Talk:Lying Bastards

From LGPedia
Revision as of 22:26, 6 April 2007 by 24.19.3.231 (Talk)

Jump to: navigation, search

title

any ideas what "lying bastards" is referring to? who lied?--24.19.3.231 17:26, 6 April 2007 (CDT)

Transcript

Can someone change the style of the article to make it more factual and less friendly? I hate to be a killjoy but no other article on here reads like this one. JapanMIke 06:40, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Done. -Gheist

Alex's conversation on the phone: what is she saying?

Isn't what Alex says first on the phone "Yes they called me" instead of "Yes that's the problem"? I dunno, but that's what I heard.

Alex's conversation on the phone: is she smiling secretly?

Is it me or is does Alex look like she smiles at the end of her bit when she is covering her eyes? In a kind of "Got ya!" kind of way, like she knows that Daniel is there and she has fooled him somehow?

Thanks Roxy_Bees

Image caption

Okay, there seems to be somewhat of a war over the image caption for this video. Instead of changing it back and forth, perhaps everyone could provide a reason why they think it should be a certain way. That is, if it's really that important to anyone.--Jonpro 14:33, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Well the picture is when Bree said "theres's no Ho in mexico" so that seems to be a good caption, adding "but theres one in the car" has no context in the video and is impying that bree is a HO. I think that constitutes vandalism. - Misty 14:48, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

I don't like the all caps though. Could we make it "there's no "ho" in Mexico" or "there's no ho in Mexico"? Just my preference. I agree with Misty -- I like having fun in the captions, but calling Bree a ho seems to be taking it a little far. --JayHenry 14:53, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
BAH. Quit editing when I do it! :P [Editing conflict]
There's no HO in Mexico...but there's one in the car! is uncalled for, imo, simply because it directly insults Bree without reason. I don't remember where, but I saw There's no HO in Mexico...until now earlier. I liked that. It implies the same thing, but isn't as direct and therefore funnier, imo. Yes, Daniel, I love fish tacos! is kinda funny, too.
Either way, I think with the strong sexual innuendos in this episode, it'd be just lame not to have them in the caption. After all, we weren't the ones talking about "hos" and then looking at Bree...
(And no, with that image, just There's no HO in Mexico is not enough. It cries for more.)
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 15:00, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
By that same token, I think "there's no ho in Mexico" implies the same thing as "...until now" because of that picture. "One in the car" and "until now" seem to be hitting you over the head in exactly the same way with exactly the same joke. --JayHenry 15:09, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
I would just like to say that I hadn't realized the caption was referring to Bree as the ho and my edit had changed it from something about a fish taco to There's no HO in Mexico...but there's one in the car!, sorry for any inconvenience over that. Chelseyrl 15:28, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
I think that the fish taco joke is funny, especially since I've used that eupemism before, but it doesn't fit with the picture as well, and I'm not sure it works coming from bree, in a heterosexual context -17:47, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
I really don't think the current quote ("You boys want my fish taco ;)") should be up there. It is humorous, yes, but LG15 is supposed to be PG-PG:13... That's just my personal opinion. Chelseyrl 19:20, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

I think the direct quote is the best route, but a few points

Daniel was in the car, too, and it is admitted that HE put the "ho" in "Mexico"
I think the "fish taco: euphemism is a HELL of a lot filthier than jokingly calling one of the THREE in the car a ho. --Nieriel.Manwathiel