Shadow And Act on Facebook

Recent Comments

Guess who doesn’t like For Colored Girls? (Bet you saw this coming…)

God help me I love Armond White. I realy do. You can disagree with him all you want and everyone does. (Though for the record I did reveal recently here on S & A that we both were simpatico with The Social Network. It drove us both up the wall) But despite it all you have to admit that he’s always fascinating to read. And why shouldn’t an alternative voice be heard? Life would be very dull indeed if everyone thought the same. So to that end it should come as no surprise that White hated For Colored Girls. How could he not? You can read his review right HERE.

Which brings up the fact that those early predictions of FCG getting Oscars nominations most likely are dead in the water. The film is getting far too many negative reviews from critics to get any real Oscar buzz going. So far the reviews are running somewhere from a poor one and half stars to the mediocre two and half range range . That’s not the path to Oscar nominations. No doubt Lionsgate will try to push it with a big Oscar ad campaign in trade publications such Variety and Hollywood Reporter, sending out Academy screeners to industry people and the media  (which means mine will be coming soon) and scheduling dozens of industry screenings on both coasts and that’s mainly because they’re contractually obligated to.  But its Oscar chances are pretty much dead on arrival.

9 comments to Guess who doesn’t like For Colored Girls? (Bet you saw this coming…)

  • Not surprised. He was one of TP’s early supporters, but I guess his tolerance has waned over time.

    I was however surprised by Manohla Dargis’ NY Times review of the flick, which is probably the most enthusiastic I’ve read. It’s practically glowing:

  • reg

    i usually find him off the wall, but i basically agreed with him about INCEPTION (not as bad as he said, but no where near as good as others suggest).

  • Zeus

    These quotes stood out to me.

    “Once again black pathology prevails while black film art suffers—like a battered woman in a Hollywood homeless shelter.”

    “For colored men, this movie is another scandalous put-down. Perry used to know better when his own movies explored spiritual distress and brought male villains to the altar of forgiveness, as in Diary of a Mad Black Woman. But in true Oprah-mode, these men are mostly bad news.”

    Even a broken clock (White) is right twice a day. :)

  • There are two reviewers that I follow without question… Rodger Ebert and Armond White. But let me qualify that statement. Armond is my Simon Cowell of film judges. When I distance myself from what I and others may perceive as his own personal agenda, I believe he gives his reviews straight with no chaser. Like Simon Cowell, his opinions may be in the minority (on occasion,)yet, love our hate the men, their words always hold huge merit. I believe Almond White says things that some folks are to afraid to whisper in their sleep, even though they know it’s true.

    I’ve been reading Roger Ebert’s reviews for 20 plus years. When I balance his reviews with Almond’s, I get exactly what I need. They are two totally different types of “reviewers/critics”. I would define Almond more as a critic… than Ebert, in that Almond gives indepth critical analysis is areas that Ebert does not touch. Sometimes I need that… depending on the genre of the movie.

    With Ebert (since I’ve been reading him for years) I understand his subtle words, likes and dislikes, to degree I understand when he’s “softballing” a movie or if it’s a movie that might hit my groove zone. In movie’s concerning racial issues or black people in general, I have to be careful with Ebert. I do not believes he understands our humor, nor our culture. But on movies on a whole, I love his reviewing style, and he seldom lets me down.

    Again, when I stand between him and Almond White, I get a pretty good overview. When I look to my left, and then to my right, and listen to what they are both saying (staying away from my own personal opinions of the character of each man) I then feel very comfortable in my decision to see a movie or keep my ass at home.

  • brandi

    What was the point in referencing Oprah? Did she produce it?

  • Armond wrote: “While avoiding freaky deaky Lee Daniels’ salacious sensationalism—although a rape montage incorporating violence, opera and burnt pork chops comes close—Perry indulges the Oprah Winfrey brand of mortified indignation where female victimhood is constant. Shamelessly substituting for the truth of black American life, it is little more than tear-streaked melodrama.

    Despite the cast’s good efforts, Shange’s themes of female self-denial and varieties of sexual guilt don’t ignite. Cat fights between Goldberg and Newton, Goldberg and Thompson are nearly risible, lacking the primacy of the sex-and-religion battles Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie memorably acted out in Carrie. The camera is usually too close to make Newton and Rose’s expressive physicality register properly. Elise disastrously sobs her way through one crisis after another. Macy Gray’s cameo as a crazy abortionist only lacks Mo’Nique’s gutbucket raucousness. Rashad shows wise authority but her elderly counterpart, Devine, is often a hot mess of jumbled good intentions and weak will. (Devine’s sweet-natured reading of the famous monologue, “Somebody almost walked off with all of my stuff,” flirts with Mammyness.”

    Well well well, I wonder if anyone will dispute… “flirts with Mammyness” and “Shamelessly substituting for the truth of black American life, it is little more than tear-streaked melodrama”

  • Most of the reviews so far have been pretty positive about the acting, so I think Oscar nominations are still quite possible in those categories.

    • Sergio

      It’s a long shot true, but not likely now. Besides, and quite unusual considering the usual dearth of solid parts for women in films, this year there are a lot of big contenders for best actress and supporting actress and the poor reviews for FCB will hurt it