35 responses so far

• 1 11-05-2009 at 9:25 am
  
  Loyal said...

  I classify as “bi-racial” or “multi-ethnic” and I’m really excited about the discussion Precious is creating.

  Take away the grandiose nature of Armond’s 1600+ word review, and he makes a lot of great points.

• 2 11-05-2009 at 9:29 am
  
  Kristopher Tapley said...

  It’s not trying to pass for sociology, it is expression, i.e., art (abstract art at that), and while I’m not surprised this would be lost on White, I am surprised that it is lost on a number of smart writers out there.

• 3 11-05-2009 at 9:39 am
  
  Ryan said...

  SPOILERS I’ve commented on this before, but I don’t get why the whole Italian fantasy sequence is so offensive and worth spending time whining over….

  Anyway, I do agree that Lee Daniels uses one too many manipulative tricks, particuarily in the first half during those rape flashbacks. It’s film school 101 showoff crap… However, I do think that Precious ultimately ends up being worthwhile and quite moving. That last scene is incredibly acted imho.

  I admit that I’m not African American, so maybe I don’t have a great perspective for this type of analysis, but I think calling Precious a “minstrel show” is totally uncalled for. Tyler Perry’s Madea is a minstel character. The characters in Precious are all very convincing and 3-dimensional. It’s a minstrel show because it shows some African American characters doing despicable things? African American filmmakers are only allowed to portray other African Americans in a positive light? That’s bs.

• 4 11-05-2009 at 10:11 am
  
  KB said...

  Interesting. To me, this film is not about race at all. It’s about abuse on all levels, and how it affects a person for the rest of their life. If he can’t see that….

• 5 11-05-2009 at 10:30 am
  
  Brian said...

  I would probably pay to see a movie with Armond White.

• 6 11-05-2009 at 10:31 am
  
  Robert Hamer said...

  I have GOT to see this movie.

• 7 11-05-2009 at 10:32 am
  
  JP said...

  White is the worst critic in the world. He should be given an honorary Razzie Award for his work dedicated to glorify really B-A-D films like Norbit and Twilight.

• 8 11-05-2009 at 10:58 am
  
  mike said...

  Armond cracks me up. He is a great guy 2 have in your corner but when he goes off on these tangents, i dont know where 2 look. Have no idea what sets him off.

  by the way, Guy, whats parts of the movie offended you?

• 9 11-05-2009 at 10:59 am
  
  Aleksis said...

  LOL I thought I’d read the whole review then scrolled down and realised it was twice as long as I thought it was. Armond is hilarious, and often insightful and interesting, but really not one to be telling others they’re patronising or offensive, given the dismissive way he’s written about filmmakers in the past for being a) from another country or b) women, making films with “feminism” (his quotes, not mine) in them.

  I knew he would hate this film. He’ll hate Invictus too, and The Lovely Bones.

• 10 11-05-2009 at 11:13 am
  
  lovespike said...

  In my opinion White went into the movie with agenda to try with all his might to bring Precious down from the rafters. Best believe he had the sketch of his review already composed based on the synopsis because his tirade is more sociological treatise than movie review. I think it is a harrowing double standard when black ppl complain abt movie roles and told that everything is equal but cant make movies without having to comb through aa history to make sure its not too minstrel showy. Daniels is an artist black or white and his movie is based off of Push which seems to be far more bleak than Preciois. I am actually disgusted that someone would reference this review, it is pure and utter self-rigtheous trash.

• 11 11-05-2009 at 11:20 am
  
  DHE said...

  I’d love to see Spike Lee make a movie about a black film critic and then have Armond White review it. White’s head would probably explode.

• 12 11-05-2009 at 11:25 am
  
  Adam Smith said...

  Guy, let me expand slightly on what I touched on with you via Twitter (you might know me as @wealthofnations).

  I try to keep an open mind, because it’s clear that Armond White thinks about films in a very different way (immediately after, I read his review of “Gentleman Broncos”, which I can’t begin to describe here). However, there are certain comments that he makes that, for me, destroy his credibility as a critic of film. His defense of “Norbit” certainly hurts that, but more than anything, it’s his final paragraph, in which he personally attacks Gabourey Sidibe by calling her “Hippopotamus-like”. People talk a lot about race in the “Precious” debate, but size-ism is just as big a problem. Over at Awards Daily, there’s a poster who has openly admitted that he refuses to see the film because obese people disgust him. You can critique and criticize a filmmaker’s choices, but then he goes and just makes fun of the actress not for a choice she made as a character, but for her appearance as a human being, and that sort of insult is not valid critique, it’s bullying.

