IT'S FUCKING HAPPENING

BASED ARMOND TEARS CIVIL WAR A NEW ASSHOLE

"IT'S TRASH" - Armond White

aptain America: Civil War confirms our national dumb-down. While the mainstream media pretzel themselves over the presidential primaries, Marvel Studios has steadily accomplished a rejiggering of the American public’s cultural and political consciousness. Civil War completes this devolution in its story of superhero combat where one faction of pop icons, led by Captain America/Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), faces off against another faction, headed by billionaire genius Iron Man/Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). As momentary adversaries, Captain America and Iron Man almost represent the schism that now divides American voters, politicians, and pundits. I say “almost,” because the film’s comic-book premise doesn’t inspire reflection upon the dire seriousness of our current ideological civil war. If anything proves the triviality of Hollywood’s comic-book franchises, it is this disregard of the class realities that truly separate Americans. Working-class poster boy Steve Rogers has no common cause with wealthy authoritarian Tony Stark; the superficial show of patriotism that binds them doesn’t erase the difference between the former’s grunt-worker sacrifice and the latter’s aristocratic expertise. It’s the ultimate sentimental cynicism when Captain America’s devotion to his dangerously conditioned childhood friend Bucky/Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) — who represents war’s emotional cost — is used to evoke ambivalence toward the military, while Stark’s authority celebrates the Military (and Hollywood) Industrial Complex.

Other urls found in this thread:

deadline.com/2016/05/ben-affleck-justice-league-executive-producer-zack-snyder-warner-bros-chris-terrio-1201750654/
splicedpersonality.com/2016/05/06/captain-america-civil-war/
rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/not-in-defense-of-armond-white
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Is it overreaching — or being humorless — to recognize and critique a piece of entertainment that takes America’s schism lightly? Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking? How did we get here?
>Since comics and graphic novels became popular as counterculture, adolescents have been encouraged to reduce mainstream politics to their own sentimentality. Thus, Marvel’s various superheroes appeal to teenage rebellion: Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Falcon (Anthony Mackie), War Machine (Don Cheadle), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Vision (Paul Bettany), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and the others personify juvenile sensibility. They remain trivial, even as their divisions play out in serial chase scenes, explosions, and technological butt-kicking. Each one’s predicament represents a denial of the moral complexities that come with maturity. Fear of growing up is implicit in both the devious terrorist plots of supervillain Zemo (Daniel Brühl), who harbors childhood dreams of vengeance, and the supercilious wit of Tony Stark, the George Soros/Steve Jobs–type to whom the superfreaks all feel indebted. (As Stark, Downey achieves the same promiscuous waste of talent as hammy British actors of old.

Despite the supergeeks’ arguing either against working for the restrictive capitalist government or for their own sense of doing right and correcting injustice, the fact is, nothing here has gravitas. Civil War is politics as adolescents misperceive social/global crisis. This has been going on for so long (ever since Hollywood realized the bounty to be had in cajoling comic-book culture’s ready audience; since, say, the 1978 Superman film, then 1989’s Batman) that, by now, the brainwashing is complete. The trivializing has grabbed such hold that when a genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art (the profound Man of Steel and Batman v Superman), many fanboys, and critics, react with anger, resentment — and ignorance.
>To praise Civil War as entertainment is to accept its puerile conflicts. This is the moral reduction that has happened to American youth culture in the wake of the generational dissents of the Vietnam War. Movies as violent as the Marvel flicks are not pacifist but are proof of anti-military sentiment — such as became evident in the confused Ferguson protestations about “militarized police,” a foolish, redundant term exploited by manipulative media outlets and politicians. Civil War furbishes aggression simply to excite viewers who are as programmed as poor Bucky.

>In a similar sense, Civil War exploits recent political trends such as Black Lives Matter. Black actress Alfre Woodard (whose portrayal of a comically psychotic wench was the only convincing characterization in 12 Years a Slave) appears as a grieving mother who blames Stark — standing in for the Military Industrial Complex — for the death of her child, a promising youth with a 3.6 grade-point average. Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.
>This pandering passes for political relevance among non-thinking viewers. So does the film’s multiracial superhero team, especially new inductee Chadwick Boseman (superb as Jackie Robinson in 42 and James Brown in Get On Up) as the offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance. Black comics fans are an immediate target of Marvel Studios’ exploitation. Note the scene where Black Widow, played by the white, ultra-sexy Johansson, is confronted by Black Panther’s aide, a Nubian queen with fore and aft protrusions and powerful swagger. She threatens Black Widow: “Move or you will be moved!”

>This patronization is consistent with Marvel Studios’ political infantilizing. The vigilante Avengers’ inability to avoid collateral casualties when fighting the bad guys raises the global body count. These blithe depictions of tragedies precipitate the film’s basic ideological quarrel, similar to that in the powerful Batman v Superman. Yet Civil War’s evaluation of this dilemma, of what’s at stake in American politics, is petulant and trite. Stark critiques the roguish Rogers: “Even when he’s wrong, he thinks he’s right. That makes him dangerous.” This tempts a Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren–style American self-reproach, just as Sanders is the model for an early scene of Stark at MIT funding every student’s research proposal. It’s alarming — if not offensive — to see an entertainment film feed this fatuousness to juvenile moviegoers so as to shore up their political fancies.
>No wonder Civil War’s big blow-out — half the superheroes pointlessly battling the other half in a Leipzig airport — becomes repetitious and calamitous. It’s the most pointless, decadent scene of the year so far. Directing team Anthony and Joe Russo work by-the-numbers, staging blurry, undecipherable action and rounding up extraneous Marvel characters Ant Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider Man (Tom Holland) for comic relief. It’s rebooting on top of rebooting simply because fanboys love a reboot; that’s how pathetically indoctrinated we’ve become. The Russos’ Iron Man versus Captain America competition appeals to comics fans’ sophomoric cynicism, but the head-banging among invincible beings amounts to nothing; it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.

Marvel Studios shows no appreciation of what “civil war” actually means. At least the Wachowski siblings were genuinely implicated in the race/sex struggles of The Matrix (1999), but here, the Russos’ imitation of the Wachowskis’ diversity carnival doesn’t work; it’s not heartfelt theorizing, just exploitation. Without Zack Snyder’s visual wit, Marvel’s tedious, hackneyed formula costs this film’s political allegory its metaphorical heft. And a generation of filmgoers, now accustomed to comic-book pettiness, will lack the proper moral outrage. They’re ill equipped to realize how Civil War’s quasi-politics cheer our current state of incivility as a thrill ride. When everybody’s vengeful this is the trash we get.

Is this the death of Marvel and the rise of DCKino?

DELETE THIS!!!

HOW CAN A SINGLE HUMAN BEING BE SO BASED???

It's amazing how some people still don't know Armond "The Contrarian" White.

THE KING HAS SPOKEN

MARVEL FAGS WILL NEVER RECOVER

DC = CONFIRMED KINOGRAPHY

Okay, "Almond". We'll take your review into consideration.

Kek, I got to give him credit for doing what he does. He's pretty based.

what

Based Armond does it again, fuckin A. How has he resisted Disney Dollars?

It's over my Marvel bros the King has spoken...

I used to be a Marvelfag, but now I'm a #DCruzMissile

rev up those evanses people

DISNEY, BURY ALL FUTURE MARVEL FILMS. ITS OVER. FINISHED. CONSIDER THIS MERCY.

BREAKING: Affleck signs onto executive produce and oversee the Justice League kinos confirming quality artistry and cinéma for years to come.

