Finally! A prominent cultural critic (Armond White) addresses the topic of the precipitous plunge in standards and rigour that has blighted mainstream cultural criticism over the past decade. In the case of movie criticism the case has become egregious. The flagrant complicity between the critics, their editors, and the Hollywood studios has become so complete, that the critic has become an apologist for the poor product that Hollywood peddles. The result: a cannily constructed consensus/critical reality, where critics employ a skillful blend of euphemism and rationalization to praise awful movies variously as: exciting-but-pointless, great-offensive, dumb-but-fun, derivative-yet-original, not-so-bad, ect. javascript:void(0)
Armond White is a tough, articulate film critic who brings to bear a wealth of (god forbid!) knowledge of film aesthetics and film history to his reviews - a proclivity that foments controversy and conflict within the critical community. He took a lot of stick for his negative review of the ill-conceived/misguided District 9; as though a black critic would be blind the inherent racism of the premise of that film.
Here's the link to Armond's thought-provoking article.
http://cityarts.info/2011/09/13/light-bulb/
