User Reviews

After seeing "The Aristocrats" I found myself wondering if I truly enjoyed a film about the craziest joke in the world. The answer: Almost.

The film itself centers around a single premise: A joke with the punch line "The Aristocrats!" has existed for a long time, and many different comedians tell their versions and try to explain why the joke is funny, allowing reflection on what makes this particular joke so memorable and humorous.

Don't get me wrong. There are parts of this movie where I was having difficulty breathing due to the humor and the telling of "the joke." Some of the deliveries were flawless, executed with the aggressiveness and impartial judgment that have made some comedians famous.

But some comedians I didn't find funny. And their telling of "the joke" created another feeling inside me: How much longer is he going to try to make me laugh? And the problem here is that these parts of the movie are just very difficult to sit through. Using foul language and references to numerous taboos is one thing, but it hurts to listen to a comedian do it badly.

Ultimately, the comedians do a good job of explaining some of the finer nuances of "the joke", comedy in general, and its place in our lives. But the film spends more time on each comedians' angle with "the joke" than the development of why the joke is great. And I think the movie suffered from it. Listening to the philosophy of "the joke" was great; listening to bad comics preach the scripture was unbearable.

So the dilemma was created: I thought I enjoyed the film afterward, but I didn't know. After careful deliberation, I gave it a 7, losing 3 stars through the lack of developing more comedic philosophy and for the sometimes painfully unfunny moments a movie like this has in it.

And with that line begins a joke that is profiled from its Vaudvillian roots,through ninety minutes and a myriad of comedians. I once made the mistake of describing this show as bing "a hundred comedians tell the same joke',which got a quizzical"Why would anyone watch that?" reaction. There's much more to this that "comedicans telling a joke".

Comedian Paul Provenza(with the help of Penn Gillette)directs this documentary that examines one joke and how it can be stretched,shrunken,reformed,refitted,debated,taken apart,turned upside-down,twisted,cleaned up,dirtied up and any other way a comic can interpret it. Philosophies and stories around the joke are also factored in,and one who watches this film(assuming one can stick with this doc,any of the wildly profane and wincingly nasty treatments of the joke)learns as much about the teller of the jokes as the joke itself.

With notable turns by such comics as Gilbert Gottfried(who tells the joke both in interview and archival footage),SArah Silverman,Bob Saget,the Smothers Brothers,MArtin Mull,Howie Mandel and George Carlin(among others),this film is a test in one's understanding of not only the telling of a joke,but the mechanics OF telling it and the joke itself. Not much of a movie and barely a documentary,this is a great "curiosity" film that will weed out people who should and shouldn't be watching this. I felt like I learned something out of this,and every so often I got laughs out of it,too. How many films can you say THAT about it?

Have you ever watched your favorite comedy film five times in one night? You know how after the third, maybe fourth time the jokes become stale and by the fifth time you don't show any teeth whatsoever. Imagine that happening with this movie...except you don't crack a smile past the fifteen minute mark.

Basically, it's one hundred different comedians telling the same joke, something that sounds like a good idea... if it were five different comedians telling the joke. As one could imagine, it gets repetitive fast, and if you make it past the thirty minute mark then you either have a high tolerance for pain or you might be the most easily entertained person to ever live.

The only comedian to even make a remotely funny version of the joke in this whole movie was Bob Saget, but the downfall is he comes into the film at around the fifty minute mark, meaning there will be pain brought to your skull as you sit by and watch comedian after comedian pound out this joke. Maybe I love Bob too much when I say he was the only good thing about this movie, or maybe I can be honest with myself; who knows, all I know is that this movie got old fast.

I may get a lot of flack for disliking this movie. People may say that I'm too much of a wuss and the subject of the film is too risqué for me...not true. Gross out humor is one of the best forms of humor you could ever find...if done properly; something it was not done here. Everyone here goes for the easy laugh, and it isn't working.

Honestly, worst documentary I've ever seen in my life.

Screened at Sundance 2005, The Aristoracts tells the story of the worlds funniest (and dirtiest) joke you've never heard before but will never forget.

The joke itself is structured to have the same beginning and the same punchline at the end. Yet each comedian that tells it has their own variation on the middle. And that's where the freedom (and generally the vulgarity) comes in.

My favorite renditions are by Kevin Pollak (doing a spot-on impression of Christopher Walken), Bob Saget, and Paul Reiser. Matt Stone and Trey Parker even animated a South Park version of the joke that had me laughing so hard I couldn't breathe.

