| “Bruno” | July 10, 2009 | |
|---|---|---|
 I just sat through Sacha Baron Cohen’s latest movie, “Bruno.” (For some reason, “sat through” sounds like a better verb than “watched.”) I don’t like Cohen’s style of movie-making, but upon seeing his mock-gay character enrolled in a National Guard boot camp in the previews, I felt that I had to go to this one. What I expected was a humorous confrontation of our country’s culturally ingrained homophobia. What I got was a geek show, a one-man cry for attention that left me feeling sick, sad and worn-down. (And this is coming from a guy who watches Italian slasher flicks and can deal with seeing actors vomit up fake internal organs.) Cohen should neither be called a comedian nor a documentarian. I don’t know what to call him. Bruno doesn’t so much examine homophobia as confront people with disturbing, graphic situations and force them to react. One might say that a person only shows their true colors under stressful situations, and there’s some truth in that. But “Bruno” is not social satire, because that would require Cohen to show himself as an intelligent voice of reason at some point in the proceedings. It’s ridicule. And any laughter that comes out of it is from nervousness and genuine concern that Cohen will eventually get himself beaten or killed. (Which he may, if he tries to outdo himself in his next movie. I certainly won’t be there to see it.) With all of that said, there are some specific parts of the movie that I thought were worth addressing with my own opinion. - At one point, Ron Paul is tricked into giving an interview to Cohen, only to find himself in the midst of what appears to be a pornographic video as Cohen drops his pants. Ron Paul leaves angrily, and in a hidden-camera video shot in the hallway of the hotel, he comments that there’s “some queer stuff going on in there.” Of course, the question of right and wrong presents itself. Was it right for Cohen to have tricked Paul with a fake interview? Absolutely not, and why Cohen wanted to make Ron Paul look like an idiot is beyond me. Was it right for this footage to have been included in the movie? Yes, and it’s entirely because of Paul’s “queer” comment. If anything, this should reinforce the fact that politicians are, under their slick surface, human beings with flaws and prejudices, and part of what “Bruno” is (apparently) intended to do is expose prejudice. As far as I know, the word “queer” can still be considered hate speech, even if said under duress. If I have any qualms about this, it’s the fact that Barack Obama and George Bush were not put in similar situations, because it would have been interesting to compare their reactions. - The National Guard segment is predictable, and unfortunately does not address what I hoped would be addressed - our military’s ludicrous “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule. I’m certainly not offended that Cohen ridicules our military culture, because I find it ridiculous myself - if anything, I’m offended that the several military officers featured in the movie (and the National Guard itself) failed to realize that this was a put-on. - Before I even saw the film, I had read some entries from a gay and lesbian blog (shakespearessister.blogspot.com) urging a boycott of “Bruno”: “Sacha Baron Cohen wants us to believe that Brüno isn’t a central part of the joke, but he composed the character from spare parts of the worst gay stereotypes, promotes the film with images of the character that heavily rely on the premise that anything gay/feminine is inherently absurd, and shows up to public appearances dressed in ass-bearing glittery gold lederhosen.” I’m straight and thus can’t comment on the movie from a gay perspective, but the character was obviously invented to offend. So I have to ask - what audience was Cohen shooting for, if he was determined to offend everybody? I went into the theater hoping for a social satire on homophobia and came out completely confused by what I’d witnessed. That’s a huge part of the problem - I don’t think Cohen had much of an idea of what he was doing when he made “Bruno,” which makes it a failed experiment at best and a mentally unbalanced sideshow act at worst. - Cohen even makes a trip to Israel and Palestine, which really has nothing to do with homophobia and more to do with mocking a volatile world situation by putting his neck on the line. He walks through the street wearing skimpy, suggestive clothing and gets chased by an angry, fundamentalist mob. Not a mob of Islamists, however - a mob of Jews. In a better movie, some commentary might have been made about this scene, but Cohen only incites emotion, not intellectual discourse. The entire conceit of Cohen’s “humor” is that it’s funny to watch stupid people get put through the ringer. Here’s the problem – in Cohen’s world, everyone and everything is stupid. While some of the ass-backwards bigots in this film deserve what they get, there are others who are attacked for no apparent reason. Why is it funny to see Paula Abdul recoil at eating food off a naked man’s stomach, or the managers of a nice hotel deal with two naked adults assaulting the staff and destroying a room? Basically, “Bruno” depressed me. It depressed me because it highlights the darkest side of humanity, and I say this even though I don’t believe that most people are “essentially good.” It made me sick, I wish I hadn’t seen it, and by writing this entry I hope to dissuade others from making my mistake. Share this: 2 Responses to ““Bruno””Leave a Reply |
||
Hey Jonathan.. Oh my gosh, I wish I had read this entry before going to see the movie because I actively regret seeing it. Most movies that are bad experiences don’t actually traumatize you.. I literally felt like crying afterward! I know that sounds crazy, but I was so disturbed. My friends after the movie were practically high fiving each other in glee, exclaiming how ‘awesome’ and funny and great it was. I felt so depressed. I actually had to cover both my eyes and ears during the ’swingers’ scene and the subsequent scene that followed with the s&m woman. I felt like I was frozen in horror because I couldn’t even get up to leave! I really enjoyed Borat, and was eager to see this movie… The only thing I think that was interesting was when he goes to the counselors trying to convert him to heterosexuality, and the parents who are trying to put their infants and toddlers into modeling. Not that these scenes were funny, but at least they weren’t completely manufactured, and the heterosexual counselor scenes showed some insight into what actual people go through. I liked the original character of Bruno he did on HBO because he would subtly expose the narcissism and thoughtlessness of the fashion world through seemingly banal interviews. I think it would have been a more successful movie if he had just remained focused on the fashion industry, instead of making it about homosexuality, although even in the beginning, what does destroying someone’s incredibly hard work on their fashion show do? It was a completely pointless spectacle. I felt like the focus group scene was a microcosm experience of what we as viewers felt when watching the entire movie.. they just felt sick and bewildered at the end. I’m sure they got the commentary he was trying to make with the ‘keep it/ abort it’ sketch, but they weren’t really given much to think about, and then were just bombarded by things they didn’t want to see. It was one of the most painful movies I’ve ever sat through, but then again, unlike you, I can’t watch blood and gore either.. so maybe I am just more sensitive all around. I actually felt scarred by it at the time. In a way all it showed was that people, albeit in flawed ways, really try to be tolerant and polite to others despite their differences..(I’ve learned more about people’s intolerance by seeing the town hall meetings), but especially with the guys who went camping together.. they were uncomfortable around him, sure, but were basically decent to him… he had to resort to ridiculous measures to get a rise out of anyone. And I agree, the prank on the hotel staff…why? What did they do? They behaved perfectly appropriately. I think the joke ended up being on the famous musicians in the end who agreed to take part in the final scene.
Hi Michelle - I agree with your comments completely. You also bring up an interesting point about the original purpose of the Bruno character. I never watched Sascha Cohen’s show on HBO, so I didn’t realize that the character was invented as a parody of the fashion industry. If Cohen had stuck with that conceit, I think it would have made a better movie.
On the subject of sensitivity, I agree that I’m more tolerant than most people of certain kinds of violence in movies, but I’m also less tolerant of seeing people get humiliated, which is probably why I didn’t like Borat and shouldn’t have gone to see Bruno.
I guess if I wanted to see a funny satire of the fashion industry, I should have just stayed home, rented “Zoolander” and ordered out pizza.