After posting my "Five Favorite Films with Adult Film Star Sasha Grey" feature last week, I was delighted to see the great response (at least, traffic-wise) to the piece. Sasha Grey -- known more among the AVN crowd than the RT one, for sure -- stars as a business-savvy call girl in the limited release The Girlfriend Experience (dir. Steven Soderbergh), which is a worthwhile little pic to check out if...More
 The ever-controversial Tomatometer critic Armond White recently submitted his Rotten review of District 9, upsetting its perfect 100% Tomatometer rating and unleashing the now-expected onslaught of reader hate. But while I myself saw and enjoyed District 9, a science fiction film that uses a mass alien encampment in South Africa as a metaphor for Apartheid, I completely support his arguments as they pertain to the incompleteness of said social commentary. The Armond hate here is unwarranted. And so, in defense of Armond, I posted this comment to his review: Actually folks, if you read Armond's full review he is quite right in his perception of District 9's only partial exploration of apartheid-as-metaphor. I've seen (and enjoyed) the film myself but agree with him that the "anthropological" aspects of the film are used only superficially as a plot device/metaphor and not fully or adequately explored. For example: how would actual South African blacks react to seeing the "prawns," save for a single alien with apparently higher brain functioning than his peers, for the most part shuffle along in isolation, content with cat food and essentially portrayed as dumb, easily distracted creatures unable to intelligently resist/revolt/express themselves? While the metaphor is an interesting tack to take, D9 moves willfully away from social commentary and into more fantastical sci-fi fantasy storytelling than some viewers may like. So yes, Armond's rather harsh on the film (and on its filmmakers) but I think he supports his argument, and I say this as a person who did like the film overall. (And I love having Armond on the Tomatometer. The rating will be updated shortly.) Armond-watching has become a sport in itself of late; he's frequently a critical wild salmon, swimming upstream against the tide of popular opinion. But as a reader, I love his work and I find that even when I disagree with his reaction to a film (as with D9), I understand why he feels so strongly. In this case, I enjoyed D9 despite noting its flaws, including the fact that Apartheid is used only superficially to create the story's drama. If the metaphor extends further than the government/MNU's attitude toward and treatment of their aliens, there are plenty of cracks that should otherwise have been better developed -- that is, if this film were aiming to be actual social commentary, which I do not think it is. It's a science fiction tale that uses a shameful historical event to tell a fantasy story, with shades here and there of accepting otherness, etc. So to that end, Armond is right. Whether that transforms a Fresh reaction to Rotten depends on how much that acknowledged shortcoming matters to you, and to the film itself. Read his review here. Comment on his review, which has 60 reader reactions at the moment, here. |
|
A little while ago I got the chance to meet a real Hollywood legend, and I couldn't pass it up. My decision to go for it had a twofold benefit: 1) I had to screen The Proposal beforehand in order to meet said legend, and it ended up being surprisingly good, and 2) I got to meet Betty White!
[CENTER]  [/CENTER][CENTER]Above: Betty White with Sandra Bullock in this Friday's [I]The Proposal[/I][/CENTER] Even in her eighties, Betty White is spry. She's a ray of sunshine. She's sharp as a tack, and game to talk about anything. On top of that, she's been working pretty much non stop since about 1950 and has achieved that rarity among Hollywood actors (and moreso, actresses): longevity. For example: - Betty started in television over 50 years ago - She nabbed her own talk show on NBC, on which she worked "five and a half hours a day, six days a week, ad-libbing with no script" - She hosted about 4 more iterations of "The Betty White Show" - She was a regular on the celebrity game show circuit in the '60s and '70s - She did live commentary on the Rose Parade for years - She's an avid supporter of animal rights - She played Rose on The Golden Girls, the Happy Homemaker on The Mary Tyler Moore Show, was on Mama's Family, The Love Boat, Empty Nest, that Golden Girls spinoff that I didn't watch, King of the Hill, That '70s Show, Everwood, Boston Legal, and a ton more shows - She was awesome as the old lady in Lake Placid - She roasted William Shatner on Comedy Central and was hilarious It was such an honor to sit with White and chat. She's so awesome. She reminds me of my grandmother, in a way; I think she's exactly what every grandmother should be: tiny, adorable, easy with a laugh, generous with the hugs, smart, and a little bit naughty. Hope I turn out that way when I grow up. Check out my interview with Betty White here! |
|
0 Comments | |
|
After posting my "Five Favorite Films with Adult Film Star Sasha Grey" feature last week, I was delighted to see the great response (at least, traffic-wise) to the piece. Sasha Grey -- known more among the AVN crowd than the RT one, for sure -- stars as a business-savvy call girl in the limited release The Girlfriend Experience (dir. Steven Soderbergh), which is a worthwhile little pic to check out if you like Soderbergh, Sasha Grey, or New York City, which serves as a backdrop. Read more about The Girlfriend Experience here.
[center]  [/center] Anyhow, back to Sasha Grey and her 5 Favorite Films. Around here, we love talking to people (famous, not famous, infamous alike) about movies; it's a feature close to my heart. So imagine my delight when Grey, the 21-year-old adult film star, picked a cinephile's batch of films as her faves? The ensuing "discussion" among commenters was as to be expected. Some impressed, some apathetic, some offensive just because of Grey's primary vocation. To be honest, she schooled me with one of her picks; I was not previously familiar with Werner Herzog's Stroczek, but it's on my radar now. This, my friends, is the beauty of the 5 Faves. You learn about movies and gain insights into a person at the same time. So thanks to the readers who left productive comments. Grey's an easy target, and an unusual subject here on RT, but I enjoyed the piece immensely. And to the haters, I think our dear RT user bigbrother said it best: "Bottom line here guys she's an attractive girl of loose morales [sic]. We in the nerd community can't afford to alienate this key demographic if we hope to procreate  ."Read Sasha Grey's 5 Favorite Films, and join the discussion here. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
OK, so technically I haven't yet stepped foot on the set of The Twilight Saga: New Moon. But I've arrived in Vancouver, checked into my hotel, gotten a few scoops, and already had one Cullen vampire sighting! Not too shabby for my first six hours on my New Moon trip!
According to gossip blogs, New Moon's Wolf Pack have finished most of their scenes, as has the bulk of the Cullen family. That knowledge coupled with the fact that the film's new cast members (including Dakota Fanning, Michael Sheen, Jamie Campbell Bower) have arrived might just mean we'll see some Volturi in the next few days! But one never knows; after all, even with the most obsessive fans stalking the production's closed sets, nobody (save the filmmakers) really knows what's going on. Anyhow, it's my first trip as an adult to Vancouver, and I'm finding it's a really compact, yet cosmopolitan city. Plenty of film and television productions have moved north thanks to tax incentives, including such movies as Tron 2 and Ramona and Beezus (starring Taylor Lautner's supposed real-life flame, Selena Gomez), not to mention a handful of Nickelodeon-type programs. Someone told me they saw Rachel Leigh Cook wandering the streets the other day; another spotted Gisele and Tom Brady. I'm curious to see how many Hollywood types I run into here, both on purpose and by accident. |
|
0 Comments | |
|
Sometimes in this job, you stumble across some mind-blowing shit while performing the most mundane tasks. And sometimes, said mind-blowing shit has the power to TURN YOUR WORLD UPSIDE DOWN!
Today, as I was adding red carpet photos from Star Trek's LA premiere to the movie's gallery page, I stumbled across what COULD be the best-kept Federation secret in the galaxy. (Unless there are some alternate reality timelines I don't know about, but the Star Trek universe doesn't have many of those... Or does it?) I'll cut to the chase. Amid the hubbub of the Everyone JJ Abrams Has Ever Met party (AKA the Star Trek premiere), two familiar faces posed for a few quick snaps: Martina Sirtis and Jonathan Frakes -- or, as I fondly remember them, Lt. Deana Troi (empath) and William T. Riker (beard-enthusiast) of the television series Star Trek: The Next Generation. According to the interweb, both Sirtis and Frakes are married to other people. (Sirtis to "rock guitarist Michael Lamper," Frakes to actress Genie Francis, AKA Laura from General Hospital!!) That's fine. But then, I ask, WHY WERE THEY HOLDING HANDS?!?! Behold, Sirtis and Frakes, making the hearts of Trek nerds everywhere flutter, if briefly: [center]  [left]I'll admit, I was always more of a Troi-Worf cheerleader. (Star Trek Nemesis... I have no words.) I'm sure the hand holding was just platonic. There were more disturbing/awesome things afoot at the Trek premiere, anyway. Behold: [center]  [/center] [/left] [/center] See more pics from the Star Trek premiere here. (Vulcan fingers, much?) |
|
I was cheering for Troi/Worf too until the awesomeness of Dax/Worf blew all those thoughts away. 0 Replies | 
Troi and Worf had it going on. Then, like some cold bastard, Worf runs off to Deep Space 9. 0 Replies | 
Yes, one could see them being together, but I'm sure it was platonic as well, they've been friends for 20 years if you think about it. And if either were cheating on their spouses, I doubt they'd do it where the whole world would see! 0 Replies | 
Scenteddemented, everyone seems to agree that this was a platonic hand holding. So I shall give Troi and Riker the benefit of the doubt. After all, he's married to freaking LAURA from General Hospital!! 0 Replies | |
|
Just launched my "Twilight Corner" on RT with my first New Moon article, which you can read here. It's been lovely to see the reader response, which is a mix of RT regulars (like my fave, jokerboy1991) and Twilight-loving newcomers. I hope the discussion continues as the Twilight Corner progresses -- and in as civil a way as possible.
