Is “Brüno” Homophobic? (Or Are Some Gay Observers Missing the Point?)

I really can't comment on Bruno.  Haven't seen it.  Might see it.  Might not.  I do know that I found Borat entertaining, but extremely uncomfortable.  With Bruno, I get the idea, I get the joke.  Cohen probably made this film because gay issues are a hot button topic, and doing a shock comedy about the topic would get him tons of press, and help promote the film better than any studio could.  All the controversy would get butts in the seats, and money in the studio, producers, and most importantly, Cohens pocket.  Sure, he may have good intentions, but lets not kid ourselves.  The bottom line here is money, and scandal and shock make money.  

The thing is, even if Cohen put "Homophobes are Idiots" in big letters up on the screen, some people still wouldn't "get" the point.   Every audience member will see what they want to see and interpret the film through their own personal filter.  No one can change that.  They could re-edit this movie to be the most gay positive film ever made, and still some people wouldn't get that message, and instead just laugh at the "stupid fag" (a term surprisingly popular in the AOL comments...) 

So, instead of worrying how everyone else will react, just enjoy the movie.  Or don't. 

Check out my blog soap at:

soapsudzbybobo.blogspot.com

Outside of Disney cartoons I feel like I usually leave a movie theater hating one or two scenes because i thought it played on gay panic or someone yells fag, that never stops getting to me. But, i can't seem to not make an exception for Bruno. While the baby scene seems too far, that satire seems to be more on celebs than anything else. Also the national guard scene looks like it will make me gasp for air.

I will probably leave the theater disliking a scene or two. But I know I'll be watching it in good company with people laughing at the homophobia and exaggeration of gay stereotypes and not becuase he is suppose to be gay.

It's weird... I've been noticing as I've started to grow older, a lot of dark and satirical humor tends to get me going better than anything else.  I could see Bruno doing just that for me as well, but I also have an aversion to uncomfortable situations.  It will be interesting to find out just how I'll react to this movie when it comes out.  The trailer is pretty good, and at least its not that horrible yelling that Will Ferrell does for laughs. 

If anything, I connect most with what Brent said about crap-tastic Hollywood needing a kick in the pants for better movies.  So this would probably be a good step in the right direction.

Visit my blog:  http://darkesaint.wordpress.com/   

Take a break and explore the world of hedonism and pleasure-seeking!

Chuckles!

I find the trailer to be endlessy funny. If a group of my friends were going to see it, i would go with them. I would be very uncomfortable a majoirty of the time; but that is cause the film is meant to be & i get that way about most films. I thought the scene with Bruno in the TV with the black audience to be hilarious.

Comedies play out all stereotypes; black stereotypes, asian sterotypes, southern stereotypes, etc. I feel that if we forbid people to laugh at gay stereotypes, then how intregrated can we be to society? In my small opinion, i  believe if we want full intregration to society, we have to be able to laugh at ourselves. Otherwise, some may see us as huffy, high brow, bitchy people. Not the bestest of things.

But that is simply my little old opinion.

<3

My only concern about this article is that you say at the beginning of the article "Really Gay. Unbelievably Gay." which crosses the line into using gay as a pejorative. "Really Flamboyant. Unbelievably Flamboyant." would be the better description without attaching his done-for-money antics to what it is to actually be gay. If someone was portraying their version of lampooning Jewish people for money and you described it as "Really Jewish. Unbelievably Jewish." it would be just as bad a description.

I think this film is a comedy about stereotypes taken to extreme absurdity levels. Will it be funny? Some parts will be. Will it be offensive? Some parts might be. It is a comedy & satire film, not a documentary.

Probably, it will be a chance to look at our reflection (even if it's incomplete). Not every part of our community is pretty. No community is pretty all around. It is part of the messy nature of humanity.

At least, it will put some topics on spot and it will provide time and space to open up and talk and explain to outsiders who may get interested. The haters will not change.

Are you concerned and wanna make something positive of it? Power up your activism and write some flyers about "teenage gay support groups" or "HIV support groups" or "why stereotypes are offensive / hateful / hurtful" and distribute them after the movie.

By the way, all this scandal is very USA-centric. Is there anywhere else in the world this level of worry about this film?

