zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. peyton+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-09-07 20:27:08
I’m not bothered. I don’t think the FCC will prioritize it.
replies(1): >>jncfhn+sN
2. jncfhn+sN[view] [source] 2023-09-08 01:28:28
>>peyton+(OP)
Because it was a tiny film from five years ago that was neither critically nor financially successful despite 8 reviewers being offered $50.

I just can’t fathom why you felt compelled to reference it and the fact that it was “feminist”

replies(1): >>peyton+UN6
◧◩
3. peyton+UN6[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-09-09 23:13:42
>>jncfhn+sN
I think it’s fine to describe a film on a discussion forum. I just Googled what it is and copied the first thing I saw. I referenced it so others have that information too.
[go to top]