Borat: El segundo mejor reportero del glorioso país Kazajistán viaja a América

For months, I could not go anywhere, see or read anything without hearing something about Borat: Cultural Learnings of American for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. It was being hailed as groundbreaking, and hilarious beyond anyone's wildest dreams. Everyone I knew wanted to see it, and I just stood back and could not understand what the big fuss was about. Yeah, it looked fairly amusing, but nothing more than that. Sacha Baron Cohen's Da Ali G Show never impressed me when I watched random episodes, so I was not in belief that this film would.

But with all of the hype, it made me want to see it opening weekend. Unfortunately, I never managed to. I caught it a few weeks later without the benefit of a huge audience watching it with me. And for the most part, I think my original assumption was correct.

Basically for the two people who have zero clue what the movie is about (despite it now being on DVD), Borat Sagdiyev (Cohen) is a Kazak journalist sent to the United States to observe the American way of life. He brings his TV crew with him every step of the way, and begins to explore the country. But because of his origin, he is outrageously obnoxious in his behaviour. But for some reason, it only becomes more tolerated as he continues on, allowing for many surprising responses from the people he comes across.

The satirical idea for the film is simply brilliant. The character of Borat is racist, misogynist, raunchy, and just downright vile in the way he acts. And the Americans he talks to either do not realize what is going on, or actually agree with him. The tour he takes across the United States involves a plethora of random, everyday citizens being duped in this fashion. The fact that the film was marketed so well in the US, and then further made millions, attests to the idea that this may just be the greatest practical joke every played.

But unfortunately, it is a one-note joke. The film loses steam after thirty minutes, and can barely pick up afterwards. It strikes a pretty solid barrier, and just cannot recover no matter how hard it tries. Yes, the proceeding minutes had their share of laughs and shocks, but nowhere near as much as the first little bit. It just sets itself up far too well, and fails to live up to its original design. Its nifty idea and execution really should have told people from the start that it would not work for a ninety minute long film, but I guess they had more faith in the picture than I did.

Another upsetting thing about the film was the grand amount of preplanning. It was continually being sold to the audience as being spur-of-the-moment, and very uncoordinated. But as the film progresses, you can tell that some moments are actually being filmed this way, and that some reek of being rehearsed. It takes away from the satire the film had built up for itself, and really brings down the genuine enjoyment for the film. I know it had barely anywhere to go from the start, but making it almost so that it was written unnaturally before hand, just takes away from the genuine impact that the film has. The fact that the writing was nominated at the Oscars also does an effective amount of damage to the final moments of the film, which otherwise would have been drop dead funny instead of just amusing.

The film-making techniques on the other hand, are just magical. You really get a sense of the gritty and grungy documentary look the filmmakers wanted from the minute the film starts, right up until its finale. The hand-held camera works beautifully in every sequence, and the very personal diary feel that the film gains during the second act works very well. Just trying to keep up with Cohen in certain scenes seemed to have been a test of endurance on its own. The film is very low budget, and it shows in how unique the film looks. If it had not been so heavily publicized, I think I actually would have had trouble deferring whether or not it was an actual documentary if I saw it while flipping through TV channels.

There are no proper words to describe Cohen and his schtick. It really is a sight to marvel all on its own. His dedication and perfection in this role is nearly unheralded in my mind. He goes beyond transcending himself into the character. Every moral fibre of this character is ingrained in Cohen's performance. You do not see Cohen, and you do not see an actor. You see a rude and ignorant Kazak journalist. He never lets up for a second, and is always acting in character. This fictional character is brought to life with so much energy, that he actually forms into a real life person. The line between reality and fiction is just so thin here, that it really begs the question of how far an actor will go for his character. And he is absolutely hysterical to watch.

Ken Davitian, who plays Borat's producer and sidekick Azamat, is also very good in his performance. He is almost always watching, and is so subtle. He never breaks a smile, and he is just so serious that he complements how perfect Cohen's character is. He is obviously not as strong an actor (and is barely understandable), but his valiant efforts do go rewarded.

Even with its flaws, Borat is an experience everyone should take. Some may find it funnier than others, and some may not find it funny at all. There is a bit of a middle ground, but not much. And in the process of watching, everyone will be able to marvel at one of the greatest character performances ever committed to celluloid.

7.5/10.

Wonderfull movie. You laugh until you cry. A perfect portrait of american culture.

In terms of pure unadulterated cringe-worthiness, this film just about outshines them all. It is brilliant, horrific, hilarious, sad, outrageous, revealing, and incredibly clever. It shows up people's narrow-mindedness, their racism, their inability to accept or understand different cultures. It makes me scared for the future of the world, and delighted that someone actually sees most people for what they really are - blinkered and uneducated.