You can click on the image below to go directly to the Twilight Corner, which houses the new feature as well as our previous Twilight features. Check back for new pieces! You can create your "Vine" blog here on RT and friend me to stay in the loop and get all of my Twilight updates.  Click below to read the full article! The Twilight Saga: New Moon - Start Obsessing Now! Get primed for the upcoming Twilight sequel, due in theaters next fall. Fellow Twilighters: if there's something you'd like to see included in the Twilight Corner, pm me here, on Twitter, or via email [jen(at)rottentomatoes.com] and let me know! |
|
0 Comments | |
|
I'm gonna give you guys a sneak peek into what we're launching this week on Rotten Tomatoes. I'll be starting a regular blog series here (on RT) dedicated to one of the biggest movie franchises of the next few years, based on a book series, and no, it's not Harry Potter...
Then again, if you've seen my posts before on RT you've already guessed what it is. Yup, a Twilight blog series! Since the DVD is coming out this week (Friday at midnight, Twilighters!) and production on the first sequel, New Moon, begins as well, we'll be launching an ongoing series of all things Twilight. There are tons of great Twilight fan sites out there, but hardly anything dedicated to Twilight -- the books and the films -- in pro/mainstream media. (Larry at MTV notwithstanding.) So, my goal will be to provide great new material and analysis and commentary for my fellow Twilight fans, and possibly -- just possibly -- dig up interesting things for you non-believers, too. I'll begin with this, courtesy of ROBsessed: [center]  [left]See what you're in for? [/left] [/center] |
|
That picture of Pattison is disturbing on so many levels... the horror, the HORROR! 0 Replies | |
|
Let me preface this by saying that Slashfilm impresario Peter Sciretta is a friend, and I'm proud of how far he's come in the last few years. His site's been named among a few top lists this year, the biggest of which (arguably) is Time Magazine's list of the 25 Best Blogs of 2009 - a big time honor, no doubt. But if you can't trust a publication like TIME FREAKING MAGAZINE to properly copy edit their content, where is the world of journalism headed?
Time names /Film one of the best in the blogosphere for posting movie news, photos and trailers (and kudos to /Film for continuing to pay the way of their staff to cover film festivals, as even larger companies have become reluctant to do in recent years). So I find it sad -- nay, double sad -- that in their celebration of /Film, Time chooses to use a quote from /Film that contains a glaring error. From /Film's review of Kung Fu Panda, Time Magazine writes: Sample /Film post: Kung Fu Panda is an awesome movie, no question about it. But the story is essentially a paired down version of Star Wars, the supporting voice acting is passable at best, and some of the character designs are just sloppy. "Paired down." Paired down?? Come on, guys. I'm sure you meant to write, "pared down," because the phrase "paired down" just doesn't mean anything. JEN MAD! JEN HATE GRAMMATICAL ERRORS!! It pains me to see that A) errors like these are passable and, honestly, rampant, on blogs across the interweb, B) fixing and/or avoiding them is not a priority for so-called journalists under the excuse of "blogging" and C) when a major print publication cites such a blog, even they can't bother to note the error. Not even a [sic] to show that Time editors noticed. This is sad, and even worse, it shows that to some degree, the lack of professionalism and quality in writing is becoming more and more acceptable to both readers and writers of the digital age. Sigh. How many people even noticed? |
|
Actually, a bigger problem is that the writer seems to have been so ignorant that he didn't realize that "Kung Fu Panda" and "Star Wars" both draw from the same well of classic story-telling. The latter is not a pared down version of the former, but, rather, a more concise (and better IMO) execution of the same basic story. 0 Replies | 
'JEN MAD! JEN HATE GRAMMATICAL ERRORS!!' 0 Replies |
I especially hate errors like that when there are million other people WISHING to get a paid editing gig who know their grammatical place. 0 Replies |
Michael, you are the only important one I know! Thanks for stopping by. 0 Replies | |
|
It's been long enough - we're finally posting our Editors' Favorites of 2008!
