Larry Charles to direct Borat movie

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (819 of them)

My definition of a funny film is one that has at least 4 out-loud laughs in it apart from what's in the trailers.

Hopefully, y'all understand that I'm not saying that this is my formula for a GREAT comedy. Its just that I've seen so many so-called comedies where a smile wasn't even cracked, so 4 oud-loud laughs is pretty good. Borat... had much more than 4.

― peepee (peepee), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

I think the antisemitism is supposed to be funny in a much different way than the racism stuff, but maybe I'm just reading too much Cohen into the character.

I though Sacha was married to a nice Jewish girl, kinda disappointed to hear he's engaged to an actress (from Wedding Crashers!) now.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:15 (nineteen years ago)

the local tv news interview and the gypsy yard sale bit. and yet, at my screening, NO ONE laughed at these things.

the gypsy bit was weirdly hilarious, and very clever, the way he acts like you have to be authoritative but also cautious with gypsies, like "I am going to look through your treasures, gypsy. IS THIS OK?"

I have to say while I can see the point of the film exposing backward views or whatever, a lot of the impact seems to be in the fact that it makes racist or anti-semitic jokes, these jokes are powerful because they are seldom allowed to be made.

Once the setting has been made "ok" for people, then you get this raucous outpouring of laughter. Some of the "FUNNIEST MOVIE EVER" type reviews kind of make me feel this a bit more intensely, like people are laughing with the relief of being able to laugh at stuff that would normally be taboo.

I suppose you hope people think about how anti-semitic, sexist etc Borat is, I mean he's obviously a cartoon character, but I'm not sure that people ponder the fact that they just laughed at anti-semitism, maybe it doesn't matter.

I guess Borat brings out the worst in some of the Americans he speaks to, but then perhaps the film also exposes European attitudes towards Eastern Europeans...

― Ronan (Ronan), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:27 (nineteen years ago)

Borat being pretty on point about racism if you ask me (admittedly this sequence was not in the move):

Borat (about black servant): "Is he your slave?"

Country Club Guy: "Oh no, we don't have slaves in America now. A law was passed years ago that we cannot use them for slavery. . . . which is good for them."

Borat: "Ah yes, but not so good for YOU!"

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:29 (nineteen years ago)

this is pretty otm, especially for the showing i saw (semi-rural, reddest state ever)

― gbx (skowly), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)

The country club guy responds in agreement, too. xp

― deej.. (deej..), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)

From the Bruno thread:

I haven't read a less than four-star review of it yet. And the majority were fives.
-- chap who would dare to welcome our new stingray masters (joe.goode...)

Just so yr not missing this:

http://www.nypress.com/19/44/film/ArmondWhite.cfm

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:38 (nineteen years ago)

We talked about it upthread.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:42 (nineteen years ago)

I was waiting for this:

Mahir is suing.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

ugh armond white

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 18:54 (nineteen years ago)

I thought the Pam Anderson part was the most obviously staged bit (yes it was sorta distracting to wonder which parts were or not, but that's not really a fault of the movie itself). So if quite a few reasonably intelligent people here weren't sure about it, that shows that the staged bits in general were done very well. (guess it helps that some of the non-totally-staged parts, eg the frat dudes, were so over-the-top)

― Chesty Joe Morgan (Chesty Joe Morgan), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

I hope Mahir does not get any money out of this. If he does, then Steve Martin and Dan Ackroyd (aka the swinging Czech brothers) will be next!

― shookout (shookout), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 21:16 (nineteen years ago)

it's funny how ppl are talking like racism and anti-semitism are two completely different things!

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 21:23 (nineteen years ago)

(well ok, one person)

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 21:24 (nineteen years ago)

OK, "hatin' black people" and "hatin' Jews," then.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 7 November 2006 21:26 (nineteen years ago)

I thought it was obvious I meant racism other than antisemitism (which is racism, of course). My point was just that surely other types of racism are a bigger problem in the US than antisemitism, yet in the film Cohen seems extra keen (perhaps understandably so) on exposing the latter but not the former.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 06:28 (nineteen years ago)

Man it would have been pretty bad if Pamela Anderson wasn't in on the ending. Also breaking stuff in the antiques shop was a little much. Borat has always been my least favorite SBC character but overall LOLOL.

