Armond Whites Top 5 National Review Film Scandals

The world of film criticism has its fair share of controversy, and Armond White, the former chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle (NYFCC), has been at the center of several high-profile scandals. As a respected and influential film critic, White's opinions carry weight, but his sharp tongue and unwavering opinions have often led to heated debates and public feuds. Here are the top 5 national review film scandals involving Armond White:

The Feud with Roger Ebert

One of the most notable controversies surrounding Armond White is his long-standing feud with the late Roger Ebert, the renowned film critic of the Chicago Sun-Times. The two critics had fundamentally different approaches to film criticism, with White advocating for a more rigorous and intellectual approach, while Ebert was known for his accessible and populist style. Their disagreements often played out in public, with White accusing Ebert of being too soft on films and Ebert accusing White of being too elitist.

The feud reached a boiling point in 2007, when White wrote a scathing review of Ebert's book " Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert," calling it "a mess of second-rate thinking" and accusing Ebert of being "less a critic than a celebrity." Ebert responded by calling White "a troll" and accusing him of being "motivated by a desire to be notorious." The feud continued until Ebert's passing in 2013.

White's Critique of "The Social Network" (2010)

Armond White's review of David Fincher's "The Social Network" sparked a heated debate among film critics and enthusiasts. White panned the film, calling it "a shallow, overhyped, and overlong mess" and accusing Fincher of being "more interested in atmospherics than in people." His review was seen as contrarian and provocative, and many critics responded with anger and dismay.

White's critique of the film was not just about its artistic merits but also about its cultural significance. He argued that the film perpetuated a simplistic and misguided view of the Facebook story, and that it was more concerned with style than substance. While some critics agreed with White's assessment, others saw his review as an example of his tendency to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

The "Lincoln" Controversy (2012)

Armond White's review of Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" sparked a controversy that went beyond the film itself. White panned the film, calling it "a simplistic, sentimental, and historically inaccurate mess" and accusing Spielberg of being "more interested in grandstanding than in genuine drama." However, it was his criticism of Daniel Day-Lewis's performance that sparked the most outrage.

White accused Day-Lewis of giving a "mannered and phony" performance, and of being "more interested in showing off his acting chops than in actually inhabiting the character." Many critics and historians responded by accusing White of being historically inaccurate and of misunderstanding the film's themes and intentions. The controversy surrounding White's review of "Lincoln" was seen as an example of his willingness to challenge conventional wisdom and to take on sacred cows.

White's Defense of "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" (2014)

Armond White's review of Marc Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" was seen as a contrarian take on a film that received largely negative reviews from critics. White praised the film, calling it "a witty, energetic, and altogether entertaining blockbuster" and arguing that it was "one of the best superhero films of the past decade." His review was seen as a surprise, given the film's poor critical reception.

White's defense of the film was not just about its artistic merits but also about its cultural significance. He argued that the film was a response to the growing criticism of superhero films, and that it was a deliberate attempt to subvert and challenge genre conventions. While some critics agreed with White's assessment, others saw his review as an example of his tendency to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

The "Birdman" Controversy (2014)

Armond White's review of Alejandro G. Iñárritu's "Birdman" sparked a controversy that went beyond the film itself. White panned the film, calling it "a shallow, self-indulgent, and overly ambitious mess" and accusing Iñárritu of being "more interested in showing off his technical wizardry than in genuine drama." However, it was his criticism of Michael Keaton's performance that sparked the most outrage.

White accused Keaton of giving a "mannered and phony" performance, and of being "more interested in showing off his acting chops than in actually inhabiting the character." Many critics and actors responded by accusing White of being overly harsh and of misunderstanding the film's themes and intentions. The controversy surrounding White's review of "Birdman" was seen as an example of his willingness to challenge conventional wisdom and to take on sacred cows.

We encourage you to share your thoughts on Armond White's reviews and the controversies surrounding them. Do you think he is a courageous critic who challenges conventional wisdom, or a contrarian who is more interested in being notorious than in genuine criticism? Let us know in the comments!