#armond white

[yourdailyqueer]

Armond White

Gender: Male

Sexuality: Gay

DOB: Born 1953

Ethnicity: African American

Occupation: Film and music critic, journalist

[historytheone]

Armond  White rebuts other journalists negative criticism of the album by describing them as a ‘hostile, repressive forces’ that intend to repress black self-representation. He concludes, ‘the beauty and complexity of HIStory — a bold work by today’s most interesting pop figure — will survive.’

[thinkingthinking]

[stream]

Critics:

Armond White:

[blazehedgehog]

What do you think of Dunkey's recent video (or previous part also) regarding game critics?

Maybe I’m in the wrong head space to be writing about this right now, because in the last, say, 48 hours, I have slept about five hours. And this is a huge, complicated issue that can’t really be unpacked in a single blog post, because it spans multiple kinds of topics and honestly even on a good day the scope is undoubtedly beyond my comprehension.

I’ve talked about it before, but there’s a very clear disconnect between a lot of the people who read the game press and those who are involved with the reporting of game news.

As a reader, it’s very easy to let yourself fall in to a trap of resentment against these kinds of people. I’ve certainly been one of those guys, who complains about Kotaku, or Polygon, or whatever for saying or doing something dumb.

And at the exact same time, I think the game press can definitely lose sight of what it was like to be a consumer. You spend enough years going to press events, seeing games early, getting games for free, and being totally immersed in that culture that you forget what it was like before that happened.

It creates this endless battle where I don’t think either side really understands the other.

Readers don’t understand things like deadlines, quotas or NDAs. In some cases, readers don’t even understand the concept of a “byline.” They see an article posted to IGN, and that’s who wrote it – IGN. Not a person, not a name, a corporation. So, when an individual makes a mistake, it casts a long shadow on the entire publication, even if it was an accident or the problem is dealt with (as in, the person is fired or whatever).

In addition to what I said earlier about slowly losing touch with their audience, I also think the game press can sometimes treat their audience like garbage. I know that can often be in response to idiots acting like idiots, but I’ve definitely been on the reader end of things, where I’ll often get unfairly treated like a type of person I am not just because I happen to be a guy leaving a comment on an article. There is kind of a built-in hostility towards the readership inherent to a lot of this stuff that I’d argue doesn’t need to be there. Every time they make fun of a pretend-neckbeard strawman they’re setting a bad precedent and setting the tone of all future conversations to be weighed against this example. That’s not how you open a healthy conversation.

All of this being said, however, lately my opinion on the matter has been skewing more in the favor of the press. Maybe it’s the fact I’ve written for TSSZnews.com for literally over a decade at this point, or maybe it’s the fact I’ve watched some friends land a job or two at some pretty large and publications, but I think readers are often harsher on the press than they deserve.

A lot more goes on behind the scenes than I think most readers realize. Again, it’s that mentality of only seeing the corporation and not the people. Articles don’t get written in a vacuum, wholly separate from each other. There is a context and a personality behind everything. And when you think they’re dumb, sometimes they feel dumb, too, because their source turned out to be bogus, or the information they got from the publisher was wrong, or because it was their last article of the day and they were just tired. This is a job, after all, and I’m sure literally everyone has had a day where they did not (or could not!) give 100% to their work. It happens. That doesn’t mean it’s okay or should be the norm, but it happens.

Think of them as waiters at a restaurant or somebody working the register at a supermarket. Most of them are just as tired and frustrated as you are, so try to be nice.

I feel like Dunkey, especially in his first video, falls more on the consumer end of things. He makes some good points about decentralization and how a site like IGN doesn’t have a clear voice, but that’s also he himself not really paying attention to the bylines, you know? He mentions film critic Armond White by name, but all throughout that first video he never once says the name of an editor at IGN, or Gamespot, or anywhere else. That doesn’t invalidate his complaints about systemic issues with the review scale, but it is a little weird, and makes him part of the problem.

And part of me almost wonders if part 2 is some amount of atonement for that, because it’s obviously turning the crosshairs to the other side and focusing on, as he calls it, “internet noise.” People who complain for the sake of complaining, often hypocritically, and without purpose.

The issue is both more simple and more complex than you think it is, and I think Dunkey’s two videos kind of highlight that, at least a little bit. Everyone, even Dunkey, is contributing to this problem and the whole thing has turned in to a big, weird, ugly mess.

[a34trgv2]

Armond White sucks -.-

FTWDK, Armond White is a critic current writting for nationalreview.com and has been labeled the worst critic ever. And I gotta agree, he’s by all accounts a terrible critic. He’s about on par with the Dishonored Wolf, Just A Robot, Hollywood God and Clay Claymore. 

The problem with Armond White isn't that he doesn't like movies everyone else does. The problem is his reviews are poorly written and his arguments hold no water. His review of Baby Driver (which is on of the seldom times he agrees with the popular consensus that it's good) barely even talks about the movie itself. Instead he goes on about how it's better than a Quinton Tarantino movie and how Edgar Wright is better than Tarantino. Like, dude I get it! You don't like Quinton Tarantino, can you please talk about the movie on it's own merits. The worst part of that review was when he blatantly spoiled part of the ending in the second paragraph. He didn't even give a warning, he just flat out said what happens during the start of the climax.

His Toy Story 4 review is even less well structured and unconvincing for anyone to avoid the film. He calls the Toy Story franchise insulting, calls fans Pixarnoids and insults their intelligence, goes on a tangent about Welcome to Marwen instead of talking about the film he's SUPPOSED to be talking about; who does he expect to convince with this review? He barely talks about the plot, he barely talks about the characters (old and new), he doesn't even give credit to the animation, the cast, the humor, or even the score. The review is about 23 sentences long (yes I counted) and all I got out of it was he doesn't like Toy Story 4 because everyone else is giving a glowing review. 

It's bad enough that his reviews are so shallow and not constructive, but the fact that he's been writing reviews since the 80s just makes him pathetic in my eyes. A man his age should not be stooping to the level of your common Internet troll. He might not be retiring any time soon, but I'm pretty sure he'll lose relevancy eventually.

[animusrox]

[filmfreak1994]

Aaaaugh, who’s the dickweed that knocked ‘Get Out’ from 100 to 99 on Rotten Tomatoes?