He sounds like someone who never learn Java in the first place. Neither he learned what it is good for, what it is bad for. I think that if you interview in some language, you should understand what kind of problems are easy to solve in that language and which are hard or never done.
If I have to write libraries less input output example in interview, my code will be ugly and long. I'm not saying that interview should not ask these questions, it tests whether the candidates ability to find his way around api he uses rarely. It is needed skill, so no problem there.
If I have to design complicated system, adjust it to changing requirements and maintain it for years, I feel most comfortable in Java. Type safety, tools and language itself allow me to focus on the system itself and how systems parts cooperate with each other.
He also sounds like somebody who is biased against whoever uses java, because he worked once in bad java shop. It sounds that it really does not matter what those people would do, they used java, so they are incapable in his eyes.
"In Java, you can forget about doing it in the cleanest or the best way, because that is impossible. Whatever you do, however hard you try, the code will come out mediocre, verbose, redundant, and bloated."
Guess I was right about learning Java.