Paul Provenza and Penn Jillette filmed the movie over a period of 4 years and between 80 to 100 hours of DV video tape.

The film has been picked up for distribution by ThinkFilm. But don't be surprised if the MPAA slaps a NC-17 on the film for the language. Save your surprise for the theater.

"A family walk into a talent agency," is all you have to remember. The Aristocrats is a documentary(of sorts) based upon an old inside joke with comedians. It centers around a family of people who have this act, and basically is the amalgamation of disgustingly terrible things that happen during the act. When the agent asks the name of the act, you get "The Aristocrats".

So now that you've got a basis to work on, let's give you a bit of this movie, which is basically a 90 minute telling of this very joke in different forms by some of the world's top comedians that even includes the Smothers Bros. It doesn't border on disgusting, it's TERRIBLY disgusting, but that's what makes it hilarious. It's so outlandish and far out for almost every version, that bringing it back around to it's almost mundane punchline is far too perfect.

Some of my associates didn't exactly think so, and I don't blame them. This isn't the kind of movie to bring your mom to see, unless she likes jokes about people peeing on each other, incest, bestiality, and scatology. That's right, I said all of that in the same line. There's not much one can review about for the movie other than saying that it's rated 18A for a reason, and I'm surprised it actually even was received in as many theaters as it did. But that's not taking away from how funny I thought the movie was, even though I know a lot of the people that see this movie that don't already know what it's about when going into it are going to be caught completely off guard and wonder what the hell they're getting themselves into.

With every funny movie that crosses boundaries, there are standouts and letdowns. Though you're not going to believe me, I'm going to tell you that the best comedian in this movie is Gilbert Gottfried's version of the joke when he was losing the crowd at Hugh Hefner's Comedy Central Roast. Props go as well to Andy Dick, Bob Saget, Sarah Silverman, the mime, and the guy who does the card trick version, as the best versions of the joke, but there are other people in the movie that I dislike who were even making me laugh (besides Drew Carey. I cannot find that guy funny ever), which was fun. And that's what makes the documentary type feel of this movie go so well. It's fun to watch all of these comedians try their luck at the same thing.

So go spend your hard earned money on a movie that will definitely make you laugh, as long as you can find poo funny.

*** of *****

The Aristocrats is not a funny joke.

This is a fact admitted at several points through this film. And it's an important thing to bear in mind when considering the film, because the film is not the joke. The film is *about* the joke. It's a documentary. It deals with far more light-hearted matter than the average documentary, but it's a documentary nonetheless. Yes, the joke is told frequently and in various ways throughout the film. But in and of themselves, only about four incarnations of the joke are worthwhile. Billy The Mime's version is inspired, the guy who does it with playing cards is clever, Gilbert Gottfried's is a masterpiece of saying precisely the wrong thing at the right time, and Sarah Silverman's first-person rendition lies perfectly between deadpan hilarity and abject horror.

The value of the film lies in the story of the joke. And in this regard, it stands as one of the funniest films ever made. The joke isn't something to be told at the dinner table. It's a challenge, told by comedians to comedians. And this is where the hundred or so comedians in this film come in, to tell us their own stories and experiences about the inception and reception of it - and of course, to do this it becomes necessary for one or two of them to provide their own interpretations. And so it goes on.

As a comedy, it's not that funny; it is, in a very literal sense, a one-joke movie. As a documentary, it's genius.

Nothing brilliant, but a really intriguing documentary centered around a gross, vulgar and very funny secret joke comedians have shared with each other for years. Features great re-tellings of the joke by some of the funniest people working in the industry today. George Carlin gives a disgusting, creative yet hilarious version, Kevin Pollack gives a great Christopher Walken version of the joke, Bob Saget gives the most deviant version of the joke, Lewis Black gives a great analogy of the possibility of the joke's premise being a television reality show, Sarah Silverman adds a retarded child to the joke and Robin Williams, Billy Connolly and Eric Idle just add more craziness to the film. If you have precious ears avoid this movie like the plague. This is definitely only for the most strong-stomached who adore the art of crude joke-telling. Grade: B

The Aristocrats uses a warhorse joke to give the audience a window into humor, obscenity, and the American conscience. I am not aware of another study capable of inducing such laughter. The premise is devilishly simple and almost a modern version of comedia delarte. This allows some of the best American comic minds to muse wildly about humor. A great achievement of the movie is the raw footage of a who's who of comedians. Comic greats such as George Carlin, Eric Idle, Whoopi Goldberg, Gilbert Godfrey, Jason Alexander, Robin Williams, Phyllis Diller, Drew Carey, Sarah Silverman, and many more weigh in on how comedians put their signature on jokes.

