I see multiple "haven't seen it but..." comments here. Feels like askreddit's "doctors of reddit ...?" "Not a doctor but ..." comments. I just watched both. I thought it was a work of art. The...
I see multiple "haven't seen it but..." comments here. Feels like askreddit's "doctors of reddit ...?" "Not a doctor but ..." comments.
I just watched both. I thought it was a work of art. The first one was a lot more offensive; second one has a really cool "coming to maturity" type plot and is filled with the subtext "it's down to you, America, to improve now". The ending gag not pulling any punches.
Making Borat represent kazakhstan is a cheap joke from the first movie they didn't really push on as much in the second one, and yeah I didn't find it funny but I'm also not losing my shit over it. My country is regularly represented, satirically, very much just as awfully and I don't find those jokes funny either but I can ignore them if the material is good.
My guess? When you don't like what you see in a mirror, some people try to blame the mirror.
PS. Excellent article, excellent review and agree with it on all points.
Agreed. The scenes of the babysitter and the synagogue were really good and heartfelt. I greatly appreciated them in an otherwise bleak movie showcasing some of the worst of America, though I did...
Agreed. The scenes of the babysitter and the synagogue were really good and heartfelt. I greatly appreciated them in an otherwise bleak movie showcasing some of the worst of America, though I did laugh quite a bit.
I attended a small college in southern Georgia for my associates and a cotillion class was part of the curriculum (which was super weird). The scenes in the movie from Macon, GA with the ball, perfectly captured my unease about the whole thing.
Da Ali G Show was comedy genius. Borat, for all it's flaws, had a razor sharp point. Borat 2 was just not as good, either as comedy, or to make a social statement. In Borat 2, it wasn't clear who...
Da Ali G Show was comedy genius.
Borat, for all it's flaws, had a razor sharp point.
Borat 2 was just not as good, either as comedy, or to make a social statement.
In Borat 2, it wasn't clear who was an actor, or what the setup was.
The original Borat and Ali G, the setup was clear. Everything thought they were on a legitimate show with a complete idiot. With Borat 2, it's not clear what some of the people thought. Did they really not recognize Sacha Baron Cohen? Did they think it was a comedy? A documentary? Were the cameras hidden or obvious? Did they think the character was an American, or Borat pretending to be an American. I frankly thought half the people were in on the joke. But apparently they weren't?
Also, while the narrative they organically weaved is impressive, I am not sure what the point of it was.
You could say the same about the original Borat, but at least that highlighted a side of America that wasn't universally recognized.
By now, we all realize how seedy parts of America really are.
I felt so emotionally bludgeoned by the movie, that it took reading the review to process my feelings. For the most part, the places it took the viewer felt necessary to the satire. But other...
I felt so emotionally bludgeoned by the movie, that it took reading the review to process my feelings. For the most part, the places it took the viewer felt necessary to the satire. But other moments stood out as existing for shock value alone. The climax of the Debutante's Ball, for instance, seemed very much like it offered vulgarity for the sake of being Borat rather than making a point.
I didn't enjoy it as much as the first. I appreciate that they used the daughter for a different take, and because Borat is so recognisable now, but I preferred his character. Maybe part of it is...
I didn't enjoy it as much as the first.
I appreciate that they used the daughter for a different take, and because Borat is so recognisable now, but I preferred his character.
Maybe part of it is Brueno taking it to more of an extreme, and Who Is America being too recent, that it didn't have as much of an impact.
Or maybe there are just too many blatantly racist, sexist, [*]ist idiots around nowadays that catching them out is not as funny.
It's satire. The entire premise of Borat is that the most ridiculous and stereotypical caricature possible could expose genuine aspects of American culture that are equally ridiculous. If...
It's satire. The entire premise of Borat is that the most ridiculous and stereotypical caricature possible could expose genuine aspects of American culture that are equally ridiculous. If Kazakhstan and Borat aren't portrayed through an ignorant American perspective, the whole concept loses its teeth.
I loved the first film (watching the second tonight), love SBC and love Central Asia, however i think the character and films undeniably portrays a country that most people know nothing about in a...
I loved the first film (watching the second tonight), love SBC and love Central Asia, however i think the character and films undeniably portrays a country that most people know nothing about in a highly negative way using false offensive stereotypes and a character using over the top accents, tanning and bushy mustache. It is satire but it has formed real, very negative impressions about Kazakhstan and Kazakhstani's.
