Great show but is constantly disrupted by the background music. WHY HSN, WHY!
21 Reviews
Please ditch the background music!
julescaroline5 April 2021
We all know what really happened.
OllieSuave-00710 April 2017
"How It Really Happened..." is basically a retread of past high profile criminal cases. It gives you a more in depth look of each case, with interviews from a number of authorities associated with the cases, scientists and so-called experts. This is more of a TV series documentary than a TV show.
Some of the interviewees over-exert their testimony and overacts their dramatic selves, which can be extremely annoying. While the cases give off some suspense and mystery, there is really nothing new to the case you haven't known before.
Grade C
Some of the interviewees over-exert their testimony and overacts their dramatic selves, which can be extremely annoying. While the cases give off some suspense and mystery, there is really nothing new to the case you haven't known before.
Grade C
Audio and visual issues
pjbruggs8 September 2020
Interesting Topics, but Dull and Boring narrative
nkabaji29 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I am not sure why every little piece of information is repeated so many times and by so many character that do not seem to add anything to the show.
The topics are quite interesting, but the presentation? It is not so much.
The topics are quite interesting, but the presentation? It is not so much.
Could have been much better
tammyaphillips2 July 2023
The one-part episodes were interesting and, at times, informative. Presentations about The Jenny Jones Show, Michael Jordan's father's murder along with the ones about Prince's and David Cassidy's passings were fine. But some of the two-part episodes were so repetitive; could have been done in one. The Oklahoma City bombing and the Elizabeth Smart Kidnapping episodes were outrageously redundant. I suggest you go to part two immediately; you will not be missing anything. Hill Harper was a very professional host. But. Jesse Martin often looked like he was going to laugh. Talented actor is he, but was not a good host.
Bring Back Hill Harper
jenford-262335 September 2022
I am watching "How it Really Happened." The Kobe Bryant episode.
I just want to know what happened to Hill Harper? This Jessi L. Martin guy looks like he is smiling half the time he is talking about some pretty sad, horrible stuff. With Hill Harper, 10/10 stars, with Jessi L. Martin 1/10 stars!!!
BRING BACK HILL HARPER!!!!
He was great as a host for this show.
Very professional and talented at the few short times you would see him.
I think the new episodes will keep me watching because I like the show, but I will change the channel until Martin stops speaking. You can call me rude, but that is just my humble opinion.
I don't know why Harper left the show, but I wish it was different.
I just want to know what happened to Hill Harper? This Jessi L. Martin guy looks like he is smiling half the time he is talking about some pretty sad, horrible stuff. With Hill Harper, 10/10 stars, with Jessi L. Martin 1/10 stars!!!
BRING BACK HILL HARPER!!!!
He was great as a host for this show.
Very professional and talented at the few short times you would see him.
I think the new episodes will keep me watching because I like the show, but I will change the channel until Martin stops speaking. You can call me rude, but that is just my humble opinion.
I don't know why Harper left the show, but I wish it was different.
Fascinating but, as usual, spoiled by noise
IMDBjncn2 March 2023
As usual, sound designers have turned a great show into an annoyance. Incessant growling, moaning, explosions, etc., etc., mar the enjoyment of otherwise excellent content. What on earth makes producers think this background cacophony helps dramatize the content? Do they not understand the drama of silence? A lone voice shedding tearful commentary against a curtain of emptiness communicates more in 2 minutes than "...Happened's" barrage of noise. May I suggest Hollywood take a look at the masterpieces of the 940s and 1950s and learn how "sound designers" -- oh, sorry, there were no such animals -- layered in the dramatic effects BETWEEN silences.
clintons
karensell-1321710 April 2021
I love the show except for this episode I watch them all the time but this
One I hadn't seen and still wish I hadn't that was a soft cover and made them out to be heros against adversity nothing could be further from the truth.
Branch dividens
stevencrowlj22 August 2020
Sever major errors in the film. # 2 film.
They never investigated the weapons. I viewed the hearings, the ATF said the didn't have the funds to investigate the damaged weapons to confirm if any were full auto. At that time the NRA stood up and volunteered to pay for it. The chair person declared that that was no possible, a private organization could not fund a government operation. So it was never determined that the weapons were full auto. They were destroyed as I am to understand.
As this was an important item, part of the warrant used to get into the house.
Also if they wanted David, they could have arrested him on the street in Waco. As he was there a few days before, when they were building their assault caravan to go to the compound. There were ATF people all over town that day. This according to the sheriff of Waco.
Also part of the warrant was a box of granads decommissioned and sold by the military as relics. A UPS driver dropped the box and saw what was inside and reported it to law enforcement. One of the initial beginnings to the warrant. Nothing illegal there, didn't matter.
You show showed an agent saying someone shot a a dog he thought was attacking. That was the first shot, how could your show say no one knows who fired the first shot. Which officer fired it?
Same thing happened at Randy Weavers. Kill the dog, claim they shot first because you were killing the dog not people. All the above was on the news days after the attack.
They never investigated the weapons. I viewed the hearings, the ATF said the didn't have the funds to investigate the damaged weapons to confirm if any were full auto. At that time the NRA stood up and volunteered to pay for it. The chair person declared that that was no possible, a private organization could not fund a government operation. So it was never determined that the weapons were full auto. They were destroyed as I am to understand.
As this was an important item, part of the warrant used to get into the house.
Also if they wanted David, they could have arrested him on the street in Waco. As he was there a few days before, when they were building their assault caravan to go to the compound. There were ATF people all over town that day. This according to the sheriff of Waco.
