"Guy Maddin continues to bowdlerize silent cinema for a sham cognoscenti. Antique pop culture still has more mystery and surprise than Maddin's drab campiness. In all, he distorts pop history" - Armond White
yes, but this comes from the same individual who said will smith's character in men in black was nothing more than a lawn jockey (never mind that the role was written for keanu reeves). i'm sure if i think about this i can come up with some other examples of armond white's stupidity, but this is what comes off the top of my head.
I like some of White's writing, but he tends to have a chip on his shoulder regarding the culture of film critics. He often touts himself on not coming from the middle class (within these boasts is the presumption that most American film critics come from that demographic), as if this different perspective alone makes his criticism greater than others. He also often criticizes other critics (but as a group, and almost never by name, almost never with a specific example) for touting certain films over others, as if marketing on the part of film studios had nothing to do with that. If his praise for certain films read in his reviews read more as passionate enthusiasm and less as backing something for shock value, and he could make more specific criticisms about what he dislikes about consensus, he'd be a greater critic. As it is, he's defensive rather than open minded and likes to take on others for simply liking something he doesn't (as if the "middle class" critic has no right to an opinion).
Comments 3
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment