seriously respect what he has to say or if its a meme because of his absolutely insane stances on certain movies compared to others such as liking Transformers. This review came off as incredibly pretentious and despite the negativity it doesn't even seem like he really thought it was bad but that the ideas behind it are bad. And it doesn't seem like anyone ITT is taking his opinion seriously because just like with anything on /tv/ no one is interested in discussing ideas and the only determining factor in shitposting is the binary bottom line. Did he like it or not? And thats what the fuel of the thread will be with idiots like these already proving me right >>69179492
>>69179361
>>69179124
>>69179183
>>69179009
Can't fucking stand this shit. Try actually having a meaningful opinion of your own. I'm still going to watch the movie some time today, kinda excited for it still.
>>69179593
>Why do you think he shits on every Disney production
Because he's the king of /tv/
Holy shit guys the onslaught has begun
>https://splicedpersonality.com/2016/05/06/captain-america-civil-war/
>" the sad middle-aged dudes who cling so desperately to these films require constant reassurances that they’re *actually about serious issues and stuff* and not just fun stories for children in which men wear tights"
>>69179699
Yeah, but he gives real criticism not like most """""""critics"""""" these days.
>>69179711
Sure is leddit in here today
i guess i have to watch batman v superman now
>>69178957
>but White clearly puts actual thought into his reviews
Yes.
>and makes valid criticisms
No, not really. This kind of politicizing can be done to any film, on almost any topic, with similar results.
His few actual critiques are buried within flowery rants, and largely boil down to pure old-world critical vagaries anyways.
Some of his only direct criticisms are understandable within the context of a single review, but make absolutely no sense compared to what he has praised in others.
The entire thing comes down to "I didn't like it, now let me rant about politics for a few pages and draw loose correlations to the film I supposedly watched." It could have been written without even seeing the film.
He is the consummate fedora-tipping, holier-than-thou, self-proclaimed-genius that 4chan loves to meme about.
Someone once told Armond White "If you make your writings sound intellectual enough, no one will realize that you're an idiot," and he took the advice to heart.
I love Armond so much. The day the Hollywood industrial complex dies of malignant aids can't come soon enough. People who advocate and celebrate these types of movies are not only mindless and childish but are the equivalent of a literal potato.
Armond White once argued in favour of Jackass 3D because
>“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).”
>>69178005
>it is this disregard of the class realities that truly separate Americans. Working-class poster boy Steve Rogers has no common cause with wealthy authoritarian Tony Stark; the superficial show of patriotism that binds them doesn’t erase the difference between the former’s grunt-worker sacrifice and the latter’s aristocratic expertise
Spot the FUCK on jesus fucking christ. It's the ever rampant and growing apathy in this country that's going to destroy it.
>>69180040
Armond likes shitty Hollywood movies though
>>69179593
Also Paramount, CBS, Viacom, they all back National Review, its an incredibly right wind and biased publication, but it doesn't hid this at all.. They backed Ted Cruz for fucks sakes.
>Armond White
>is black
>>69178053
>George Soros/Steve Jobs–type
murricas best film critic knows who the true boogey man is
>genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art
>offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance
>it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation
HOLY SHIT! MARVELKEKS ON SUICIDE WATCH!!!1
>>69179711
capeshitters BTFO
Jesus he is so pathetically contrarian it's no wonder this shithole eats it up.
The only way to win with capeshit in general is not to play the game.
>>69180246
You haven't actually addressed any of his points I want you to know that.
>>69178005
I'm not saying he didn' make some good points (black lives obviously), but together it doesn't make much sense. At one point Tony Stark represent wealthy authoritarian Trump and the other George Soros/Steve Jobs–type billionaire?
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
>>69180081
Which ones did he praise? Did he like one of the planet of the apes movies?
>>69180299
>At one point Tony Stark represent wealthy authoritarian Trump
he didn't mention trump even once libcuck
>>69179737
these aren't good criticisms
Roger Ebert on Armond White
>"It looks to me like White is the epitome of the ideal critic, positioned smack dab in the middle of the scale."
>>69178005
No one takes this nigger seriously
>>69180299
You are the one mentioning Trump friendo.
>>69178957
Yeah, well, all I've seen so far he shoves in politics into every review, hit-or-miss-style while being as contrarian as possible.
>>69180310
Well for one, Norbit >>69180061
>>69178005
I love this nigga but how the hell does he keep getting work
>>69179799
>she will NEVER perform a live dissection of your dick with her teeth
Just end it lads
>>69180310
Grown Ups
Jonah Hex
G.I. Joe
Transformers
Indiana Jones 4
>>69180462
>Grown Ups
>Jonah Hex
>G.I. Joe
>Transformers
>Indiana Jones 4
Jesus christ, man.
>>69179215
wut
He was trashing the movie because it went completely muh feels dumbed down simplicistic and infantilizing view with the black lives matter bs, can't you read?
>>69180500
also Fantastic Four: Silver Surfer
>>69180371
lolno
http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/not-in-defense-of-armond-white
Ebert died knowing Armond is a hack.
>>DCucks so triggered, they end up making TWO threads on an infamous contrarian's review
>>69178005
>>69173372
Y'all bananas
>>69180299
>I'm not saying he didn' make some good points (black lives obviously)
>>69180540
>can't you read?
can you?
>>69180559
SO basically Ebert said Armond was a great critic, but then some of his readership got mad at him so he flip-flopped and said "Ok he's actually bad"
Which one is supposed to be the 'bad' critic again?
>>69180414
Just turn your brain off bro
>>69180462
He didnt like Planet of the Apes? Neither of them? Those movies are currently my test for critics on if they like action blockbuster type movies. They are a franchise, but they're not hero fucks the girl, has a car, and cell phone type action movies. And, they are really well done in pacing and story.
I cannot grasp how anyone would like Grown Ups or Jonah Hex, those movies were so awful.
>>69178739
breathed through my nose slightly. RIP El Rato.
