This joke was repeated numerous times in this film. Anyhow, I just didn't get the joke and still don't get it. Somebody has to explain it to me, otherwise I keep thinking about it for days...
So, somebody has a wooden leg, and he calls his leg Smith. What is so funny about that? Why in the world would you call your leg anything at all???
[deleted]
erm.. ok, so that's the funny thing in this joke? Apparently not my kind of humour then.
share[deleted]
I don't think there is reason for insult, because I didn't get the joke.
share[deleted]
The joke may indeed not be that funny. But I really don't understand how anyone can not get it.
share[deleted]
the whole point is its not meant to be funny you have to use your imagination.
shareI think the bigger joke is by the original poster of this thread pretending not to get this joke. My five year old thought it was hilarious.
shareMy five year old thought it was hilarious.
[deleted]
I'm reading this thread and feeling really sorry for the OP right now.
"TV audiences are far too dependent, you expect us to do everything for you" Hitchcock,1955
[deleted]
"I met a man the other day with a wooden leg call Smith.
Really? What was his other leg called?"
Do you *really* not get this?
To be totally honest, I still don't get the joke. Is there any special meaning in the word leg or in the name Smith? Why Smith? Why not Peter or James or whatnot?
shareThe name does not matter, the whole point to it is that the sentence can be taken 2 ways, that the mans name is Smith (which is what most will think) and that the wooden leg is named Smith (which is the joke part). The joke is a 2 person joke, one person can not tell it alone and both have to be in on it really, the first part is the starter, who says they know a person with a wooden leg named Smith, the bystanders assume that the mans name is Smith, then the second person responds with something like "Really? What's his other leg named?" making it seem as if they assumed that Smith is the legs name. It's the misunderstanding and the odd picture it creates in your imagination (well everyone elses since you don't seem to have a good one really) that makes it funny. Either way it's more of a joke for someone who can think more simply and not over analyze things (which you are doing), if you think too much you will ruin it for yourself, it's funny cause who would name their wooden leg anyway? It's a kids joke meant to be understood by kids and those who know not to over think.
shareThe joke is in the ambiguity of just what is named "smith" in the set-up. A normal person would assume it's the person. The joke is in a straight man seeming to think the name applies to the wooden leg.
shareYou didint get it nor did you like the joke? Wow... I am not going to lie but I found it hilarious every time and still do.
__
Jesus, that's really super... How'd a nitwit like you get so tasteful?
*sigh*
Bert: Speakin' o' names, I know a man with a wooden leg named Smith.
Uncle Albert: What's the name of his other leg?
[he, Bert, Jane, and Michael laugh]
Bert is stating that the name of the man with the wooden leg is "Smith". Smith is the name of the man with a wooden leg.
Uncle Albert is playing with the way the statement was phrased to assert that it was not the man, but his wooden leg that is named "Smith".
Honestly, it's not even remotely difficult to "get" the joke.
FINALLY I GOT IT!!! YEEEEEEEESSSS
It's because the sentence has wrong syntax. That's why I didn't understand it!
It should be like this: "I know a man named Smith. He has a wooden leg." or "I know a man [named Smith] with a wooden leg". I know that humour is not my strong side - I never ever use that skill at all.
When you change the syntax like Bert does, you can understand the sentence wrong, namely that he "knows a man with a leg that is called Smith". hmm, funny.
It's the way the sentence was constructed that causes the problem - like in "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" when actually referring to a panda which "eats shoots and leaves"!
sharePrecisely. That kind of joke was very common at one time, when grammar and punctuation were a large part of children's education. It was a common schoolroom joke. Such things crop up a lot in old books, and it would have been a familiar notion to most of those watching in 1964 - and certainly to those of the Banks family's generation.
http://www.46664.com/
Now days, many people don't get jokes unless they are about bodily functions, or contain the f-word.
The way the sentence is phrased is why the joke is funny. I guess if you're a real grammar nazi (no disrespect intended if you are, lol) then the joke won't make sense because you can't see past the phrasing. You're expecting good grammar when you should be thinking about what the other person is implying.
shareYes..That was EXACTLY the punchline! Even as a KID, in 1964..I got it!
sharehi what it is is
i know a man with a wooden leg name smith.
( the man's name is smith)
and the other person says h whats the name of his other leg.
( the other person thinks the leg's name is smith when its really the man's name.
under stand it now?
Here is the real explanation.
The first person says "I once knew a man with a wooden leg named Smith." What he is saying is that he knows someone named Smith who has a wooden leg. But because of the nuances of the English language and the way he phrased the sentence it sounds to the second person as though the man's LEG is named Smith. So he asks, "What was the name of his other leg?" Obviously the man is named Smith, not his leg.
It's just a simple play on words.
This thread is so absurd that I have to believe that the OP is making a joke about not getting the joke.
It's along the same lines as the joke about the man who accidentally ran over a cat, and went to the owner and said he wanted to replace it. The owner inquires whether he can catch mice.
Hey, you dang woodchucks! Stop chucking my wood!
"I know a man---with a wooden leg---named Smith."
"I know a man---with a wooden leg named Smith."
It's a Leslie Nielsen sort of joke.
Now that we're on the topic, I don't get that joke either. So the cat's owner wanted a mouse instead. What's funny about that?!
shareNow that we're on the topic, I don't get that joke either. So the cat's owner wanted a mouse instead. What's funny about that?!I think you miss the point of this one. The man kills the cat and says "I am sorry, would you like me to replace it" (meaning buy her another cat). She says "yes how good are you at catching mice" (meaning she expects him to take over from her cat). share
[deleted]
i think it's possible to have heard the joke without understanding it and not intentionally be a troll lol. the OP probably thought it was absurd to make a joke about naming a leg (which it is) and that would make the point of the joke confusing. but though it's not a very funny joke, it does make sense once you understand that the point of it is actually supposed to be absurd
PS- that cat joke is hilarious haha
Would you perhaps have preffered the scene to go like this:
Bert: 'I once knew a man whose surname was Smith, he lost his leg during the war when he stepped on a landmine as he ran across the battlefield to aid an injured comrade. He now walks with the aid of a wooden prosthetic limb.
Uncle Albert: 'Really, what was the name of his other leg? AHAHAHAHAHA AHHAHAAAA'
There is an awkward silence as Bert, Jane and Michael stare blankly at Uncle Albert who shifts uncomfortably in his seat.
Mary Poppins 'Albert, you really are a pr1ck, the man was a hero. Come along children, we're leaving. We'll show ourselves out'
lol, that's funny derek :) That would have made the scene even funnier in my opinion.
shareit's simillar to the 'I once shot an elephant in my pajamas, how he got into my pajamas I shall never know' joke. You're lead to believe one things but it's actually a more surreal situation.
shareI agree. Kiss Me Kate had several big hits... "From This Moment On", "Why Can't You Behave", "Always True to You in My Fashion" to name a few.