Say what you will about contrarianism, but White clearly puts actual thought into his reviews and makes valid criticisms. Obviously when there's a hivemind-like predisposed decision about a movie, if one tries to be independently critical about it they run the risk of simply becoming contrarian and denying that movie's positive aspects. But we need people who are willing to stand against the current of accepted popular opinion and point out flaws where nobody else wants to see them. Interesting that he gave BvS a good review. I haven't seen either new capeshit and don't plan on it, but neither looked good.

Same. I was going to see CW, seeing as everyone was praising it like their life depended on it, but now I think I'll pass.

Maybe one day I'll see both BvS and CW and make comparisons.

This kills the Marvel.

Holy shit source?

No mention of Trump at all?

Thanks for stopping by a thread discussing the movies to share that information. What's it like having nothing better to do with the Internet your parents pay for.

deadline.com/2016/05/ben-affleck-justice-league-executive-producer-zack-snyder-warner-bros-chris-terrio-1201750654/

>a nigger AND a literal faggot

Opinion discarded.

>talks about BLM
>credible

This review isn't contrarian at all. He's went overboard many times, but this is rather accurate.

>class realities that truly separate Americans
so without reading the rest of this bullshit, hes mad because the movie didnt talk about the poor dindus and didnt show tony handing out reparations to blacks in the hood and captain america getting them out of prison?

I went to watch super heroes punch each other not give a shit about politics. All that black lady crying about her dindo that was a good boy is made me laugh.

Hello, reddit!

>28%

I hope Based Bin Afleki will kill this motherfucker with the help of a suicide bomber dressed like Robin so all you Evansposters will be gone

hi Ben

How can one man be so based?

How does he do it?

He doesn't critique the quality of the film making. He critiques what the film stands for. That should be apparent to anybody who has read his reviews, and yet I still feel it is lost on many.

>National Review
>Supports republican candidates
>backed by Time Warner

Why do you think he shits on every Disney production guys?

Armond confirmed for shill.

I cant tell if you guys seriously respect what he has to say or if its a meme because of his absolutely insane stances on certain movies compared to others such as liking Transformers. This review came off as incredibly pretentious and despite the negativity it doesn't even seem like he really thought it was bad but that the ideas behind it are bad. And it doesn't seem like anyone ITT is taking his opinion seriously because just like with anything on Sup Forums no one is interested in discussing ideas and the only determining factor in shitposting is the binary bottom line. Did he like it or not? And thats what the fuel of the thread will be with idiots like these already proving me right Can't fucking stand this shit. Try actually having a meaningful opinion of your own. I'm still going to watch the movie some time today, kinda excited for it still.

>Why do you think he shits on every Disney production
Because he's the king of Sup Forums

Holy shit guys the onslaught has begun

>splicedpersonality.com/2016/05/06/captain-america-civil-war/

>" the sad middle-aged dudes who cling so desperately to these films require constant reassurances that they’re *actually about serious issues and stuff* and not just fun stories for children in which men wear tights"

Yeah, but he gives real criticism not like most """""""critics"""""" these days.

Sure is leddit in here today

i guess i have to watch batman v superman now

>but White clearly puts actual thought into his reviews
Yes.
>and makes valid criticisms
No, not really. This kind of politicizing can be done to any film, on almost any topic, with similar results.

His few actual critiques are buried within flowery rants, and largely boil down to pure old-world critical vagaries anyways.

Some of his only direct criticisms are understandable within the context of a single review, but make absolutely no sense compared to what he has praised in others.

The entire thing comes down to "I didn't like it, now let me rant about politics for a few pages and draw loose correlations to the film I supposedly watched." It could have been written without even seeing the film.

He is the consummate fedora-tipping, holier-than-thou, self-proclaimed-genius that Sup Forums loves to meme about.

Someone once told Armond White "If you make your writings sound intellectual enough, no one will realize that you're an idiot," and he took the advice to heart.

I love Armond so much. The day the Hollywood industrial complex dies of malignant aids can't come soon enough. People who advocate and celebrate these types of movies are not only mindless and childish but are the equivalent of a literal potato.

