Based Armond

>"Kong: Skull Island" is a big, noisy B-movie infused with moments of wit and sprightly visual sophistication, anchored by what surely must be the most enormous version of our beloved ape since he made his debut in 1993.

Other urls found in this thread:

nationalreview.com/article/445647/kong-skull-island-junky-blockbuster-contemporary-color-condescends-small-town-culture
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Armond likes it

Oh, it's shit and he knows reviews will be terrible

>1993

is he, dare I say it, /ournigga/?

>I'm a big, black ape.
- Armond White

>King Kong made his debut in 1993

was there even a King Kong movie in 1993?

How much longer until we get armond copy cats

OP's bullshitting, Armond slammed it while reviewing a completely different movie


nationalreview.com/article/445647/kong-skull-island-junky-blockbuster-contemporary-color-condescends-small-town-culture

doesn't surprise me. He's never described a movie as "noisy" and positive anymore

holy shit he literally is just saying go see some shit indie flick, you weren't bullshitting

kek

KAIJI KINO IS SAVED.

Can't tell if Sup Forums unironically like this guy or not

>kang likes kong
what a surprise

how could you not? He gives well thought out criticisms from a consistent set of values and a technical competence in film making, as well as a significant understanding and appreciation of film history

he doesn't even have contrarian taste when it comes to the classics; Bergman, Tarkovsky, and DW Griffith he adores

based

you can't call an art critic contrarian, did you know that reddit?

>which of these broads is Reean Johnson

I take it all back. Armond is a treasure and we would be lost without him

Nothing new for Werner. He's used to dealing with crazies.

>Francis Coppola’s overrated Apocalypse Now
A meme too far.

You can say a movie is overrated but still like it right?

For people who think Armond isn't an actual critic:

Academic criticism

More often known as film theory or film studies, academic critique explores cinema beyond journalistic film reviews. These film critics try to examine why film works, how it works aesthetically or politically, what it means, and what effects it has on people. Rather than write for mass-market publications their articles are usually published in scholarly journals and texts which tend to be affiliated with university presses; or sometimes in up-market magazines.[5]

This is what Armond does, not the kind of product reviews plebs today expect from a critic

>Grown Ups and Grown Ups 2 are masterpieces
yeah fuck this guy and his boyfriend too

>implying any of the shit he praises actually has any merit other than contrarianism

How can one man be so based?

>muh cultural wars and spiritual metaphors

Maybe read what he says

you know OP is trolling and Armond actually hated Kong right? He spent most his review shilling for some indie film called Contemporary Color

nationalreview.com/article/445647/kong-skull-island-junky-blockbuster-contemporary-color-condescends-small-town-culture

Naah, I ain't gonna do it.

it's literally impossible

that's why he hates some great films and loves some shit films, otherwise he'd be a perfect human being

Gonna watch it senpaitachi