Review: Bruno

Posted by Landon Palmer (landon@filmschoolrejects.com) on July 9, 2009

bruno-header2

Sacha Baron Cohen is, without doubt, a comedian with balls. In Bruno, his latest feature-length adaptation of one of his three characters from The Ali G Show, the Peter Sellers of the 21st century puts himself in such absurd and sometimes unbelievably real situations that result in him, at various points within the film, being whipped mercilessly by a dominatrix, walking past a “God Hates Fags” protest held by Fred Phelps’s notorious Westboro Baptist Church while helplessly locked in S&M paraphernalia with another man, flamboyantly roaming the Middle East, and finally, making out with another man in a cage match while a shocked and angry audience throw increasingly large objects at him. Throughout all these ordeals, Cohen remains thoroughly and consistently enmeshed as Bruno, never once breaking character even as the situations escalate to absurd proportions. Cohen is a brilliantly talented comedian who has raised the bar of expectations for comedic performance—he may even be the first method comedian. And many of the setups within Bruno are undeniably brilliant, but unfortunately, and very disappointingly, the execution and follow-through simply doesn’t match the talent involved.

As with the feature-length adaptation of Borat, Bruno incorporates the prank-reality situations and setups into a manufactured and scripted narrative, allowing each comic episode to be a part of the character’s overall journey. After a disastrous turn of events at a European fashion show involving Bruno’s all-Velcro suit, the Austrian fashionista is exiled from the fashion world, and then decides to travel to Los Angeles to become famous, where he tries out as an extra for the show Medium, creates an outrageous American version of his fashion show which (to say the least) disturbs an unwitting test audience, adopts and exploits an African child, goes to the Middle East intending to become kidnapped, and even tries to convert himself to straightness. But the attempted crux of the film is Bruno’s off-and-on relationship with his assistant.

But Bruno becomes encumbered by its strained attempts at integrating all these episodes into a forward-moving trajectory for its title character, as if the film is trying to be a character piece rather than a collection of comic setpieces simply involving the same character. In Borat, the “plot” incorporating that title character’s journey to find Pamela Anderson was more an excuse for his comic ramblings across America and a way for the film to end with a climactic prank involving the actress rather than an actual attempt at a cohesive narrative. The unwritten contract between audience and filmmakers in that film assumed that both sets of people understood that movies like these don’t need plots, and all people really want to see is Borat involved in various comic episodes. With Bruno, the plotting is heavier and more deliberate, resulting in far more scripted moments than its predecessor, distracting from the real comic draw in these films (his interaction with real, unassuming people) and making it difficult to distinguish between what is scripted and what is real. The plotting of Bruno feels invasive rather than a convenient way to tie these setpieces together, and what the filmmakers don’t seem to understand is that the audience doesn’t need an excuse for Bruno to go to any of these places. And this extensive plotting doesn’t even pay off, as the movie finds no other way to end itself than a blandly unfunny celebrity-filled charity song, a cliché that should be far beneath Cohen displaying a depressing sign of a lack of inspiration.

bruno-review-1

Making the distinction between real and scripted even more difficult to distinguish is the fact that Bruno clearly has much higher production value than Borat, which sacrifices Borat’s on-the-go, improvisatory feel that made the crazy reality of its situations seem all the more real. Bruno looks too sleek and refined to give off the same feeling of immediacy, and thus many of its comic situations lose their intended shock value.

But Bruno’s biggest problem is in the overall execution of these real moments, and perhaps this problem can be best exemplified with a description of the character’s interview with former pop star and American Idol judge Paula Abdul. Like in many moments of Bruno, the comic setup itself is brilliant. Bruno invites Abdul into an empty rented house, where the only furniture he has provided are Mexican laborers crouched on their hands and knees. In Cohen’s wonderful critical and satirical fashion, Bruno convinces Abdul to sit on the “furniture” while she talks about her charity work. But the meeting is cut short when a tray of entrees are brought out, served on another Mexican laborer’s bare body, and Abdul abruptly leaves. The setup is genius, but Cohen never seems to give these situations enough time to breathe, follow through, and reach their real comic potential before he pulls out the truly absurd that predictably forces his interview subjects to abandon ship.

In The Ali G Show, Cohen allowed all his characters to bring out the absurd in a deliberate slow burn fashion, extending each joke for all its potential comic gold. Cohen had patience as the Bruno of the show, allowing his interview subjects to trust him before making them feel uncomfortable. The Bruno of the film, however, seems hurried to take each situation from A to Z, as if his goal is to get his unwitting subjects to leave the situation as soon as possible. Same holds true for his interview with a member of a terrorist organization and his attempted seduction of Ron Paul. Both are brilliant situations, but one can’t help but feel that there was something funnier to be mined within them, that Cohen didn’t play them for all the potential therein. The setups themselves are far funnier than how Cohen uses them.

Will Bruno make you laugh throughout? Probably. Will moments of it shock and appall you? Most likely. Has Cohen retained his reputation as one of the most talented and daring comedians of this, or any, era? Absolutely. But will you leave feeling that there could have been a funnier Bruno movie somewhere out there? I certainly did.

Grade: C+


Read more articles by Landon Palmer

Related Reading:

Your Ad Here

Comment Policy: No hate speech allowed. If you must argue, please debate intelligently. Comments containing selected keywords or outbound links will be put into moderation to help prevent spam. Film School Rejects reserves the right to delete comments and ban anyone who doesn't follow the rules. We also reserve the right to modify any curse words in your comments and make you look like an idiot. Thank You!

  • I saw Bruno the other day and I really didn't like it. I laughed at parts but I felt he was trying way to hard to be funny and a lot of the stuff was staged. No way was it better than Borat. I wrote a review as well. http://a2a.me/XTM
  • I like how the reveals that Ron Paul is a bigot. Too bad Paul's fanboys won't see that.
  • Cole_Abaius
    What are you doing? You never, never, never say that name anywhere on the internet. Now we're going to be swarmed by Paultards (Wonkette's word, not mine).
  • He was a bigot because a gay man sexually assaulted him and he got angry and said "He's a queer?" Really? That qualifies as bigotry?
  • How would you feel if he said "faggot"? "Queer" can be used as a pejorative and that's exactly how Ron Paul used it.
  • Words are words. Queer is one of the preferred term. Could he says "He's gay?" without being offensive? Is the only phrase he could have "he likes to have sex with other men?" He was just sexually harassed. He was flustered, he described the situation, and the fact is he DIDN'T use the word "faggot" which is undoubtedly one of the most offensive words he could have used. I'm not a R** P**l fan (that's for you, Cole), but I don't like people being oversensitive, or finding offensive material in something that's relatively harmless.

    If we get right down to it, we basically have sexual harassment vs. saying somebody is queer. Faulting P**l for that is beyond absurd. Now perhaps he's said OTHER things, that I haven't heard, that put him in a more negative light. But what I saw in Bruno showed someone who kept his composure together rather well.
  • First you claim it was sexual assault and then sexual harassment. Which is it? It certainly wasn't sexual assault. It could be considered sexual harassment. All Cohen did was dance while clothed and then undress to his underwear. I guess I'm guilty of both since I have undressed and danced in front of my fellow campmates when I was a child. Ron Paul freaked out and said "He's queerer than x! Let's get out of here!" I couldn't make out what he said in place of "x". If you look at his entire comment and the way he reacted, you can say that Paul was scared because the guy was gay. Anyway, the point is that he used the word in the pejorative manner. Suppose I was assaulted by a black guy and I called him a monkey. According to what you are saying here, that wouldn't be racist because a I didn't use the term "nigger".

    It's also funny that you think he kept his composure together rather well. He didn't! He rushed out of the room and freaked out and wanted to get out of there! He's a bigot, plain and sample.
  • He may be a bigot, but he didn't display it too harshly here.

    I apologize for confusing you by saying assault and harassment. Please forgive me.

    "All Cohen did was dance while clothed and undress to his underwear."

    That's all he did? Really? It looked to me like a blatant seduction ploy. He took Paul to a closed room and started stripping.

    "I'm guilty of both since I have undressed and danced in front of my fellow campmates when I was a child."

    Yeah, this is the same. Kids dancing around and an adult gay male stripping for a politician. Jesus Christ, come on.

    Do you really think he would have just gone through with it and been fine if it was a woman who was stripping? No, he would have left. Maybe he would have called her a whore on the way out. "Oh no such intolerance."

    Your 'black person' attack is not fair either. For one, 'nigger' and 'monkey' are completely pejorative terms. 'Queer' is a term gay people actually use to describe each other. Again, I ask you, what could Paul have said? "He's gay?" would that have been insulting? "He's a homosexual" I'm sure would have been acceptable, and "He likes to have sex with other men!" would have been the most descriptive. He was flustered, he used a relatively tame word. He could have used "fagot" "fairy" or any number of insulting words, but he used Queer. That's what I mean when I say he kept his composure relatively well. He thought that this was really somebody trying to seduce him into having sex with him. It's obviously unprofessional, and definitely sexual harassment. He didn't react violently, he didn't use any slang words, he used the term 'queer,' a term many gay people use for themselves. He could have been so much worse. But he wasn't.

    You're looking to put him into a negative light. And based on that he doesn't deserve it. I take in the fact that he was just put through the runner, and he reacted in a flustered but responsible manner.
  • You are once again ignoring that there are other uses for the word "queer". It can be used as a pejorative and the way RP said it fits that usage. Look up the definition on Merriam Webster and read the "usage" part.

    My example about calling a black person a monkey is the same thing as calling someone a "queer" when using the pejorative use of the word.

    And yes, I am putting him in a negative light. Why? Because he's an idiot, his political ideology kills people (that's for another debate), and he's shown in this very film that he is a bigot.

    He did not become flustered. He was freaking the fuck out. He was scared and wanted to get out of there because Cohen was "queerer than x".

    And I am a dumbass for using the example that I have undressed in front of campmates when I was a child. That is totally different, indeed. Yes, Cohen sexually harassed him, but that does not excuse RP's behavior.
  • Yes, it can be used as a pejorative. But on the lists of pejorative words for homosexuals, I rank queer pretty damn low (particularly when, as I've said, it's used by the homosexual community).

    And yes, he was freaking out. I'd freak out to if I was sexually harassed. It's inappropriate, insulting, inconsiderate, and damaging. So Ron Paul stormed out, and said he's queer. We can debate if he used it pejoratively, descriptively, or a blend of both. But what he DIDN'T do is react violently, he did NOT call Cohen a fagot, a fudgepacker, a fairy, or any other of the multitudes of words far worse than saying queer. The fact that he WAS sexually harassed (which we both agree), and still kept his sense enough about to only say queer, and did not file a lawsuit which would have been rather easy, says a lot.

    Your phrase "He's an idiot, his political ideology kills people," tells me enough. You don't like him, you don't like his policies, and as soon as he was on camera you were looking for him to do something that would come off bigoted. I don't give a damn about Ron Paul. I think he's pretty much an idiot. And perhaps he is a bigot. But he didn't demonstrate that in the movie. He was harassed and he stormed out.

    Hell, calling somebody "white" can be used pejoratively as well. Any word can be. But Paul chose a rather innocent descriptive word in a moment of anger and shock. He very easily could have done so much more.

    If anybody's in the wrong here, it's Cohen. He sexually harassed somebody, period. Now it was absolutely hysterical, but I could argue he did more damage to homosexuals here, portraying them as aggressive, constantly horny people who will trick people into going into small rooms with him. Now I won't do that, because he did it for humor, and it's an isolated incidence.

    Paul said two things in this exchange, neither of them terribly harmful.

    But I find it most ironic that the person who is bashing Paul for bigotry has dismissed half the country as inbred assholes.
blog comments powered by Disqus