Armond White once argued in favour of Jackass 3D because
>“Steve O’s Super Cocktail Bungee routine in a feces-filled port-a-john utilizes distance and trajectory in a way that recalls the great waterslide joke in Norbit (and should help rehabilitate that wonderful film’s unfair reputation).”

>it is this disregard of the class realities that truly separate Americans. Working-class poster boy Steve Rogers has no common cause with wealthy authoritarian Tony Stark; the superficial show of patriotism that binds them doesn’t erase the difference between the former’s grunt-worker sacrifice and the latter’s aristocratic expertise

Spot the FUCK on jesus fucking christ. It's the ever rampant and growing apathy in this country that's going to destroy it.

Armond likes shitty Hollywood movies though

Also Paramount, CBS, Viacom, they all back National Review, its an incredibly right wind and biased publication, but it doesn't hid this at all.. They backed Ted Cruz for fucks sakes.

>Armond White
>is black

>George Soros/Steve Jobs–type
murricas best film critic knows who the true boogey man is

>genuine pop artist like Zack Snyder deepens comics lore into visionary, moral art
>offensively named Black Panther, a pseudo-African potentate who possesses suspiciously feline/feminine powers of vengeance
>it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation

HOLY SHIT! MARVELKEKS ON SUICIDE WATCH!!!1

capeshitters BTFO

Jesus he is so pathetically contrarian it's no wonder this shithole eats it up.

The only way to win with capeshit in general is not to play the game.

You haven't actually addressed any of his points I want you to know that.

I'm not saying he didn' make some good points (black lives obviously), but together it doesn't make much sense. At one point Tony Stark represent wealthy authoritarian Trump and the other George Soros/Steve Jobs–type billionaire?
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?

Which ones did he praise? Did he like one of the planet of the apes movies?

>At one point Tony Stark represent wealthy authoritarian Trump
he didn't mention trump even once libcuck

these aren't good criticisms

Roger Ebert on Armond White

>"It looks to me like White is the epitome of the ideal critic, positioned smack dab in the middle of the scale."

No one takes this nigger seriously

You are the one mentioning Trump friendo.

Yeah, well, all I've seen so far he shoves in politics into every review, hit-or-miss-style while being as contrarian as possible.

Well for one, Norbit

I love this nigga but how the hell does he keep getting work

>she will NEVER perform a live dissection of your dick with her teeth
Just end it lads

Grown Ups
Jonah Hex
G.I. Joe
Transformers
Indiana Jones 4

>Grown Ups
>Jonah Hex
>G.I. Joe
>Transformers
>Indiana Jones 4
Jesus christ, man.

wut
He was trashing the movie because it went completely muh feels dumbed down simplicistic and infantilizing view with the black lives matter bs, can't you read?

also Fantastic Four: Silver Surfer

lolno

rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/not-in-defense-of-armond-white

Ebert died knowing Armond is a hack.

>>DCucks so triggered, they end up making TWO threads on an infamous contrarian's review

Y'all bananas

>I'm not saying he didn' make some good points (black lives obviously)

>can't you read?
can you?

SO basically Ebert said Armond was a great critic, but then some of his readership got mad at him so he flip-flopped and said "Ok he's actually bad"

Which one is supposed to be the 'bad' critic again?

Just turn your brain off bro

He didnt like Planet of the Apes? Neither of them? Those movies are currently my test for critics on if they like action blockbuster type movies. They are a franchise, but they're not hero fucks the girl, has a car, and cell phone type action movies. And, they are really well done in pacing and story.

I cannot grasp how anyone would like Grown Ups or Jonah Hex, those movies were so awful.

breathed through my nose slightly. RIP El Rato.