>>69180676
Armond white is /tv/ personified, a contrarian narcissist thats so convinced of his own brilliance that he believes his contrarianism is genuine criticism
>>69180651
Ebert realized he had been duped. He put it together that Armond is a troll and a master craftsman of trolling. That his reviews have to stay on rotten tomatoes because they are so intelligently written. That perfect scores will always be blemished by him because he knows what he is doing better than the people he pisses off. Ebert fell for the trap, but wasn't going to sit there and take that, so he threw it right back in his face.
>Civil War is trite and ammounts to nothing with vague signs of meaning slapped onto it
What else is new if the only thing one can say about the film is that it methodically treats its characters' pacing well.
Batman v Superman was abhorrent, but at least it tried.
>>69180547
Holy shit, just how!?
>>69180246
Being contrarian is just saying somethings shit or saying the opposite for the sake of it.
This is not contrarian as it is an actual review with valid points that you fail to address.
Look at them.
Look at them, all these people who spend their lives validating their opinions through the eyes of others.
As if what they think has any weight. As if now they matter too.
Look at them and laugh.
>>69180342
He was clearly talking about the great divide today in American politics. Who the fuck can be the weathy authoritarian then, smartass? It doesn't take a genoius to figure it out.
>>69178109
>Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.
I think connecting a random black character in a popcorn flick to Tamir Rice by virtue of being black is way out of bounds
>>69180641
Yeah, so I understood he wasn't on the dindus side, unlike you.
>>69178005
>>69178053
>>69178076
Why dont you just link to the article you braindead marvel fan.
>>69178005
From the other thread:
>Projecting current politics, including the current election, onto a movie based on a comic from 10 years ago and a movie scripted 3+ years ago
>Thinks BvS is good and has written things like >>69178224, >>69178253 or >>69178338
>It’s the most pointless, decadent scene of the year so far. Directing team Anthony and Joe Russo work by-the-numbers, staging blurry, undecipherable action and rounding up extraneous Marvel characters Ant Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider Man (Tom Holland) for comic relief. It’s rebooting on top of rebooting simply because fanboys love a reboot; that’s how pathetically indoctrinated we’ve become.
No one rebooted Ant-Man, and everyone was against Spidey reboot before they released the trailer. There are people that wants the old to come back for some reason.
>it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.
Both were the same shit.
>Is it overreaching — or being humorless — to recognize and critique a piece of entertainment that takes America’s schism lightly? Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking? How did we get here?
Is he fucking real? Does he really attribute to some movies the power of remove the rational capacity? Do you believe a movie genre is the main problem of the thought of our generation?
If MCU prevents viewers from thinking, why are we discussing the film here and in other posts? Why this critic has detected some analogies in the movie with the real life?
However, If his argument were true, movies like CW or BvS are the consequence of the problem and not the cause. The critic is comitting "non causa pro causa".
>>69173402
>First Stark represents the wealthy aristocratic and the military industrial complex
>>69173498
>Now he represents Bernie Sanders
No coherence in Armond critics
>>69181087
>>69180970
The thing to consider is not Trump vs Liberals, but richer vs poorer. These kinds of films are causing Americans to ignore that growing gap, pacifying them.
I can't believe some random nigger has shills on a Egyptian pharaoh-worship message board.
>>69178005
STOP THIS MADMAN
Mylack ofdubs says Armond is a hack writer whose opinions are so contrarian they can't be taken seriously and thus you are truly pathetic if you do so.
>>69180935
And yet you're here and you're phishing for (you)s. Pathetic.
>>69181135
so the site doesn't get hits for click baiting.
>>69178005
>>69178053
>>69178076
>>69178076
>>69178109
>>69178143
>>69178173
When you don't understand shit about human behaviour.
Movies don't define how you'll think anon.
Basic psychology. You've ever heard of the word reinforcement in your conspiracy websites?
Nice meme tho
For the rest of you anons, don't worry, you can enjoy watching civil war without the fear of anything this man says happening. Movies do not influence behavior as it is proposed here, neither thinking.
DE_STROYED
>>69178410
>literally an avengers movie
>200m opening
>can't even beat BvS
>>69181061
you cant read. otherwise you wouldnt have missed the first few word of my post. the ones where i said i didnt read anything else. the ones that make you the stupid one for asking me if i can read despite you yourself not being able to read
>>69178005
As expected from our Patrician master Armond.
I don't understand why so many capeshit fags are mad though? It's no secret Marvel movies are soulless assembly line cash grabs with the depth of a Saturday morning cartoon.
Is this just Disney damage control? Or have people actually deluded themselves into thinking capeshit has some sort of artistic value?
>“Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.
As much as I want to dislike someone I always agree with for disliking a film I myself would probably dislike, I have got to applaud.
>All this Marvel damage control
It's beautiful, thank you based Negro
>>69181197
He means cinephilia and film criticism, obviously. Not going to defend his "my days were better" argument, but mind numbing films/series of films have existed all the time, shitted out by every studio that could make it.
>>69179215
You realize he is a republican right?
>>69181185
I am here yes. But that is not what my post was about. Learn to read.
>>69180783
>not realizing he's doing it for the memes
faggot
>>69181240
>Or have people actually deluded themselves into thinking capeshit has some sort of artistic value?
Armond has written a review in which relates certain aspects of American policy with ideas or characters of the movie. Therefore, he must think it has some sort of artistic value.
>>69179051
No mention of Obama, either. Guy's losing his marbles.
>>69181446
Every movie can have artistic value. The artistic value of horrible facile shit, obviously.
>>69180462
And Resident Evil: Afterlife
>>69181600
What in the FUCK?!
>>69181617
ya he's just being opposed because everyone is for. it's a thing to be seen in the crowd.
>Reposting
>When you don't understand shit about human behaviour.
>Movies don't define how you'll think anon.
>Basic psychology.
You've ever heard of the word reinforcement in your conspiracy websites?
Nice meme tho
For the rest of you anons, don't worry, you can enjoy watching civil war without the fear of anything this man says happening. Movies do not influence behavior as it is proposed here, neither thinking.
>>69181669
SO THEN THIS LEADS TO THE FACT THAT REVIEW ARE MORE ABOUT GETTING READERSHIP THEN ACTUALLY DOING REVIEWS.
>>69181682
Movies don't influences behaviour.