Two countries came out of Borat looking bad, USA and Kazakhstan. For the USA it is Americans making Americans look bad, for Kazakhstan it is SBC making Kazakhstan look bad. Where there is other exposure to Americans, much of it fantastic, there is very little representation of Kazakhstan and Kazakhstani's other than Borat. I think it if it was anyone else portraying Borat or a country anywhere else in the world a certain section of the America media would be howling for blood.
America has spent all summer removing far more obvious and less offensive satire from films and tv. I honestly dont know why he didnt just claim Kazakhstan kicked him out and Boratistan gave him citizenship.
EDIT
Just finished Borat 2 literally 15 minutes ago. Less funny than the first, less shocking, less original and ultimately less interesting. The pay off scene was Giuliani tucking his shirt in, yeah he has a creepy smile but that was about it, nothing to suggest he knew she was 15 or that he was pulling down his pants like implied.
Either Americans have become so immune to being in "its a prank bro" type videos that their reaction to the outrageous is sheer apathy or most of the people involved were actors or at least clued in to some degree. I wont do a scene by scene breakdown but i found it was the script going overboard that created the cringe/discomfort rather than the organic reactions of those being filmed like in the first film.
I thought I had something to say to defend Borat, but it's not there. I will say I liked the first one and will watch the second, but totally agree that he's unfair to Kazakhstan and Romania. If...
I thought I had something to say to defend Borat, but it's not there. I will say I liked the first one and will watch the second, but totally agree that he's unfair to Kazakhstan and Romania.
If you were to ask me if it was worth misrepresenting Kazakhstan to dunk on America, I would answer with a hard "no." Frankly, he probably ought to do something closer to Ali G: Weaponized ignorance to the point of parody as an exploitation of people's willingness to tolerate endless bullshit through politeness. As I understand it (but haven't seen because it's from Showtime), "What Is America" did something like this. But I think an important part of Borat's operation is he's from a country nobody lives in, speaking a language nobody understands (Hebrew, actually) behind the scenes, and has to operate with no familiarity. Unfortunately, there isn't really a way to do this without possibly damaging the reputation of another country. With Borat, rather than try to play it safe and still mess it up, I feel he went the route of going so over the top as to be unbelievable, which is unfortunately still a misrepresentation of an entire country.
I see multiple "haven't seen it but..." comments here. Feels like askreddit's "doctors of reddit ...?" "Not a doctor but ..." comments.
I just watched both. I thought it was a work of art. The first one was a lot more offensive; second one has a really cool "coming to maturity" type plot and is filled with the subtext "it's down to you, America, to improve now". The ending gag not pulling any punches.
Making Borat represent kazakhstan is a cheap joke from the first movie they didn't really push on as much in the second one, and yeah I didn't find it funny but I'm also not losing my shit over it. My country is regularly represented, satirically, very much just as awfully and I don't find those jokes funny either but I can ignore them if the material is good.
My guess? When you don't like what you see in a mirror, some people try to blame the mirror.
PS. Excellent article, excellent review and agree with it on all points.
Agreed. The scenes of the babysitter and the synagogue were really good and heartfelt. I greatly appreciated them in an otherwise bleak movie showcasing some of the worst of America, though I did laugh quite a bit.
I attended a small college in southern Georgia for my associates and a cotillion class was part of the curriculum (which was super weird). The scenes in the movie from Macon, GA with the ball, perfectly captured my unease about the whole thing.
Da Ali G Show was comedy genius.
Borat, for all it's flaws, had a razor sharp point.
Borat 2 was just not as good, either as comedy, or to make a social statement.
In Borat 2, it wasn't clear who was an actor, or what the setup was.
The original Borat and Ali G, the setup was clear. Everything thought they were on a legitimate show with a complete idiot. With Borat 2, it's not clear what some of the people thought. Did they really not recognize Sacha Baron Cohen? Did they think it was a comedy? A documentary? Were the cameras hidden or obvious? Did they think the character was an American, or Borat pretending to be an American. I frankly thought half the people were in on the joke. But apparently they weren't?
Also, while the narrative they organically weaved is impressive, I am not sure what the point of it was.
You could say the same about the original Borat, but at least that highlighted a side of America that wasn't universally recognized.
