*Edit Oct. 2, 2011: Comments are closed; the majority of those coming in now are disrespectful and do not spark intelligent conversation. They come from those who did not read my comments about this being based on a review of the movie and not the movie itself. Sorry to have to close it for these reasons.
 |
| Tom Naughton on the cover of the movie "Fathead" |
A couple of weeks ago, I tried to watch the movie Fathead (Tom Naughton), a reply (secretly from the fast food industry?) to the movie Super Size Me (Morgan Spurlock). I like to hear both sides of an issue, so I thought I would sit down and hear what Tom had to say. As I watched the first few minutes, I grew uneasy. It seemed like pure propoganda from someone in cahoots with McDonald's, with claims in the beginning that that eating fast food is okay for you. It is NEVER okay for you. Just because you continue living after eating it doesn't mean it is beneficial for your body. After a few minutes of the film, I shut it off in disgust.
However, I stumbled upon an article this morning on Twitter with the title "Everything You Know About Weight Loss is Wrong." Written by a fan of the movie Fathead, I wanted to know what they took away from the film.
More disappointment. Within the article, the author quoted Fathead "facts" (the same ones they claim on their site) which made me 99% sure that this movie was produced by an industry desperately grasping for some credibility and finally giving up and creating counterfeit claims. Take for example:
The obesity “epidemic” has been wildly exaggerated by the CDC. People the government classifies as “overweight” have longer lifespans than people classified as “normal weight.” (Explain THAT one to me.)
Eating a diet rich in saturated fats has been shown to reduce cholesterol levels in your blood.
You’re better off eating fries cooked in beef tallow or duck fat than fries cooked in vegetable oils.
Get about 50% of your calories from saturated fats. (Yes, I read that one twice just to make sure...)
But since I didn't watch the full movie, I can't judge anything more than what I was fed before turning it off. But I can critique what the Fathead's fan wrote. And according to what she took away, she was equipped with some amazing garbage. Take this little tidbit, for instance:
"We prefer fatty foods because our bodies crave these foods, because we evolved to eat animal fats over millions of years. The diets of our ancestors were mostly meat-based, with a few fruits and veggies, and very few carbs…and they didn’t have a lot of heart disease."
Yeah. Guess what else our ancestors were NOT doing for millions of years? Sitting on their behinds, chomping on chicken nuggets, watching movies like Fathead.
First of all, saturated fats contain high amounts of calories which provide energy. Our ancestors needed the slow release of energy that fat provides because they were chasing the original version of fast food... their prey. Fast forward "millions" of years... we chase our fast food in cars. Big difference. Secondly, our ancestors weren't eating their saturated fat in highly processed forms: oils used over and over again to fry foods in, meats with fillers in them, breads lacking whole grains and corn syrup laced throughout. These things did not exist. Their foods were whole and homecooked. Another big difference.
What confuses me most is how Americans are so quick to believe whatever the media spews out at them. How can overweight be healthier than normal weight? How can saturated fat, which clogs our arteries, be safe to consume at 50% of our diet? Yet here is a seemingly intelligent author, quoting unbelievable Fathead facts, saying Tom has discovered the secret to longevity.
Sorry. If the takeaways the movie intended are as stated above (which, as a search on the subject shows, happens to be the case among more than just this one fan) it's no dice this time, Fast Food Industry. Just because you produce a movie catering to what people want to hear, doesn't make it true. Back to the drawing board for you.
Wow! that was insane, but I must say, my favorite quote from up there is "Guess what else our ancestors were NOT doing for millions of years? Sitting on their behinds, chomping on chicken nuggets, watching movies like Fathead."..hahah I can just imagine seeing you all fired up shouting this at the computer screen..CLASSIC! :D
ReplyDeleteThat kind of food makes you feel terrible, too. I know this firsthand :)
ReplyDeleteMan if I ate as much bologna as he is sticking in his mouth I'd be sick. Actually: if I eat any bologna at all I get sick...
ReplyDeleteI hadn't heard of this until now (I know, I'm behind). I would be just fine if they got rid of fast food in general (like that would ever happen). At the very least I think they should have calories next to each item on the menu and maybe even nutrition classes in schools. Have I gone too far?