  Armond White has some value because he writes film criticism in a very unique way, and it’s better to have someone writing from a unique perspective than to have another quote-whore a la Travers. But the more you read his reviews, the more it just seems like he’s contrarian for the sake of it.

  So yes, in my original tweets, I attacked his defense of shitty movies, when my real beef is with the final paragraph, so I apologize for being a bit reactionary and less articulate with my thoughts (and how much can you really say in 140 characters?). He has a right to his opinion and the New York Press has a right to print it, but a film review is not the forum for personal attacks. When Armond White stoops to that level, I can’t help but think that he is just a very well-published (and tolerated) troll.

• 13 11-05-2009 at 11:54 am
  
  Guy Lodge said...

  Adam: I don’t know why you’re apologizing — there was nothing reactionary about your Twitter replies, which were both fair and civil. I enjoy such exchanges!

  You make some strong points. It’s interesting that you bring up White’s description of Precious’s obesity, since David Edelstein’s review has prompted similar discussion. (Check out the comment thread following the review.)

  Yes, the “hippopotamus-like” descriptor lacks sensitivity — though I wouldn’t call it an “attack” per se, just an indelicate description.

  But, as Edelstein also says, I would venture that Daniels invites such reactions by letting his camera linger so luridly on Precious’s obese form (not to mention the food that abets it). From my perspective, her unhealthy physical appearance is played for shock value in the film’s early stages, which struck me as a little exploitative.

• 14 11-05-2009 at 12:00 pm
  
  M.Harris said...

  Wow! I have to find a way to see this soon.Even though I’ve never be an Armond White fan – I’ll wait to see it before giving an opinion on what he wrote.

  Am I right to assume that,NYC is one of the cities that it will be released in – this Friday?

• 15 11-05-2009 at 12:20 pm
  
  Sound Designer Dan said...

  Man, that review was hilarious. He was tearing apart Winfrey left and right and then goes on to say that he absolutely loved Beloved.

• 16 11-05-2009 at 12:24 pm
  
  lovespike said...

  White’s review is going to be used as merely a bullet point for detractors of Precious like the creator of this thread. What he doesn’t realize or does is that his reviews are pandering to another subset of “patronizing white ppl” who cant wait to tear down the latest great black hope. He is a black critic so his words must mean more on a black movie. Where on this site is he referenced on a review for a white movie? I am guessing nowhere. But this actually just the opposite, White uses his blackness as weapon and shield, his reviews are not robust they are linear and intractable. The worst part about his whole schizoid book report is that i never saw him explain in detail anything about the actual construction of the movie screenplay, directing, acting, nothing. It is once again trash, worst type of crab in the barrel mentality.

• 17 11-05-2009 at 12:42 pm
  
  M.Harris said...

  You have a well-written response lovespike -and I do agrre with some points that you have. I have to disagree with you when you say”Where on this site is he referenced on a review for a white movie?

  To my knowledge(and I can only speak about this site)Armond White has been referenced on this site for other reviews.Not just movies with a largely African-American cast.

  He’s contradicting nature on most films,makes him easy to reference.Just calling it as I’ve seen it on this site.

• 18 11-05-2009 at 12:47 pm
  
  salem said...

  srsly, you can’t take seriously a “critic” who thinks Norbit is excellent

• 19 11-05-2009 at 1:02 pm
  
  Chase K. said...

  As much as I hate Armond White, he was pretty much right about “District 9″.

  I could have told you three months ago that he would tear “Precious” a new one. I have a feeling I’m going to hate this film, but I’ll give it its fair shake when the time comes.

  On a side note, I can’t wait for White’s pan of “The Blind Side”…

• 20 11-05-2009 at 1:02 pm
  
  Guy Lodge said...

  “White’s review is going to be used as merely a bullet point for detractors of Precious like the creator of this thread.”

  I have a name, by the way, Lovespike. And while I appreciate (even if I don’t agree with) your considered take on White’s review, I have no idea what you’re saying here. By “bullet point,” are you implying that I’m using White’s review as some kind one-stop vindication for my own point of view?

  I know better than to use White, of all people, for such purposes, given how rarely I’m on the same page as him. And I have enough faith in my own opinions not to need so-called “bullet points” to back them up. I read the review, thought it was an interesting, passionately written take, and thought I’d share. Simple as that, really.

  PS. We actually brought up White on the site only a few months ago with “District 9″ — not a black film, but a racially-themed one. Sue us if that proves your point.

• 21 11-05-2009 at 1:39 pm
  
  Brian D. said...