By now, we all realize how seedy parts of America really are.
I felt so emotionally bludgeoned by the movie, that it took reading the review to process my feelings. For the most part, the places it took the viewer felt necessary to the satire. But other moments stood out as existing for shock value alone. The climax of the Debutante's Ball, for instance, seemed very much like it offered vulgarity for the sake of being Borat rather than making a point.
Kazakhstan, Reversing Itself, Embraces ‘Borat’ as Very Nice
I didn't enjoy it as much as the first.
I appreciate that they used the daughter for a different take, and because Borat is so recognisable now, but I preferred his character.
Maybe part of it is Brueno taking it to more of an extreme, and Who Is America being too recent, that it didn't have as much of an impact.
Or maybe there are just too many blatantly racist, sexist, [*]ist idiots around nowadays that catching them out is not as funny.
Haven’t watched it and don’t plan to, so I can’t judge, but here’s a Twitter thread I saw this morning arguing that thiese films are racist.
Twitter user doesn't understand satire and refuses to acknowledge it because this time the satire is aimed in their general back yard.
I cannot remember the name of the fallacy but it goes like this:
I really don’t think you can make these assertions about the film without actually watching it.
(Guilt by association?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
Sure, but I was thinking of a specialized case. Maybe it’s “guilty by association” like @petrichor suggested.
I think 'guilty by association' is based purely on the relationship, i.e. between X and Z in your example. It wouldn't require 'Z to do Y'.
It's satire. The entire premise of Borat is that the most ridiculous and stereotypical caricature possible could expose genuine aspects of American culture that are equally ridiculous. If Kazakhstan and Borat aren't portrayed through an ignorant American perspective, the whole concept loses its teeth.
I loved the first film (watching the second tonight), love SBC and love Central Asia, however i think the character and films undeniably portrays a country that most people know nothing about in a highly negative way using false offensive stereotypes and a character using over the top accents, tanning and bushy mustache. It is satire but it has formed real, very negative impressions about Kazakhstan and Kazakhstani's.
Two countries came out of Borat looking bad, USA and Kazakhstan. For the USA it is Americans making Americans look bad, for Kazakhstan it is SBC making Kazakhstan look bad. Where there is other exposure to Americans, much of it fantastic, there is very little representation of Kazakhstan and Kazakhstani's other than Borat. I think it if it was anyone else portraying Borat or a country anywhere else in the world a certain section of the America media would be howling for blood.
America has spent all summer removing far more obvious and less offensive satire from films and tv. I honestly dont know why he didnt just claim Kazakhstan kicked him out and Boratistan gave him citizenship.
EDIT
Just finished Borat 2 literally 15 minutes ago. Less funny than the first, less shocking, less original and ultimately less interesting. The pay off scene was Giuliani tucking his shirt in, yeah he has a creepy smile but that was about it, nothing to suggest he knew she was 15 or that he was pulling down his pants like implied.
Either Americans have become so immune to being in "its a prank bro" type videos that their reaction to the outrageous is sheer apathy or most of the people involved were actors or at least clued in to some degree. I wont do a scene by scene breakdown but i found it was the script going overboard that created the cringe/discomfort rather than the organic reactions of those being filmed like in the first film.
I see the point of the backstory being racist, but I think just reducing the character and movie to it is not doing it justice.
I thought I had something to say to defend Borat, but it's not there. I will say I liked the first one and will watch the second, but totally agree that he's unfair to Kazakhstan and Romania.
If you were to ask me if it was worth misrepresenting Kazakhstan to dunk on America, I would answer with a hard "no." Frankly, he probably ought to do something closer to Ali G: Weaponized ignorance to the point of parody as an exploitation of people's willingness to tolerate endless bullshit through politeness. As I understand it (but haven't seen because it's from Showtime), "What Is America" did something like this. But I think an important part of Borat's operation is he's from a country nobody lives in, speaking a language nobody understands (Hebrew, actually) behind the scenes, and has to operate with no familiarity. Unfortunately, there isn't really a way to do this without possibly damaging the reputation of another country. With Borat, rather than try to play it safe and still mess it up, I feel he went the route of going so over the top as to be unbelievable, which is unfortunately still a misrepresentation of an entire country.
The movie was very meh, it made me cringe more than laugh.