Bulls-Eye: ‘Bruno’ Hits Hollywood Hard
by Maura Flynn“It’s such a fine line between stupid and clever.” –David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap (1984)
When it comes to humor I’m super picky. I physically cringed at all but one of the multiple fart jokes in Pixar’s Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. I still don’t get The Three Stooges. Call me uptight. Slapstick without redeeming intellectual humor, toilet jokes, sexual references, and ”shock” scenarios do nothing for me. So how is it possible that I laughed myself sick while watching Bruno? That’s easy. Because, goofy as it pretends to be, it is a pretty smart film.
You’ve probably heard that this film is about homophobia, but the story arc is about what it takes to become a celebrity. Frankly, both facets are hilarious.
This satire has real teeth, and it’s also fair. I completely disagree with the reviews that claim it mocks middle America, puts “innocent” people on the spot or casts them in a bad light. If anything this film ruthlessly savages Hollywood. The scenes with stage mothers are so appalling that the audience collectively gasped and groaned. One hopes that this exposure will, at the very least, lead to interventions from Social Services and cause us to rethink some of the “entertainment” exemptions from child labor laws. Cohen introduces us to women who are willing to have their babies/toddlers strung up on crucifixes, dressed like Nazis, subjected to bees/wasps, and driven in cars at high speeds without restraints. (Personally, I hope this leads to actual arrests). One toddler’s mother adds that she’s okay with all of that, “if he’s got the job.”
Other fun includes exposing a Hollywood PR agency that doesn’t have a clue or a care about the causes they claim to promote. When Cohen posits that his cause will be “Dar-five” (as opposed to Darfur) the reaction is priceless.
But how do the average folks fare here? Pretty darn well, if you ask me, and this film doesn’t make much of them either way. Among the only average folks in this film are the hunters Bruno camps with, who, in my opinion, comport themselves admirably, despite the filmmaker’s best attempts to provoke a reaction. Is homophobia alive and well in America? This particular snapshot says not so much. Even the military seems at ease (almost shockingly so) with Cohen’s antics.
While Paula Abdul uses a Mexican migrant worker as furniture (literally), the audience of a local Texas talk show demonstrates genuine concern for Bruno’s “adopted son,” OJ. A social worker is called upon to intervene.
Sure, Cohen exposes some disturbing trends east of Hollywood. The two reverends who claim to be able to “cure” homosexuality are as ripe for satire as any stage mom. They raise some flags, but frankly come off as tawdry and confused and somehow not quite as sinister as their California counterparts.
The most disturbing scene in the film is the wrestling match in which Cohen takes on an entirely different character who is boldly anti-gay, and who then proceeds to…well, shock the audience at hand. This scene is far more tense and frightening than humorous, and made me fear for the safety of the camera crew, never mind the principle actors. This is the only scene that felt gratuitous, and yet on another level it was probably the most insightful. In other words, those who came off poorly deserved it. The hooting wrestling fans were truly scary. And if Cohen had been clocked with that metal folding chair by the crowd he deliberately riled? It would have been tough to argue that he didn’t deserve it.
Another uncomfortable scene in the story is Ron Paul’s “interview.” This segment is part of the celebrity story arc (Bruno attempts to make a sex tape with Ron Paul to garner world fame), and Paul’s reaction has been described by some as homophobic. I thought the Congressman handled the situation surprisingly well, but judge for yourself.
About that fine line between stupid and clever: Mike Long is on the right track when he invokes Bill Hicks and Howard Stern and Penn & Teller. Not because they ”break barriers,” which isn’t inherently funny. But because their work is smart. You don’t have to agree with Bill Hicks’s politics to understand that the guy could write a brilliant joke. You don’t need to enjoy the entire Howard Stern show to understand that he conducts celebrity interviews that put Rolling Stone to shame, and that he’s used his radio pulpit to defend the First Amendment more vociferously, and maybe more effectively, than almost anyone. And if you haven’t seen Penn & Teller’s brilliant program on Showtime, it’s your loss.
But Bruno isn’t for everyone. If you enjoy smart, biting satire, and you aren’t put off by coarse language or sexual scenarios, you’ll love it. If you’re afraid that this film mocks middle America, or that it ambushes average people, a la Michael Moore — your fears are misplaced.
Like most laugh-out-loud comedies, this is best appreciated in the theater. And if you enjoy comedy that reaches — even reaches a little further than it grasps — then I highly recommend that you buy the ticket and take the ride.





Subscribe via RSS
62 Comments
still don’t get The Three Stooges.
okay, someone get Maura to a "old fashioned slapstick comedy" class.. QUICK
A guy thing? I don't know. My wife is the biggest Stooges fan I've ever met.
I know, it's a bit of a cliche. There are obviously some exceptions.
If this film lambasts Hollywood, that would explain the reviews.
Now, if it only lambased the South, well it would be what, brilliant, insightful?????
Why are conservatives so afraid of being labeled homophobes? Judging people for being against homosexuality is rather intolerant, no?
Thanks for this review, I think I'll actually watch the movie now, especially after hearing about the "Darfive" and the stage moms.
[...] the original post here: Bulls-Eye: ‘Bruno’ Hits Hollywood Hard This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
Pixar made the brilliant UP. Blue Sky Studios made the Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. Not even in the same league. Give Pixar some credit.
I kind of knew that this movie was going to get panned because of the content. So let's recap shall we? Borat was brilliant according to the pundits because it skewered middle America but Bruno is horrible because it skewers the left? Sounds like the usual liberal b.s. to me. How I wish I could stomach this kind of humor because I would go see it just to stick it to the left. I may just buy a ticket and not watch it to show support.
I kind of knew that this movie was going to get panned because of the content. So let's recap shall we? Borat was brilliant according to the pundits because it skewered middle America but Bruno is horrible because it skewers the left? Sounds like the usual liberal b.s. to me. How I wish I could stomach this kind of humor because I would go see it just to stick it to the left. I may just buy a ticket and not watch it to show support.
How on earth can you confuse pixar films with making Ice Age? Thats like biting into an apple, and declaring your discovered an orange!
Ok… I guess I don't really understand the premise of the Borat and Bruno films… Is Cohan taking on a perosona and then documenting out real people react to it? Or is it all scripted? I didn't watch Borat and never really paid attention (was trying to graduate at the time).
[...] being said, I find myself agreeing (somewhat) with the review by Maura Flynn on the conservative website, Big Hollywood that the more interesting elements of satire in the film [...]
Um, no… disagreeing with someone but still being able to live next them is tolerance… forcing someone to believe the same way as you do is intolerance…. so I believe that I am the tolerant one in this situation.
I don't have to agree with how they live their life (regardless of whether or not homosexuality is a genetic trait) but I am perfectly capable of living in the same world with them and even *gasp* being their friend…. How in the world is this intolerance? If this is intolerance than I am afraid that Merriam-Webster got the definition of tolerance (and thus intolerance) wrong…. at least according to your post.
Think you missed the point a little K8
Excellent Article, but AGGHH my head nearly blew up when you wrote that Ice Age was a Pixar Production!
Hm… maybe I am… If I am I apologize… :/ Maybe today is not my day for commenting…
yes but holding the mirror to the accuser rarely works.
k8/went round and round with Yeah on Mike Long's previous review. This is a person who believes 'Bruno' is gay porn. I disagree and still do. 'Bruno' may be a lot of things, outrageous, raunchy, gross, disturbing, over-the-top and so forth. Porn, it is not.
Thankfully we have a forum here at Big Hollywood which allows differing points of view to be expressed, respectfully for the most part. It will be interesting to read some of the comments with today's article from
Maura Flynn.
I didn't care for "Borat", although watching the Kazakh government going ape over it was pretty funny. But that wasn't in the movie. I may have to check this one out, but I think I'll wait for the DVD release.
Sure, Cohen exposes some disturbing trends east of Hollywood. The two reverends who claim to be able to “cure” homosexuality are as ripe for satire as any stage mom. They raise some flags, but frankly come off as tawdry and confused and somehow not quite as sinister as their California counterparts."
Clearly, Ms. Flynn has never heard of former homosexuals like gospel singer Donnie McClurkin.
Is it me or do White people, including some conservatives, buy the "gay rights = civil rights" argument faster than Black people (e.g., Black Democrats)?
Does this have anything to do with Black people having parents or grandparents who endured REAL oppression (e.g., Jim Crow) instead of "oppression" (e.g., disagreeing with the homosexual lifestyle)?
I'm so tired of the term "homophobia." It's a catch all term for the sexual deviancy of the left it seems. Tolerance versus acceptance and all that. I know of a crazy person Nicky Van Overloop who openly asks teen girls as young as 15 for group sex in public (whether she has done anything yet is unknown,) but if you call her out on it she'll scream the homophobic charge and closed minded and whatnot.
I thought Bruno was going to another of those goose stepping movies where you either accept the perversions of the left, or you would be branded a nazi. There was only one acceptable view, and that was all sexual perversion is acceptable, but I guess maybe Sasha Cohen isn't trolling the people in his film, but maybe he was trolling the people he was defending? This is the first time I have actually wanted to see one of his movies now. I want to see how this one shakes out,
<<"homophobia." It's a catch all term for the sexual deviancy of the left…>>
So you're saying that every left-wing person is a sexual deviant? That's just like me saying every right-wing person is a racist. Neither are true.
But you're still an idiot.
Thanks to those of you who caught my sloppy "Pixar" slip! I'm a huge fan of Pixar's films, most recently their stunning and brilliant film, "Up!" (I lauged, I wept, I admired). Truly an inexcusable mistake on my part. Apologies!
It's been out a long time on DVD – I picked up several last Christmas for $2 each at Walmart and each one included a free Borat T-shirt. I take it it wasn't too popular on DVD
Well said. Tolerance indicates a wilingness to be open to those with whom you may disagree. The left is the most intolerant group in this country and the radical gay-left is out-of-control intolerant.
An orange? I would have gone with a lemon myself–sour to the taste, glaring in color, and desperately in need of sugar. Now doesn't that sound like the non-Pixar CGI films these days?
Yes, you indeed missed the point. Some people actually believe homosexuality is wrong, like pedophilia and incest are wrong. My point is that these people are frequently judged, attacked, ridiculed, insulted and discriminated against simply for holding the view that homosexuality is wrong. Is that not intolerant?
In the meantime, many conservatives live in fear of not being culturally hip (i.e., accepting homosexuality) so they are busy expunging any rejection of homosexuality from their ranks.
Nothing to do with the article, Maura Flynn is hot…..just my opinion……
Thank you for clearing that up for me… Apparently my ability to read in between the lines today is non-existant. So I apologize for my harsh reply. It's one of those things I am passionate about and frustrates the crap out of me…
No, homophobia is a blanket term for dislike/fear of gay people, usually used as an accusation for the smallest perceived slight against gays. I think "Bruno" is going to crash at the box office this weekend–given how it dropped over the course of last weekend, looks for it to end up in flopsville.
Bruno is definitely a better, smarter film than Borat. (And, I loved Borat, even as I also cringed at some of the cheap shots leveled at average folks.) Flynn's review is largely spot on. (Want proof? Look at the tepid reviews or even silence from the usual quarters.) I fully expected to find the movie funny (Cohan is uber-talented), but still prepared to cringe at the cheap shots exposing "homophobia." I think the film actually went a bit further and exposed a kid of "homophilia". Does anybody think Paula Adbul would have sat down on a mexican laborer if the interviewer (Bruno) had been a conservative-looking male with a southern twang? Or the PR people would have indulged Bruno's desire to adopt "Darfive" as a cause if he posed as country music star? Because Bruno was obviousy a gay European, they gave him the benefit of the doubt. He was one of the club, after all. In the end, a great film.
And Hank, yes M Flynn is hot…who cares if it has nothing to do with the article. Always good to point out these things…
Expect to hear from Disney lawyers in 3…2…1…
Great points by the author and a smart look at it…
Good article! One quick correction: the Ice Age films are NOT Pixar, they're produced by Blue Sky Studios.
And as a Three Stooges fan born and raised, I can't say I'm surprised. I guess it's a guy thing.
Depends on how you define "works".
You are on a 'Bruno is not porn' crusade.
Porn, it is.
what a low point in humanity to find ANYTHING redeeming about this foul film.
and frankly, if you find this type of humor spot on, please don't procreate.
The liberals are CRYING and whinning like a 11 year old school girl…. and I must admit I am LAUGHING about it!!!! and where were they when BORAT came out… thats right they where holding it in HIGH ESTEEEEM!!!! with there noses pointed up in the air….
The Bruno segments on Da Ali G Show were all infinitely smarter than this lowbrow, uninspired film which is only slightly smarter and funnier than The Hangover. Borat had a smugness to it as well but it was much funnier than this. It was like the naked wrestling bit in Borat for 90 straight minutes, and the song at the end with Bono and friends completely undermined the message. How can you take it seriously when the same kind of sanctimonious celebrities are complicit in the very film that's mocking them?
Go see In The Loop when it comes out next Friday. Or watch it on Pay-Per-View if you can't get to a cinema. It is the only satire worth seeing all year.
Homophobia is alive and well. You just need to watch Fox News and read the National Review to find it.
There is a cure for homosexuality (among other things). Its called Christianity
Good points made in the comments. Because Cohen is posing as a gay European, he gets away with remarks about "hot" "trendy" and "in" charities like Darfive. The stage mom segments was so unreal, I believe it must have been scripted. What person would seriously subject a baby to blatant danger?
Good review. I, too, thought some of the Bruno segments on the Ali G show were funnier than the bits in the movie, but I still laughed out load & screamed in the theatre a few times. Sasha Cohen is truly fearless.
Some parts were good: the Richard Bey Talk Show, the Army base, Paula Abdul, the Gay conversion, baby O.J.____BUT, most of the film seemed set-up/staged/scripted including Ron Paul, Paula, te P.R. agents, the Mommies Dearest and the Public Relations Guy and Focus Group.____Was it entertaining yes. Was it as good as BORAT? No.____BTW, the Wresting scene at the end was got a lot of media last Summer as the BRUNO Producers organized it outside an Arkansas Army base and offered FREE BEER to everyone to get them nice and hammered. Guess that helped them "find their motivation"? ____Where Cohen goes from here will be hard to guess. The disguises and premises ran their course here.
Why is the gay community never labelled as "Heterophobes"?
The term homophobia is being thrown around way too easily. I am sure that many women have rejected a guy just because they aren't interested but that doesn't make them "manaphobes".
Just because a straight man gets upset when hit upon by a gay man is not homophobia. Getting hit upon (ala Ron Paul) is a major invasion of his personal space/body. Ron Paul has the right to choose whom he gets physical with and just because he prefers women does not make him "homophobic". The gay community expects us to accept them. Tolerance is not just good enough. Why can't the leftisits understand that we conservatives want acceptance, not just tolerance. The left to demand tolerance when they themselves don't practice it is the ultimate hyposcrisy on total display, everyday, yet they do not see it. Of course not, freedom of speech only applies to those they agree with. Liberalism will destroy this country. Liberalism is destroying this country.
I find it interesting reading Big Hollywood articles where the conservative author rails against the left for their non-negotiable position that Man-made global warming is confirmed, settled science and then the next article sounds like the histrionic rantings of the offspring of Michael Moore and Al Gore when the idea that maybe the jury may still be out on the mental, physical and moral dangers of homosexuality.
It's settled morality now, right? No further questions need be asked. Moving along…..
Ah the typical liberal makes his case and then delcares himself correct and no questions need be asked…because he might no like the answers. Here's one if you say that the cause of homosexuality is still open to debate are going to go to the liberal/gay sites and tell them that no one knows for sure if being is something someone is born as. If you your answer is no then your a hypocrite and no further questions of you need to be asked and please move along.
As a satire "Bruno" did work best taking its jabs at Hollywood. As for a commentary on homophobia it gets pretty fuzzy. The problem is Bruno is a not just gay but a borderline deviant who I'm sure would make even a lot of gay men very uncomfortable. Some either reacted as appropriately as they could muster, like the hunters who looked seriously uncomfortable, and others looked like they were aware of a joke going on, like the karate instructor who must have caught on this was a sketch at least halfway through. Ron Paul experienced what I like to call an "ugly moment." That's where you get so angry you end up saying or doing something you regret. It doesn't excuse the language but you certainly can't condemn him. I laughed really throughout this movie, anyway. If Cohen does another one like this I'll be very surprised. It would take a brilliant disguise next time and a complete media blackout. Good luck on that. And I'm hoping his next target is every facet of the media. Its a group of people who are in touch with pop culture but completely out of touch with the human race. Thats ripe for satire.
Eh, I just don't like the Candid Camera style humor he uses. It could be funny, but I cringe when I see bystanders embarrassed for the sake of humor.
Oh well, it'll still kill at the Box Office whether I see it or not.
Yeah, Ms. Flynn's article does a wonderful job in making the exact same point. As do many of the commenters. Everyone seems to agree with you. You win!
Go to the head of the class!
Eh, I just don't like the Candid Camera style humor he uses since Borat really put me off.
I may see it but the general template Cohen uses for his humor isn't something I generally enjoy.
You may wish to think a bit more about it. According to another source here at Big Hollywood (see 'Yeah' up above) this movie is…
It begins with the letter (p) and ends with ornography. (sorry the filter will not allow you to even type the word)
Bad. Bad. Naughty. Naughty.
I don't know gio…according to another source here at Big Hollywood (Yeah) Sacha Baron Cohen is a…
well, it begins with a (p) and ends with an ornographer. It's such a bad word, the filter will not even let you type it. Oooh.
I agree with you by the way. I guess those of us who found the movie silly, outrageous fun and had a good laugh have all been corrupted.
Oooh.
"Is Cohan taking on a perosona and then documenting out real people react to it? Or is it all scripted?"
Hard to say. Some of it seems genuine. Other parts are quite obviously staged.
Amen.
The film got a 69% positive rating according to Rotten Tomatoes. Not exactly a universal panning. For that matter, Tropic Thunder, a film that bashed Hollywood all over the place, got an 82% positive rating.
So what was your theory about critics again?
The movie was given positive reviews by 2 out of every 3 critics, according to Rotten Tomatoes. It was not exactly universally panned because of content.
and the conservatives were crying and whining like 11 year old school girls when Borat was out…. blah blah blah.
Or read the following comment. :/
The Marx Brothers.
Hope and Crosby.
Han and Chewie.
All excellent slapstick! The Three Stooges? Not so much.
Drew, you see your crying like a little girl as well… bwahahahahahhahaha
You lost me when you said you don't get the three stooges.
You must be logged in to post a comment.