A meme (/ˈmiːm/ meem) is "an idea, behavior, or style that spreads from person to person within a culture".
>>69181617
he is a contrarian troll
>>69181739
meaning MEME is how movies influence behaviour.
>>69181617
>If critics and fanboys weren't suckers for simplistic nihilism and high-pressure marketing, Afterlife would be universally acclaimed as a visionary feat, superior to Inception and Avatar on every level
>>69181682
>For the rest of you anons, don't worry, you can enjoy watching civil war without the fear of anything this man says happening. Movies do not influence behavior as it is proposed here, neither thinking.
This is probably the most retarded sentence I've read on this site. Which takes some doing.
Congrats on the (You), tho.
>>69181180
why contain stupidity? nobody takes him seriously.
>>69181808
>This is probably the most retarded sentence I've read on this site
But Armond´s review is in the beginning of the thread
>>69181446
Semantics. Point is, capeshit isn't worth analyzing in any serious capacity.
>>69181903
Don't worry, the irony in your comment topped him. Especially in light of what (crazy? maybe not that much) accusations he makes.
>>69181903
savage
>>69178005
Not unbiased critic here
>>69179735
The movie is PG-13, its not meant for children despite what marvel drones claim
>>69181161
That's an other way to put it, but I'm clearly not the only one >>69181153 noticing this incoherence
>>69181996
Is armond white a faggot or not? Someone please confirm
>>69179735
>ad-hominem
>>69181965
>Capeshit isn't worth analyzing in any serious capacity
Then why the review focus more on the ideas of the movie and their correlation with American policy rather than in plot, characters, rythm...
I was more entertained reading this than I could ever be checking another Marvel joint. Thanks, Armond. In a age of "10/10 it's so fun" seeing actual criticism once in a while is refreshing.
>>69182130
then it's not a real film review.
>>69182165
/Thread
>>69182130
Because there is nothing else that can be done with it.
>Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking?
MARVELETS STRAPPED TO THE BED ON LITERAL SUICIDE WATCH
WHEN WILL THEY LEARN?
>>69181219
>international opening doesnt count to fit ny shit posting.
Capekino is shit in general, but let's delve deeper
>It’s the ultimate sentimental cynicism when Captain America’s devotion to his dangerously conditioned childhood friend Bucky/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) — who represents war’s emotional cost — is used to evoke ambivalence toward the military
Why though? I don't get it.
>Thus, Marvel’s various superheroes appeal to teenage rebellion: Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Vision (Paul Bettany), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and the others personify juvenile sensibility.
Why? In what way does Black Widow personify teenage rebellion?
>a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman)
C'mon son don't be playin', I appreciate good trolling when it's appropriate and it's not appropriate here.
>“militarized police,” a foolish, redundant term exploited by manipulative media outlets and politicians.
America isn't the only country that has concerns over the issue tho.
>3.6 grade-point average
OH COME ON
>offensively named Black Panther,
COME
ON
>suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance
I guess Diabolik is also feminine then you dunkass. What the fuck does this even mean.
>ultra-sexy Johansson
DUDE
Good review otherwise. 90% of what Le Contrarian Man writes is shit but sometimes he manages.
>>69182359
Are you fucking real? Do you really attribute to some movies the power of remove the rational capacity? Do you believe a movie genre is the main problem of the thought of our generation?
If MCU prevents viewers from thinking, why are we discussing the film here and in other posts? Why this critic has detected some analogies in the movie with the real life?
However, If his argument were true, movies like CW or BvS are the consequence of the problem and not the cause. The critic is comitting "non causa pro causa".
>people here are criticizing a member of an audience for asociating the events of a movie with real life events.
kek
>>69182589
>of our generation
See you are assuming it only affects a single generation. You might be past the impressionable age but a lot of early teens are chugging this drivel masked as entertainment. MCU has them by the balls.
>>69182589
As I've already told you. It's about future waves of cinephilia and film criticism being dumbed down by careful use of thematic elements to be seen as meaningful. Thing that could be easily said about every other film about superheroes, anyway, including his beloved BvS.
>>69182703
people don't take movies that seriously.
>>69178005
He's completely misreading comics and their target audience. They're frivolities for children and adolescents. They aren't supposed to reflect problems in our society. The banality of a man armed with a shield punching a man in robotic armour would jar too much with the serious message.
It's why batman vs superman fails and civil war succeeds. It's about knowing the limits of the genre and source material you are working with and operating within your limits. Armond White can't differentiate between arthouse and blockbuster. Or that he can and he wants to peddle his thesis and he will use any movie to do it.
>>69182793
But entertainment influences you in more ways than you think, anon. It can really impact you growing up. They are icons for the children.
>>69182845
yes.
>>69178005
Too fucking redpilled
ITT: Capecancer defenders literally saying it's not a real movie review because he didn't LE SHUT HIS BRAIN OFF AND LE ENJOY IT
>>69182845
There's no hard rule preventing you from evolving past the constraints of the genre. Stop being a champion for mediocrity. It's not the golden age of cape comics anymore. The medium can and should aim much higher.
>>69182883
you're overestimating.
I agree with a lot of what he said. Comics infantalize everyone.
Still doesn't make BvS a good movie.
Also, I am glad that Armond Exists. After you have read three positive review's the film critics all say the same boring shit. Why can't anyone bring real cultural criticism into their reviews like Armond? Nearly everything I read is on the level of Chris Stuckmann.
>>69182589
Modern entertainment has already done irreversible cultural damage. All because statistics and industrial psychology got too fucking good at their job.
>>69183027
Oh there fucking is, come on. It's called the public. Superhero movies are sold for a market. BvS tried to change it (bluntly and with too much confidence on itself, to be honest) and it got panned over it.
"Superhero movies don't have to be like homework", remember? But they do have to have a theme done superficially to cling onto.
>>69178005
he said nothing of worth. i was hoping he would say something intelligent so that my perspective of black intelligence could be changed.
>>69183027
>There's no hard rule preventing you from evolving past the constraints of the genre. Stop being a champion for mediocrity. It's not the golden age of cape comics anymore. The medium can and should aim much higher.
