Borat aka Sacha Baron Cohen
Thaldarin
Alonzi! Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Members, Constellation
Alonzi! Join Date: 2003-07-15 Member: 18173Members, Constellation
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Stirred up nations. Entertainment or racism?</div>Borat's latest movie has brought together alot of controversy. Do you personally believe it is entertainment or outrageous racism which isn't needed? A few sites with articles for and against below,
<a href="http://www.topix.net/content/ap/4056295380296922893809604604091520473031" target="_blank">http://www.topix.net/content/ap/4056295380...604091520473031</a>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6071486.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6071486.stm</a>
<a href="http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/6189114p-5410898c.html" target="_blank">http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationw...p-5410898c.html</a>
<a href="http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/11/unsolicited-advice-advertising-oped_meb_1012borat.html" target="_blank">http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/11/unsolicit..._1012borat.html</a>
The sites show some clear views about Borat's culture, humour and personal opinions from the authors theirselves. One female even describes his rather sick-minded anti-cultural movie as good for the country, because it's actually being noticed and not ignored.
Personally I will watch the movie and will probably laugh my face off all the way through it because I know that it is mostly if not entirely fiction. However what impact does the movie have for those ignorant minded? What impact does it have laughing at an entire nation for some things which are completely untrue?
Compare this to a superpower such as America, Russia or China? I believe one article does say Sacha Baron Cohen pokes a bit of fun at the USA. Although really, if he had made the whole movie aimed at America and not a small nation such as Khazakstan would the movie be banned? Would Cohen be taken to court? I'd assume he would do because a superpower can't sit back and just take abuse.
I've made a little bit of input for now although discuss away <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<a href="http://www.topix.net/content/ap/4056295380296922893809604604091520473031" target="_blank">http://www.topix.net/content/ap/4056295380...604091520473031</a>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6071486.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6071486.stm</a>
<a href="http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/6189114p-5410898c.html" target="_blank">http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationw...p-5410898c.html</a>
<a href="http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/11/unsolicited-advice-advertising-oped_meb_1012borat.html" target="_blank">http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/11/unsolicit..._1012borat.html</a>
The sites show some clear views about Borat's culture, humour and personal opinions from the authors theirselves. One female even describes his rather sick-minded anti-cultural movie as good for the country, because it's actually being noticed and not ignored.
Personally I will watch the movie and will probably laugh my face off all the way through it because I know that it is mostly if not entirely fiction. However what impact does the movie have for those ignorant minded? What impact does it have laughing at an entire nation for some things which are completely untrue?
Compare this to a superpower such as America, Russia or China? I believe one article does say Sacha Baron Cohen pokes a bit of fun at the USA. Although really, if he had made the whole movie aimed at America and not a small nation such as Khazakstan would the movie be banned? Would Cohen be taken to court? I'd assume he would do because a superpower can't sit back and just take abuse.
I've made a little bit of input for now although discuss away <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
Comments
It's a funny movie, mostly because of just how outrageous it is. But at the same time I don't feel completely right laughing at it. I think that a lot of the reason we feel ok laughing at it is because of the character being in the guise of a foreigner from a little known country.
As for America banning movies... the US government has only once had control of the movie industry, and that was during WWII. Movies are banned by the MPAA or through copyright law if a conflict exists. The government itself has no regulation over movies. Simple first ammendment.
Primarily the scatalogical humor, and the naked guy chasing a naked fat guy for visibly masturbating to a picture of Pamela Anderson. Those segments were not satire, that was stupid humor meant to give the lowbrow viewers a laugh. You'd get the same amount of wit in a Jackass flick.
The bit with the rodeo was pretty damn funny, until he started singing.. then it just turned pointless, as it turned into an obvious heckle, rather than any kind of witty commentary. The 'buying a car' sequence was pretty good. 'Driving school' was mostly pointless as well. The rest was pretty forgettable.
All I can say is, don't waste ten bucks like me.. not worth it. Wait for it to hit DVD.
Doesn't sound very appealing really. What is the discussion here supposed to be about?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Was meant to be racism or entertainment? And where do you draw the line at.
Sadly, though it had funny moments... I wouldn't call most of it satire. Then again, I'm reviewing sections of the movie, rather than the movie as a whole, pointing out that sections of it were unneccessary. Someone being 'unintentionally' rude is on just about the same level as Triumph in my mind. It's a cliched (see: ikissyou.org, where the 'Borat' schtick originated... I'm sure some of you remember him!) hour and a half long script that would have flown as fifteen-minute 'Borat' bites on SNL, but make the joke old before the movie is half over.
You'd get the same effect by asking a tourist who barely speaks English to walk into a redneck bar in the heart of the bible-belt to walk in and read from a script of slurs and non-sequiturs.
It isn't funny. It isn't satire. It's a lame-duck gag that doesn't inspire thought, a basic neccessity of satire. It's actually closer to the old 'candid camera' shows where they put unsuspecting individuals into awkward situations, and record their reactions.
If someone would like to explain how someone taking a crap in a topiary by the side of a busy New York road is 'satire', I'm all ears. Same with the naked chase, and returning to a dinner party with a sock full of feces. I challenge you, rather than pointing at a talking head, to explain how those bits are NOT specifically aimed at getting a laugh from the immature movie-goers.
Before saying that I <i>don't</i> 'get it', show that you <i>do</i>, and aren't just going on a knee-jerk reaction, attempting to trivialize a conflicting opinion.
Borat had a few funny moments, and some bits of satire. But it was not as cohesive of social commentary as, say 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Napoleon Dynamite', 'Dark City', 'Brazil' or 'Donnie Darko'. Getting into the old greats, it can't hold a candle in the same room as 'Dr. Strangelove', 'A Clockwork Orange', 'A Boy and His Dog' or the original 'The Producers' on the satirical front. Hell, 'M*A*S*H' stomps it flat.
It simply isn't a good enough movie for me to recommend that anyone go see it in the theatre, though some might enjoy it when only paying $3 for an entire room of viewers, rather than $10 a head.
In general, the movie is witty and satirical but not exclusively so. I definitely recommend it to anyone.
Singing a 'national anthem' to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner that is derogatory, nonsensical, and outright uninspired in front of an audience that will be certain to take offense to it is low-grade shock jock antics, not wit. It evokes an expected reaction... it's 'wince comedy', not satire. The speech beforehand that had the crowd cheering along with him? THAT was satire, and quite good.
Visual gags are all well and good (bear in an ice cream truck scaring happy kids away? sure that got a laugh), but they aren't wit and they aren't satire. It's a juxtaposition of themes to evoke cognitive dissonance, similar to the classic bear riding a unicycle. There's no comment there, it's just 'ha ha weren't expecting a BEAR, huh?!' and the joke is over. It's the same reason that bunny-with-a-pancake is funny.
The whole distrust of jews was more an over-the-top running gag in the film than anything else. It could be considered satirizing antisemitic behaviour, but is very weak in its own right.
I could go through the film and point out each of the weaknesses if you like. The truth is that most of it is lame gags wrapped in a very loose layer of weak satire. As I recall, the last laugh I really got out of the movie (it'd stopped appealing to me on an intellectual level far beforehand) was when he dropped his bag later in the movie, and there was a little plaintive chicken noise from it. Another running gag, and honestly the only time it ended up being funny.
The most vulgar segments are the abovementioned scatological humor scenes, mentions of intercourse with family members on more than one occasion, and two onscreen acts of masturbation. Neither of which 'contrast' vulgarity to acceptable behaviour, they blatantly ignore acceptable behaviour in true shock-jock fashion. Similar to having someone crapping in a bush (with extreme exposure, with the buttocks at eye height) by the side of a busy street, having someone masturbating by the side of a busy street, in front of a Victoria's Secret while female pedestrians walk by with horrified looks on their faces is simply crude behaviour, intended to get a guffaw from the lowbrow in the audience.
Short version and counterpoint. Just because a movie contains minor satirical scenes is no reason to deem the whole thing a satire.
