case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-11-02 03:38 pm

[ SECRET POST #2861 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2861 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #409.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2014-11-02 11:40 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm not suggesting it wouldn't, I'm merely pointing out this this hurdle is a very common one. If you look at TV or movies made thirty years ago, they will also lack the technology that you find commonplace today, or it'll be amusingly out of date. But since the canon is set in Victorian times and people accept that traveling by horse-drawn carriages were a Thing, then I imagine they're also intelligent enough to realize that a show set in the 2010-ish era will also have the technology of that time period.

(Anonymous) 2014-11-02 11:59 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah but still hilarious an baffling.

I just watched a detective with porn cinemas in them. I mean I did know that pre internet and pre vcr people must have watched porn. But it was still funny to me.

(Anonymous) 2014-11-03 12:29 am (UTC)(link)
in other words you're 15 and you're feeling awfully smart about watching your first pre-90s movie?

(Anonymous) 2014-11-03 02:11 am (UTC)(link)
How the fuck is it "baffling?" How are you so stupid that you're confused by people in decades prior not having the same tech that exists today?

(Anonymous) 2014-11-03 04:09 am (UTC)(link)
nayrt - I'd chalk that up to a poor choice of words. My guess is anon is young and/or isn't quite used to seeing media from 20+ years ago with a conspicuous technology difference, or they'd realize it's not really that big of a deal.