ReplyDeleteI had to re-read some of those statements (maybe even all of them) two and three times. Seriously?!?! Who believes that crap? Wait, probably those who WANT to believe it so they can keep chowing down on supersized meals day after day thinking they are doing their bodies good. Don't get me wrong, I like a good order of fries but that's a treat, not a daily requirement from a food group!
ReplyDeleteWow! I have never heard of this movie, but I am sure I'd last about as long as you and I'd be yelling at the tv the whole time (I yell at the radio a lot too when I am listening the statist stuff on NPR). This is wrong on so many levels. Now, I would like to say I am a completely healthy eater all the time, but I do indulge in stuff I know I shouldn't. However, to actually think it's healthy to eat the Standard American Diet and to think that saturated fat should be a majority of your diet, rather than fruits, veggies and whole grains is laughable at best and completely tragic. I know you and many others don't take what the media feeds us hook, line and sinker, but far too many people do, and well, they would love an excuse to keep eating they way they do. For a healthy counter dose to the garbage you were subjected to in this flick, check out the latest post at the blog Disease Proof: http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/inspiration-i-could-never-do-that.html .
ReplyDeleteThe fact that some people will believe the crap from that movie would be funny if it weren't so detrimental to them.
I'm interested to see you vilify a movie that you only saw a few minutes of. That's like writing a thesis based on the back of a laffy taffy wrapper. While I fundamentally agree with your argument, it's bad form to base those arguments around a movie that you proclaimed to see a few minutes of. See the whole thing, don't make conjecture about material unseen. It demeans your argument structure.
ReplyDeleteI agree 100% percent with the Fat Head movie but let me explain. What author is trying to say is that our paleolithic ancestors diet is the optimal diet we should be consuming which excludes grains (wheat, barley, rye), legumes, sugars (especially fructose). He's not supporting any corporate interest.
ReplyDeleteI'll ask you to watch the complete movie.
I'm also living the paleolithic lifestyle. My major target is to lose weight but since my health has improved on many other areas, I'm planning to adopt this for the rest of my life. And yes i almost take 50% of my calories form saturated fats and I'm losing weight.
There is a huge community that follows paleolithic lifestyle and there is some real science to back up our claims. We don't support conventional meat industries, fast food chains. We buy local, organic, raw, grass-fed.
I'll suggest you google or youtube Mark Sisson, Robb Wolf, Art De Vany, Gary Taubes, Sean Croxton, Mat Lalonde, Paleo Diet, Caveman Diet.
I wish people wouldn't post anonymously and then post up a comment that is obviously going to get a reply... BUT I did choose for that option to be available, so it's my own fault. ;)
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you read the whole post, Anonymous, but I wasn't tearing apart the movie. I was tearing apart the article that was about the movie and the "facts" claimed in the article supposedly pulled from the movie. The author of that article loved the movie so I find it hard to believe that she was inserting false claims. The vilifying of the movie is a byproduct of this review.
@Anonymous: Nice try fast food industry...
ReplyDeleteDaniyal - I will, thank you for posting further resources. =)
ReplyDeleteI'm not attacking eating saturated fats- if your lifestyle condones it (please read my post all the way through if you missed that part). Our ancestors ate a lot of meat - but they were also very active. Sedentary folks - most of the US - can not sustain the same diet and not expect some health implications.
I also believe that carbs can be threatening to your health for those who are sedentary.
@ Anonymous: Hi, I find it very interesting that you chose a "laffy taffy" wrapper for the material to write on, instead of a an Organic Yummy Earth candy wrapper. Hmm..I wonder why. Have a nice lunch buddy :) *whisper* fathead */whisper*
ReplyDeleteI'm just going to throw this out there. Watch the whole movie. Don't read an article about what somebody else thought/liked about the movie.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying that people should eat at McDonald's every single day with no consequences, and that isn't even close to what the movie is saying either. In Fact, the entire point of the movie is what Emily said- french fries are a great treat, but not a daily requirement. People need to use their brains when eating.
And I promise you, if Fathead was "produced by an industry desperately grasping for some credibility and finally giving up and creating counterfeit claims" the production quality would have been much, much higher. The food industry spares no expense.
Wow
ReplyDeleteSo much hate so little science.
@Emily - Who believes it? Google "Paleo Diet" or "Crossfit" for some elite very fit looking people who believe it.
