All for one and one for awful
except I wasn't prepared to concede one for anything. (My second choice was 'All for nothing', but theartsdesk's platform, tragically, wouldn't allow me to award no stars.)
Less wittily, The Times goes on to award the film not one but TWO stars, and begins its subheading: 'Lots of stars, lots of effects...' Double-clannnnggg.
No comments:
Post a Comment