The editing and pacing of the movie insure that the audience goes no longer than two minutes without a good laugh. There is no shortage of obscenity and lewdness in the film. The Aristocrats is not a family film. However, the film proves that there is much to be gained from wading into the lake of obscenity. Packed between laughs about bodily functions and social taboos, are searing insights about improvisation, character, show business, and things which most of us would not willingly put in our mouths. The movie hits on many different levels and stands as an insightful sociological achievement garbed in laughter.

When I'd finished watching this, I couldn't quite believe I actually had watched it. And liked it. It's one comic after another, spinning variations on a dirty joke. I'm not easily offended but even I occasionally was taken aback by where the joke took certain performers.

Yet, I laughed so hard I literally washed a cinder out of my eye. I'd been trying to get it out all day, to no avail. Laughter is the best medicine -- though if this joke had its way, all medication would be taken rectally.

Bob Sagat throws himself into it with absolute abandon. His version is the raunchiest. What could this do to his career? He seems to be trying to change it: I saw him last summer in an off-Broadway play. It wasn't a comedy and he was quite good. So he must be trying to reinvent himself.

I love Gilbert Gottfried and his rendition is probably the smoothest and funniest.

I'm not a televise watcher and was therefore lost as to many of the people were until they were identified at in the closing credits. It certainly isn't a documentary but it involves mostly talking heads. So the traditional manner of identifying each person as he or she first appears might have been helpful. Then again, nothing about this is conventional and who am I to make suggestions?

One of the funniest movies I've seen in a long time. If you're not familiar with the joke, that's fine. If you are, you'll probably enjoy this movie on an entirely different level (which may or may not be better).

Whatever the case may be, be prepared to laugh to the point of crying and in some cases, sides aching.

Now, be forewarned... this movie is not rated, and is about the most disgusting joke ever told. If you're a prude, you'll probably walk out like the stuck up couple who left the theater about 10 minutes into the screening I was at tonight.

There are some howling moments, there are some painfully unfunny moments, but overall, I can't recall laughing this much in a theater since seeing There's Something About Mary.

This is an exercise in 1st Amendment rights (this movie would have been shut down in the days of Lenny Bruce).

If you think 97 minutes of various comedians doing their versions of the same joke won't work, you're in for a surprise. This movie has so much more than that... It shows a real affection for comedy and comic performers.

I have to see it again, there were so many jokes I missed, either because of other people laughing or because I was laughing to hard to hear.

If you love stand-up comedy (or just enjoy laughing) and aren't easily offended, you must see this movie. You'll laugh your ass off.

This comedy won't be remembered for its shocking language. What marks it as a turning point in comedy is the fact that it features a mime with comedic talent. Steven Banks is his name. An earlier review mentioned that an audience of industry insiders in Easthampton, Long Island, while laughing at the rest of the movie, stayed silent during this part. I think this is because the audience at that showing was afraid to laugh, mimes having become pariahs around 1980, when every drama school couple took the subway to Penn Station and stood outside trying to be artistic clowns. But the mime in THE ARISTOCRATS upstaged everybody else. The audience I saw it with laughed when he was on. (This was at the Cinema Arts Centre in Huntington, Long Island, whose patrons are PARENTS of industry insiders.) I'm willing to entertain the notion that I do not have a sense of humor, but my inability to laugh at most of this is not due to the fact that these comics weren't being funny, but that the editing prevented their tellings of the joke from going at their own pace. Do what you want with the camera, but don't cut the pauses the comedians have inserted. You ruin the comedian's intended effect. Some of the participants appear to have been ambushed. Jon Stewart, sitting in his dressing-room being made up, is one of the few here who seems to sense that this is cinematic onanism. After joking a little ABOUT the joke, he gracefully refuses to tell it.) Everybody else, with the exception of George Carlin and Steven Banks, seems to be at a loss. The camera is up in their face. Here you have highly skilled comics trying to do what they know they can do, but something's wrong. It's as if, at a party, a friend says to you, "Tell that one you told at lunch." You start telling the joke and somebody says, "Hey, we should put this on the camcorder." You wait ten minutes while they search though the trunk of somebody's car to get the camcorder. Somebody has to drive to the drug store and get batteries. Then, with the pizza getting cold and the guests getting a little antsy, you have to tell the joke that's supposed to be so great in front of a camera held an inch from your face. The laugh's on somebody. But that person's on the cutting-room floor.