@Sabrina - If you hate statist stuff like you say you should be most for this diet. The original Standard American Dietary Recommendations were the first in the world to say Saturated Fats were bad all at the behest of Senator George McGovern who was after to make a name for himself for a presidential run. Google "What if its all been a big fat lie" and read "Good Calories Bad Calories"
Also fruits may have been good in the past but due to selective breeding they are hyper sweet and filled with fructose which is not metabolised in the gut but shunted to the liver (much like most toxins).
Wholegrains are even worse, they are full of anti-nutrients and cause Gut Permeability (Leaky Gut) which is a major cause of diabetes, auto-immune diseases and even psychological issues such as depression.
For more science on the matter here are some studies:
Study showing saturated fats have NO link to cardio vascular disease - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20071648
Study showing a gluten free diet (grain free) is good for EVERYONE - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16635908
Some doctors who agree - Google "Paleonu" or "Dr Emily Deans" or "Dr Eades"
Finally check out my blog for more info. - www.paleoz.com
Thanks, Kyle. I wasn't reviewing the movie, but the facts stated within the movie... I think this comment should be put on repeat ;)
ReplyDeleteI will say though that the Whole Grain part of the diet, while inherently good, can cause problems. I know someone who was recently diagnosed with Celiac's and while I am sure that this cannot be fully attributed to focusing on whole grain, it definitely doesn't help. From what I have read, our bodies are not designed to digest high quantities of whole grains.
ReplyDeleteWhile they are better for us, still everything in moderation. No one wants to get Celiac's... especially when it could turn into a corn intolerance too. (Yes this person I know is intolerant to corn as well)
Thanks, Gina. I understand that you were not reviewing the movie, but rather an article that was written about the contents of the movie. Which is why I expressed that you should watch the whole movie and not simply read an article that pulls information from the movie.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, when your last line of the blog is "Sorry. No dice this time, Fast Food Industry. Just because you produce a movie catering to what people *want* to hear, doesn't make it true. Back to the drawing board for you." - it's hard to make the case that you are not reviewing the movie...
I watched a good chunk of the movie and while it was not a total waste of my life it took short cuts and set up straw-man argument to the point that it undercut the few valid statements it had to make.
ReplyDeleteI really didn't appreciate the sentiment that "the government" and "researchers" want you to think you're obese. And I can easily see someone watching this movie and getting validation for an unhealthy lifestyle.
If "Fat Head" really wanted to advance the discussion it had legitimate points about nutrition in general. Starving ourselves to reduce caloric intake isn't good for us and a balanced approach even if it includes fast food can make us healthier.
I found the way it approached most topics borderline offensive but then I'm a vegetarian, I run regularly, and I don't eat fast food much so I don't think this documentary was made for me.
In the same way that Supersize Me made folks like me feel good about our diets probably more than it should Fat Head makes people with generally balanced diets with the occasional indulgence feel validated and both are probably okay.
I wish there was a film that took a middling stance on the subject, that didn't take so much creative license with facts or dramatize results like both these films do - but that's less popular and polarizing
Sadly, all this talk is just making me crave french fries. But so did Supersize Me. ;o)
ReplyDeleteI'm going with the folks who are critical that you didn't watch the movie, yet choose to be critical of it and the person who posted. Let's take a look at a few of your opinions that you don't back up.
ReplyDelete1. Overweight vs. not. You say "explain that one to me", but it's a simple matter to look up. It's been shown in many scientific studies that fitness is more important (fit overweight have better health than non-fit "healthy: weight.) It's also been shown, particularly for older folks that overweight people do, indeed live longer. It could be that these studies include people with wasting diseases such as cancer, but the fact remains and you don't bother to provide counter proof.
2. Saturated fat clogs your arteries. This has also been debunked by many a study. I don't know if I'd recommend getting 50% of cals from SF, but have yet to see credible scientific evidence that sat fat is the demon it was claimed to be. This is well explained in the parts of the movie you skipped.
3. Why would sitting on our behinds more mean we should eat less fat? It would actually seem that we need fewer carbs since we're not doing the activities that burn carbs. Again, studies show that as we have decreased our fat consumption and increased carbs we have seen a growth in overweight / obesity.
4. Finally, had you watched the movie, you would have seen that after eating this way his blood work improved and he lost weight. He goes on to do a high protein & fat / low carb diet and continues to lose weight (and body fat %) and improve blood work. I realize this is a sample size of one, but have a rule against preferring my biases over evidence.