― Adrienne Begley (sparklecock), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 07:51 (nineteen years ago)

My point was just that surely other types of racism are a bigger problem in the US than antisemitism, yet in the film Cohen seems extra keen (perhaps understandably so) on exposing the latter but not the former.

Maybe this is because HE IS JEWISH.

― n/a (Nick A.), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 11:18 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, that's why I wrote "understandably so". However, him being Jewish doesn't stop him from exposing other types of racism. I'm not saying Borat is a bad film for not doing this, but it's not exactly the scathing social satire some folks (including me) might've expected it to be.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 14:02 (nineteen years ago)

goddam Tuomas go do some fucking heroin

― am0n (am0n), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 14:13 (nineteen years ago)

yes he should have exposed all forms of prejudice equally, I totally agree. and while he was at it he should have found some cinematic cure for cancer and aids...but only if both were as effective as each other.

jesus christ save us from this moronic bullshit

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 15:20 (nineteen years ago)

Saw it again last night (not really out of choice). Laughed louder at certain points. But I gotta say that within a couple of days, many in the theatres will be seeing it for a second time, and anticipating certain scenes --- less enjoyable for first time viewers.

― peepee (peepee), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 15:45 (nineteen years ago)

Well, excuse me for saying that a comedian who's lauded exactly for exposing the bigotry of ordinary Americans didn't, in my opinion, really reach that goal in this film. I really liked the film, but based on what I've read about it (and the few episodes of the TV series I've seen), it wasn't quite what I expected, more like your typical anti-PC comedy. Which is perfectly fine.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 15:49 (nineteen years ago)

the fact that this thread is not purely celebrating the transcendent rofflez of borat is tragic.

i shall lead the way

http://scoopsnoodle.com/lix/yay.gif
http://scoopsnoodle.com/lix/yay.gif
http://scoopsnoodle.com/lix/yay.gif

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 15:58 (nineteen years ago)

http://scoopsnoodle.com/lix/yay.gif http://scoopsnoodle.com/lix/yay.gif

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 15:59 (nineteen years ago)

One of the people I went to see this with last night laughed and laugh and laughed through the whole thing, and came out being nothing but critical.

I mean, c'mon!!....Its intent was to be funny AND IT WAS! How many "comedies" achieve that???

― peepee (peepee), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:05 (nineteen years ago)

the naked fighting was the craziest thing i've ever seen in a movie - i had to look away i was laughing so hard.

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:13 (nineteen years ago)

Here's a Guardian article with reviews of/comments on the film from a Jewish writer, a Kazakh, a human rights campaigner, a black journalist, an academic and a donkey expert (via Metafilter):

http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1931712,00.html

― peepee (peepee), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 17:29 (nineteen years ago)

Scoopsnoodle & peepee OTM, and during the naked fight scene, I had already reached the point of pain w/ laughing when ass-to-face occurred, I seriously almost fainted from lack of oxygen by the time they made it downstairs.

― diebold with a vengeance (nickalicious), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 18:14 (nineteen years ago)

'you make hand party with CJ'

― beeble (beeble), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 18:40 (nineteen years ago)

the producer's fat all flopping around covering up his dick omg

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Wednesday, 8 November 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

Well I thought it was pretty damn funny. In fact I don't think I've ever heard such uproarious laughter from a cinema audience before.

The Jewish b&b=staged, no?

― chap who would dare to welcome our new stingray masters (chap), Thursday, 9 November 2006 15:36 (nineteen years ago)

I like Borat, and I am quite glad that his film has done well. And yet - I don't think it's as good as has been made out. The whole schtick originally was about talking to unsuspecting people - confronting them with this character. I don't think that there are very many such people in this film. I think that if you totted up the minutes of that kind of vox-pop, Borat meets genuine American, stuff, it would come to about ... 15% of the film? The rest is linking shots of the van, Borat and Azamat, and Borat interacting with people who have been set up. In that category, I think, come eg: the B&B Jews; the prostitute (of course); the hotel porter who tells him his wife's dead; all the Kazakhstanis (of course - and I liked that sequence, up to a point); the children who run from the bear; the frat-boys; perhaps the 'Gypsy' and the black youths... people who have been primed, are in on the act - or even (if not) who have seen Borat before on TV. Very little of the film consists of what Borat is best at. When he goes to DC and interviews two politicians, each of them speaks c. one line before he's cutting to the next scene. Seems to me that the possibility of encounters with the unsuspecting had run down, and he had to make it up with staged scenes; and these are not really that funny.