  Well, it kinda does proves his point. I haven’t seen the film yet, so I don’t know whether this is more contrarian eye-poking from White or not, but I would be curious to see a thread entitled “Insight within Madness” for his eventual takedown of “Up in the Air”, or “The Lovely Bones” (though with the Spielberg connection, that seems a lot less likely), or “Nine”.

  I love coming to this site, even when I disagree with some of the reviews and analsys. And I’m sad that this is the first comment I’m posting.

  However, by accident or design, it saddens me more that, so far, the only time White’s illegitimate role in the early Oscar guessing game is referenced on this site seems to be limited to two films; the one with the African-American cast and crew and the years most talked about racial alagory.

• 22 11-05-2009 at 1:54 pm
  
  AmericanRequiem said...

  the backlash you guys were talking about, well its definately here

• 23 11-05-2009 at 2:11 pm
  
  AdamL said...

  My respect for Armond White just went up. 300 pound teenagers should not be rewarded with starring roles in Hollywood films. It is an absolutely disgusting failing of society that 300 pound teenagers even exist when millions of children living in abject poverty can’t get enough calories into their wasting bodies to prevent them dying from malnutrition (the number one cause of child death worldwide.) I bet she consumes enough food on a weekly basis to feed about 30 African kids. If you find my comments offensive then think about how offensive it must be for a malnourished 5 year old who hasn’t eaten for 3 days because their countries rice harvest was wiped out due to global warming, to learn that in America there are teenagers that eat 9 meals a day just for the hell of it. 63% of Americans are overweight, 31% of Americans are obese. Teenage obesity has trebled in 10 years. This is not a failing of America, it is a failing of the west – I just use US stats as they are easy to find and widely reported (reliable source: WHO)

  I’d much prefer to watch a hard hitting documentary on the excesses of life in the western world and how teenagers don’t get enough exercise and eat junk – one that explores the socio-economic issues behind eating to such excess. I refuse to watch something that I can tell without watching a frame, is going to be simultaneously exploitative of the “actress” and rewarding of her obesity.

  Plus the director sounds like a right moron, so I’m steering well clear.

• 24 11-05-2009 at 2:39 pm
  
  qwiggles said...

  White rarely gets through even one of his more interesting reviews without an offensive, bizarre jab at somebody, and this piece is no different. “Hippopotamus-lite” : stay classy, Armond. At least he didn’t call her a “hipster-lite,” which for him is a real unpardonable sin.

  Still, he’s onto something, as he occasionally is, with the carnival of horrors stuff that seems to get Daniels off. The pigs feet/rape/mother-watching stuff is every bit as grotesque as he describes it in a Fangoria kind of way. It’s obviously designed as a kind of grim social tableau, and good on him for being bold, I guess, but too often these moments come off clumsy and groan-worthy instead of being provocative (to me).

• 25 11-05-2009 at 2:44 pm
  
  M.Harris said...

  AdamL,that three-hundred pound teenager…is a twenty-six year old woman.Who has the right to decide(wether we like it or not)what size she wants to be.

  Your assertion that “300 pound teenagers shouldn’t be rewarded,” doesn’t hold much merit.

  Hell – let’s not reward chain smoking teenage characters in movies.Nicotine is one of the most addictive drugs in the world.

  Let’s not reward sexually permissive teens in movies.When sexually transmitted diseases can not only do a great deal of bodily harm – they can actually kill.

  I write this about smoking and being promiscuous – because there have been actors who have gained some notoriety(not necessarily Oscar buzz) in performance of roles in which their characters have did these things.

  I would agree Obesity and starving children in the world are a problem.But to pin the responsibility onto Art – instead of parents,communities and governments is a bit of a stretch.

  Like I stated above – I have yet to see the film. So it would be unfair to praise Armond White (like you did)It would also be unfair to denounce what he has stated – because of this reason.

• 26 11-05-2009 at 2:49 pm
  
  Brian D. said...

  Ugh. As much as I absolutely do not want to wade in your pathology, AdamL, here we go…

  I just hope your passionate stance against obesity extends beyond this film (I wasn’t privy to your comments surrounding any of the Hairspray incarnations) and that you are actively involved in creating systemic solutions to both ending obesity and poverty rates in this country and around the world.

  I also hope that if you are involved in the hiring, firing and/or promotion of anybody, that you are objective enough to judge a person on their merits and skills, not on their physical appearance. I say this because, as her chosen profession is acting, Gabby Sidibe apparently earned the part for more than just her size. She brought her talent for acting to the project and was thus given the job.

  From what I gather from your screed, you would deny her that opportunity because that would be rewarding her for being obese. And we shouldn’t do that, should we?

