Comments on the Soloist article.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article6847491.ece
The article although well constructed and informative was basicly a hissie fit on the dissappointment the author had after watching the film. He included a basic interest and some fair sided comments but the main jist of his response was based on the lack of £7 he felt after the cinema had nicked from him.
The most unfortunate side of the authors aritcle was his comments on joe wright the accomplished, british director, who he tyhough was out of place and slanderised his work in this recent film forgetting the unusual setting he was in and his inexperience in the area he was filming. This responce was highly critical and indefinitely unfair.
The article although well constructed and informative was basicly a hissie fit on the dissappointment the author had after watching the film. He included a basic interest and some fair sided comments but the main jist of his response was based on the lack of £7 he felt after the cinema had nicked from him.
The most unfortunate side of the authors aritcle was his comments on joe wright the accomplished, british director, who he tyhough was out of place and slanderised his work in this recent film forgetting the unusual setting he was in and his inexperience in the area he was filming. This responce was highly critical and indefinitely unfair.
0 Response to Comments on the Soloist article.
Post a Comment