Although some might argue that 2008 wasn't such a great year for movies, I thought a good plenty had emerged (first during the summer, and again in awards season). It seemed a good year for blockbusters (the fact that TDK even earned Oscar buzz is tremendous for the genre) and for prestige flicks, especially festival favorites like The Wrestler. But a girl's gotta have her favorites, no matter the Tomatometer... In no particular order, my favorite films of 2008: Let the Right One In This Swedish import is absolutely one of the best films of 2008. Yes, it's about vampires and kids, but give it a chance and you'll find it extremely dark, moving, beautiful and morbidly funny. Twilight What can I say? Stephenie Meyer's young adult novels are utterly ADDICTIVE and anyone who's read the books is already devastatingly in love with the handsome, hundred and seven-year-old vampire Edward and his gawky teenage girlfriend, Bella. To see the story that one knows so well unfold (mostly) faithfully onscreen is any fan's delight -- be it LOTR, Harry Potter, Jane Austen or even Twilight. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button David Fincher surprised me with this moving, epic tale of life and death; watching the hospital scenes is even more tear-jerking if you've watched a loved one convalesce in similar fashion. It's a magical fable about the passage of time and how we are touched by the people in our lives. Plus, Cate Blanchett pulls off her dewy-cheeked ballerina so perfectly, it's enough to make a 27-year-old jealous. Revolutionary Road Kate Winslet deserves all of the praise she's gotten this season; her turns in both The Reader and Revolutionary Road are simply marvelous. Both characters, perhaps coincidentally, are tragic female figures in the 1950s, stuck with some horrible decision or secret and utterly doomed by the lack of sympathy around them. Though I have small reservations about Rev Road (most glaringly, that one is meant to sympathize with the selfish and indulgent Frank Wheeler by film's end), it's one of the more beautiful films I've seen this year. Speed Racer Haters be damned; Speed Racer is a good movie. It's really a love it or hate it film: heavy on the eye candy and made with a childlike sense of wonder, or perhaps made only for those who have a childlike sense of wonder. What the Wachowskis have done here is just amazing, and if you don't like it, well, I'd bet you'd never mix Pop Rocks with Coca Cola and hate puppies, too. (Seriously, what's wrong with you?) The Wrestler Darren Aronofsky's film rages in its handful of ring scenes (some of which are insanely brutal and difficult to watch) but, more effectively, builds a certain tension even in its small scenes -- an agonizing, aching feeling that somehow, Randy "The Ram" Robinson (Mickey Rourke) isn't going to get anything that he wants -- and that's what affected me most about The Wrestler. WALL-E While I admit it's not in the tippy-top of my favorites list, WALL-E makes the cut. The folks over at Pixar simply know what the hell they're doing, and they do it well -- finely detailed animation, storytelling without the aid of words, entire worlds composed beautifully out of trash heaps and discarded junk... Milk As a Bay Area native, I was already familiar with the tragic tale of Harvey Milk. But in watching Gus Van Sant's biopic, I realized that it's just a tragic ending to a triumphant story. Milk's fine ensemble work (especially by James Franco) fleshed out the film and made it a story about an entire community and not just one man. Sean Penn certainly lost himself more in Harvey Milk than any other actor had this year (or most years), and for that alone, perhaps he deserves awards. Happy-Go-Lucky Who'd have thought the infamously grumpy Mike Leigh would make a movie about the world's happiest, pluckiest person? Sally Hawkins is just delightful as Poppy, a woman who at first seems superficially (or simply) cheerful, until you come to realize she's much more aware of herself and of the world than she lets on. My hopes are with Hawkins come Oscar night. Sukiyaki Western Django To fully appreciate Takashi Miike's Sukiyaki Western Django, I think one needs to have seen the original spaghetti western, Django; familiarity and love for the entire genre helps, too. So does any knowledge of Japanese culture, the referential relationship between the East and the West, and why it makes sense that Quentin Tarantino is involved at all. With all of those prerequisites, Sukiyaki Western Django is a stylish exercise in both the spaghetti western genre and cross-cultural studies: a samurai clan leader who quotes Shakespeare! A quickdraw duel between a gun and a sword! Bloody Benten's last-act reveal! Movies seldom come cooler than this. |
|
So, one of your blood suckers is Sarah Palin. Sure would enjoy hearing your reasoning. Oops, you don't have a reason, just bile. 1 Reply |
Hi Holly, 0 Replies |
I'm with "Holly" on this one. Your lame tongue-in-cheek reference to Mrs. Palin isn't funny in the slightest, except maybe to the DailyKOS and DemocraticUnderground bloggers. 1 Reply |
FedUp, thanks for the comment. It's always interesting to hear both sides of an issue. Thanks for taking the time. 0 Replies |
I'm going to enjoy watching the next four years and see how the ObamaKosDisciples try to weave the ultimate failure this President is ALREADY turning out to be. Closing Gitmo even though there are reports/videos/statements from all over the globe that 62 of the prisoners released are already back to their old ways. Forcing auto companies in the middle of a recession to go "green" even though 90% of the world's top client experts say man made global warming is a fad. 0 Replies | 
Nice to see that somebody actually gets Speed Racer! Rock on, Jen! 0 Replies |
jeez tough crowd. I'm glad you liked LTROI so much because, although I haven't seen many of the contenders for best picture and the like, It was without a doubt my favorite film that I saw in 2008. You're right, the pool scene was masterfully hilarious. 0 Replies | |
|
|
It comes as no surprise since I've already heard about this particular "snub" (IMO), but [b][i]Let the Right One In[/i][/b] isn't even eligible to be nominated for the Oscars next month!
Foreign nominees are sometimes known to general audiences, often not (see last year's contenders), but I'd wager more people have heard about and perhaps even seen the Swedish vampire romance LTROI than most of this year's potential nominees. [center]  [/center] Sad, too, because LTROI deserves all of its acclaim. At 97 percent on the Tomatometer and Certified Fresh, It's gorgeously shot, atmospheric, quietly intense, and suspenseful; most importantly, it draws you in and leaves you breathless and touched. The tale of adolescent loneliness and friendship (between a bullied boy named Oskar and his vampire neighbor, Eli) is riveting, even morbidly funny. The pool scene was perfect, if you've seen it and know what I mean. And all this from child actors and a newbie director? I had heard that LTROI wouldn't have a shot at the Oscars since its native country, Sweden, chose not to champion it - instead, their alternate flick [i]Everlasting Moments[/i] made the shortlist. That period drama by Jan Troell (who's proved Oscar-worthy with two previous nominations) has been seen by far fewer people and critics, though the few reviews in are quite positive. But it's a shame that such an excellent film as LTROI gets passed over for honors just because Sweden has too many excellent films... The full list of shortlisted Foreign Oscar potential nominees: Austria, "Revanche," Gotz Spielmann, director; Canada, "The Necessities of Life," Benoit Pilon, director; France, "The Class," Laurent Cantet, director; Germany, "The Baader Meinhof Complex," Uli Edel, director; Israel, "Waltz with Bashir," Ari Folman, director; Japan, "Departures," Yojiro Takita, director; Mexico, "Tear This Heart Out," Roberto Sneider, director; Sweden, "Everlasting Moments," Jan Troell, director; Turkey, "3 Monkeys," Nuri Bilge Ceylan, director. |
|
I get the feeling "Waltz with Bashir" might win regardless. 1 Reply |
Waltz with Bashir is great, but even a nomination would give LTROI some well deserved attention. 0 Replies | |
|
IGN.com |
GameSpy |
Comrade |
Arena |
FilePlanet |
GameSpy Technology
TeamXbox |
Planets |
Vaults |
VE3D |
CheatsCodesGuides |
GameStats |
GamerMetrics
AskMen.com |
Rotten Tomatoes |
Direct2Drive |
Green Pixels
IGN RSS Feeds
sean d. on 8/12/09 at 12:38 PM
c'mon, jen. it's clear that white just likes to hate things other people like. that he supports his arguments better than most trolls doesn't negate the fact that he's a troll.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Chris B. on 8/12/09 at 1:54 PM
I'm sorry, but Niell Blomkamp AND Sharlto Copley both have more cred in regards to aparthied than you and Armond White COMBINED. They've both witnessed it first hand and I trust their judgment on how to use the angle in this film. Besides, Armond White is nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual who ends up grasping for straws more often than not. For crying out loud, the guy praises nothing but black comedies and black directors, it's obvious he's racist towards white people.
You know you have a bias when you consider movies like 'Next Day Air' and 'Norbit' quality films. Armond White isn't smart or thought provoking with his reviews, he's a nimrod, plain and simple. The fact RT is going to continue to allow him to share his reviews is a crying shame. He has no business even being a professional critic to begin with.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Trav on 8/12/09 at 2:19 PM
I understand the principle that you're trying to support, but this is the wrong person to back with it.
The "Devil's Advocate" opinion loses it's worth when it's given by a person who displays consistent and predictable bias. Any legitimate opinion that Armond White might have had on the film is worthless now because of the pattern of his behavior. Even if he brought up good points, no one will listen to him or take him seriously because his opinion is so obviously tainted. It makes him a bad journalist. He doesn't have credibility anymore, and that's why he's taking so much flak.
He consistently says ridiculous things as well. The most recent I can remember is from his Star Trek review where he calls Mission to Mars and Minority Report "visionary standard-setters," movies which didn't effect any standards in film making anywhere, let alone "set" them.
At this point he's essentially a professional troll that you're giving validity to by supporting.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Barjuca on 8/12/09 at 2:24 PM
not everything is racist, suck it up and move on with your life Armond.
1 Reply |
Reply Report Abuse
Barjuca on 8/12/09 at 2:26 PM
I also love how he tries to make peter
Jackson sound like an idiot in his review. hes one of the only directors I know on the site who has a 100%. if Jacksons an idiot then what the hell is Armond....?
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
RAND on 8/12/09 at 2:30 PM
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/1897/armondwhiteisntinsane.jpg
HE LOVES NORBIT AND DANCE FLICK.
HE HATES THERE WILL BE BLOOD...NUFF SAID.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
dx23 on 8/12/09 at 2:59 PM
The Armond hate here is completely warranted. Week after week, Armond spews diatribes giving negative reviews to great films (those that have 90% + in the Tomatometer) while gives good reviews to films that are just awful and have usually 30% or less rating in the Tomatometer. He uses the race card in everything and then insults people, calling them fools, when they like a movie he gave a bad review. That my friend, is called a troll. Usually, trolls are banned from internet forums and sites, since they just want to create chaos for the fun of it. It is sad that Rotten Tomatoes hasn't banned Armond and sadder that they are defending him, when it is clear that the reaction he wants is discourse, not discussion.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
a13815 a. on 8/12/09 at 4:53 PM
"District 9's only partial exploration of apartheid-as-metaphor. I've seen (and enjoyed) the film myself but agree with him that the "anthropological" aspects of the film are used only superficially as a plot device/metaphor and not fully or adequately explored."
--------------------------------
Interviewer:What do you want people to take from this film?
Blomkamp: Well, it's not a message. I don't want the audience to walk away from this thinking that I gave them some sort of societal message, but what I do want, the reason that the film exists I think in the first place is because hopefully – I don't know that I've done this – I've given them science fiction presented in a slightly different way. So it's not so much a message but it's more like, 'Oh, I really enjoyed watching that film because it was an unusual take on science fiction.' So that's the goal.
---------------------
This is not a pretentious movie. This is a sci-f-/action movie in which the social set up and situation is simply used as a framework for the action and sci-fi. As a way to give it a different unique spin and engrossing story. It's "junk art" with more depth, competence and creativity than he's used to (with Terminator Salvation and Transformers 2). Additionally, it supposedly has characters who you actually care about. Maybe that's what confused him.
Other people who have watched District 9 have commented on the amount of humor and outrageous campy gore and splatter, Jackson spoke of how the script was almost completely improvised by the main actor who is partially a comedian. The film takes a turn after the start and becomes just relentless action. All of these should indicate that the movie is not trying to be pretentious or preachy or develop a social commentary. It's just an action movie. If Armond White is criticizing the lack of social commentary being developed in the movie, he fails as a critic to recognize what this movie was supposed to be.
Maybe he's just confused by the fact that most recent action movies are entirely superficial, so when one comes along that has more depth, he mistakes it as a serious movie. Too bad he is in the minority on that. It's not the job of the film to accommodate retards.
1 Reply |
Reply Report Abuse
Chris B. on 8/12/09 at 6:05 PM
This post is on point like no other.
It really is a shame that Armond White will be allowed to continue to post reviews on RT. However, we all know he's controversial, so it creates more traffic for RT, so it's only logical that they keep him. Unfortunately, my respect for the site as a collective whole has dropped a bit.
Armond White doesn't deserve to be a professional critic. Talk about taking a great and fun job for granted. There are more deserving people out there who should have his job, not him.
He's a pretentious asshole, nothing more and nothing less.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Ouch O. on 8/12/09 at 9:47 PM
when i first read your comment, i laughed because i thought u were making a joke. but its sad that RT is defending this angry sad man who has taken all the joy out of movies.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Shaggy89 on 8/12/09 at 11:37 PM
What a dumb PR move. You just made a lot of enemies with this. We all know the reason he's still here is because of the amount of traffic it gives the site. Here's a new idea for the site: a section for you, to back up every Armond White review. Because guess what? We're all going to want to hear THAT now. It will be great to keep your viewers interested. "Armond White Jr."
1 Reply |
Reply Report Abuse
jokerboy1991 on 8/13/09 at 3:37 AM
Calling Jen's defense of Armond White a PR move is just ridiculous, I highly doubt a whole lot of people come to RT just to see Armond White's ridiculous and distasteful opinion on films. RT gets over a million and a half hits per day, I honestly dont think Jen cooked this up so the site can get more traffic. I can't stop laughing that you think this is a PR move.
1 Reply |
Reply Report Abuse
Ouch O. on 8/13/09 at 12:41 PM
honestly though, RT loves it, because he certainly brings in at least tens of thousands of hits alone. that is definitely good fro RT, and DEFINITELY good for NY Press, which is a NO NAME publication in ny. ask any new yorker if they have read the ny press and they will say NO
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
David R. on 8/12/09 at 11:58 PM
Jen,
I am disappointed in your response to the massive distate for Armond White evident in the comment thread.
The reason so many users are upset over Armond's reviews is because he is ABUSING his position. We come to this site because we want reviews regarding the quality of the movie. Armond is using his position to garner attention, notoriety, and web traffic by systematically and purposely giving good movies a negative review, and bad movies a positive review. He is subverting the fresh/rotten system, reducing the value and legitimacy of the freshness rating. This is upsetting to readers because RT is allowing Armond to use this site to promote his own selfish interests rather than providing meaningful and useful commentary on movies. He should be removed from the site.
Clearly most people want him off the site. So here is what I propose: Let's use the rotten/fresh system to decide. Put up a poll where people can vote for one of the three options:
Poll: Should he stay or should he go?
1) Rotten: I have read Armond White's reviews and believe they are generally rotten (useless).
2) Fresh: I have read Armond White's reviews and believe they are generally fresh (useful)
3) I have not read them/have no opinion.
If
1 Reply |
Reply Report Abuse
Mazdaspeed on 8/21/09 at 12:14 PM
Now THAT sounds like a plan, let's be democratic about this. Honestly, if there are that many people that love White and wish him to stay then let's hear who they are! Trust me, there are more people who feel he is a worthless critic and needs to be removed from RT.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
FireArmondWhite on 8/13/09 at 12:41 AM
I don't always like a movie just because it's popular, but Armond White cannot be for real! He not only trashes some of the most well received award-winning audience-beloved films, but he goes on to compare the masterpieces to the silliest unpopular movies (while holding those inferior files in high regard).
It is not possible for someone to be this far removed from fan reality... it's NOT funny anymore!!! He has no respect for RT, or for the RT audience, so why do you respect him so much.