I think everything politically correct is so sanitized to the point of stop being & feeling natural and losing spirit (think of sugar-coated Disney movies).

"Kids who don't play with dirt become allergic to (almost) everything."

afhickman

"Borat" was sporadically funny, but the concept was far more entertaining than the execution.  Neither the trailer nor the advance publicity (Cohen is ubiquitous these days) makes me think that "Bruno" will be an improvement over the first film.  I'll probably wait for the video to come out.   

"The mountain has wings."

I saw Borat and had a hard time laughing. maybe i'm just uptight.

With bruno, as i've said before....i understand it...but i don't get why he must go to the extreme to show how people think. I mean, a baby in a tub with naked men?

COME ON. WTF. (all i can think about is that whole "pedophile" argument some use)

I know most educated people will understand this isn't how gay men are, but i also know there will be some who will be grossed out in general because of how far he goes.

I won't watch it, but am curious to see what the reaction will be overall when it comes out.

On page 1 you wrote: Some GLBT people are worried that everyone might not get the joke – that some people are going to be laughing not at the satire, but at the extreme gay stereotypes

OMG! How DARE you put the 'G' before the 'L'!!!

Ya know, I just watched a video of minor gay celebs putting in their 2 cents regarding the harm the stereotype that is Bruno could cause.

One person was the wonderful Jack Plotnick... I saw 'Girls Will Be Girls.' I don't think he's the right person to be talking about stereotypes in movies.

One person was Peter Paige, who I have gripe with, but he was in (IMO) the horribly stereotyped Showtime series 'Queer As Folk.' That was what? five years? of cartoon-ish gay behavior. (I am a devoted fan of the original show.)

And then we have GLAAD trying to protect who??? Not me. I'm am not a slave to our queer masters.

'Bruno' is nothing more than a bigger and louder 'Buddy Cole,' who, when I last checked, was still loved by all (most) ((many)). I can't wait to see 'Bruno' opening weekend. I'll laugh more than I did with 'Girls Will Be Girls.'  

PS: I just saw out loud and beyond pround Scott Capurro last night at the Punchline. If you have any problems with 'Bruno,' you should not support Scott!

He's brilliant and VERY offensive. I loved every second of his show. How often do you get to watch a comic drop his pants and play with himself (within the confines of his pink briefs) for three minutes on stage and get a room full of laughs? 

but judging from this trailer it doesn't look very funny -- or pointed. Baiting idiots isn't a difficult thing to do -- as Borat demonstrated. Happily it had more on its mind -- particulaly the nude wrestling scene with the fat guy. That was downright surreal.

Unless Bruno has something similar to offer it's just an extended TV sketch invoilving a "gay" cartoon character who has no relation to anything or anyone in the real world.

That's the thing about satire:  sometimes it has to be seen through the prism of time and maturation.  Look at one of my favorite movies, Network.  At the time, everyone regarded it as brilliant, funny, but completely zany and over-the-top.  Nowadays, one watches that movie and we can see how eerily prophetic it was.  I have to agree with Brent - the audience is always ahead of the movie studios in terms of what they're ready for.  I think people will get the joke.

I like satire, so I'll probably go see it. 

"When the people fear its government, that's tyranny.  When the government fears its people, that's liberty."

- Benjamin Franklin

and why did he drop his pants while talking to Ron Paul? was it JUST to freak him out?

or did he drop his pants and demand oral sex?

I just can't get very excited anymore about the things Sacha Baron-Cohen does. It's all so repetitive. Ali G over and over again, just different stereotypes

I didn't find Borat funny, really. It seemed like a lot of easy laughs in situations where people were responding like you'd imagine they would. For example, the scene where he brings a bag of shit to the dinner table. What was the point of that, exactly? He wasn't exposing people as racist, or small-minded, or anything because they reacted poorly to him bringing shit to the table. Who would want shit at the table? That doesn't say anything about them or their views. I just found it pointless.

As for Bruno, it seems like more of the same. I suppose I should see the whole sequence before I form an opinion, but what exactly does it "say" about the audience of that talk show when they respond poorly to someone getting a baby for an Ipod, or Bruno just being ignorant about things in general? Where is the satire? Anyone would react poorly to watching someone (gay, straight, whatever) speak like Bruno does about that baby.

Cohen just isn't funny or special to me, I guess.

I thought Borat was one of the funniest films I'd ever seen, absolutely subversive and hilarious. Rarely had I seen an audience laughing so hard and so long. BUT, when I later watched the film with just my mother, and nobody else around, we chuckled but the falling out of the chair laughing out loud did not occur. These types of films require a large audience so that the laughter can feed off of each other.

I can't wait to see Bruno, it looks absolutely hilarious to me, and if it points out the discomfort with homosexuality and even gender stereotyping, I'm all for it.

Review  is here

"Brüno is funniest, though, when it's at its most politically incorrect, especially when it comes to homosexuality. There's an eye-popping montage of extreme gay sex practices (imaginary, one hopes), a surfeit of waving penises, dildos, fetish gear, anal bleaching, and an excruciating mime in which Brüno fellates the ghost of a deceased member of Milli Vanilli in front of a psychic."

I'm sure the American audience will be able to understand that they are fake....

I was hoping this would be some clever satire against prejudice, but I can't help but thinkiing the joke could be on us. Who knows, maybe I don't trust enough. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, at the moment - if they don't tone a couple of scenes down I can see this will create a lot of division and angst.

Anyway, I'll just reiterate what I said in the Crankyboots thread, as it sums up my views.

People say gays need to learn to laugh at oursevles, and that would be fine if we lived in a world without this degree of discrimination and unequal rights, alas we don't. My fear is that the Bruno caricature will be used to pour scorn on some gay kid on the playground. If that happens to just one kid, then SBC has a lot to answer for.

Someone else mentioned that SBC works because we have all these positive gay Hollywood celebs like NPH, Ellen, George Takei, the Allan Balls of this world. But some of these same people have been horrified at pre-screenings of Bruno. One gay Hollywood figure is quoted as saying it makes you feel "icky" about gay sex, even if you participate in it. How can that be "pro", the gay community?

Sure, make fun of stereotypes and homophobes, embarrass them in public and on screen, but be clear this is what you're doing. Black and white minstrel shows where the actors had their faces coloured black, may have been "funny" in the 60s, now they are considered racist.

Please don't insult everyone by pretending this is somehow different, in Bruno. Please don't insult common sense by saying this is simply "making fun of our worst characteristics". Please. Some gay kids are just naturally effeminate, they don't need your internalised homophobia thrust upon them.

In the US at least, it is not possible to have intimate, natural gay love and expression on the screen. Instead, we ARE allowed to have Bruno at every blockbuster portraying gay sex in terms of bondage, gerbils and faecal stains on sheets. Enough said, really. I hope gay Hollywood does force changes.

Nukely, you are a fairly perceptive commentator. Like a lot of things, this whole topic is not cut and dried or black and white, and my view is kind of evolving over the last couple of days, the more I read.

I mean, at least the beefeaters in London with the hot pants were kind of sexy and now the matador guys, in Madrid. 

 Don't get me wrong, I do have some concerns about what I've read about certain scenes, and the stereotyping - however I doubt that the real SBG would have bad intentions towards gays.  I mean, isn't he a friend of Matt Lucas of Little Britain, who is gay but shares a similar type of stereotype humour.  And some commentators are saying the homophobes in Bruno, eg the anti gay protestors, are made to look like real idiots as they are.

I am still concerned about the possible scenario someone mentioned above, eg the guy in the cinema who laughs about the "stupid faggot" - I still think that is something in a film that plays up to this prejudice and will only reinforce it.  To me, it's simply not enough to say:  "Oh well, that guy will feel like that anyway no matter what's on the screen, he'll never change."

Well, I'm sorry, that's a cop out.  And it is possible for people to change - people in my own family have changed their attitudes toward homosexuals over the years.

It is good that people voice concerns about this movie, whether they are on the money or arguably not, because that can only move the goalposts further in our direction.  Maybe SBG sticks the hot guys on the carpet at the premier as a response to rumblings of discontent.

On the postive side, maybe these extreme scenarios will make the studios more acceptable to real gay love stories and M 2 M intimacy....because after SBG's charades, anything goes?  Maybe on a deep level and on the sly, SBG is trying to help us - while he draws the laughs and makes the mullah.

