Is anyone really upset by 'Bruno'?
And if so... isn't that the point?
Bruno arrives with his very own Palace Guards for the 'Bruno' premiere in London today
I'm not the guy who spends all his energy writing about what I consider to be failures on the part of other websites. For one thing, I'm too busy trying to make sure I do my job right to really care whether or not other people are doing theirs. I'd rather link to stuff I like in "The Morning Read" than play schoolmarm for the whole internet. Sounds exhausting.
But sometimes you just have to wonder what's behind an editorial decision, and right now, I genuinely question what the hell The Wrap is doing in regards to their sensationalistic coverage of the upcoming comedy "Bruno".
They're not alone, of course. The New York Times, determined as always to establish that they aren't even sure what the cutting edge is anymore, ran a whole lot of puffed-up nothing about "Bruno" over the weekend, and even The Hollywood Reporter has contributed one of these empty pieces about fictional hand-wringing.
Fellas... settle down. Really.
First of all, the gay community will be just fine. "Bruno" will not radically alter the fortunes of gay people in this country, pro or con. It is a comedy film from an artist who uses the outrageous to get laughs. That's it. Really.
Second, just because Mike White was shown the film doesn't mean "they changed the film to appease the gay community." Was Mike White elected to some office I'm not aware of? Or could it just be that the filmmakers have shown the film to a whole bunch of funny people and asked them to give them feedback while they fine-tune the movie? Because in my interview with Seth Rogen at SXSW this year, he talked about seeing the film and offering up some notes, too. Was that so the young Jewish comedian community isn't offended?
Here's my real issue with all this noise over what is not an issue: if you think the character of Bruno represents the entire gay community, then I'd suggest you have a problem. I'd say that the majority of the gay people who are my friends or colleagues or family are not over-the-top flamboyant stereotypes. But I know a few people who are absolutely superqueens, prissy and outrageous, and that is an act. It's an affectation. It's something that a certain percentage of people adopt as their way of announcing themselves to the world. If you're going to tell me that flamboyancy is off-limits for comedy for any purpose, whether it's to expose homophobia or to indulge it, you're wrong. There is a world of difference between making fun of someone because of something as fundamental as their sexual preference and roasting someone who decides to be a three-dimensional cartoon character. Bruno is an attack on vapid celebrity. He's an attack on people who are homophobic. And, yes... brace yourselves... he may even be an attack on people who blanket themselves in one aspect of their personality and then crank that aspect up to a deafening "11," just to force a reaction out of others.
Oh, no. However will our culture survive?
I'm seeing "Bruno" very soon. I loved the footage I saw at SXSW. I am able to interpret comedy for myself, so I'd like to respectfully ask that the rest of the media shut up about what I'm supposed to feel about the film, and I'd like to suggest that the outrage the media's trying to fuel doesn't really exist, or at least not to the degree they're trying to portray. When you do a Google search for "outrage" and "Bruno" and "gay community," I see a lot of newspapers and feature writers telling me that there's outrage, but that's about it. I don't see any real organic outrage out there. This is manufactured, pure and simple, and as with most cases where people try to stir up noise about a movie, they're doing it without actually having seen much of anything.
If you see the movie and it infuriates you, just remember one thing: any reaction you have is a victory for Sacha Baron Cohen, except for complete and utter indifference.
Your move.
Can't get enough of Motion/Captured? Don't miss a post with daily HitFix Blog Alerts. Sign up now.
Don't miss out. Add Motion/Captured to your iGoogle, My Yahoo or My MSN experience by clicking here.
Not part of the HitFix Nation yet? Take 90 seconds and sign up today.
News From Our Partners
-
Brandi Glanville Claims She Hooked Up With Gerard Butler
Charlie Sheen Talks Ladies – Onscreen & Off
Jonah Hill ‘Overwhelmed’ By ‘Moneyball’ Supporting Actor Nomination
-
The Telefile - Modern Family: Best Lines of the Season 3 Finale
The Telefile - Today's TWoP News: Wednesday, May 23, 2012
The Telefile - Today's TWoP News: Tuesday, May 22, 2012
-
Total Recall: Will Smith's Best Movies
Cannes 2012: Critics Scorecard
24 Frames: The Films of Wes Anderson
-
The Dandy Warhols Celebrate 18 Years Together
Lady Gaga Turns Yellow For The Simpsons
Dance Music Vocalist Susana Releasing New Album
-
Pamela Newton: My 'Downton Abbey' Fantasy Life
Remy M. Maisel: It Turns Out, We Can Indeed Haz Super PAC: Part I
WATCH: Reporter Fakes Sandstorm On Live TV
-
'Dark Knight Rises' TV Spots: A Lighter Side Of Batman
Emma Stone Nabs First 'MTV Trailblazer Award'
Charlize Theron Gives Dirty Details About Michael Fassbender
-
Russell Crowe, Elvis Costello, Sing Elvis Presley And Johnny Cash In London
Zero Dark Thirty: Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Given Secret Access By CIA For bin Laden Film
'Transformers 3' Extra Receives $18.5 Million Settlement For Injury
-
Gateways To Geekery: There’s more to Russ Meyer’s films than breasts, though those are pretty important
Interview: Men In Black 3 director Barry Sonnenfeld on creating character and managing 3-D
The Walkthrough: 30 Rock showrunner Robert Carlock walks us through some recent series highlights
About This Blog
Los Angeles has changed since 1990, and Drew McWeeny, all-around Chauncey Gardner of movie fandom, has seen it all as an industry insider and screenwriter who wrote for 12 years as "Moriarty" for Ain't It Cool News.
Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured
Latest Posts
-
Our review of the best film at this year's Cannes Film FestivalWednesday, May 23, 2012
-
Long-rumored Kerouac adaptation mostly gets it rightWednesday, May 23, 2012
-
His second film with Andrew Dominik is dark, cynical, and fairly greatTuesday, May 22, 2012
-
We take a little time with one of Hollywood's living legendsTuesday, May 22, 2012

Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupJH315
June 17, 2009 at 5:45PM EST Reply to CommentDrew, finally! You're absolutely right. No one is "outraged" at Bruno. It's a movie. Just like Sarah Palin's fake outrage with Letterman this week. With so many problems surrounding our culture these days, to get hung up on something like a movie is just pointless and silly.
Ella I was always thoroughly entertained by the Bruno character on Ali G, so I couldn't wait to see what brilliance Sacha Baron Cohen came up with this time. I was sorely disappointed, not only did I leave the theater upset, but also very disappointed in Sacha Baron Cohen.
August 4, 2009 at 3:16PM ESTI understood that Baron Cohen was trying to expose homophobia in America, but, was he really? And if so, then I am absolutely outraged by his hypocrisy.
Being a fan of Baron Cohen I have been trying to find out as much info as possible about the real man. Ever since Borat and Ali G, he has always been somewhat of an interesting mystery to me. I found out a lot of interesting info about this person. In his own personal life, he is an observant Orthodox Jew, he is quiet, shy and highly intelligent. He has dual Israeli-British citizenship and he is of Ashkenazi and Mithrazi Jewish decent. His great grandmother was a famous German prima ballarina and he is fluent in Polish, Hebrew and Persian. I read in a recent article how he hasn't married Isla Fisher yet because she has not converted to Orthodox Judaism. I thought he sounded like a pretty cool person, before I saw his new film, that is.
I was genuinely confused if Baron Cohen really was trying to expose homophobia or if he was actually trying to mock the gay life style and community. If I wasn't aware of Baron Cohen's personal life, I would probably tend to think that he was trying to accomplish the former, but since he himself is a member of a particular branch of Judaism that condemns homosexuality, I truly started to wonder if he was just being an outright hypocrite or if the joke is actually not on homophobic, conservative America but rather progressive, liberal hollywood.
If Baron Cohen was trying to expose homophobia in a America, (which I have no doubt, exists), but if that is indeed the case, what outrages me is the blatant hypocrisy on the part of Baron Cohen. Now, I have no problem with what people believe is morally right or wrong in their own personal lives as long as you don't bother others who disagree with you, but if you are going to mock other people in other countries based on their religious beliefs when you yourself practice and preach the same line of morality in your own private life, then I think that is just disgustingly hypocritical. What bothers me is that he just targets Americans. He was trying to make all Americans look like douche bags from Jerry Springer. Unfortunately, and wrongly so, many Europeans have these stereotypes about Americans. I believe this movie would only enforce these horrible stereotypes. Growing up in Europe, I for one know for a fact that many Europeans think that all Americans are homophobic, evangelical Christians right out of the case of Deliverance. Its rather insulting and an insult to my intelligence as an American citizen who has lived all over the world, speaks 4 languages and grew up in a mixed Jewish/Christian household with gay family members. Is this what the rest of the world really thinks of me? Is this how my European friends really see me? All because I was born in the United States?
