It seems some of his victims are none to happy about the film though, lawsuits might be appearing. Sounds like some of it might even be labelled entrapment.
I haven't seen the film yet but saw that antique shop scene and that was hilarious. I shudder at the fact though my own mother still thinks the confederate flag should be displayed as a sign of 'the heritage of the south'. *shudders*
Personally, I think anybody who tries to sue has no leg to stand on. I mean, they didn't force them to sign the consent forms... they didn't force people to get drunk and say terrible things.
What about the poor buggers in that Romanian village or Dharma Arthur. “I spiralled into depression, and before I could recover, I was released from my contract," she wrote in a letter to Newsweek Magazine. "It took me three months to find another job, and now I'm thousands of dollars in debt and struggling to keep my house out of foreclosure.” It says she is not taking legal action to be fair. http://movies.uk.msn.com/features/Borattrickedme2006_article.aspx I know those two young lads said 'orrible stuff. I think they might be regreting it all now. I just found SBC a smug self rightious prick. So i hope he gets shafted by as many people as possible .
I'm trying to think when I've ever seen Baron Cohen out of character - and I'm not sure I ever have. So what are you basing that on? You could well say that his characters are self righteous pricks ... but that's kind of the point.
At awards ceremonies and a few interviews he has done. I have to say you have a point, i don't know him that well out of character. Even so, 'in character' imho he is acting like a prick. So he should imho pay the price when he is not in character. I'm not averse to people like him, i can see the charm. I just think he has done it far to long. So bugger him, i hope he gets a little bit of his smile wiped of his face. He may give up acting like a prick or just being smug out of character. Paul Kaye managed it. I hope so.
Well here he is, being interviewed about Da Ali G Show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0b_lTEgICw Seems like a very charming, clever, articulate man who knows exactly what he's doing in using his characters to expose the hubris and folly of those in public life who should know better. The 'ordinary people' targeted by Borat is probably the source of the unease about what he does - nonetheless it always makes some serious sociological points about how people behave when they're put in front of a TV camera, their assumptions about others, and he has a knack of exposing people's core beliefs and prejudices. Does their desire to get on TV and their rush to sign the release form mean they don't think properly about what it is they're exposing themselves to? If they actually read what they were signing, it'd give some clues - I've seen the release form used for Borat, and there are reams of stuff about waiving the right to make legal claims. I'd think very seriously before signing such a document and agreeing to participate. Why didn't those racist fratboys? Hubris? Doesn't that make them a legitimate target? It's a tricky area. But I have a great amount of respect for what Baron Cohen does, and the fact he does it with such intelligence and skill. It's worlds apart from a lot of trash exploitation TV.
I did say: I have to say you have a point, i don't know him that well out of character. Thanks for the link, he aint no Ricky Gervaise i suppose. I don't mind re-assesing my opinion of him. I can see your point to a certain degree, i just think he milks it. I accept some have better cases than others. Ofcourse you will find people like he did. I'm just looking at the aftermath. I don't care if they fully understood the release form. Do you think the people in that tiny little village in Romania understood the release form ?. Maybe they fully appreciated he ''makes some serious sociological points about how people behave when they're put in front of a TV camera, their assumptions about others, and he has a knack of exposing people's core beliefs and prejudices'' . I don't think he was doing anything like you say, in the front of that driving school car. he was just being a prick imho. Who knew this would generate over $200million. Imho the release form never covered that level of exposure. To be fair you don't hear the majority of them moaning or suing him. Imho The Villagers Of Glod…and Dharma Arthur. Should be suing his ass off. Atleast it seems one is. Even so, 'in character' imho he is acting like a prick. So he should imho pay the price when he is not in character. I'm not averse to people like him, i can see the charm. I just think he has done it far to long. So bugger him, i hope he gets a little bit of his smile wiped of his face.
How well did the driving instructor come off? He came off like a star - such a kind, generous man to someone he obviously just thought was a bit simple. Shows that what Borat does is provide a magnifying mirror to people's personality. The Romanian villagers too - I ssumed they were in on the joke. They were not the butt of any of the jokes in any way. The story about them seems to have been deliberately stirred up by a British tabloid whose reporters went there to tell them they had been mocked - I don't believe they had in the slightest. They were exploited far more by the reporters who stirred up that story than they were by Baron Cohen. Just for the record, repeating yourself verbatim doesn't really add anything to a debate
You justify his behaviour too much imho. I can see where you are coming from. Please tone it down a little though, it almost feels like you are being payed by the chap . No doubt he [the instructor] maybe a little miffed, if he feels pissed off he has every right to be. I'm not sure how i would react, i suppose you would laugh it all off. Maybe i'm being oversensitive. I have read that 4 times, i still have no clue what you mean. Could you say it again in more simple language, just for me. Cheers. We don't know if they were 'got at' by journalists. Unless you have a journalist from a tabloid underneath your bed ?. That might be a bit of wishful thinking on your part. It does not matter if they were exploited after the the lawyers had petitioned to sue [i suspect they were]. That does not make the slightest bit of difference to the SBC case. If they wanted to sue the tabloids they could. We shall have to see what the judge has to say about it. Fair comment. I would have just said something along the same lines. Don't see it has repetition. Just see it as me putting the same words in the same order, at a different time.:tongue: I'm sorry if i'm not being completly fair. I just think he should be taken down a peg or two. As irratioanal as i might be, that is the simple truth.
As far as I'm aware the case has been thrown out of court. It was the Daily Mail who sent reporters to Glod to inform them that they had been savagely mocked and exploited. I needn't really say more than that - read the story yourself - the lawsuit seems pretty obviously opportunistic and the tabloid story a set-up. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6168148.stm http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=415871 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glod,_Dâmboviţa
I never knew it had been thrown out. It seems they will refile. Imho when better advised. He said they said we said who said. The 'truth' is somewhere out there i'm sure. The Mail article did not seem exploitative well no more that SBC imho. I think they may have had a twinkle in their eyes 'exposing the truth' and spun the story in a way only The Mail can. To be fair, their online editions sometimes seem to be not so bloody awful. This about sums it up imho. ''No one from the 20th Century Fox studio was available for comment on the villagers' claims.'' ''It is small comfort that few, if any, of them will get to see the Borat film. Not a single villager we spoke to had ever been able to afford a trip to the nearest cinema, 20 miles away.'' ''Perhaps that's the real reason why film-makers chose Glod in the first place.'' However considerate SBC may or may not have been... i'll refer you back to my last comment, in my previouse post.
Yes, once upon a time. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0852401/ Just been watching her in http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0813734/
