Originally Posted by Gear
Am I the only one who doesn't get this?
Originally Posted by kongisking
I don't get it either, honestly. I'm assuming its some Monty Python-level complex wit at play that I'm just not grasping.
Guys, if a joke has to be laid out then it wasn't delivered very well so here's the deal:
It's a 3-pronged poke at the following statement:
"FRANCHISES (the accepted term for people without a large, uncomfortable stick up their butt)".
If 'franchises' is "the accepted term for" people without sticks up their butts, then it's OK to call those people, FRANCHISES.*
(Notice how the 2 characters WITH sticks up their butts are talking about the others without.)
UNEMPLOYED (the accepted term for people without a job)
SOCIOPATHS (the accepted term for people without a conscience)
FRANCHISES (the accepted term for people without a large, uncomfortable stick up their butt)
If people WITHOUT sticks up their butts consider it acceptable to use a word incorrectly, then the 2 guys represent the likely appearance of those people. (Notice how they don't have sticks in their bums.)
If some people are smart enough, they will realize the 3rd poke without any explanation.
BACK TO INDY 5
If anyone has a stick up their derrière, it's people who make a BIG NOISE for a 5th movie. (That's not a stick, though, it's an enormous SHAFT!