"The Aristocrats" would've been far more funny had the director cut out all the boring "history of the filthiest joke in the world" stuff and simply let the comediennes tell the joke. Instead, much of the joke telling is poorly edited to the point where some of the comediennes never even get to the punchline. Still, some of this foul-mouthed extremely raunchy and scatological humor is pretty darn funny. I personally found the Martin Mull, Sarah Silverman, and Wendy Liebman versions of the joke to be laugh-out-loud hilarious. Even better are some of the DVD extras of the comediennes telling other jokes. Still, this is probably a must-see for any fan of stand-up, as "The Aristorcrats" will still always been the lamest, funniest, filthiest, most offensive, sweet-natured, sickening joke any stand-up could ever tell.

For all its over-the-top vulgarity -- with large helpings of pornography, scatology, and incest -- "The Aristocrats" is fundamentally an intelligent and affectionate film. One gifted comedian after another dives into the time-honored muck of this joke, keen on retrieving the filthiest possible diamond from the sludge. The result is some of the most hilarious film-making of recent years.

It's difficult to select just a few favorites from this assemblage. Bob Saget is surely the most startling (and one of the funniest). George Carlin offers both great humor and insight into joke telling. Sarah Silverman's deadpan first-person account is unforgettable, and Gilbert Gottfried's post-9/11 version is a jewel. Billy the Mime has riotous sexual encounters with various invisible family members. Only a few comedians misfire: perhaps most notably, a guy who tries to pull off a "clean" Jerry Lewis sort of physical comedy routine.

And this is the paradox of the both the joke and the movie: clean versions just don't work. The hilarity comes from the clash between the pornography and the punchline, the comedic brilliance and the carefully crafted vulgarities.

90 minutes on one joke may seem like overkill, but the film skillfully avoids monotony. The broader subject matter is the art of comedy: the comedians' insights are fascinating and their enthusiasm is endearing.

Two minor complaints. First, it would have been helpful to identify each comedian *during* the film, not just during the (excellent) closing credits. Second -- and more seriously -- some of the camera-work was intrusive and distracting, with rapid MTV cutting that flipped back and forth between full-face and profile shots. This got so bad at one point that I had to look away from the screen until the segment was over.

9/10. A masterpiece of filthy good cheer.

"The Aristocrats" is an odd film. Perhaps one of the strangest i've seen actually. It's not a comedy, although it's often being treated as one in reviews and articles. It's a documentary about comedy and comedians, a story about a joke so foul and bizarre that it can never be told to the audience. It's only meant to be used as an inside thing between comedians to see who can ad-lib the most insanely offensive things for the longest time. Kind of like soccer players standing around playing with the ball, showing off to each other. Who can conjure the biggest and most elaborate tricks? So "The Aristocrats" is the joke never meant to reach the ears of the common audience. And yet here we have a movie devoted both to the story of the joke as well as the telling of the joke. We have dozens of different versions being told, as well as dozens of comedians telling you what the point of the joke is. Perhaps the most interesting, and most telling, point of the whole movie is that the joke is NOT supposed to be funny. It's so grossly over the top, so unbelievably offensive, that it's really extremely unfunny if you stop and think about what it contains. Like someone in the movie said "I think you would actually get the death penalty in many places for what goes on in the best versions of this joke". It's incest, feces, bestiality and perversions to last you a lifetime. The reviews have in most parts been good, at least where i live. And yet, most reviewers still look at this the wrong way.

The question should not be "do i find the movie funny?". Rather "do i understand comedians and comedy better after seeing this movie?". I did find the movie funny myself i grudgingly admit. Sure it was over the top, but to me it's something akin to laughing at the violence in a splatter-movie. It's so disgusting it becomes funny. And i understand some people can't cope with this kind of comedy, just as some people can't stand the blood in a splatter-movie. And of course the fact that i found this movie to be funny helps when i rate it. But it's not really necessary. The point for me rather was that this movie gave an inside view into what comedians share among themselves. Comedians like Bob Saget (who i've always found to be an extremely boring person) who breaks at least my views on his character by telling an amazingly disgusting version of this joke. "The Aristocrats" is an exercise in gross exaggeration, but it is also an exercise in ad-libbing. As such it's interesting in more ways than one.

