British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen – who produced and stars as Bruno – has not done any favours for the gay community.
Before the film was released, there was talk that Sacha was taking on the role of a gay fashionista named Bruno in order to expose homophobia among common folks. Done in mockumentary style, the film’s modus operandi is this: Drop Bruno in a group of unsuspecting ultra-conservative/religious heterosexuals and see how they react to his open gayness.
It sounded delicious.
But now that we’ve seen the film, we doubt those were Sacha’s real motives. For starters, there’s absolutely nothing likeable about Sacha’s representation of gay men. Bruno is loud, vain, flamboyant, smug, bitchy, rude, selfish, dishonest, outrageous, stupid, mean and oversexed. Sacha seemed to have picked the worst stereotypes about gay men and stuffed them into one giant dick of a role, just for the pleasure of pissing on everyone.
Now smart people may argue that Sacha is playing on a satirical note so fine that few will get it. But then again, what’s so enjoyable about an A-grade A-hole ambushing people with aggressive gay behaviour? Somebody please let us in on the joke.
Straight people who hate gay people will hate gay people even more after they watch Bruno. If Sacha wanted to put up a mirror for homophobes to see themselves, this is not the way to do it. But if Sacha wanted to play a mean flaming queen so he can offend millions of people, strengthen his reputation as a shock jock, and make more money as an entertainer… then yes, this would be the way to do it.
We do not recommend watching Bruno.
Bruno is so July 2009.
列印版本
RSS Feed: 時尚娛樂
讀者回應
It's really a movie form of the old TV show "Candid Camera" or "You've Been Framed", and like those shows, we know it's a joke on his victims, and we're amazed they can't see through it despite the shocking lengths he goes to that should make it obvious it's a stunt, such as asking a mother if she would be prepared for her baby to have liposuction if necessary before a shoot (she agreed!). It also has a serious side in the shocking attitudes it exposes, such as the lengths some parents are prepared to go to to get their child on screen in the example I just mentioned.
What people find funny is different in different cultures, and humour often doesn't travel, so maybe this is just isn't funny to people who prefer Old Mother Riley (1940's UK humour) a.k.a. "Liang Po Po" evidently still popular in 2000's Singapore, but incomprehensible as humour now in the UK.
I do take the point though that this film may not be helpful in places with limited representations of gay people on screen and where this sort of obvious gross caricature is actually still portrayed as the norm of a gay person, as I have seen in film and TV in Singapore. But I would hope that it might help expose that practise, which appears to be quite deliberate, by helping create discussion of the issue.
if the writer said "DON'T WATCH IT", he really means GO WATCH IT! :)
請先登入再使用此功能。