I disagree. I think there's only so much you can do when at the end of the day you have a hero wearing a cape fighting and defeating a villain. Superhero comics (I don't mean to talk about all comics) are limited by their defining features.
Superhero comics which have read and enjoyed like Invincible and Watchmen have reached a limit I think. You can subvert the genre so much and it's clever and interesting. But you cannot do it too often before the idea gets boring and you cannot go too far lest you find that you are no longer writing a superhero comic.
Call me a pleb but I believe the same goes for other genres in art such as nu-metal and third wave ska or minimilism.
>>69183055
The internet validated them. Now every kid that got a A+ on some shit essay thinks he has what it takes to be a professional critic. These remunerated fanboy rants give you no more insight than reading autists sperging out here for free. You can just mix random paragraphs from multiple critics without even noticing it. The difference in form and content is negligible.
>>69183173
He said a lot more than you or most of the so called critics really. Don't let your boner for Marvel cloud your judgement. You don't approach his text just when it's convenient, I disagree with him many times, you have to absorb it dissident ideas and all.
>>69179215
>>69179124
t.retarded poltards are triggered because a nigger is way more intelligent and than them and their inbred brains can't even understand what he's saying.
He liked:
>Grown Ups
>Jonah Hex
>G.I. Joe
>G.I. Joe 2
>Battle: Los Angeles
>The Green Hornet
>Clash of the Titans
>Indiana Jones 4
>Transformers 2
>Death Race
>Fantastic Four: Rise of Silver Surfer
>I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry
>Takers
>Taken
>Transporter 3
>Resident Evil: Afterlife
>Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
He disliked:
>The Tree of Life
>There Will Be Blood
>Black Swan
>The Social Network
>Tangled
>The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
>The Road
>The King's Speech
>Synecdoche, New York
>Speed Racer
>Transformers
>Toy Story 3
>Eastern Promises
>Stardust
>The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
>Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives
>Tales from the Golden Age
>Let Me In
>All Marvel movies
>The Dark Knight
>Mother
>The Hurt Locker
>Blue Valentine
>Up
>Hellboy 2
He also compared Hannah to Kick-Ass because they both have a young female character, thinks I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry is a modern classic, thinks Live Free or Die Hard is the best Die Hard, compared The Road to Resident Evil, thinks Clash of the Titans is better than the LOTR Trilogy, prefers Transformers 2 to Transformers, and thinks CJ7 is deeper and more profound than There Will Be Blood.
>>69184174
Analyse the argument and not the man.
>>69183055
>Comics infantalize everyone.
I fucking dare you to say that again after you read The Sandman, Lucifer, I Kill Giants, American Splendor, V for Vendetta, The Nao of Brown, Maus, Transmetropolian, Persepolis, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Bone, or Sweet Tooth.
Why does /tv/ like the opinions of a zionist film critic who works for a zionist rag?
>>69184355
Chill out. Anyway, I should have said so but I was referring to the vast majority of superhero comics. The vast majority of which are childish as fuck.
Also, I've read a number of those and and I consider V for Vendetta pretty childish to be honest familia.
>>69179954
>The entire thing comes down to "I didn't like it, now let me rant about politics for a few pages and draw loose correlations to the film I supposedly watched." It could have been written without even seeing the film.
This. It's the fucking New York Post. They need to maintain an image.
>>69184174
The only good movies he dislikes are Black Swan, The Road, Dark Knight, and Hellboy 2
Not that bad a record
>>69184307
I'll do that if he begins analyzing the movies themelves and not the ideologies behind them, just because BvS has some (unexplored) political/god vs man themes it doesn't mean it isn't a mediocre borefest for fuck's sake.
>>69184445
V for Vendetta gets better when you realize V isn't really being portrayed as a hero.
>>69184538
Analyze the argument and not the man.
>>69184466
I repeat, he thinks I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry is a modern classic and that Clash of the Titans is better than the LOTR Trilogy.
>>69178005
a big bullet for you
......
........
comes in october malvelcucks
>>69180462
>Grown Ups
>Jonah Hex
>G.I. Joe
>Transformers
>Indiana Jones 4
>King of /tv/
>>69184654
Analyse the argument and not the man.
>>69184705
I see, you have no arguments to defend your god so you just throw memes at me.
Holy shit the Marvel tiers ITT
>>69182589
>If MCU prevents viewers from thinking, why are we discussing the film here and in other posts?
Tumblr discusses John Green shit everyday, what's your point?
>>69184538
>MUH SYMBOLISM
>LOL UPSIDE DOWN PAINTING MARVEL BTFO
>WE WUZ ANGELS AND SHIT
>>69178005
Wow who is this pretentious nigger? I bet he loves the smell of his own farts
>>69180462
G.I. Joe and Transformers were good movies, though.
>>69184174
/thread
See, its fine and dandy if he doesn't like the film, sure. But his criticism seems to be that it handles class warfare and America's political schism badly.
Those aren't themes of the piece, they are ideological conflicts he is imposing. Its a little like criticising Transformers for its unfair representation of Inuits. Inuits simply don't feature. Class warfare and the current political climate in America simply don't feature.
The last review of his plastered all over TV at least had a grain of truth to of, one can't deny echoes of 9/11 in BvS, one can't deny what Snyder attempted, only quibble over the execution.
This though?
It reeks of pseudointellectualism masking clickbait contrarianism. Sorry, but if you put aside your battle over whose movie about toys is better, you'd see you are ALL being played.
>>69184926
who doesnt?
>tfw you know you're an actual literal retard
I cant wrap my head around what Armond is trying to say except maybe he's taking a comic flick too seriously
>>69184174
>>69184966
>his taste is different to mine thats why he sucks
how immature and insecure of a faggot are you?
>>69184926
>who is Armond White
how new are you?
Why are Marvelfags so insecure bros?
>>69185051
I'm sorry. At least you know, most don't
>>69185051
That's wheat he relies on buddy. Its all bluster and bullshit designed to falsely elevate his critique.
>>69185051
he isn't saying anything.
he's throwing up big words for clicks.
How can a gay black man be so based?
I'd offer him my wife and sister if her were straight. Truly, he is the king.