Armond white is Sup Forums personified, a contrarian narcissist thats so convinced of his own brilliance that he believes his contrarianism is genuine criticism

Ebert realized he had been duped. He put it together that Armond is a troll and a master craftsman of trolling. That his reviews have to stay on rotten tomatoes because they are so intelligently written. That perfect scores will always be blemished by him because he knows what he is doing better than the people he pisses off. Ebert fell for the trap, but wasn't going to sit there and take that, so he threw it right back in his face.

>Civil War is trite and ammounts to nothing with vague signs of meaning slapped onto it

What else is new if the only thing one can say about the film is that it methodically treats its characters' pacing well.

Batman v Superman was abhorrent, but at least it tried.

Holy shit, just how!?

Being contrarian is just saying somethings shit or saying the opposite for the sake of it.

This is not contrarian as it is an actual review with valid points that you fail to address.

Look at them.

Look at them, all these people who spend their lives validating their opinions through the eyes of others.

As if what they think has any weight. As if now they matter too.

Look at them and laugh.

He was clearly talking about the great divide today in American politics. Who the fuck can be the weathy authoritarian then, smartass? It doesn't take a genoius to figure it out.

>Woodard’s “Who’s going to avenge my son?” shamelessly taps the illusion of Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, and Tamir Rice as Boy Scouts and potential Rhodes scholars. That’s way out of bounds.

I think connecting a random black character in a popcorn flick to Tamir Rice by virtue of being black is way out of bounds

Yeah, so I understood he wasn't on the dindus side, unlike you.

...

Why dont you just link to the article you braindead marvel fan.

From the other thread:

>Projecting current politics, including the current election, onto a movie based on a comic from 10 years ago and a movie scripted 3+ years ago

>Thinks BvS is good and has written things like , or

>It’s the most pointless, decadent scene of the year so far. Directing team Anthony and Joe Russo work by-the-numbers, staging blurry, undecipherable action and rounding up extraneous Marvel characters Ant Man (Paul Rudd) and Spider Man (Tom Holland) for comic relief. It’s rebooting on top of rebooting simply because fanboys love a reboot; that’s how pathetically indoctrinated we’ve become.
No one rebooted Ant-Man, and everyone was against Spidey reboot before they released the trailer. There are people that wants the old to come back for some reason.
>it lacks the magnitude of Batman v Superman’s soulful contemplation of wounded people who are torn and fighting against themselves.
Both were the same shit.

>Is it overreaching — or being humorless — to recognize and critique a piece of entertainment that takes America’s schism lightly? Will fanboys — or for that matter film critics — ever understand that Marvel Studios has engineered a cultural coup that prevents viewers from thinking? How did we get here?
Is he fucking real? Does he really attribute to some movies the power of remove the rational capacity? Do you believe a movie genre is the main problem of the thought of our generation?

If MCU prevents viewers from thinking, why are we discussing the film here and in other posts? Why this critic has detected some analogies in the movie with the real life?

However, If his argument were true, movies like CW or BvS are the consequence of the problem and not the cause. The critic is comitting "non causa pro causa".

>First Stark represents the wealthy aristocratic and the military industrial complex
>Now he represents Bernie Sanders
No coherence in Armond critics

The thing to consider is not Trump vs Liberals, but richer vs poorer. These kinds of films are causing Americans to ignore that growing gap, pacifying them.

I can't believe some random nigger has shills on a Egyptian pharaoh-worship message board.

STOP THIS MADMAN

My lack of dubs says Armond is a hack writer whose opinions are so contrarian they can't be taken seriously and thus you are truly pathetic if you do so.

And yet you're here and you're phishing for (you)s. Pathetic.

so the site doesn't get hits for click baiting.

When you don't understand shit about human behaviour.
Movies don't define how you'll think user.
Basic psychology. You've ever heard of the word reinforcement in your conspiracy websites?
Nice meme tho

For the rest of you anons, don't worry, you can enjoy watching civil war without the fear of anything this man says happening. Movies do not influence behavior as it is proposed here, neither thinking.

DE_STROYED