Also part of the warrant was a box of granads decommissioned and sold by the military as relics. A UPS driver dropped the box and saw what was inside and reported it to law enforcement. One of the initial beginnings to the warrant. Nothing illegal there, didn't matter.
You show showed an agent saying someone shot a a dog he thought was attacking. That was the first shot, how could your show say no one knows who fired the first shot. Which officer fired it?
Same thing happened at Randy Weavers. Kill the dog, claim they shot first because you were killing the dog not people. All the above was on the news days after the attack.
Great details of the crimes
wlrobinson-6763319 January 2021
This show let's viewers see, why people could be guilty and pretty much gives unbiased facts. Each episode makes you question your beliefs on crimes of the past and present. I hope they continue to make more seasons of the show. I'm currently beinge watching the series.
Love this show!
fiftycentqueen5 October 2020
Back ground music too loud
eddiecarolan13 March 2021
Archive footage
sarahjeanlost11 April 2021
Subject Matter Great
ronnie-1412012 March 2021
Documentaries should be HEARD
lyndaspas5 April 2021
Everyone of these shows should be interesting- however, the music and background is so LOUD
Almost all of the vocal is drown out.
People watch this type of program to obtain Information!!!!!
This happens so much in documentaries these days.
Drives me crazy- why do they think we tune in; Certainly NOT to struggle to hear the information.
People watch this type of program to obtain Information!!!!!
This happens so much in documentaries these days.
Drives me crazy- why do they think we tune in; Certainly NOT to struggle to hear the information.
Repetitive and dull.
QuickPoints26 August 2019
Just watched both parts of the Susan Smith story. As others have complained, there's really nothing at all new reported in either episode of you're already familiar with the case. If not you're better off reading or watching about it elsewhere.
There's no reason for this to be stretched into two hour-long episodes. Both episodes consist of almost nothing but repeating the same facts and showing the same news segments over and over and over. Without the repetitive story structure it might have been a watchable hour-long episode, but it's still far from an exciting show/structure.
Highly recommend spending your time watching more interesting true crime content.
There's no reason for this to be stretched into two hour-long episodes. Both episodes consist of almost nothing but repeating the same facts and showing the same news segments over and over and over. Without the repetitive story structure it might have been a watchable hour-long episode, but it's still far from an exciting show/structure.
Highly recommend spending your time watching more interesting true crime content.
Background Music too dramatic and LOUD!
jim_copley19 April 2021
The background music is so loud, the narrative is almost unintelligible and practically impossible for me to understand without closed captioning. How did the editors allow these programs go to final production with this serious problem? I had to tune out and will NOT watch any more of them.
Waste of 2 hours of my time.
aniceguy-763275 March 2017
This show is complete garbage. The jonbenet show doesn't tell you anything more than what you have already heard over the last 20 years even though the show is called'How it really happened' but it really doesn't tell you how it really happened. A complete waste of my time to even bother to watch it.
Absolute garbage
On_The_Mark18 November 2022
This is supposed to be a "here's what really happened in this crime" documentary that gives you completely fake and disproven theories.
The OJ case was the absolute worst. Every "alternate" theory they gave has long been proven false - the Glen Rogers theory, the OJ's son theory, they're ridiculous and stupid. They also quote evidence that isn't remotely true, the "blood from someone else all over the crime scene they never found whose it was" - just ridiculous. This is supposed to be a network crime series and it's giving clearly fake theories as facts.
The OJ one is hard to watch. It's easier for idiots to believe all these completely outlandish theories than that a really nice guy killed his wife.
Vincent Bugliosi said "I have never seen more evidence against one person than there is in this case." Even Alan Dershowitz, befoer he joined OJ's team, said "this is the most evidence I've ever seen - it's a mountiain of evidence" and then he joined the team and changed his tune.
To think OJ was innocent, you'd have to believe that the police ALL decided on the spur of the moment to frame OJ, not knowing if another killer would be caught the next day and somehow get OJ's blood that night and mix it in the crime scene.
OJ's blood was mixed with the victim all over the crime scene, his car and his house.
End of story.
But this idiotic show tries to claim it wasn't OJ and provides a bunch of fake theories long disproven and that's somehow "what really happened."
It's unethical and bad TV.
The OJ case was the absolute worst. Every "alternate" theory they gave has long been proven false - the Glen Rogers theory, the OJ's son theory, they're ridiculous and stupid. They also quote evidence that isn't remotely true, the "blood from someone else all over the crime scene they never found whose it was" - just ridiculous. This is supposed to be a network crime series and it's giving clearly fake theories as facts.
The OJ one is hard to watch. It's easier for idiots to believe all these completely outlandish theories than that a really nice guy killed his wife.
Vincent Bugliosi said "I have never seen more evidence against one person than there is in this case." Even Alan Dershowitz, befoer he joined OJ's team, said "this is the most evidence I've ever seen - it's a mountiain of evidence" and then he joined the team and changed his tune.
To think OJ was innocent, you'd have to believe that the police ALL decided on the spur of the moment to frame OJ, not knowing if another killer would be caught the next day and somehow get OJ's blood that night and mix it in the crime scene.
OJ's blood was mixed with the victim all over the crime scene, his car and his house.
End of story.
But this idiotic show tries to claim it wasn't OJ and provides a bunch of fake theories long disproven and that's somehow "what really happened."
It's unethical and bad TV.
What a waste of time.
romieamerson1 September 2019
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
