Review: Another view of Borat
Olga Kuracheva, MSU
The movie "Borat: Cultural
Learnings of America for Make
Benefit Glorious Nation of
Kazakhstan", or just "Borat",
caused quite different reactions
all over the world. Many people
felt hurt or want to criticize this
movie; but most want to watch it.
Anyway it doesn’t cost to forget,
that this movie is just product of
its author’s fantasy and has nothing
in common with reality.
It’s not a documentary, it’s
just a comedy. Borat Sagdiyev
is a fictional Kazakh journalist
invented by British comic actor
Sacha Baron Cohen. He travels
around the "U.S. and A." collecting
information about the
country to show it to people
in Kazakhstan. He meets feminists,
politicians and students,
then coerces them into answering
provocative questions. All these
people believe he is an actual
Kazakhstan journalist who has
no idea what the USA is. This
prankster shocks everybody with
his misunderstanding of reality.
He appears to be a real savage,
and "his country" seems to be a
country of barbarians. But really,
the "Kazakhstan" represented in
the film has nothing in common
with the actual country. All this
is just part of Cohen’s joke.
There are few real actors in
the movie. Nearly all scenes
were unscripted and the characters
are ordinary people. By
the way, these ordinary people
weren’t glad to become actors
accidentally. The scenes showing
Borat’s home village were
filmed not in Kazakhstan, but
in one Romanian Gipsy village.
The Kazakh language is not spoken
in the film, and the people
from the so-called "Borat’s village"
are speaking Romanian.
When Borat and Azamat, his
producer, speak to each other,
Borat speaks Hebrew, Azamat
speaks Armenian. Sometimes
Borat uses some phrases from
different Slavic languages:
yak se mash? ("how are you?"
in Czech) and dzen dobriy
("good afternoon" in Polish).
The Cyrillic inscriptions used
in film are either geographical
names written with mistakes or
just random Cyrillic characters.
Soundtrack is a mix of Balkan
and Gipsy music. At the end of
the film there is a person against
the background of the Kazakh
flag. Is it Kazakhstan’s president
Nursultan Nazarbayev? No. The
person is Azerbaijan’s president
Ilham Aliyev.
Besides the people of
Kazakhstan, who accuse Sacha
Baron Cohen of creating an
unreal country, where racism and
sexism reign, there are many
others that are offended by the
movie. For example, Romanian
Gypsies, who claim that they
were lied to about his motives
claiming they were told it was a
documentary, not a feature film,
similarly the Gypsies felt they
were not paid for their participation.
Representatives of the 20th
Century Fox Company declare
that they have never said it was a
documentary and that they paid
enough. Likewise, two American
students who appeared in the
film complain they were given
alcohol and coerced into the
film, consequently they claim
their reputation has suffered.
The Kazakh people headed by
president Nursultan Nazarbayev
demonstrated their indignation,
by promising to condemn Cohen,
and closed the site (now you can
find Borat on www.borat.tv).
Cinema department of
Russian Culture Ministry can’t
ban anything. However, it has
recommended to distributors to
refrain from showing "Borat",
calling it a politically incorrect
movie. As a result we don’t have
an opportunity to see the film at
cinemas in our country.
Why was the reaction so?
Some people perceive this film
as something real or as a parody.
But it’s not a documentary, it’s
not a parody, it’s just Cohen’s
fantasy.
In my opinion, Borat and
the invented Kazakhstan can’t
be compared with Mohammed
caricatures, published in Danish
newspapers. "Borat" doesn’t
claim to be a documentary. I
don’t believe Cohen wanted to
harm Kazakhstan, and he didn’t
mean anything substantial. He
just wanted to make us laugh,
which we really did. There is
nothing wrong with wanting
to make people laugh. Besides
everybody knows that laughing
makes our lives longer and more
interesting.
"Nice", as Borat would say.
2008 Woodie Awards
Be the first to comment on this story