chrisfisher/jubilant-waffle: server/resolvers/film.go; 3 LoC

Found a possible issue in [chrisfisher/jubilant-waffle](https://www.github.com/chrisfisher/jubilant-waffle) at [server/resolvers/film.go](https://github.com/chrisfisher/jubilant-waffle/blob/a9123c5fdd92bfbe695e7656b2606ca5d1e9aeb0/server/resolvers/film.go#L34-L36)

Below is the message reported by the analyzer for this snippet of code. Beware that the analyzer only reports the first issue it finds, so please do not limit your consideration to the contents of the below message.

> reference to review was used in a composite literal at line 35

[Click here to see the code in its original context.](https://github.com/chrisfisher/jubilant-waffle/blob/a9123c5fdd92bfbe695e7656b2606ca5d1e9aeb0/server/resolvers/film.go#L34-L36)

Click here to show the 3 line(s) of Go which triggered the analyzer.

```go
for i, review := range r.film.Reviews {
l[i] = &reviewResolver{&review}
}

```

Leave a reaction on this issue to contribute to the project by classifying this instance as a **Bug** :-1:, **Mitigated** :+1:, or **Desirable Behavior** :rocket:
See the descriptions of the classifications [here](https://github.com/github-vet/rangeclosure-findings#how-can-i-help) for more information.

commit ID: a9123c5fdd92bfbe695e7656b2606ca5d1e9aeb0

Start with server/resolvers/film.go at lines 34-36 and read the surrounding resolver code. Trace how reviewResolver uses the referenced review, then run the repository's existing tests to check whether the analyzer finding affects resolver behavior. Done means the finding has a confirmed classification and any necessary change is covered by passing tests.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.