I don't feel very troubled by most of the things that people find 'offensive', but maybe I would if I was in a minority that was mocked; maybe I even should on their behalf. What I don't like is what this shares with most comedy nowadays: a quick recourse to sexuality, obscenity and scatology in place of wit. First lines of the film: 'Hello - I Borat - I like sex! Is nice!'. Would he say that? Isn't the point, the interesting aspect of this character here, his innocence, his attempt to well-meaning to a foreign audience ...? etc. SBCohen, like many others (Gervais among them), reaches for smut like a nervous tic, when he can't do any better; and he thus brings his talent down into the general mediocre ruck of bad filthy comedy.

― the pinefox (the pinefox), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:40 (nineteen years ago)

those frat boys were too real - black guys and gypsy too.

also stfu

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:48 (nineteen years ago)

One of the duped weighs in:

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_179/howiwasduped.html

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:49 (nineteen years ago)

I was gonna say, how could the frat boys be anything other than real???

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:50 (nineteen years ago)

So the feminists weren't staged either. I don't see why the hotel porter would have to be staged - his response seemed pretty 'real' and un-acted.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

It didn't seem real at all to me: seemed like he was a real hotel porter who'd been paid to play that scene. Same with the frat-boys.

― the pinefox (the pinefox), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:55 (nineteen years ago)

Members of the producing team have worked on productions about women war correspondents and female boxers, she reported.

In humor or art theory, you could argue that his statement is so ridiculous that the very utterance of it proves the reverse, and therefore is an unmasking of his character’s small mindedness. Some of Borat’s most famous segments do just that, such as when the comic, who is Jewish, cajoles patrons in a country-western bar to sing “Throw the Jew down the well” to expose covert anti-Semitism. But what exactly is he trying to unmask when he ridicules women?

My art confronts fears and overcomes them with symbols of empowerment. I don’t know what motivates Borat/Cohen to use his considerable talents to deceive and manipulate: maybe it’s his way of gaining power over the childhood sting of religious animosity or the feelings of inferiority from a woman’s beating him at Scrabble. I only know that afterward, I am left feeling confused and sad.

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:55 (nineteen years ago)

BTW, I never thought the feminists were staged at all. Some of what she says in that link is good sense, but I don't like the sound of her Art.

― the pinefox (the pinefox), Thursday, 9 November 2006 18:59 (nineteen years ago)

They were paid to appear, they just weren't aware that this wasn't actually a foreign television program.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 9 November 2006 19:07 (nineteen years ago)

she might be taking herself a little too seriously

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 19:07 (nineteen years ago)

Armond White kind of goes off the deep end like he usually does, but I thought this was a much better negative review of the movie:
http://www.citypaper.com/film/review.asp?rid=11009

I'm not even gonna try to argue about it here because I know I'd probably end up looking like some humorless fun-hating PC police type, but really, fuck this shit, I can't wait until people stop talking about it.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 9 November 2006 19:50 (nineteen years ago)

i dont know why people keep thinking that's a negative review!

― bo janglin (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

maybe it's just because i sat next to the reviewer and we both rofflehaused the whole time.

― bo janglin (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 19:56 (nineteen years ago)

well the sense i got from it was that he saw through the formal comedy cliches at work but still thought they were done effectively. i mean i'm not gonna go line for line but you have to admit there are some pretty negative parts in there. me, I just fail to see how this is all just a slightly more explicit/'edgy' version of Latka Gravas/Balki Bartokomous as played by a much less entertaining performer.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:10 (nineteen years ago)

did you see the movie?

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:12 (nineteen years ago)

no, and i'm not going to just for the sake of argument/fairness, so i'll leave it at that.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:13 (nineteen years ago)

lol

― gear (gear), Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

the slightly more explicit/edgy part was the tip off

― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 9 November 2006 20:15 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 719 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.