He gave Jack and Jill a positive review. He'll probably give the new Ghostbusters a positive review. I can't take that contrarian fuck seriously.
>>69185077
He has bad taste in movies and his reviews are political nonsense, he's literally contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, kill yourself faggot.
>>69185077
his taste in udder fucking shit
kill yourself, so I don't see you posting on MY image board anymore.
>>69178005
Well written but I disagree that it's ineffective pseudo-political critique. That may be because I already work for the government and can reflect on the purpose of my work better than a politically disengaged fan boy of which he speaks. Show a somewhat open and politically minded well adjusted adult the film and I'm sure they'd take something of value from it.
>>69184770
You keep attacking the man. You're the one with not arguments.
>>69178173
>snyders wit
wat
is this a troll reviewer?
>>69185161
>>69185156
Why marvel babbys have to be so intellectually dishonest?
>>69180462
ITS OVER
MARVEL IS FINISHED
>>69185167
But not only is he openly gay, he's catholic. Because he has to be as contrarian as possible.
>>69185127 (You)
BASED BAIT OF THE CENTURY
>>69185127
Fucking this.
>>69185213
His reviews are filled with political/religious nonsense, he almost never reviews the movie itself.
He gives bad scores to objectively good movies.
He gives good scores to objectively bad movies.
There's your argument shithead.
>>69185296
Stop attacking the man, for fuck's sake. Can you not see your hypocrisy?
>>69178005
>Flicks are serious business
DCuck confirmed
>>69179051
Check his twitter, he's a trump supporter, good lad
>>69185316 (You)
>>69178173
I was on board until "Snyder's visual wit." Snyder is fucking awful.
>>69185179
>kill yourself faggot
like I said, insecure and immature
>>69185327
Likewise.
>>69185327
Not him but great comeback, seriously.
>>69185316
I just gave you an argument for why I think he is a really bad movie reviewer and you should stop talking about him as if he was the big shit.
>>69184174
>>69184691
>>69184826
>
>>69178109
>exploits recent political trends such as Black Lives Matter
>Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars
>That’s way out of bounds.
Hey look a black woman crying over her son, THAT'S GOT TO BE CONNECTED TO BLACK LIVES MATTER AMIRITE? YOU CANT HAVE A STRONG INDEPENDANT BLACK WOMAN WHO NEEDS NO MAN IN MOVIES! STOP EXPLOITING MY CULTURE
jesus christ, capeshit shilling aside, do people actually take this guy seriously?
>>69185077
>>69185335
>how immature and insecure of a faggot are you?
insecure and immature amirite?
>>69185364
>>69185375
you're all baiting for replies, this man is jewing you and everyone else for clicks and nothing more.
>>69184538
It's not god vs. man. It's perception vs. reality, and it's exploring that across multiple films, largely from a visual perspective.
>>69185388
>He gives bad scores to subjectivley good movies i like that are objectivley bad
>He gives good scores to subjectivley bad movies i like that are objectivley good
>There's your argument shithead, so stop having a different opinion to my far superior one
great argument you have there, retard.
>>69179711
he actually said some things that i had kind of predicted, while also touching on my thoughts on how they depicted, or rather haven't depicted stark and rogers
>>69185423
That's right anon, everyone here that makes you look stupid is baiting you.
>>69178005
He's just mad because he saw the words "civil war" and thought the movie was gonna be filled with niggers
>>69185500
checked.
Can you explain how, in any way, movies like Grown Ups, I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry or Resident Evil: Afterlife are better than The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Mother, or The Road.
>>69185196
>udder
Figures that a drooling capeshit lover can't use basic words.
>>69185477
Yet it's badly edited(save for the Batman related fight scenes), the plot is a mess, has tons of unnecesary scenes, and is filled with bland, unrelatable characters.
>>69185507
Only Armond supporters are the ones that looked stupid.
see>>69184174
Kill yourself and your shit fucking taste in films and critics.
>>69185656
>Kill yourself and your shit fucking taste in films and critics.
>shit taste
>having a taste in critics
I often disagree with Armond but his writing is beautiful
>>69185296
>objectively good movies.
>objectively bad movies
These things don't even exist. Nothing outside of science and math is objective.
>>69185724
yes they do. film isn't music.
>>69185619
Not even the plot is a mess once you look at it from the perspective of what the villain's true goal is. Argue the rest all you want, but none of the points you address changes the fact that these movies have nothing whatsoever to do with God. "Deification," sure, and a man struggling to reject it, but that's a whole different thing.
Jesus christ, the butthurt of Marvel drones in this thread is on a new level. Just accept it, your precious "cinematic universe" is shit for manchildren. Grow up. You lost.
>>69185788
>Implying not all capeshit is for manchildren.
>>69178005
>While the mainstream media pretzel themselves over the presidential primaries, Marvel Studios has steadily accomplished a rejiggering of the American public’s cultural and political consciousness.
What did he mean by this?
>This patronization is consistent with Marvel Studios’ political infantilizing.
What did he mean by this?
>>69185773
I'm waiting for the extended blu-ray to come out so I can edit this movie into something decent(yes, i'm so far up my ass I think I can improve the editing of a movie edited by ''professionals'')
>>69185773
not that guy but i definitely think it plays with the way we think about god, the way god functions in our world and so on
i'm both surprised and not surprised that no one has been triggered by how the death and it's aftermath play out
>>69184174
I agree with the dislike list except fro Tree of Life, Tangled, Dark Knight and Eastern Promises. Hellboy II I could go either way.
Liked list I have more differences but that won't stop me from reading him. People find lulz and critiques in his trashings rather than his praises.
>>69185788
It was honestly over since age of ultron but i was still holding out hope. This movie was a disaster.
>>69185756
Nothing, creative or otherwise, can be "objectively" "good" or "bad."
Whether something is appealing is an *opinion* entirely in a person's head. Therefore, it's not objective.
Can you not see that 2 + 2 = 4 is *not* an opinion, and that it will be the same in everyone's head (whose IQ is sufficient, and who are crazy)?
>>69185788
Marvel is for children, DC is for manchildren.
>>69185881
tbf even if his reviews are bad you can't deny he's a pretty good writer.
>>69185892
*who AREN'T crazy
>>69185945
He's good for a clickbait. It's more telling that he is one of the best, meaning the rest of the critiques are really unreadable trash.
>>69185857
Whoever edited the theatrical release has no business calling himself a professional. Good luck with the project!
>The red asscheecks of Marvelcucks
>>69185892
I don't care about literal definitions.
This is a film board, not a math or science board.
You can dislike films like The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption but that doesn't mean your taste isn't horseshit.
>>69182426
He's saying Black Panther is not the great inspiration to Blacks people pretend he is because his central themes have to do with spite and retaliation, considered feminine traits and probably things Armond view as big problems in the Black community.
ARMOND WHITE IS SO CONTRARIAN
>How contrarian is he?
HE'S A BLACK MAN WITH THE LAST NAME "WHITE"
>>69185863
This is what I've been suggesting to folks who are interested. Go back and watch MoS again and notice how often God is mentioned and in what context.
Pay special attention to how it plays in the first flashback to Jonathan Kent, then think about what Perry says to Lois after she drops the story, Perry's question is what almost the entirety of BvS is addressing in the background.
>>69184985
This
>>69186124
and he's a nigger who's a faggot and we all know how much niggers hate faggots
that's how contrarian he is.
>>69184985
>Those aren't themes of the piece, they are ideological conflicts he is imposing
how do you know that he is imposing those themes onto the flick? do you personally know the screenwriter and the director?
>>69186123
>Spite and Retaliation
Which he disgards.
Almost as if rejecting them, not extoling them.
>>69186130
to me the visual allusions are to frame a reference, in which we watch what happens on that screen in relation to that reference
it's kind of funny that people are so triggered by it since it's obvious it's not a one to one equivalence since christianity is very much a part of the world of the movies
something that's also on my mind is how martha has a cross necklace in her scene in the warehouse
>>69178076
>Despite the supergeeks’ arguing either against working for the restrictive capitalist government or for their own sense of doing right and correcting injustice, the fact is, nothing here has gravitas. Civil War is politics as adolescents misperceive social/global crisis.
NAILED IT HOLY SHIT.
>>69186260
Not that guy, but why would you need to be?
The movie was written months ago, the comics its based on years. It's not a critique of current politics. Armond is just framing current politics through the film narrative. It's kind of a strawman. He's criticising Civil War for it's inability to achieve a goal that the story in no way sets out to achieve.
>/tv/ is considered /pol/-lite
>/pol/ doesn't hate and shitpost about a gay nigger who like shitty movies
/pol/ please help.
>all these cucks worshiping a nigger for reading what a human wrote for him
BIG
>>69186385
Yes, through his vast intellect he saw a simple fiilm wasn't complex.
Well done him.
He's right, you know.
Superhero fans are petulant manchildren.
Marvelcucks have been so BTFO now they are resorting to edgy rageposting
>>69186484
Him being a degenerate doesn't mean he's wrong about Marvelcucks.
>>69186526
Comic fans are.
The movies are for everybody.
>>69185788
Lost what?
>>69186498
a feat when you take into account all the other "reviewers" calling it complex and deeply political and thoughtful.
Didn't this guy like Jonah Hex and Transformers?
>>69186551
he's mentally ill. do you really take what he says seriously?
you're not a true /pol/ack.
>>69186573
Can't say I've seen any reviews that make that claim.
ITT: marvelbabies perform damage control with hilarious results
>>69186608
I'm not a /pol/ack (still voted Trump and will vote for Grand Leader in November).
I like the ramblings of mentally ill people. Alex Jones, Jean Claude Van Damme, I've even watched some Bernie Sanders rallies.
>>69186586
and Jack and Jill.
>>69184174
I'm holding out for Armond's retrospective of Roland Emmerich's KINOzilla and how it symbolized France's Islamification and its polluting America from within.
>>69178005
le contrarian gay nigger
>>69182359
>>69184772
>>69185127
>>69185788
>>69186548
>>69186637
literally all me
>>69179215
No, you should read it.
>>69186746
those were all me actually. including this post.
>>69186746
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>69186445
>He's criticising Civil War for it's inability to achieve a goal that the story in no way sets out to achieve
how do you know what the flick really sets out to achieve if you're not the screenwriter or director? any political projection could be faulty or true, you just don't know.
Saying Armond is wrong with his assumption just because some of the topics weren't hot topics when the movie was conceived, doesn't mean that they weren't on the screenwriters or directors mind at the time (see hateful eight that has topics that could be perceived as current topics as well)
>read the comments
>Armond is getting BTFO
Top lel
>>69186795
>91%
what damage?
>>69186908
>You're not the writer or director
Nor is nutty Almond.
I am however just as entitled to an opinion as he, and based on the actual product and the series on which it's based, he is simply...well, not wrong but simple.
Cap and Tony represent broad strokes, individual freedom and personal responsibility. Can these themes have a political coat of paint applied? Sure. That was kinda the point.
Drawing a parallel means it's relatable. Drawing a parallel and saying that was the absolute intent whilst ignoring source material is egotism at best, lazy at worst.
The guy is the very definition of pretentious. Whilst I am a fan of comics (not brands just comics) and thus biased, I really can't see things from as simplistic a view as Armond. Make no mistake, his reading IS simplistic, just padded out to be grandiose.
>>69186484
He legit knows a lot about movies, cares about movies, is smart and is a good writer--and he's not afraid of being criticized for his opinions.
That's what makes him a good critic worth following. His opinions would be just as valid if he killed children or puppies, let alone being black or gay.
He's got about 50 more IQ points and much more integrity than the average critic who praises Nolan shit or comic book movies.
/film/ when?
Marvel discussion and DC discussion don't belong on the same board after this shellacking t b h (to be honest) f a m (senpai means family)
>>69180676
He said Dawn of the Planet of the Apes was the best film released that summer
>>69187321
He does praise comic book movies selectively, as if to encourage traffic.
>>69186973
>g-getting triggered and unleashing my chris evans folder totally means I-I'm not mad af and trying to save my favorite spandex wearing superhero movies' reputation from being tarnished on a south east asian dog recipe forum
>>69187343
>tfw /film/ was shitposted into oblivion during its brief existence
>tfw I knew this would happen
.....theres no recovering from this
I honestly don't see marvel surviving this
White is the king of Kino
>>69187413
...wait, when was there a /film/ board?
>>69187527
For about a day a week ago.
>>69187527
someone has the screenshot of it, post it fagget
>>69187384
>implying it was ever tarnished
>>69180462
This is the man /tv/ calls "based," which is already embarrassing. And the people on this board have the nerve to shit on Reddit's taste. This is a level of embarrassment beyond cringe.
>>69187545
How the fuck did I miss this?
Whoever has that screenshot, fucking post it!!!!
>>69178410
>>69179412
>>69179472
>>69181995
>>69184963
>>69185248
>>69186168
>>69186973
>>69187675
>>69187744
These are all me guise. I've got enough Evanses to last me for days
>>69179954
shoo shoo marvelcuck
>>69187704
gotchu senpai
>>69185403
Not even the mouth-breathers who call him "BASED" take him seriously.
>>69182845
I know many adults who take these Marvel capeshits very seriously, and try to use them as a guide for their own moral compass. Are they idiotic for doing this? Yes. Is it fucking insane? Yes. However, these are very smart people who, for reasons of their own, have turned to certain forms of pop culture to help reinforce their childish attitude towards morals.
This shit is real, and it's frightening, and I guarantee you there are many out there just like the people I know.
>>69178143
Should have been more like GI Joe 2 or Transformers Revenge of the Fallen.
Who is Armond voting for?
>>69178005
this is a man who gets ass mad when he has to share a review space with someone from a "lesser" publication
why do we care what he thinks?
>>69188158
>>69182845
spotted a couple plebeians that don't belong in this thread
>>69188430
>unironically using "we"
>not just taking his opinions at face value
>>69187744
Yeah but all Batman scenes in BvS are better than literally every Marvel movie ever made save for Ant Man, and the original Iron Man(Original and X-2 along with Deadpool are Fox)
>>69188237
oh my god
this guy has no taste.
>>69188584
>save for Ant Man
When is this meme going to die? Ant-Man was utter shite, and you all know it.
>>69178005
God I love reading Armond White, it just affirms how below the average university graduate he is. Absolutely hilarious.
>As momentary adversaries, Captain America and Iron Man almost represent the schism that now divides American voters...
Not its intent. The title civil war is a misnomer, i'll grant that, but this is the means to a different end.
>superficial patriotism.
Over the course of their movies, and even with civil war itself, there is absolutely no allusion to their "patriotism". Cap is hardly the most patriotic even at the height of WW2, while Ironman is wary of leaking his technology to the government. To point this quality out as a shortcoming is to completely misinterpret this.
>Ironman represents authoritarianism
Again, an idiotic misreading of the movie. This civil war adaptation is not nearly as ideologically driven as the comic. The "civil war" in this movie is character driven. The difference between the "serkovia accords" and the registration act is a difference of several magnitudes. One is accepting limitations and responsibility, the other is submitting to a higher power.
>taking America's schism lightly
Not its goal. This is doubly retarded in light of the notoriously long production cycle and planning of these movies; civil war has likely been in the works long before such a "schism". Again, Armond's uncontrollable autistic political wankery is getting the best of him.
>Prevents its viewers from thinking?
There are good movies that are "turn your brain off movies" in ways. These are movies that have very little basis in reality, but have internal consistency that merits recognition. i.e. Total Recall, Die Hard, etc, etc. Lots of action movies are not "thinkers" and yet they are undeniable good FILMS and ENTERTAINMENT.
>politics as sentimentality:
This has a historical and psychological precedent actually, there's correlation (and perhaps causation if i checked long enough) in political views and youth.
>Cont
>>69188430
we don't
>>69179212
boy you look stupid right now
>>69186968
nah:
>Lots of people saying "I don't care if the movie was just an incoherent childish Happy Meal, that's all I wanted anyway! Lighten up, it's just a movie!". To these people I say: lighten up, it's just a review!
White's core criticism nails the target: Marvel movies are juvenile, bland, and clownish. Even as light entertainment they totally fail to engage the emotions or develop any worthwhile themes (frankly Fast & Furious 5 had more humanity and depth than anything Marvel has made). The conflicts are contrived and weightless and the characters are interchangeable twinks in rubber Halloween costumes. The plot has no point except to move from one over-choreographed video game fight scene to the next, and the whole thing is designed to be forgotten in a few months by the time the next one comes out. Blockbusters CAN be powerful, exciting, moving, and memorable, but the Marvel franchise assembly line is instead working overtime to churn out the cinematic equivalent of Hot Pockets and Mountain Dew.
Thanks Armond for calling it like you see it. Your reviews are a beacon of sanity in our crazy franchise-addicted media culture.
>>69188029
>tfw I got the first dubs on /film/
feels good
>>69188645
>Superheroes represent teenage rebellion
>Proceeds to list heroes on both sides of the view, including those in favor and those against.
That's embarrassingly weak evidence.
>Each one’s predicament represents a denial of the moral complexities that come with maturity
Precisely. Both sides are wrong, and given that he has listed heroes on both side this statement is an implicit affirmation of how the viewer can see merit for either side. Armond is again letting his political wankery supercede a qualitative analysis. That is, an analysis as to its objective qualities rather than the subjective qualities it may have in whichever retarded ideological lens he chooses.
>Arguing against working for the capitalist government.
Apparently Armond is so close-sighted, or else so idiotic that he missed the part in the movie where they state that the accords would be based in the UN. In fact, there is a lengthy sequence of the movie dedicated to this fact. He is either setting this absolute fact aside in order to progress his objectively wrong interpretation, or else has such a bad memory that he's made a mistake.
>Civil War is politics as adolescents misperceive social/global crisis.
Another embarrassingly bad phrase, did he even proof read? The use of slashes in writing is ordinarily bad, but to have such a clumsy sentence is pretty funny for a writer.
>deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art
Art has no morality. To judge art's quality based on morality is idiotic. If this is his stance, then Armond is in the same strata of people that would condemn Wagner for being an anti-semite, and so on. Ironically, it would seem that he's as misinformed about art as the "cry bully" far-leftists that he deplores.
>Movies as violent as the Marvel flicks are not pacifist but are proof of anti-military sentiment
Movies that are so violent that no one dies? Seems a tad hypocritical to criticize their lack of consequences and then follow it by condemning its violence.
>>69188158
I've met adults who take comic book movies seriously. I'd describe a couple of them as "smart" but I'm very doubtful there are more than a few adult comic book movie fans whom you could describe as "very smart."
>>69189045
Well you must feel pretty stupid right now considering I unironically love comic vook movies and I have an IQ of 160, am 6'2" with a 9-inch cock, and make over $180K a year as a professional chef at Wendy's.
>>69189045
you have to be very smart to understand MoS and BvS, if you watch it with a Marvel-level intellect you'll miss almost everything in the movie and just cry and shitpost about them
>>69189101
I can confirm this, as I also make $180k a year as a professional chef at Wendy's
>>69188645
>>69189009
very true.
>>69189112
>someone will fall for this
>in all probablity most of the console wars are people trying to outbait each other
>>69188602
>>69188237
>being this retarded
Glenn?
>>69189009
>Civil War references BLM: Tamir rice, etc, etc.
ROFL. Genuinely made me laugh. Holy shit that's hilarious. This literal nigger faggot thinks that a dead black person that is referenced is a stand in for those revered (falsely most often imo) by BLM? Based on what? That they're both black? Where's the evidence? If anything, the fact that he WAS a scholar and WAS an enterprising as well as affluent kid precludes such comparisons. Not that such a comparison would even matter if Armond's political idiocy wasn't being deferred to.
>Pointless fighting.
Except that the movie's pacing and plot has made all the motivations clear, has explained what is going on, what's at stake, and what the timeline is. Unlike BvS the action of the scene, while certainly has indulgent as Armond states, is completely cohesive. Its because of this cohesiveness that its arguably far less decedent than the battles between Superman and Batman as well as the trinity versus Doomsday. The catalyst for these events are muddled and flawed in a number of ways, and yet are executed for the sake of fan fare.
>undecipherable action.
Another embarrassing example of Armond's writing, undecipherable isn't even a word. Based on my experience 90% of the action, regardless of shakiness at times, is entirely understandable. Not only are all the character components present, but the actual camera movements and blocking makes all the movements and actions work. But again, Armond resorts to hyperbole to arrive at his politically informed pre-existent judgement.
>rebooting for rebooting
Considering the studio fuckery that has gone on no. Considering the new casting and its positive reaction no. Considering spiderman's role in the comics no. Again, Armond has baseless cyncism.
>Overall
Grade C+. Disregards evidence to substantiate a vague thesis, has instances of flawed writing, lacks specificity and examples. Maybe after a couple more drafts it could earn something worth while.
>>69189368
out of curiosity i watched some youtube guy who went about explaining all the factions in the right
he had high praise for glenn and i absolutely could not take him seriously from then on
>>69189208
Absolutely. Trying to evaluate a film review which uses a subjective political lens as its basis is a flawed enterprise.
But then again so is using such a review as an objective measurement of the film's objective quality.
Given how much DCucks venerate him its fun to make fun of. Being able to pick apart essays and theses is what I do for a living, its hilarious to put actual standards on such absolute drivel.
Civil War is not a "great" movie, and Armond isn't an idiot, but the people that deny the former, and that claim the latter to be an intellectual, are idiots.
>>69189384
the discrepancy between the movie kid and dead blacks and their fallout irl is the point
>>69178005
>writing a serious, deep review of capeshit
No one expected this to be good from a writing standpoint, right? I mean, this is like doing a thesis paper on why Barney the Dinosaur is a bad character.
>>69189101
lmao bruh
I make $650,000 per annum and drive a Bugatti Veyron stay outta my way cuck git gud
>>69182845
Holy shit, an actual intelligent comment in here.
>>69189384
well said.
>>69189679
>fanfiction
>>69185224
>>69185334
It's pretty obvious what he meant by this, and it's true.
Marvel's movies look like episodes of Star Trek TNG with much higher effect budgets. Man of Steel and (oddly to a lesser extent) Batman V Superman, for all their flaws, actually looked like a grand cinematic spectacle. Much better shot blocking, sense of scale, composition, etc throughout - especially in Man of Steel - than any of the Marvel movies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMKsuA4Bi-c
The most impressive shot to me in that video is Superman and Zod crashing through Union Station. It's beautifully-composed, regardless of any feelings you may have about the neck-snapping outcome.
Snyder's biggest issue as a visual stylist is that he has an awful propensity to filter and desaturate the fidelity out of his images. He's probably trying to ape the look of truly classic Eurocomic artwork (pic related), but it doesn't quite translate to film in the way he's going about it.
>>69189748
>Much better shot blocking, sense of scale, composition, etc throughout - especially in Man of Steel - than any of the Marvel movies.
no
>>69189822
Objectively yes.
>>69178957
>Interesting that he gave BvS a good review
I don't know if interesting is the right word
More like, predictable
>>69178957
Yeah, I completely disagree with nearly every word of that review but it was an interesting read.
I like him.
>>69189822
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ciuisg2RNA
Try and tell me with a straight face that there is ANYTHING in the Marvel movies this well-done visually.
Man of Steel and Batman V Superman may have been deeply, deeply flawed movies but cinematography is most definitely not one of those flaws.
>>69189975
Doomsday looked like shit, he ruined BvS visually and in terms of tone.
MoS was great until the Zod fight turned into a big, loud, uninteresting mess of noise.
>>69190101
>Doomsday looked like shit
That's the special effects department's fault, not the director and DP's. The actual arrangement of the Doomsday fight seemed to draw a lot of inspiration from Renaissance and post-Renaissance era paintings, especially Caravaggio's work.
Also as much as people like to give this shit for the Jesus imagery, I thought this scene in Man of Steel looked fantastic on the big screen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHTv_oEfBow