If you're sensitive to foul language, sensitive to crude humor or sensitive in general you should stay away from this movie. It demands that you can distance yourself from the words being spoken. If you are the kind of person who watch "Dawn of the Dead" failing to see the comedy in shooting a movie-star look-alike in the head, you are probably the kind of person who could never get through this movie. For those who can stomach it, and distance themselves enough to see beneath the superficial layer of filthy words, this can be a rewarding experience. And for the right person also a lot of laughs.

7/10

I consider myself to be an open-minded progressive creative with an appreciation for creatives pushing the limit and telling it like it is. I'm not a prude. I'm a big fan of Margaret Cho. With that said, I find the Aristocrats' obsession with scatological bestiality and incest – all presented in a "humorous" context – to be insulting, demeaning, and not the least bit funny. It espouses the kind of humor indicative of a psychopathic juvenile delinquent. As many of the comedians in the film themselves admit – the Aristocrats just isn't funny. The film is not totally without merit, however. It is living proof of how psychopathically juvenile our culture can be. And that's just not funny.

Typically, I'm not one to encourage obscenity so I shunned the idea of the "Aristocrats" at first. However, I must applaud the "Aristocrats" and tell you that it was brilliantly presented and not at all about obscenity. It seemed to be more about being creatively obscene while keeping your audience horrified and simultaneously roaring with laughter. Many of the bits in the film will shock the prudish movie goer, but you'll also find that, like a fatal car crash in heavy traffic, you must keep listening and watching. Later you'll be embarrassed to admit that you laughed so hard, you're not sure if your lungs are still intact. Warning: skip the beverage during this film unless you enjoy nostril burn.

I think the buildup to my seeing this movie would have made any judgment unfair. I actually went in expecting to pee myself and came out with a few larger-than-normal laughs and a little embarrassment for some of the comics who just came off poorly. The premise is simple, but not quite simple enough: simply having a bunch of comedians telling the joke would have made a shorter movie and probably a more entertaining one as well. It's hard to get anything as shallow as the aristocrats joke to hold up after all the analysis put to it by Provenza and Jilette and their cavalcade of writers, comedians, and journalists.

That said, when some of the comedians do tell the joke, it kills. George Carlin is the one of the most-heard in the movie and the first to tell the joke, and it's a good setup. His style is inimitable. Everyone has their own flourish or angle: Drew Carey uses a goofy hand gesture, a couple people tell it backwards, Sarah Silverman gets disturbing, Gilbert Gottfried (supposedly the film's inspiration for his telling at the Friar's Club roast of Hugh Hefner) blasts you assaultively, and of course Bob Saget plays off of his famous dichotomy of dirty comedian with a family-oriented TV past, in what might be the most riotous part. I mean, really funny.

Those aren't the only good parts, some should be left as surprises you don't see coming: Kevin Pollack's twist, for instance. Some of these comedians really just aren't funny, and many obviously don't belong telling this joke because they can't seem to cut loose enough to do it. Not everyone can be as comfortable with people's "danger zones" as Carlin or Trey Parker, so veterans like Howie Mandel and even Emo Phillips come off as little kids playing a bigger boys' game. I felt embarrassed for some of the lack of reaction from both the guys behind the camera and the people in front of the screen at the theater.

Overall, the parts that are great are worth the ticket. I suppose it balances out, and in the nature of the film, a hit-and-miss effect should probably be expected. But why go see a movie with consistently decent laughs when you can see one that'll bomb on a few and absolutely slay you with many more, like the Aristocrats.

I rented this movie out of curiosity. It seemed an interesting idea and I thought this could be funny. There was so much good actors and comedians in it, it had to be good. A new idea, I have to say, though it sounded too simple. Unfortunately, it was as bad as it sounds: 90 minutes talk about one joke. I have heard those words before!?! And maybe dirty jokes aren't so big a deal around here. You can say some dirty words in my country without being arrested. Waste of everyones time and money (film company, comedians, viewers). Time for a new joke. This is probably really funny and meaningful for some people, especially the comedians, but to me it was "fast forward".

