Given the 'posting date' at the foot of this review, and the slight vagueness around specific plot details and/or scenes, would I be overly suspicious to wonder if the writer of the review had actually seen the film?
I think there have been some press screenings, so I could be wrong, but the posting date certainly makes me suspicious. And not for the first time in recent weeks - this book review spends a lot of time talking about the background to the book, and makes very little reference to details such as writing style, pace, or dialogue, which rather led me to suspect that the book review was more likely to have been created from a combination of a quick skim and the information in Penguin's press pack.
I'd prefer to be wrong, but it looks a bit questionable to me. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment