“Bruno” got a burst of applause from the audience on its opening weekend. It wasn’t because of any of the jokes, but rather during one of the rare, three-second intervals between them. The people here started clapping when a particular scene changed and the words “Fort McClellan, Alabama” appeared on the screen.
Our very own section of Alabama plays a prominent role in the film’s second half. The character Bruno visits actual religious experts in Birmingham who promise to cure his homosexuality. One of them recommends spending time with other straight men doing manly things, so next stop: Army base.
“Bruno” did some actual filming at Fort McClellan, which delighted the audience members that knew it. These people must have felt like they were in on the joke. It was their chance to laugh at something that belonged to them.
No one applauded throughout the rest of the movie. They were too busy laughing. There wasn’t one full minute of silence within the seats. This is what “Bruno” promises and delivers in spades. It’s simply hilarious from start to finish.
“Bruno” follows the same formula as actor/writer Sacha Baron Cohen’s earlier film, “Borat.” He plays an outrageous character who interviews people, usually with outrageous questions or making sure they’re visibly taken aback by him, and weaves this into his character’s story. The character is a gay Austrian fashion insider who goes to the U.S. to become famous.
The movie is outrageous done well. It presents pervasive shocking, obscene and unapologetic words and acts. The thing is, even those who are offended by seeing these things won’t be offended by him. For example, while he enhances every gay stereotype by 1,000, he doesn’t offend them. He never says this is what other gay people are like. He’s saying this is the way this fictional whack-job is like.
To show flaws in others, Cohen prefers to let them do it themselves. Still, he wants a laugh more than a message. He takes his obscene interviews to the breaking point. What he does is push the people he’s talking to their limit and then push some more to see what will happen. It’s hard to imagine anyone not seeing immediately that the whole thing is a joke, but they don’t, or they get mad about it.
People have a hard time laughing at themselves. That’s what movies like this want to happen. Audience members may imagine themselves being interviewed by Bruno, and either shudder or crack up at what they might say. I would love to see some outtakes where interviewees figured out this guy wasn’t on the up-and-up, and split their sides over it.
Some of Bruno’s subjects are obviously more in on the joke than others. It’s hard to believe Paula Abdul would sit on a Mexican bending over because the interviewer insisted it was a chair. It was obviously arranged beforehand. On the other hand, Bruno’s failed seduction of Ron Paul reveals the former presidential candidate had no idea his host was a comedian in disguise.
Neither did most of the everyday folks he crossed paths with. He milks that anonymity for all the laughs he can muster, which it turns out is a lot. Apparently, it’s easy for a crazily-dressed, flamboyant Austrian to get people to open up.
Some of his findings are downright scary. In one scene he pretends to be producing a photo shoot for babies. He asks desperate stage mothers how far they’re willing to go to get their diapered children in front of a camera. One mother even agreed to make her baby lose 10 pounds in a week and subject him to liposuction if he didn’t. It must have been all Cohen could do to stay in character and not simply stare in shock. Keep in mind that these people know they were being filmed, only perhaps not for a movie. Their pretense of reality makes them all the more frightening.
“Bruno” is also helmed by “Borat’s” director, Larry Charles, who must have gotten his appetite for candidness wet with that movie and has expertly crafted both real and fictional documentaries since.
Upon leaving the theater, I heard some people say Cohen’s mockumentary days are over because he won’t get away with filming his outrageous characters incognito anymore. He’s too easily recognized now. I disagree. People are flawed, and they’ll sell their ideas without always thinking about what they’re saying beforehand. That’s what Cohen’s characters bank on. While I hope he doesn’t rely on the same trick for every onscreen outing, it’s possible he could go back to it. If recognition is a problem, perhaps a better disguise is in order. He’s in the right business for that.
By Jonathan Grass
Home Staff Writer
jdgrass@crimson.ua.edu
No comments:
Post a Comment