For satire done well (and buried for it) with the same vein of crudity, but with a GOOD application, I'll point you to <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/" target="_blank">Idiocracy</a>. I was fortunate enough to catch it during its eight-day contractually obligated theatrical run. Zero advertisement... not even movie posters were made. Only reason it saw the theatre was so the contract did not need to be re-written before putting it on DVD. Absolutely biting commentary on the state of the US as it stands now, and a projected future in the vein of 'Planet of the Apes'... except that the human race is dying because the stupid people of the world have managed to outbreed the intelligent.
Yes, there are sight gags. Yes, there are fart jokes. But the humor comes from the reactions of the in-movie observers. Total sendup of modern day commercialism and social influence.
You can look it up on Rotten Tomatoes (it never made their top ten board due to just how limited the run was, with no advertising), and reading some of the 'rotten' reviews can be pretty funny, when you find a reviewer who thought that you were supposed to laugh about the fart jokes, rather than that you were supposed to laugh at the people who were laughing at the fart jokes.
Would you find it odd that people would take offense to someone sculpting their particular religious symbol out of fecal matter, after being simply informed that they were sculpting the icon and invited to come and see it? There is a difference between 'irreverent' and 'intentionally and pointedly irreverent'. The first is simply not caring about something that people hold dear. The second is going out of your way... realizing that others attribute it some special importance, and specifically sullying it to evoke a response. Sure, someone's allowed to take a picture of your daughter and urinate on it. Accidentally (not seeing it for some reason) would be satire, and potentially a humorous situation... possibly even extendable by continuing to do so until the fact is pointed out, at which point you stop. Intentionally doing so is provoking confrontation.
You don't find it odd that 'the land of the free' take offense to someone singing anything to the tune of anything?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not really. They are <i>free</i> to take offense. If one person has the right to sing a vulgar song to the tune of the national anthem, or defecate or masturbate in public, then another person has the right to be offended.
Actually, public defecation might not be illegal so long as it was inside your pants. I'd never really given it thought before. Potentially a health hazard as well. If any rolled out of the pant leg it might be subject to 'curb your dog' laws... but this doesn't deserve quite that much thought. :b
Only know this as it's a common tactic for Beverly Hills cops to follow any transients around and ask shopowners not to allow them to use their restroom, and when they're reduced to urinating/defecating in the street, they're offered either arrest and prosecution or a ride to the city limits and to not come back under penalty of arrest.
By the way, I read that Cohen has signed a deal to make a Bruno movie
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlL806Mubgo" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlL806Mubgo</a>
This will bring more controversy then the Borat movie.
It's Hilarious though.
he says that each character points out a certain gap, ie Ali G demonstrates the generation gap, Bruno touches on homophobia / the fashion industry which practically lamboasts itself. Borat just demonstrates what we let foreigners get away with / misgivings about the "stans" and it's the lack of educated Americans who don't realize that Kazakstan isn't the way that borat portays it.
Borat is going to suffer from what happened to Ali G in the UK after he "blew up"
Who are we to say that Baron Cohen as a jew can't poke fun at his own cause? Do we yell at African Americans who refer to themselves as...
I plan on seeing the movie for $4 in my local theatre after it has been out for 3 weeks.
[edit]
oh yeah tal, he has done the fake anthem before at a baseball game, he dragged it out for like 3 minutes and a park employee was at his side trying to politely head him off. And there was a skit that was never aired in that was shot in Arizona or one of those states around it. The skit had borat masturbating *under* sheets, [cohen said that he just pantamiming it, not actually doing the act] and they arrested him on some law against masturbation.
[/edit]
He allso got sued by 2 students...
is this the end of our noble hero?
If you think that, then you are forming an opinion. To violently oppose and verbally belittle people who find such things amusing is laughable, to look down on people who do so is just pathetic.
Almost nobody agrees with Talesin, especially among movie critics. It's one of the highest critically rated comedies I've ever seen--with rotten tomatoes giving it 96% by all critics and 100% by cream of the crop--and I found it hilarious. I'm guessing Talesin didn't understand a lot of it. I rarely say this about comedies, but go see this movie.
<a href="http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/borat/" target="_blank">http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/borat/</a>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with Talesin. Most of it was too lowbrow...The rodeoe was hilarious, none the less.