  If you are an obese actor, AdamL would deny you employment until you got on a Stairmaster.

  Forgive me, what’s the definition of discrimination again?

• 27 11-05-2009 at 3:08 pm
  
  AdamL said...

  Brian,

  I may be wrong but it is my understanding that Gabby was not actually an actress until this film, so I would hardly call it her chosen profession. Why didn’t he get a real actress and put them in a fat suit? Why go out and exploit a 300 pound girl with serious, serious, serious issues and exploit them for profit? She shouldn’t be starring in films, she should be losing weight. She’s morbidly obese.

  I agree with M.Harris that morbid obesity is a failing of governments, parents, societies and communities. I do think you have to throw “art” into that mix as well however. In my opinion this film is a shocking example of art exploiting (and, to a certain extent, rewarding) an outrageous failing of society and appalling life-style choice.

• 28 11-05-2009 at 3:24 pm
  
  M.Harris said...

  AdamL,I didn’t know that “Precious” was auto-biographical? I write this because – who is being exploited? Like you stated above “I will steer clear of this movie” So basically your taken some one’s word on what exploitation is.

  Am I wrong? And if you did happen to see the film,and still fell this way – again,who is being exploited.An actress who’s of age and getting paid for it.Be it not much but paid none the less.

  Now if it was a Documentary – instead of a fictional character – then you have a point about exploitation.

  If your saying that the subject matter is being exploited – then do so.As oppose to saying that a fictional three-hundred pound girl is being exploited.

• 29 11-05-2009 at 3:24 pm
  
  Brian D. said...

  Actually, she was in theater in school. So one could say that she did choose to be an actress, and after that, landed the part.

  And in the interest of avoiding exploitation of an obese girl, you would put someone in a fat suit? Really? Well, what if to avoid exploitation of African-Americans in general, we decided to have white actors play them in blackface?

  Oh, wait…

• 30 11-05-2009 at 3:42 pm
  
  Brian D. said...

  I work in social services. From my POV, the vast majority of the Preciouses of the world didn’t get obese because they didn’t step away from the table and go jogging enough. Not any more than the impoveished just didn’t plant enough tomatoes. There are a host of complicated factors that go into obesity rates in this country. A lot of it involves pain.

  So why in the world would you target your ire on someone you don’t know, playing a woman you’d judge and dismiss before even getting into the factors that brought her there in the first place?

  You don’t even want to see her story, for goodness sake. How can anyone trust you to be a real, yet compassionate part of the solution?

  From where I stand, the epidemic obesity rates in this country are dwarfed by a culture that allows people to be dismissed instead of treated.

• 31 11-05-2009 at 4:18 pm
  
  Matt said...

  Agreeing with Armond White is not a valid excuse for giving him a pass, IMO. I loved Coraline just as he did, but his review was still full of his usual trolling and nothing he had to say deserve me “looking past” any of his idiocy. He is a troll and an attention-seeking fool and giving him more attention just because you agree with his review is only feeding the troll. Stop linking to his shenanigans and ignore him, he will eventually have to go away because the money will stop coming in.

• 32 11-05-2009 at 7:01 pm
  
  Dan said...

  Lovespike-

  I think a SCATHING pan of a so-called Oscar frontrunner from a major critic deserves a post on this of all websites.

• 33 11-05-2009 at 7:16 pm
  
  Charles said...

  This is par for the course for Armond White. I am black and I have seen this in other black people-some of us are so insecure, so self-loathing about simply being born black that we are afraid that anything that might paint one black person in a negative light reflects back on us and must be slapped down. If black people do not behave *precisely* as Armond White thinks they should on screen, God help them. He’s policing other black people’s artistic expression-he has deluded himself into thinking he is some self appointed gatekeeper and protector. We are always hardest on whatever group we are a part of.

  But I think he has taken this into the realm bordering on mental illness-not because of the opinions he holds, but of how he conveys them. I always envision him ranting to himself by himself on a park bench.

• 34 11-06-2009 at 5:54 am
  
  M.Harris said...

  Charles,you hit the nail on the head.Your entire post rings true to me.I don’t need anyone to speak for me.And some one’s else’s actions is not reflective of who I am.

• 35 11-06-2009 at 8:39 am
  
  interstellar said...

  AdamL,

  you clearly don’t know the difference between being overweight (which is what you’re talking about)

  and Obesity, which is a genetic problem, with NO cure, NOT depending from how much you eat.

  Talk with a doctor, please, and inform yourself.

  Btw, I’d like too see a photo of you, just to see how much more beautiful/healthy/socially acceptable you are…

Name

Email

Web site

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail