Armond White works for one of the smaller media outlets in the Big Apple. But his fame far outpaces the size and scope of The New York Press.
White manages this trick, in part, by hating movies that nearly every critic adores (“Toy Story 3″), and loving movies that nearly every critic despises (“Jonah Hex”).
But White isn’t satisfied with being a reliable, and often thoughtful, contrarian. He recently threw insults around while on stage at the New York Film Critics Circle Awards after director Darren Aronofsy of “Black Swan” fame mentioned White’s pans of his work. Aronofsky, a director usually embraced by most critics, should have a thicker skin here considering how much adoration most critics give him. But White took the bait and went on to insult “Black Swan” and continue a long-standing conflict with director Noah Baumbach (“Greenberg”).
Not the time. Not the place. Not in his job description.
Critics do themselves a disservice when they bully their way into the news cycle. They exist to enlighten movie lovers, steer audiences away from lousy films and engage readers in robust debates about the film industry past, present and future.
The incident is part of a greater journalistic trend where writers seek a slice of fame to call their own.
The incident made me revisit my own thoughts about the movies covered here at WWTW - and the actors in them.
I often will tell an actor or director before an interview how much I enjoyed their latest project. I don’t say it if it isn’t true, and for me it’s a way to start a conversation on a positive note. I’ve learned that’s often the best way to get my subject to open up about his or her craft.
But what if an actor Googles my review of his or her film before our conversation and finds an outright pan? Might that affect our chat? I wouldn’t blame the actor if it did.
A fuzzy line exists between actors, who can be rather sensitive souls, and the press folks covering their work. I’m still figuring out the details of the line, but I know well enough not to openly insult a creative person to their face. Or, much worse, to assume my take on a film is the final say on the matter.
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
White is a very talented film critic, one of the best out there I’d say in terms of engaging one’s thoughts regarding a film and helping one to look at it from a different angle and dig deeper into the content. Unfortunately he is too provocative to the point where it’s hard to take him seriously. It’s disappointing when you read his reviews and he attacks people personally.
I give Mr. White a pass since the people he annoys tend to be the type who invite the Black Panthers to their dinner parties, don’t know any Republicans and call middle Americans looking for less government intrusion “Tea Baggers”.
Besides, I’m sure he makes them appreciate polite critics like Ctoto all the more.
Armond White won me over with his pan of “Avatar” and “Precious” (referring to them both as racist).
That being said he clearly knows he is a gadfly. Some of his reviews are NOT contrarian and are well argued (pro and con). But to engage in face-to-face attacks at an award show is just for the 15 minutes fame.
I must admit to a secret pleasure…and that is reading the hate-mail he gets at Rotten Tomatoes whenever he posts. He could write “I love cute little bunnies” and he would be slammed up one side and down the other.