Linoge said:Will there be another thread soon titled, 'What happened to my thread asking what happened to my Barrymore thread?"
Good jokes though.
Well,, the joke uses the fact that celebrities of Barrymore's ilk can often be seen performing in pantomimes to try and recreate their once popular images or earn a few more pennies. Because of this, the first line draws you in as it's a question which it would be quite reasonable to ask Mr. Barrymore.Jihad said:Would somebody explain the OP's joke to me please.
Haha I get it now!Rich_L said:Well,, the joke uses the fact that celebrities of Barrymore's ilk can often be seen performing in pantomimes to try and recreate their once popular images or earn a few more pennies. Because of this, the first line draws you in as it's a question which it would be quite reasonable to ask Mr. Barrymore.
The second bit is the punchline - where they've again used a reasonable response to the question, Aladdin being quite a popular pantomime. However, what could be considered a perfectly reasonable response to the question asked previously is later revealed to be anything but!
When you look at the syllables contained in the answer that the true genius of the joke becomes apparent. Aladdin could also be construed as saying 'a lad in', and 'doing a lad in' is a common phrase used to describe the act of killing someone. Now then, in 2001, a chap called Stuart Lubbock drowned in Michael Barrymore's pool after a party which was allegedly a 'drug-fuelled' gay orgy - the allegations that Barrymore had something to do with it dogged his career from then on, including the private prosecution and wish for an inquiry brought by Stuart's father, consigning him to the dumpster of Celebritytown - and recently the story has taken a new twist with the arrest of several people, including Barrymore in relation to the death of Stuart Lubbock.
So as you can see, what on first reading appears to be an innocent response to a question on pantomimes, could also be read as:
""No way, I did a lad in (killed a man) 4 years ago and haven't heard the last of it".
It's the realisation that through a clever play on words, rather than talking about panto he could also have been construed as talking about the incident, which provokes a humurous response.
Hope that helps
Rich_L said:Well,, the joke uses the fact that celebrities of Barrymore's ilk can often be seen performing in pantomimes to try and recreate their once popular images or earn a few more pennies. Because of this, the first line draws you in as it's a question which it would be quite reasonable to ask Mr. Barrymore.
The second bit is the punchline - where they've again used a reasonable response to the question, Aladdin being quite a popular pantomime. However, what could be considered a perfectly reasonable response to the question asked previously is later revealed to be anything but!
When you look at the syllables contained in the answer that the true genius of the joke becomes apparent. Aladdin could also be construed as saying 'a lad in', and 'doing a lad in' is a common phrase used to describe the act of killing someone. Now then, in 2001, a chap called Stuart Lubbock drowned in Michael Barrymore's pool after a party which was allegedly a 'drug-fuelled' gay orgy - the allegations that Barrymore had something to do with it dogged his career from then on, including the private prosecution and wish for an inquiry brought by Stuart's father, consigning him to the dumpster of Celebritytown - and recently the story has taken a new twist with the arrest of several people, including Barrymore in relation to the death of Stuart Lubbock.
So as you can see, what on first reading appears to be an innocent response to a question on pantomimes, could also be read as:
""No way, I did a lad in (killed a man) 4 years ago and haven't heard the last of it".
It's the realisation that through a clever play on words, rather than talking about panto he could also have been construed as talking about the incident, which provokes a humurous response.
Hope that helps