It's a pity we have to go through the discomfort to get there.  Like someone else said, it would be much easier to take if the landscape was otherwise more gay friendly and all the battles had been won.  It's kind of bad timing, what with the Prop 8 defeat recently.  It sounds plain wrong, when I hear gay identities in Hollywood saying that certain scenes made them feel icky about being gay.  I can't see the purpose in such scenes, and they are not funny anyway.  About as funny as a toasted cheese sandwich.

Also, I'm Australian, so I'm sure that many gays here would feel conflicted about this movie also....it's not just Americans being sensitive or anything.  I am trying to feel optimistic so we'll wait and see how reaction to this movie develops. 

afhickman

If "Help" is satire, it is surely the gentlest of its kind (cf "Dr. Stangelove," "The Loved One").  I think of it more as good-natured farce, and, as such, I still find it relevant.  What Cohen specializes in is mockery and/or ridicule.  Some subjects are deserving of mockery (politicians, televangelists, blockbuster films, etc), others are not.  I didn't think most of the people who were humiliated in "Borat" were worthy targets of satire, except perhaps in the broadest sense.  We are all capable of our own little pomposities, just as we are all capable of speaking carelessly in situtations where we think we are among friends.  I felt sorry for most of the victims in "Borat," even when I was laughing at them.  I wonder what kind of cheap laughs and sneers we might get out of turning the camera back on Sacha Baron Cohen, in his private moments, himself?   

"The mountain has wings."

that SBG is mainly trying to embarrass people to bring out their prejudices.  There was enough of that in Borat.

Hearing about the cage fighting in Arkansas which results in near mayhem (one of the scenes in "Bruno), is enough to underscore much of that.  This could possibly be seen as a statement exposing prejudice.  Though I'm not sure what point it proves except as a courageous and outrageous stunt.

My problem is more along the lines of what Peter Paige said.  If you watch Bruno in a room full of straight men, it seems more like they are laughing at the "silly faggot" than it seems like they are laughing at homophobia.

Also, you wonder if a room full of straight men would be as comfortable watching it if was Matt Lucas playing the role as a opposed to another straight like SBG.

If I heard a guy behind me in the theatre, when we're watching a bromantic comedy, say to this girlfriend "bloody stupid poof", I'll probably turn around and give him an earful.

And I'd have the same reaction if I heard the same guy say it in the cinema when watching "Bruno".

My discomfiture is that the movie seems to be giving a free pass to all kinds of bad behaviours and prejudices.

However, if it makes anti gay bigots like the Phelps people look like loonies, that would be one saving grace. 

I visited a movie website today where there was an article about the Bruno controversy, centering on some changes people like GLAAD had suggested.

Hate to tell you Nukely but many of the comments on the site (some 405) made fairly sad reading.  No, I didn't read all of them, but managed to spot the general trend.

It was fairly depressing stuff, and kind of a stake through the heart of any optimism, seeing some of those comments.

There were a lot of comments saying: it's just a movie, don't take offence, lighten up.

There were maybe 40% of the comments I saw that disliked Cohen generally, but not because of any perceived anti-gayness, more prudishness.

There were some gays, not many, but a few saying it was the modern day equivalent of 'blackface' except aimed at gays. However there were an equal number of gays that were FOR the movie. Depressingly, instead of taking issue with the extremely homophobic posters (see below), these gay posters were hitting out at GLAAD and totally dismissing those gays who had complained about the movie. In some ways, I found this aspect the most depressing of all.

There seemed to be a lot of other comments saying some fairly despicable things about gays. Some citing religious passages, some just plain prejudiced. Some of those posters were against Cohen, but many of them were for Cohen, and were revelling in the movie. They seemed to see it as reinforcement of their prejudices. (It was totally disgraceful that these views were often going unchallenged, instead people seemed more likely to hit out at GLAAD than the bigots).

It would appear these are mainly US people posting there ('nuff said). Kind of depressing, I was fairly upset to read some of these comments. 39 years old and you've done hard yards, you don't need this bullshit wheeled back out in your direction.

 At my age, not in a risk group.  One can only hope that SBC and Universal have considered those most at risk, eg teenagers at high school struggling to come to terms with their sexuality?  Not their lookout?  Ok, as you were then.