Raises controversy...

Rating: 10/10 (7 June 2007)

First, I would like to start off by saying I found this movie to be extremely funny, and I believe that Sacha Baron Cohen is brilliant. I was also very happy (and surprised) to see him rewarded for this groundbreaking film by winning a Golden Globe for best actor in a comedy.
One of the main reasons this film is so good is the fact that it is unlike almost anything that has been made before it. I have read comments where people compare it to Tom Green or Jackass, and while some of the stunts he pulls do stoop to he level of these comparisons, there is a very distinct difference for the majority of the movie. In most cases, the things he says or does are meant to create some sort of reaction from the unknowing people he is with, and in a large number of cases, rather than being offended, these people agree with what he is saying! This is what makes this a political/social commentary, rather than just a guy running around doing stupid things to get a reaction.
Being Canadian, I can compare this to a t.v. show, called Talking to Americans, with Rick Mercer, in which Rick Mercer goes to various places in the United States, pretending to be a legitimate news reporter, and tells people ridiculous things about Canada, to see if they will be naive enough to believe him, and to recognize the ignorance that many, NOT ALL, Americans have of their closest neighbour and largest trading partner. "Congratulations Canada, on legalizing staplers," or "Congratulations for getting your second area code," are some of the statements that have been made on this show. Harvard professors and the Governor of Arkansas, among others, have made appearances unknowingly on this show. However, it uses much less offensive language and does not approach the topic of racism and sexism as Borat does.
Before anyone starts criticizing my comment as being stereotyping all Americans as ignorant, I want to make it clear that this is not what I am saying. And neither is Sacha Baron Cohen. Although he does show cases where he is supported in his prejudices by the Americans he is with, he also shows cases where people behave as any "normal" person should respond, with outrage and disgust. I love that so many people are offended by his treatment of the people who are trying to teach him etiquette at the dinner party, but almost nobody got the point that this is how people should be responding to him! Why are there so many comments that show disgust at his treatment of these people, but so few that show disgust at the gun salesman who supports his desire to kill Jewish people, or the college students who make disgusting comments about women? These are meant as a comparison, and as a way of showing that he is in NO WAY stereotyping all Americans in with these prejudices.
If nothing else, this movie created controversy, and made people talk, more than any other movie I have ever seen. This alone should make people realize that it is a great film, and even if you didn't like it, at least have the sense to recognize that it has affected you in some way. The fact that there are approximately 50 pages of comments from people who hated this film shows that it had enough of an effect on people to cause them to take the time to comment on it, whether they liked it or not.
And to the two or three people who have gone through and marked every comment that gives this movie a good recommendation as being not useful, I commend you on your patience and stick-to-it-tiveness. If you had put that much drive toward something useful instead, like helping those less fortunate than you in your community, the world would be a much better, if slightly less opinionated place.