I recommend you go back and watch the entire movie without your preconceived biases and then do research to see if you still disagree.
Bill, I am writing this from my phone, so pease excuse me not going into depth and any spelling errors- predictive text isn't perfect (neither am I).
ReplyDeleteIn the interest of keeping my reader's interest, I couldn't post everything that I already understand about nutrition. Most people are intimidated or turned off by long posts. For example, I considered adding the bit of information you added about active overweight people being healthier than inactive "normal" weight people. However, I decided that because that was not party of the claim made by the author of the article, that I would say my peice at the same level the author did.
I need to go right now, but will continue later.
Thank you for your comment.
I think many are misunderstanding the point of the movie Fathead. The creator was initially doing a reaction to the movie Super Size Me because he believed there were many flaws or misrepresentations in that movie. Tom Naughton felt Morgan Spurlock falsified the diet he said he ate and asked on multiple occasions for the food log from Spurlock's experiment. He never received the food log despite the fact he was told it existed.
ReplyDeleteWhat Naughton set out to do was prove that eating fast food all day every day had the potential to not cause all those health issues. He never said it should be a long term diet choice. In doing the research and prep, he also discovered how misguided the current conventional diet recommendations are. He interviewed experts in the field and read countless studies. And he continues to do so. You don't need to be a doctor or scientist to read and interpret information. It does take time and intelligence to understand it.
In the end, if you haven't already, just watch the damn movie. It is free on Hulu. It will be about 1.5 hours that could change your life or may not but certainly isn't a waste of time or intelligence.
I don't know how, but I stumbled, tumbled onto your blog and saw the picture and began reading the comments. WOW you touched a hot wire! While everyone has a choice of what to eat, I thought I would just put in my 2 cents of what I have chosen for the past 20 years and it too has not been the best way to survive. I am 5'9" and 105-108 lbs I panic if I hit 110 lbs. I have been hospitalized several times. Maybe a good word here is MODERATION and if anyone knows how to live it--let me know.
ReplyDeleteThank you for being there and letting me vent.
A new friend
i would agree with the moderation thing as long as the things you put in your mouth in moderation don't make you sick or kill you. there is a great author who i'll paraphrase.
ReplyDelete"heroine and hookers are probably pretty fun but i wouldn't recommend anyone try them even once"
Rob,
ReplyDeleteI not really into a war on words, but I will just let you know where I am coming from. I am Mormon and I am pretty libertarian (not anarchist, just very, very limited gov't), so unless you are either one of those, we are probably starting from fundamentally different places and won't change each other's mind. That being said, I am libertarian, so I am alright with that. Although I do think there are a number of things we would agree with.
I totally agree the gov't was wrong in scaring everyone away from saturated fats and steering people in the direction of the trans fats. I just think the gov't should stay out of it completely. The gov't supports what is most strategically lobbied for, so I don't really pay much attention to what the FDA or USDA or whatever other alphabet soup agency recommends.
As far as fruit having too much fructose, etc., I sure wouldn't doubt it. I don't have a great love for the food science industry as a whole, with all the genetic modifying and processing of foods that they do. I think most of the food from the grocery store is probably a worse version of itself than something found on a locally-owned and operated farm. I wish I had some of those closer to me so I could eat more products from them. I also know that with all our industrial ag processes and the chemicals we've added into our water and soil that our fruits and veggies don't even grow with the same amount of nutrients they used to because our soils are depleted. It really is a very sad state affairs.
I know a number of people with Celiac disease. It's something I pay attention to because it's in both my family and my husband's. A celiac diet is far from grain-free, although I supposed it could be. The grains they can't eat are wheat, rye, barley, spelt, kamut and oats are often laced with wheat, so they have to be cautious with those. However, there are still many grains and starches that are available to them such as rice, quinoa, amaranth, corn, potatoes, etc. So, a grain-free diet is not a celiac diet. A celiac diet is just a limited grain diet, but within those limited grains, I would still seek out the whole grain versions of those as much as possible because that is where the nutrients from those products are found.
