« The Red Krayola with Art & Language and, briefly, Kathryn Bigelow | Main | Damned Damned Damned »

March 17, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sam Adams

"I'm gonna send you to Sing-Sing, Gettys! Sing-Sing!"

Daniel

Awesome

Craig

My favorite part of that laughably vainglorious piece is the suggestion that Baumbach's DP for Greenberg paid a visual homage to a joke in White's review of Margot at the Wedding.

I'd say that Armond rises below vulgarity, but that would be an insult to Mel Brooks.

Jeff McMahon

What an asshole.

Keith Uhlich

As my editor is so fond of saying: "Well played, old bean!"

Anonymous

"To the unbiased, I am known as a critic who speaks truth to power; it will test our film culture’s commitment to democracy if I suffer reprisals for the freedom of speech expressed in this article."

Oh boy...

TheJeff

Thanks for being classy enough not to post a link to that obnoxious fuck's "review." I'm sure that his paper is loving the traffic that his tantrums are driving to their site.

Glenn Kenny

@ Keith: Your editor is Bertie Wooster? How cool!

Keith Uhlich

Should Bertie ever grow a devil goatee and go mosh pit casual, they could very well pass for twins.

Jaime

Glenn, I don't know how Oscar-completist friendly your blog is, but in case the weather is good, I wanted to report that the hard-to-see SKIPPY, winner of the fourth Oscar for Best Director - a film that was never considered lost, just ignored by its rights-holders - is viewable on Netflix Instant.

On topic, I've learned to ignore the Wellses and the Whites and etc., but man, did that screen grab make me want to take a work hiatus and just chill with the Mabuse films. It's possible that Fritz Lang never rocked harder.

John Svatek

Glenn, The worst part of all this is that you won't be able to use "scoundrel-czar of contemporary film criticism" as SCR's tagline.

Michael Worrall

White says Hoberman is a shill for the film industry?! Just ridiculous.

SpodoKomodo

White's review is hard to read, he actually sounds borderline paranoid schizophrenic at this point.

bill

Borderline?

Anonymous

It's a sad spectacle. The piece is hard to read because it's so deeply embarrassing. I think the people at The New York Press should be ashamed of themselves. Publishing the piece (and letting him run on and on without any visible editing for so many years) is bad enough, but putting it on the cover is horrifying. It's like giving a junkie the keys to the pharmacy.

Steven Santos

I am pretty sure we can mark Armond's lunatic manifesto as the low point of film criticism.

rdmtimp

Just read White's pice...

I need some industrial-strength brain bleach, stat!!!

Claire K.

I agree with Anonymous--it seems like, at this point, the NYP is acting in very bad faith for an employer. Publishing this kind of craziness feels like exploitation.

wilson hl

Really? Outrageous and sad? I laughed at that. Laughed and laughed then stopped reading and laughed some more! Really it's my belief that "Armond White" is a performance artist, who built a persona of Ron Burgundy/Stephen Colbert as film critic.

I mean, accusing all his detractors of being racists, fascists and pro-Lifers? Comedy gold, my friends!

msic

A persona built from parts of Ron Burgundy and Stephen Colbert would most likely be, you know, funny. I'm sticking to my own pet theory: that Todd Solondz is involved in some kind of long-term gonzo "reality" project, and Armond White is really just his meticulously crafted protagonist.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Tip Jar

Tip Jar
Blog powered by Typepad

Categories