Go and rent it, and enjoy. It will make you want to be a better person, make you laugh until you almost cry, and undoubtedly make you hide behind a cushion at times.

Sacha Baron-Cohen is a genius. A definite 10 out of 10.

This movie was probably most and the highest criticized from Kazahkstan itself. Unrigthfully so. The movie doesn't make fun of Kazahkstan, it makes fun of Americans, in a criticizing way. Kazahkstan is merely used as a platform to show the (of course exaggerated) contrasts between the advanced and 'civilized' America and the simplistic Kazakhstan and how a simplistic man, from such a simplistic place, such as Borat Sagdiyev (Sacha Baron Cohen) is capable of pinching right through the advanced and civilized Americans and puts his finger right on the spot. The movie is about Borat learning from America and Americans. for the benefits of his country Kazakhstan but the question raises; Shouldn't America and Americans also learn from simplistic countries such as Kazakhstan, for their own good and benefits?

Just like in Michael Moore movies often is the case, Borat knows to put his finger on the right place and manages to show America how it really is. An uptight, patriotic, homophobic, God fearing, anti-social country, in which minorities still have a hard time and not all rights are considered equal to some. It's funny, in the interviews it often is not Borat who says the most offensive things, it are the interviewees who do so, such as the rodeo-guy and the frat boys.

But no, the movie is not all criticism. For most part it's just a fun and often also hilarious people about making fun of ignorant people.

In all honesty it's hard to tell how much of the movie was actually improvised and how much of it was real. Obviously some sequences were scripted such as all the scene's in Kazakhstan and some other sequences will make you really doubt. Some of obviously planned the camera-positions are often too coincidental and also the fact that the movie had an actual professional director attached to it, makes you really wonder. It also is hard to imaging that all those people actually took this silly talking and looking character so seriously as they did in this movie all the time. When a person who wears his underwear above his pants and is talking slang is entering your hotel with a camera-crew following him, wouldn't you crack up, realizing that this just can't be for real? The movie is also edited in such a way that the emotions and reactions get exaggerated. It's also are the reasons why you can't really call this movie a fake documentary or mockumentary.

What I loved about the "Da Ali G Show", in which Borat often made an appearance, was that it was improvised, real, often had no point and was all about the responses of the other person on the Sacha Baron Cohen characters. It was fun to see the peoples reactions and how they did respond to the character and its outrageous and often also offensive questions. This movie is overwritten in my opinion. The movie has a main plot line in in, in which Borat falls for non other than Pamela Anderson and makes it his personal mission to find her and marry her. In my opinion the improvising way of traveling through the USA and meeting and interviewing people would had worked way better, in both terms of criticism and humor. Now some parts in the movie feel planned and acted, which is definitely not Borat's strongest point. It also again raises the question of how much of the movie is actually improvised and how much of it was planned, though I definitely believe that most of the interviews and Borat with other people were for real. Ironic, since it was the screenplay that was actually being nominated for an Academy Award.

But all this criticism aside, this is a very fun and also often hilarious movie to watch. Some of the situations Borat gets himself into are priceless and the reactions from the ignorant persons are even more hilarious. They often don't know how to cope with this odd talking and looking character from the far away and insignificant country of Kazakhstan.

There are a couple of especially memorable sequences, such as when Borat and Azamat wrestle naked in their hotel room, after Azamat's 'hand-feast' and then start running naked through the hotel, elevators and eventually ending up wrestling naked in a convention room with hundreds of people in it. There are a couple of more hilarious and memorable sequences but no one really matches up to that moment, that totally catches you completely off guard.

It's all fast paced, which makes sure that you'll probably laugh your way non-stop trough this movie.

A perfectly fun and amusing movie that also has some striking criticism, that could had used some less story and perhaps should had been more like the show.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

The laughter is genuine even when I was appalled at what I was laughing at. Is Sacha Baron Cohen a genius of sorts or the biggest smart ass to hit the screens in a long, very long time? He makes John Waters appear like an (old) Disney product. The nastiness works because it is immediately recognizable and his targets live next door if not with me between my four walls. It is a social-horror-documentary. The three guys talking about women between beer and beer was so horribly real that I wanted to leave the theater laughing and screaming at the same time. Borat is not tender about his own background either. He is an equal opportunity offender if I ever saw one. The world is a cesspool and nobody is immune. Even his innocence is corrupt. I've been considering seeing it again, as the whole thing in one single disgusting lump was too much to take but I'm not sure I want to. I'll wait for the DVD where I'll be able to select and discard. My only question is now, what will Sacha Baron Cohen do for an encore.