Susan (lil_shepherd) wrote,

One thing about receiving a slightly outdated copy of Starburst in the pack at Nine Worlds (though maybe a pack of Starburst/Opal Fruits would have been more welcome) is that it really does highlight just how much is studio puff, rumour and uninformed speculation. I looked at a couple of articles, and...

There is a long piece on how fantastic the new FF film is going to be (8% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes in reality) which is pure studio puff. This is the July 2015 issue which will have come out in June - but the rumours of how much of a mess the movie was and that the director had been behaving badly on set had surfaced in January. By this time the reshoots had taken place and the studio had cancelled the 3D conversion.

The review of Jurassic World (picked because, hey, I'd actually seen it!) is also excessively kind - but they also give the same marking to 'The Human Centipede III' (17% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) which must rank as one of the largest mistakes since Empire gave four stars to The Phantom Menace.

A quick look at their news pages reveal that they still reckon that Asa Butterfield was "favourite to win the gig" as Spider-man when apparently, Tom Holland had already nailed it the auditions. Nothing to see there, either.

I gave up reading 'Starburst' a couple of years ago. Nothing in this issue convinces me I should ever give it the time of day.
Tags: film, magazines, movies
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.