 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.200.116.138
In Reply to: Notable in the rudely personal disparagements below... posted by clarkjohnsen on November 15, 2006 at 09:41:57:
"Concerns about the rampaging egotist arranging humanity in a hierarchy and installing himself at the top of the heap."Pure invention on his part.
" That kind of thing. Can, as an example, an Alabama minister's wife -- bluntly insulted for her dearth of pulchritude -- be safely assumed to be less of a human being than our fearless guerrilla artiste?"
Again pure invention on his part. He obviously didn't get the joke. The joke was at the expense of the character Borat as much as the mark. Cohen possesses is an ability to creat an outlandish character that still manages to draw real people into real discoarses. Then he turns the table with a shocking twist. The geniune reactions of his marks are funny in that we can relate with the mark as much as we can laugh at their predicament. The humor is very layered because of this. Much of the humor is in the complete awkwardness Cohen creates with his invention of a clas of cultures. looks like Duncan completely missed ll that."The film, right down to the spottiness of its laughs,"
I suppose that depneds on who you saw it with. The audience I saw it with laughed from begining to end.
" and regardless of whether staged or not, is amazingly similar to that of your average Will Ferrell comedy."
Duncan clearly doesn't understand comedy on it's most elementary levels. Borat was as close to your average Will Farrell comedy as it was to a Woody Allen movie or a Monty Python sketch. I suppose there are some very basic similarities due to both actors having their roots in improv sketch comedy but that is where any similarity ends. While Will Farrell and Sasha Cohen both create distinctive cartoony characters the direction they take and devices they use from that point on are completely different. Duncan's comparison is painfully ignorant of comemdic conventions and techniques.
He pretty much makes a fool of himself while pretending to be concerned about the greater good of humanity. All in all he comes off like your garden variety idiot who blames America's violent culture on Heavy metal music and video games. I can't help but think he felt like one of the marks in the movie. It seems he, like most of them, take themselves far too seriously to get the jokes.
Follow Ups:
" That kind of thing. Can, as an example, an Alabama minister's wife -- bluntly insulted for her dearth of pulchritude -- be safely assumed to be less of a human being than our fearless guerrilla artiste?"
Again pure invention on his part. He obviously didn't get the joke. The joke was at the expense of the character Borat as much as the mark. Cohen possesses is an ability to creat an outlandish character that still manages to draw real people into real discoarses. Then he turns the table with a shocking twist. The geniune reactions of his marks are funny in that we can relate with the mark as much as we can laugh at their predicament. The humor is very layered because of this. Much of the humor is in the complete awkwardness Cohen creates with his invention of a clas of cultures. looks like Duncan completely missed ll that.Yes but he does so at the expense of people's trust and general good nature as in the scene at that dinner. It's one thing to expose a racist or serious hypocrite it's another thing to just be insulting to people who are being kind to you. So, no invention, just a noting of a lack of basic decency.
This bit from the L.A. Times review reflects my feelings about Cohen's style...
"But because Cohen is intentionally provocative, willing to mock whoever crosses his path, he ends up baiting the harmless and playing ordinary people for fools just because they are gullible and had the bad luck to run into him, and it's here that the laughter especially sticks in your throat. The car dealer who doesn't object when Borat makes anti-Gypsy remarks may not be a secret racist but simply someone who decided it was a mug's game to get further involved with an obvious lunatic. And the Southern dining society that gets mercilessly humiliated seems to have committed no sin worse than earnestness, credulity and hospitality.
With his corrosive brand of take-no-prisoners humor that scalds on contact, Cohen is the most intentionally provocative comedian since Lenny Bruce and early Richard Pryor, with a difference. For unlike those predecessors, there is a mean-spiritedness, an every-man-for-himself coldness about his humor. The one kind of laughter you won't find in "Borat" is that which acknowledges shared humanity."
FWIW this is the stuff that was being discussed previously about Borat.
Don't piss on my shoe and tell me it's raining.
...they sued.Plus recently I caught him on some late show and his shtick never arose above... shtick. Not funny at all. The audience sounded like a laugh track. It was pitiful.
Ali G. was an inspiration, however.
clark
> Plus recently I caught him on some late show and his shtick never arose above... shtick. Not funny at all. The audience sounded like a laugh track. It was pitiful.Now there's a succinct, to-the-point review of comedy. You either like it or you don't.
/*Music is subjective. Sound is not.*/
And no so good natured people who are exposed for what they are or otherwise don't have the ability to laugh at themselves. Seems like hos who attack this movie largely fall into the latter catagory. For those who attack the movie without even having seen it. They fall into a special catagory of self righteous idiots.
"Yes but he does so at the expense of people's trust and general good nature as in the scene at that dinner."That is true. the vehicle of his approach requires a set up akin to a practical joke. It is a very pure form of improv in that the mark doesn't know that they are in a sketch. Phil Henry does the same thing with his brilliant radio talk show. It is a form of comedy that requires specific skills on the players' part, Sacha Coehn is one of the best at it, and in the end it requires a level of humility and humanity on the part of the mark. If they lack one or the other they are busted for it. Should I feel sorry for the few who were exposed for what they really are?
" It's one thing to expose a racist or serious hypocrite it's another thing to just be insulting to people who are being kind to you."
But he was "just" insulting. That would be shallow. He was outrageous but smart enough to keep in the context of a severe cultural square peg. The bottom line is you can't script those reactions with actors that are aware of the set up. It's uniquely funny, fresh and involving. It also allows for a range of directions that would likely not be found by a single writer. IMO some of the best stuff was the very humane and kind hearted reactions some of the marks gave to Borat's outrageous offerings. You just can't script those geniune reaction to such absurd circumstances.
" So, no invention, just a noting of a lack of basic decency."That doesn't make any sense. The "invention" I was speaking of was that of Duncan Shepperd. A lack of basic decency? or a lack of basic humility. Some people just can't take a joke. It is interesting that the same folks thought Jackass was just fine. maybe because it was low lifes playing jokes on low lifes and folks like Duncan Shepperd felt safe and above it all. Maybe Cohen's ability to infaltrate the trust and intelect of "highbrows" scared Shepperd and others that find it lacking in basic decency.
"But because Cohen is intentionally provocative, willing to mock whoever crosses his path, he ends up baiting the harmless and playing ordinary people for fools just because they are gullible and had the bad luck to run into him, and it's here that the laughter especially sticks in your throat. The car dealer who doesn't object when Borat makes anti-Gypsy remarks may not be a secret racist but simply someone who decided it was a mug's game to get further involved with an obvious lunatic. And the Southern dining society that gets mercilessly humiliated seems to have committed no sin worse than earnestness, credulity and hospitality."Again only an afront or threat to those who take themselves far too seriously and are afraid of playing the fool. He doesn't simply mock his marks. That would be cheap and uninteresting. If that is all one sees than I think those folks are simply falling prey to their own fears fo playing the mark themselves. It does seem that most folks aren't too sensitive for this sort of humor. But obviously some are. Oh well.
"With his corrosive brand of take-no-prisoners humor that scalds on contact, Cohen is the most intentionally provocative comedian since Lenny Bruce and early Richard Pryor, with a difference. For unlike those predecessors, there is a mean-spiritedness, an every-man-for-himself coldness about his humor. The one kind of laughter you won't find in "Borat" is that which acknowledges shared humanity."
Interesting that he would cite other trailblazers that were in their time taken to task much the same way as the author takes Cohen to task. Now that is ironic. Maybe he has good reason to fear this sort of humor.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
