←  How Did This Get Made?

Earwolf Forums


Episode 168 - Hard Ticket to Hawaii: LIVE...

The_Awesometeer's Photo The_Awesometeer 08 Aug 2017

It seemed the group had a hard time understanding some of the odd lines in this movie as did I but one I think I understood was the joke about the nude lawn mowing wife. So he says his wife used to mow the lawn nude and people would ask if he married her for her money. Lets imagine that either big boobs or small boobs was this wife. If she was out there all the time mowing the lawn naked I am pretty sure the neighborhood would enjoy it. Now if an unattractive woman was doing this people might react differently and not not want to see it. So I believe the joke is obviously about the attractiveness of the wife and could be said as "well you ' marry her for her looks/body so you must have married her for her money"

Littlebee's Photo Littlebee 08 Aug 2017

 firsttimecallerlongtimelistenr, on 07 August 2017 - 02:47 PM, said:

that's fair enough. like i said i only listened to the first 2 episodes so it should only be taken in that context. i can't remember specifics but i was angered by the humor and the lack of research. you shouldn't publish true crime stories without being as factual as you possibly can and without full respect for the subject matter. i believe it to be in bad taste to be honest. i really don't think humor is the best vehicle for true crime. i'm sure we've all indulged in "gallows humor" when discussing heavy stuff like this with friends but i would never publish it. in saying that, if they were talking about fictional crime i wouldn't have a problem about it.

i have a similar problem with some other true crime podcasts. some of them are close to a sort of crime pornography (probably not the best turn of phrase there but some people seem to get off on the details). sword and scale is coming to mind. i mean it's nothing new but it's a mass market thing now and i've developed a problem with it.

the only crime podcast i listen to anymore is criminal. i think they do it well and in the correct tone. i haven't listened to a whole lot of crime podcasts in about a year to be honest. i just think it's not being done properly by alot of people. they're searching out unsolved cases or cases where they believe the wrong person has been convicted and they're making some very strong cases against people who they think are really responsible for the crime.

serial is a prime example of this. i have no idea if adnan killed hae min but i can see why he was convicted (i can also see why people believe him to be innocent). but to go out and turn so many people against this jay guy ... that's so dangerous. he might have been the one who killed her, i've no idea, but he was thrown to the wolves by, at best, amateur detectives. this put him and his family in alot danger and must have scared the s##t out of them. and it's been copied over and over again. i've been sucked in myself by these shows. making a murder is another one. i had to stop listening to/watching them.

but that's just my opinion. to each their own. people get offended by different things i guess

Like you, I've only listened to a couple of episodes of it but it really bothered me that they were getting basic acts wrong about various crimes (admittedly I am hugely biased bc I went to college for criminology) but like the Karla Homolka case, they literally couldn't be arsed to read the wiki page beforehand? They got a bunch of facts wrong in that episode - like basic facts like what city the murders mostly took place in - "I want to say Ottawa? Or maybe Vancouver? Somewhere Canada, though." And as I said it put me off because it's like why bother discussing these crimes (even in a conversational and casual manner) if you are fast and loose with what you're talking about.

joel_rosenbaum's Photo joel_rosenbaum 08 Aug 2017

I might as well share my favorite murder. Dude certainly had it coming:

Posted Image

David Rosen's Photo David Rosen 08 Aug 2017

Just wanted to share that my friend's magazine Weng's Chop just did an article on Andy Sidaris in the new issue. You can check out a screen shot of the first page of the article and link for info on how to get the magazine here:


You guys would all dig this magazine, really great stuff in there.

PeterParkerThomas's Photo PeterParkerThomas 09 Aug 2017

I don't think it was discussed on the podcast or earlier in the message boards, but there is another incredibly ridiculous line. They are meeting another woman at the restaurant shortly after they shot that guy in the face.

Donna says "I just shot Seth Romero in the face. I should've killed him."
The girl they're meeting responds with "You may wish you had. The best you can hope for now is crutches."

Crutches? For being shot in the face? Hahahaha. I had to rewind it to make sure I heard correctly. I know its nothing compared to all the sexist and genuinely awful moments of dialogue in this movie but I thought it should at least be brought up.

Radaka's Photo Radaka 09 Aug 2017

So is the Cancer Snake like the Patient zero for throat cancer? Kinda of like the monkey in Outbreak? I guess the moral of the story is all ways check twice before cunnilingus.

dickhoff3's Photo dickhoff3 09 Aug 2017

This was one of the more cocaine fueled films that HDTGM has taken on, and that's really saying something. But clearly it was either written in a hotel room or poolside, next to a mountain of cocaine. The male dialogue in the restaurant was seriously on par with Pacino in "The Devil's Advocate." I'm pretty sure Sidaris just brought that blow up doll to the set as a joke and then was like, "Hey, let's get this in the shot! It'll be funny." I'm surprised the incredibly racist Asian accents done by Rowdy and Jade weren't addressed in the podcast.

Society Max's Photo Society Max 14 Aug 2017

I made this but couldn't upload it in time 'cuz no internet or electricity until now...

Posted Image