I don't know what movie RT Firefly saw... I saw this at the Deep Focus film Festival, and think it is one of the smartest and funniest movies I have ever seen. A bunch of friends and I are still talking about it. Every one of us found different things all through the whole movie. It's only repetitious if you are not watching for the nuances and subtle variations in each different version. Little things make a big difference every time someone else tells the joke. Some are funnier than others, but none of the people I saw it with agree on who - some love what others didn't and vice versa (except we all agree SarahSilverman, Taylor Negron, Bob Saget, Gilbert Godfrey and Billly the Mime are hilarious). Yeah, some of it is childish but that's part of the fun, and kinda the whole point of it. Let yourself go and see what happens. The creativity is amazing, no matter how filthy. But it's got so much to say about being free, and about the art and craft of comedy. when you see how many different ways this one joke can go, it is truly amazing. I thought it was just going to be a dirty joke, but it is also about crossing lines and where are those lines anyway? It's hilarious to see all these big stars just being silly and having a blast. It's like we're at their private party and they don't care what anyone thinks. We all LOVED this movie and can't wait to see it again because we missed so much from all the laughing throughout.

Comedic-magician Penn Jillette and veteran stand-up Paul Provenza have developed a film that explores the comedic process. They asked over 100 of the best comedians from the last 50 years to tell an improv joke so vile, that the film itself could not be rated. With these tellings (of which, we hear about 15-20 complete efforts), Provenza and Jillette have created an entertaining view of ignoble humor turned cerebral.

This filthy old joke is the comedic equivalent of jazz. It's raunchy; it's free of constraints, yet is has a simple "melody" to hold onto. -Paul Provenza, Excerpt from the Director's Statement It should probably be said at this point that the joke, itself, is not very funny. A man walks into a talent agent's office and says, "Boy, have I got an act for you. A family comes out on stage and does unspeakable acts to each other." "What's the act called," asks the agent? "The Aristocrats...(long pause, cough, a tumbleweed rolls past)." The fact that the joke has very little meat, means that the humor is in the delivery, and in whatever meat the comedian can add.

So, how does the film stack up? Pretty good, considering what content Provenza had to work with. Because many of the comedians tell a similar joke, he chose to edit the film into snippets of the joke. With these smaller clips, he was able to explain the history of the joke (from vaudeville, to backstage, to parties, to the Friar's Roast, etc.), and its common themes (scat, blood, incest, etc) in a detailed and humorous manner. There were no specific instances when I was doubled over with laughter (the last comedian to accomplish that response in me was the late, great Bill Hicks), but I must admit to smiling throughout the 90 minutes.

Do they prove what they set out to prove--that comedy, like jazz, is an improvisational art form? Sure. But then, that's not much to prove. It's been done already a thousand times over (think Whose Line is it Anyway?, or Saturday Night Live even). Rather, what the directors really prove is that there is an insiders club that only stand-ups and a few select fringe elements can take part in. This is shown most accurately as Gilbert Gottfried busts-up an entire room of comics at Hugh Hefner's Friars Roast, only two weeks after the 9/11 circus. Though the clip is pretty funny, the real humor is in watching Rob Schneider fall off a couch from laughing so hard. And it all adds up to the masturbatory nature of the film. A comedian films comedians telling jokes to other comedians (BTW, if you replaced the verbs in this sentence with "f$%", you've pretty much got a good start to a version of the joke).

To put it succinctly: even though The Aristocrats won't leave you gasping for air, the movie has its moments (Kevin Pollack's impression of Christopher Walken had my girlfriend dying). If you're not the sort to buy a comedy album and listen to it until you've got the routine down pat, you might not go for this sort of thing. But if you've got a collection that spans back to Lenny Bruce, it would hardly be right to miss this one.

On a final note, I think something should be said about the reactions to the content of the joke. This is the first film I've been to in ages that people walked out of. Or rather, they hobbled out, holding their colostomies. I think it was around the part where Drew Carey was explaining how the grandparents got into the act by screwing their grandkids…and then eating their own sick. So don't be surprised if the blue hairs can't take it. Even Gracie Allen would've had a hard time with that one, I'm sure.

For another great Bob Saget Joke, Check out this post on IMDb. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436078/board/nest/25827579

Christ, this film is pitiful. It's basically like when little children shout obscenities thinking it's funny and clever, only made worse by self-congratulatory smugness of it all as though they're "pushing the envelope". It's true that there could have been an opportunity here to explore the boundaries of acceptability but the reality is that rather than address any actual taboo subject matter such as terrorism, Islam, race, etc. almost all the comics stick to the same safe pubescent topics i.e. coprophilia, bestiality and incest. which becomes tiresome and predictable almost immediately and are only really funny to begin with if you're a thirteen year old schoolboy, and if any of it actually shocks you then you've obviously led a pretty sheltered life.