"That Guy With The Glasses did a version, competing with Bob Saget's as the best one so far."
Am I the only one who feels that line is too fanboyish? I mean, there is no reason why it should be in the main article. It should be cited under examples. The only reason it's there is because someone really likes That Guy With The Glasses.
Hide / Show Replies
While I do absolutely adore TGWTG's version, I gotta agree. It felt out of place in the article's body.
I'm also in favour of removing it, but for a completely different reason: Bob Saget's? Really? He was awful in The Aristocrats. He kept giggling, it's clear he had no real imagination for how to make the joke not just puerile but funny too and... yeah.
What I want to know is, how come Whoopie Goldberg's truly inspired version (in particular the golden bit about wearing foreskins as hats and then doing a silly dance) doesn't get as much praise?
one month later it is still in?
Why don't we just put a "list of notable variations", maybe using links to that site
?
anyway I reformulate the TGWTG sentence to avoid the YMMV, for now.
And, to have more clarity, we might split the page as Main.The Aristocrats, the joke (which is something very codified, so it's a trope, and should have a page reflecting this fact), and The Aristocrats, the movie, which is a movie.
I think a PG-rated version of that joke would concern burglary.
Edited by Dylanmc6 BLM