Now, I wouldn't have had the problem with the message Bruno was trying to convey if he bothered to expose the homophobia that exists all over the world. It exists rampantly among the poorer classes in Great Britain, neo-nazism has revived two-fold in some parts of Austria, and in his own home country of Israel, homophobia is as much alive there as it is in our own backyards. There was just one scene where he gets chased down by a pack of angry Orthodox Jews for walking around in a sexualized version of their traditional dress, and acting flamboyantly gay, but why didn't Baron Cohen go further with that part of the world and the subject of homosexuality? Was it because he was too scared that he would genuinely get killed? Or is it because he believes that it is okay for people who share his religion to condemn homosexuality but not people of other faiths. I just didn't get the point to this movie. Why is it just Americans and Christians that have become the butt of his joke? Homophobia is not just an American problem. Its a problem that exists in every part of the world.
I also couldn't blame the hunters for being scared out of their minds. They had no idea who this person was and he kept acting weird and making sexual comments. Heck, I'm a woman, but if I was sleeping in the woods in the middle of the night and some strange naked man just walked into my tent, looking for sex, and kept doing it, I would be so scared. It wasn't funny. That has nothing to do with homophobia, the possibility of rape exists in both genders and in any form of sexuality. Think about it. That was sexual harassment. There were other maneuevers that Baron Cohen could have used to expose homophobia instead of scaring 3 malnourished and very poor hunters. I didn't think that was fair at all. Anyone who thinks that that was hilarious has to be out of their minds.
JoeK
June 17, 2009 at 6:09PM EST Reply to CommentThis sort of thing is almost always an attempt to gravy-train something in the populist space for self service of some kind. I've seen nothing from this episode to suggest otherwise.
Your crack about the NYTimes was apropro as well. I was just thinking recently of how they parroted that early negative reaction to Kingdom of the Cystal Skull by some theatre circuit employee as reported on AICN in advance of release as some kind of representative reaction on the "internet" as a whole. When that sort of thing happens it's ridiculous how otherwise insignificant or agenda driven opinions can be empowered or take on lives of their own.
BadMrWonka
June 17, 2009 at 7:23PM EST Reply to CommentDrew, I agree that people are making a whole lot out of not much. But isn't that part of the point? If people weren't getting into a lather prematurely, and for exactly the same idiotic reasons that Bruno is baiting them into, Cohen wouldn't really be satisfied. I think provoking the people who don't get it is as important to him as making the people who DO get it laugh hysterically. And I support that! There's no point in committing so completely to these characters and their reality if you don't do something really over the top with the comedy. I think this whole thing is hilarious, and I can't wait to see Bruno...
gibraltrkid
June 18, 2009 at 7:47PM EST Reply to CommentHoly cow dude, you just took all my frustrations with media hub bub and put them into a curse word free masterpiece!!!!
Guy Lime
July 9, 2009 at 4:52PM EST Reply to CommentThis is all so one sided. Why are there worries about the gay community's response to this but zero negative reaction to the two racial steriotypes in Transformers? If Bruno was a CGI creation, would there be the same issues??? M. Bay got away with this year's biggest insult toward African Americans and he did it with ill intent. Cohen is serving a pure and genuine purpose with his message.
begtodiffer
July 11, 2009 at 4:50PM EST Reply to CommentLet me respectfully disagree.
I saw Bruno at its midnight release and was very disappointed. As a straight man and actor, I found the over-the-top character to be a desperate attempt at being outrageous and shocking, and it's lack of the grounding honesty that Borat had greatly detracted from the humor for me. The comedy in this film was more about watching Cohen be an ass that it was watching his victims be asses. And sorry, I haven't found gay stereotypes to be funny since middle school. Furthermore, I don't care how gay friendly you are, having someone attempt to sexually assault you is upsetting, period. How can we really think less of people for reacting the way that we all would?
I knew from the get-go that the character of Bruno was a joke, as did you. We are intelligent people. But you give the people in this country way too much credit by assuming that even most of them will not see Bruno as the everyday gay guy. Otherwise, we would not still be in the midst of a fight for equality. They will think the Cohen, too, is ridiculing the gay community with his portrayal, and they will love it.
The reason people are upset, and i think rightly so, is the same reason I get upset when I see people posting comments like "SO MUCH MORE DICK IN THIS ONE, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT THOUGH HE'S GAY LOLZ ROFLCOPTER!!1!" Not only do they not understand that the joke is really on them, but it perpetuates their worst homophobic fears: that this is actually how all gay people are.
It's like if a white guy dressed up as a black guy in 1960 and paraded around the south singing slave songs while trying to sexually harass white women. All it would do is confirm the fears that simple minded have and set back the fight for equality.
When it's all said and done, will this truly damage the gay community? No, probably not that much. But in my opinion, Sacha Baron Cohen is smarter than this.
April 29, 2010 at 12:51PM EST Reply to Comment"Bruno" is a masterpiece of comedy and social commentary. It is the funniest movie I've ever seen.