Integrity is over rated? The very value of what you say is entirely hinged on your integrity.

What value does a review have when you KNOW he is not above lying to serve his own needs? A reviewer’s integrity is the ONLY value that matters or the rest are just random words and the rating and viewpoint offered is worthless. Would you believe a stranger if you knew he was a pathological liar? Of course you wouldn’t. You would be an idiot to think that didn’t affect anything he told you.

And Trolls never serve any purpose other than to cause arguments and watch the chaos go around.

This is not about him not liking the same movies as everyone else. Its about him deliberately LYING to say a movie is bad when even he doesn’t agree.

Every word of your argument justifies why you like this worthless troll. He doesn’t care about things like truth or reality. He is completely self serving and offers nothing to anyone who reads his reviews (which MOSTLY go with the flow until an opportunity arises to stand out) and yet you like him.

Because you have no value in truth or integrity.

Integrity is overrated and totally useless to me coming from complete strangers through reviews on the net. Each review is an individual piece and I judge them exactly that way. I don’t want his reviews to be complete and never hypocritical because NO review does that. Some try, all of them fail.

Trolls are underated and serve a usefull purpose. He brings out the flaws we all have by proving time and time agiain that people are far too defensive of pieces of art they had nothing to do with creating themselves, and the amount of vitriol targeted towards him is pretty damned funny. People are obvisouly over-reacting because he doesn’t like the same movies. So what? He’s one guy.

What more do I want? How about some integrity?

The guy bashes movies that everyone else likes JUST to be noticed. Not for valid reasons or concerns. He goes against the flow when there are extremes just to get his name noticed.

A movie rates really well? He bashes it like its the worst piece of trash in cinematic history. And that trash that rates poorly? He praises it.

Otherwise he mostly goes with the flow just like “opinions that another 1000 critics have repeated” until he gets a chance to stand out in the crowd again.

He is a professional troll, and does NO good to the film industry. He only serves himself.

What more do you want?

People just hate him because he hates on movies they love and does so with this over-intellectual language. Piss off, grow up, and try to learn to learn from other opinions.

That didn’t stop them from being widely successfull and influential within their professions!

But I disagree on one point with the comments above: being a critic isn’t the single easiest job in the world.
If you’re just commenting or giving your opinion on a movie, it is then just a comment or an opinion, not a critic.
A critic should be “deeper”: the author should know movie history, have the necessary references, know how to analyse a sequence, a frame, how to express himself to be clearly understood and so on. That’s what I expect from a good critic… so one does need some kind of training.
Or else just clicking on the Facebook “i like” makes you a critic!

Does commenting on the news or what’s happening around make you a journalist?

Anyway, Armond White is a moron, and anyone has the rights to express one’s opinion.

Maybe, but if you didn’t put forth a good effort when making the film, why but forth the effort in reviewing it. When he does do it, it is usually for the generic films that he is tired of watching. He could make the generic review and say the same things over and over again for movies that do the same things over and over again. Instead he finds things more interesting for him to write about.

Yes, that has always been his stance, but there’s a good case to be made that it’s bad film criticism. Of course, I think criticism is generally a fairly gutless and unimportant endeavor, so it really makes no difference to me.