• Armond White Brings the Noise

    The movie American Gangster grew out of a profile of Frank Lucas that Mark Jacobson wrote for New York magazine, and now Jacobson is back at the same place with another troublemaker, Armond White, movie critic for the New York Press and newly elected chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle. As Jacobson notes, White has the position "because he was the only one who wanted the generally thankless job." That's a clue both to how seriously White takes his job and also to the mixed feelings, to put it gently, that he arouses among many of his colleagues. White is a man of strong opinions, opinions that run against the main current of received opinion more often than not. (He panned the Dark Knight and thought the world of Torque.) The late, great Pauline Kael used to say that people who could agree to disagree with other people about politics and religion and whether their own kids belonged in rehab or on Death Row would lapse into seizures and hurl death threats at you if they found out that you disagreed with them about some stupid-ass movie. You might think that people who form and express opinions about movies for a living would be beyond this sort of thing, and boy, would you be wrong. But even in the the smaller-than-it-looks world of movie criticism, White is a contentious figure. He says that his father "taught us about the rights of the working man, and also that if you didn’t have anything to say, you should keep your mouth shut. But if you did have something on your mind, you should talk up, don’t keep it to yourself." There isn't much that White doesn't feel comfortable sharing when it comes to movies and writing about movies. There was a time when Kael and the self-styled "auteurist" critic Andrew Sarris had a rivalry that inspired younger critics to pick sides and keep old fights going, but when White spoke to Jacobson, he made a point of pledging allegiance to both critics, as a way of declaring his admiration and kinship with any good writer and sharp thinker who takes movies seriously. The reason so many other contemporary critics treat White as the enemy isn't that he provides an alternative to a chorus of mainstream voices but that when he goes after his colleagues in print, he isn't shy about suggesting, or even saying out right, that they're not as serious as they should be. This can even take the form of things such as White's decision, back during his previous tenure as head of the New York Film Critics Circle in 1994, to schedule the annual awards dinner "during the Sundance Film Festival, creating conflicts for some members. White defends this decision. 'The circle is the oldest and most legitimate film-critic group in the country. We’re not the Dallas Film Critics Circle. If people wanted to carry water for penny-ante shit like Sundance, that’s too fucking bad. The circle comes first.' ”

    "If you cut me open," says White, "that’s what you’d find: the movies, Bible verses, and Motown lyrics.” He recalls growing up on movies as a kid, when “I used to love to see stuff like The Long, Hot Summer and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. To me, this was a window into the adult world. Now people watch movies so they can stay kids, which proves how infantilized the culture is. I wanted to see how grown-ups acted, in CinemaScope."

    Read More...


  • Steven Spielberg: Teacher’s Pet?

    The fourth Indiana Jones movie has finally been unveiled at Cannes, and it didn’t take long for the initial critical reaction to hit the intertubes. (In fact, indiewire critic Eric Kohn actually texted his review line by line from the theater as the movie was screening. No word yet on whether this caused Armond White’s brain to explode.) The consensus so far hasn’t exactly been one of childlike glee (with the exception of Roger Ebert, who says “If you liked the other movies, you will like this one, and if you did not, there is no talking to you.”). Manohla Dargis of the New York Times sums it up thusly: “I was bored out of my mind while watching the movie, which makes me think that Spielberg was terribly bored while directing it.”

    Peter Rainer of the L.A. Times takes that last idea and runs with it, asking the musical question, “Will Spielberg take a walk on the wild side?” Seems like it might be a little late in the game for that, but Rainer does offer an interesting analysis of Spielberg’s career trajectory.

    Read More...


  • In Other Blogs: The Armond White Vendetta

    This week finds the movie blogosphere all hot and bothered over New York Press critic Armond White’s latest jeremiad, “What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Movies.” (If you’re not familiar with Mr. White’s bomb-throwing rhetorical strategies and absurdly contrarian taste in movies, please don your flame-retardant suit before reading.) Among other things, White is concerned that the internet is overrun with know-nothing idiots blathering about film, and of course, we resemble that remark. Glenn Kenny, for one, has had enough. “My friend (well, he was my friend, and then he does this) Aaron Aradillas points me to New York Press critic Armond White's latest 'everybody in the world sucks but me' screed, ‘What We Don't Talk About When We Talk About Movies,’ which he kicks off by flexing his disdain for the ‘opinionated throng’ of internet critics who emulate the ‘Vachel Lindsay-Manny Farber tradition.’ That's a great start, given that only a person who has read either Farber, or Lindsay, but by no means both, could possibly conceive of yoking the two together in this way. White then goes on to piss all over the recently-grievously-ailing Roger Ebert...after which he wishes him ‘nothing but health.’ That's awfully sweet of him...Now, White's known for spewing bile at his peers in print, and then turning around and being quite affable to said peers in person—I've experienced it. And I've had it. So: screw you, Armond. Don't say ‘hi’ next time you see me at a screening because you won't get a 'hi' back. You think you're applying some form of moral rigor to your work, but the fact is that you're a bully and a hypocrite, and I don't want to know you.”

    At Hollywood Elsewhere, Jeffrey Wells doesn’t take it so personally.

    Read More...


  • Slate's Movie Club Still Swinging

    Just when we think we’re completely burned out on year-end critic’s awards, list-making and assorted summations of What It All Means, along comes another installment of the Slate Movie Club to remind us how much fun it is to argue about this stuff. The annual roundtable of film pundits is always at its most entertaining when the gloves come off. The 2004 edition was particularly juicy, with original ringmaster David Edelstein and guests including A.O. Scott of the New York Times and Salon regular Stephanie Zacharek gleefully taking their shots at everyone’s favorite infuriating contrarian Armond White. (White’s style is accurately characterized by the Village Voice’s Dennis Lim as “entertainingly predicated on a bullying, unpredictable subjectivity.”)

    Read More...



in