criterionforum.org

Tangent...

Didn't Rivette write a scathing review of Kapo in Cahiers?

You can read the article "On Abjection" in its entirety here.

justeleblanc wrote:You can read the article "On Abjection" in its entirety here.

Thanks for that!

I loved this:

Jacques Rivette wrote:the point is that the filmmaker judges that which he shows, and is judged by the way in which he shows it.

Such a succinct way to sum up all of film criticism. Just amazing writing.

The New York Press has finally folded, at least in its present form, so a decade of schadenfreude may finally descend upon Mr. "I Write For a Real Paper, Not the Internet" White.

He'll probably just get transitioned over to Our Town Downtown

I dunno: they admit they're targeting hipsters as their audience!

Perkins Cobb wrote:I dunno: they admit they're targeting hipsters as their audience!

Surely his writings create(d) a lot of hits at the NY Press site.

and even more misses ...

In a move they're sure to regret, cityArts has hired him.

And Armond ruins yet another unanimous Rotten Tomatoes score.

Shrug, why do you guys care at this point?

Love this comment:

You found it hilarious? You must have been internalizing your laughter, because I was sitting three feet away from you during the screening and you didn't so much as crack a smile.

The Fanciful Norwegian wrote:Love this comment:

You found it hilarious? You must have been internalizing your laughter, because I was sitting three feet away from you during the screening and you didn't so much as crack a smile.

Oh man, that's great

In Jill drag, Sandler looks like young women you see on the subway

I now have even more reasons to never want to go to New York.

essrog wrote:And Armond ruins yet another unanimous Rotten Tomatoes score.

And this matters because...?

I hope he keeps pissing off the Rotten Tomatoes community for as long as he possibly can. It would be much less fun if they didn't take it so seriously, but they take it really, really seriously.

MichaelB wrote:

essrog wrote:And Armond ruins yet another unanimous Rotten Tomatoes score.

And this matters because...?

It doesn't at all, at least to me. In the past he caught hell for ruining a 100 percent fresh rating with negative reviews (I think it was Toy Story 3). With Jack and Jill, I was assuming he ruined a 0 percent fresh rating with a positive review.

Rotten Tomatoes' freshness rating is far more important the quality of the film itself in determining what Armond's review will be.

All Sandler’s best comedies (Grown Ups, Bedtime Stories, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry and the great Spanglish)

The guy's contrarianism has become so predictable.

Classic Armond: He claims he was "kicked off" Rotten Tomatoes because of his bravely honest review of Jack and Jill - but they just aren't posting his new "work" anymore since he's not with an accepted publication.

Even more classic is the fact that in his final review on RT - for the Romanian film Tales From the Golden Age - a poster called him out for complaining about the wrong director. (His blurb states "Puiu's a skillful widescreen filmmaker, but he's also an urban snob who finds farm animals backward and funny." The film was directed by Cristian Mungiu, not Cristi Puiu. Never mind the laughable hypocrisy of Armond calling someone an "urban snob" \:D/ )

What are we predicting as his #1 film of the year? The Adventures of Tintin, War Horse, or a tie for both?

I found this Armond gem:

Moneyball- Glum and smug look at professional sports martydom (Brad Pitt as Oakland A’s GM Billy Beane), this may be the least enjoyable baseball movie ever made: The Social Nework for jocks. Rent Oliver Stone’s masterpiece Any Given Sunday instead.

That's actually perfectly acceptable. I don't agree with him naturally, but considering the Sorkin connection The Social Network makes some sense and the film has been criticized elsewhere for it's portrayal of Beane for similar reasons (even on this very board though martyrdom hasn't been mentioned yet to the best of my knowledge). Giving a rec for a movie he feels is better is perfectly reasonable and this one at least has a similar topic. Why pick on the neutral at worst stuff when White has actual howlers. Also to be honest it's boring and sad now. He's no longer working for the Post and isn't even bothering the Internet with that stupid RT thing. Just let the nimrod have his bubble.

Professor Wagstaff wrote:What are we predicting as his #1 film of the year? The Adventures of Tintin, War Horse, or a tie for both?

Well, his top 5 for the year in the Sight and Sound poll are:

Incendies
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Attack The Block
Paul
Film socialisme

colinr0380 wrote:

Professor Wagstaff wrote:What are we predicting as his #1 film of the year? The Adventures of Tintin, War Horse, or a tie for both?

Well, his top 5 for the year in the Sight and Sound poll are:

Incendies
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Attack The Block
Paul
Film socialisme

I haven't seen the final poll yet, but did Attack the Block make the top ten? I know it was hovering around the lower reaches last time I was in the S&S office, but the votes hadn't all come in then.

Naturally, I have an ulterior motive for asking this.