And finally, relying on scientific evidence as a whole is not the only way I have determined what I feel is the most ideal diet. I appreciate science, but it is not my God and where I find absolute truth. Science is incomplete at best. The newest finding is often added to, changed or completely debunked decades later when we find out more. For all the scientific evidence for a paleo diet, there is also evidence for vegan diets, low cholesterol diets, etc. There are scientific studies to back up pretty much any claim made out there and it's hard to navigate that. On top of the science are the myriad anecdotal evidence out there for any given diet.
As I mentioned earlier, I am a Mormon. I don't know how much you know about that belief system, but to give some background, we have a dietary code (if you will). Most people are aware Mormons don't drink alcohol, coffee, tea, or use tobacco or illegal drugs. Another part of the code that is lesser known or talked about (probably because it's not so strictly followed) is we are told to eat lots of whole grains, fruits, vegetables and to only eat meat sparingly. Because I have that added "witness" to eating very little meat and eating mostly a plant-based diet, for me I feel that is the closest to the truth I can come. I also find I am healthier, happier and have more energy when I eat that way, so it would seem to be a good way for me to go.
I am happy you have found something that works for you. I still don't believe that much saturated fat is good in the long term, but I do think each person should be free to eat as they choose. If it's making you feel good to eat that way, go for it. I am a huge proponent of freedom.
Let me try this again, haha (first time, unsuccessful).
ReplyDelete*Bias warning: commenter owns Fathead*
In hopes to defend the film a bit, I think Tom's initial goal was to find out why Spurlock's health deteriorated so quickly accompanied with copious weight gain. During his time perusing the internet looking for information, he came across some interesting things (http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/recommended-reading/).
His goal with the film: demonstrate that eating fast food can induce weight loss and lower cholesterol. Was he successful? Of course. He wouldn't have put out the movie if that weren't the case. I do admit, the second half was better than the first because that is the half that brings out the nerd in me.
He does state how trans fats in the partially hydrogenated oils lowered his "good" cholesterol and he was more methodical about how he approached the diet: tea and diet soda while keeping his carbohydrate intake to about 100g a day. He also did a nice job in showing how "calories in, calories out" is effected by the hormonal milieu of the human body and it isn't as simple as it seems.
As far as saturated fat is concerned, I follow the paleo diet about 85%. This means I am on the bandwagon that saturated fat doesn't clog arteries, rather inflammation is the process that begins plaque build up. A one-size-fits-all approach to dieting is crap and why I hate the food pyramid. I also know people can thrive on a high carbohydrate diet as well as high fat diet. You just have to do it right (I was a 70% fat dieter during my 40 pound loss in weight - http://www.ajcn.org/content/91/3/535.abstract). Again, what works for me won't work for everyone, but minimizing the inflammatory agents is the best way to minimize health issues down the road. Other than processed/artificial foods pumped full of preservatives (I call them fake foods), the foods that the paleo community address as the most inflammatory are wheat, fructose, and linoleic acid (omega 6).
Again, there's an individual perspective that needs to be addressed so the best advice I could give: "If it makes you feel like shit, don't eat it."
And to take another point of being slightly overweight as a protective factor, I think he got that from Eric Oliver's book Fat Politics (he interviews him in the movie, as well). Basically saying it's a U shaped curved with normal to slightly overweight in the bottom with underweight and overweight/obese riding the sides.
To conclude: I think he wanted to demonstrate a few things that were addressed later in the movie (and in the special features) while showing you can improve "health markers" by eating fast food - it just needs to be methodically planned and definitely not ideal for every meal, everyday. Is going a couple times a month going to kill you? Eh, probably not. Is it better to go a couple times a year? Yes!
That way you can #ski and #climb and enjoy life instead of worrying about what you're eating, how much you're eating, and what the number on the scale is.
Life is to be enjoyed.
Jeromie
I agree with you to many extents, but it's very strange to give a critique on a movie you yourself said you didn't even watch. And unfortunately it makes you look extremely foolish because Fathead actually addresses how McDonald's and fast food is NOT good for you on numerous occasions. The point he makes (in part) is that you don't necessarily gain 25 pounds in a month from eating it much like in Supersize Me. The film has very little to do with fast food, and more to do with calorie count, activity, and saturated fat.
ReplyDeleteFurther, he makes the point MANY times how sitting on your butt is a huge problem with obesity.
I didn't like how the documentary was executed and thought it was cheesy, but everything you are complaining about are things that were addressed in the movie after you shut it off. Further, the film goes into great detail and cites sources and doctors that explain exactly why saturated fat is misinterpreted when it comes to obesity.
I have seen Fat Head twice now. The first time I thought I was only going to be entertained. I had to watch it a second time to try to absorb the science of what he was saying. I have always been a true believer that the simplest answer is normally correct (Occam's Razor). Fat Head actually made sense. Of course saturated fats make the best sense. Why are we getting oil from corn? Yes our brains are fat. You mean the government messed something up? What I do not agree with in Fat Head is that it is a giant conspiracy to sell grain (Occam's Razor says no). But the movie was a welcome slap in the face to get us back to reality. Just because a majority of people believe something does not make it true. I have made my final switch...margarine? heart healthy stuff? butter?...BUTTER from now on!...sheesh that makes sense.
ReplyDeleteTom naughton isn't an supporter of the fast food industry!Read his blog!!!he is very against overly processed foods and follows a paeleo diet!The whole purpose of fathead was to show that spurlock exaggerated his claims and that sugar and processed white carbs are the true evil!
ReplyDeleteI hope I don't come across as negative or aggressive, but this is kinda funny. The people that are so critical are the ones that "turned off the movie after five minutes" or are vegetarian. Hey, guess what? Most of us were wrong (including ME) about diet and nutrition, and the great thing about being a human is that we can change. I believed in whole grains being a foundation of my diet with all my heart. But here's the thing, if you lived 60 years ago, had been a smoker, and were told that your doctor was wrong, that smoking causes cancer and does not "improve air exchange", wouldn't you wish you had stopped smoking?
ReplyDeleteIf you start doing your own research you realize that a lot of what you have been told by "experts" is bullshit (stronger word than Tom's use of bologna). I was vegetarian, low fat, ate only good fat for 3 years, I dropped down to 168 lbs. I had a monthly cold, got pneumonia twice during this period, had major depression, and watched my weight training dwindle.
I finally scored a job with health insurance, so I went in to get a physical. My triglycerides were 289 and my fasting glucose was 120! I changed my diet to one suggested by the movie and the research within and presto chango! My bloodwork is now great.
The movie does not say that you should eat fast food; it says that it is your choice. It merely used fast food to prove two points:
1) Morgan Spurlock is full of BS.
2) Even eating the lowest quality of food can be beneficial when you just don't follow the high carb, low fat diet.
If you had watched the whole movie you would have seen him be very critical of the quality of fast food. He also had a segment on how sedentary a large portion of people are in modern times. He demonstrated this by showing his daily walk to and from school as a kid, while showing that most people drive their kids or use buses instead nowadays. He even showed a parking garage, which we can all related to, where people were fighting for the closest spot rather than just parking and walking.
Again, I'm not attacking you and I hope I do not come across as such, you are just defending what you believe in. I just hope you do some more digging around, same with the other people on this page.
This country is about choice, not being a nanny state. I think this is the underlying message from the movie. With the right information people can make their own educated choices, but I don't think it would be very indicative to freedom to cut out choices. Some of us may want an ice cream on our birthdays! In the end we are all human beings, citizens of the cosmos as Carl Sagan said. So I hope everyone has a wonderful day and spreads around happiness and open-mindedness!
From GinaBegins site :
ReplyDeleteWeight loss is wrong twit, eat garbage.
And be cruel to animals as well.
-------------------------------
I think this is mis-information. And also disgusting, little puppies are cute.
Oh, i wasnt reviewing the blog just a few words within it. This suits what i *want* to believe because im lazy.
However it makes my opinion of the sites contents void.
Not sure why everyone who posts a comment negating what I wrote can't sign their name to their comment (it's really that hard to stand behind what you say, eh?) but anyway...
ReplyDeleteAs I have stated over and over again: this was mostly about what I read in the article ABOUT the movie. Not necessarily the movie itself. I was talking about the facts that the movie presented as depicted in the article reviewing the movie.
Kinda feel as though the people writing these comments are doing exactly what they are accusing me of by not reading all that was written. ;)
You should watch the whole movie. A lot of the questions you asked on you post are answered.
ReplyDeleteHi Gina,
ReplyDeleteI just read your article and all the comments on it over the past 7 months. Just curious - did you ever end up watching the whole movie? Thanks.