He ruins the whole idea of RT, and bugs the crap out of everyone...
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
ryanjm on 8/13/09 at 7:50 AM
You honestly thought his review for this movie was good? Of course, you disagreed with his overall assessment of the movie, as I'm sure the vast majority of the viewing public would, once again. You point out one particular facet of the movie in which you agree with Armond, but then say that depending on how important that is to you, it may influence your opinion of the movie. Was it _that_ important to the movie? It's like saying "the movie took place in the daytime, I only like movies that take place at night," and then saying "well if that's important to you then I can understand your opinion." How is that rational? It's one thing to dislike a movie for a particular reason or reasons, but to say every element of the movie was substandard and poorly done is extreme to the point of bordering on lunacy. His other reviews of big studio films are the type of writing I would expect to find in some dark corner of the Internet on a blog where some maniac with access to a thesaurus is furiously pounding away on a keyboard ranting and raving about obscure technical details of movies.
Armond's biggest flaw is that he doesn't review movies for what they are, he reviews them for what he thinks they should have been. If they do not follow his political or philosophical beliefs, or convey the message he thinks they should, then the movie is crap. No redeeming features. He did the same thing with Dark Knight.
I come here regardless of who reviews movies, so Armond does not increase traffic to the site for me. At best, he's a once a month freakshow that may turn some users away from RT for allowing such an irrational and idiotic reviewer to continue to pretend his opinion makes any sense.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Jon V. on 8/13/09 at 11:16 AM
The point has never been that "oh no, this guy gave my movie a poor review." It's that he's wildly inconsistent. If he brought the same level of stringent criticism to every movie he might only publish 15% positive reviews, but that would still be a welcome resource to his readership and RT. I may not agree, but there's much value in someone that raises difficult questions.
This isn't the case, though. Mr. White obviously uses a wildly sliding scale, and it invites the idea that something beyond what's on the screen is shaping his opinion, be it agenda or bias or other. His reviews are untrustworthy as a result. District 9 might've received a more critical review because Mr. White would rather a sensitive subject be treated more seriously, and Transformers might've gotten a pass because Paramount bought him a new car; I seriously doubt the latter, but without consistency and transparency there's no way to know, and what's the point of a critic you can't trust?
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Ouch O. on 8/13/09 at 12:42 PM
armond white is gay, black and republican. every part of himself hates himself. so thats why he is such a lunatic
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Jared M. on 8/13/09 at 4:11 PM
You're so full of crap it's ridiculous. This moron has indefensible opinions on movies, and here you are generating more buzz for him. Nice job, a$$hole.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
FireArmondWhite on 8/13/09 at 6:23 PM
If Armond White wasn't affiliated with an otherwise credible/recognized news organization, then RT wouldn't include his reviews.
In other words, if Armond Whie didn't work for The New York Press, RT would drop him.
Email The New York Press and let them know how worthless his reviews are... do they pay him, I wonder?
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
the_machete on 8/17/09 at 3:34 PM
Come on, Jen. You have to know that this controversy has little or nothing to do with District 9. Armond White is using RT to generate page hits for himself, plain and simple. You guys are just going along with it because you've been benefiting indirectly. In any other environment, you be calling him out as a troll as well.
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse
Mazdaspeed on 8/21/09 at 12:32 PM
Wow Jen, now I have to think that White paid you off to write some good things about him. I’m guessing that you feel sorry for the SOB that you have to stick up for him since no one else will. But you and RT are no dummies (You love having Armond on the Tomatometer?), I mean come on the publicity and traffic that he brings to the site is priceless, so of coarse you are never ever going to remove him because he brings in the fodder for the rest to comment on and view. It’s like a fantastic car crash, you know it’s bad and someone probably got hurt but you just have to slow down and gawk (or in this case read) about what sort of car wreck he has created for a film. Blomkamp has always implied that the movie was first and foremost an action movie which used real life situations as its backdrop not what White thinks the movie is about or should be about. Jen I just lost a lot of respect and credibility for you. Even Roger Ebert who initially supported White as a critic has now taken that back and has confirmed that he is nothing more than a lowly troll. Read the articles here:
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2009/08/roger_ebert_retracts_defense_o.html
http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2009/08/in_defense_of_armond_white.html
0 Replies |
Reply Report Abuse