Kazakhstan filmmaker, Erkin Rakishev is underway on, My Brother Borat, an unauthorized sequel to Sasha Baron Cohen’s 2006 hit.

Vassup, dis ist der Bruno review! I am constantly amazed that Sasha Baron Cohen is still alive. After his antics in Borat, he should thanked his lucky stars, and now after Bruno, he must have sold his soul for his safety, because his antics here, should have got him killed. Bruno is incredibly outrageous, for all 80-some odd minutes, topping the humor in Borat, and besting the next funniest comedy you laughed hard at this year.

One of the immediate things I noticed is this film’s quick attempt to be shocking and unpredictable. It spares no expense, and more importantly, it is funny. Yes, it’s rude, crude, and all of that jazz, and fans of Borat or Cohen’s work in the HBO series Da Ali G Show know what to expect, and it wastes no time being shocking. Now, shocking humor can wear off, or get old and empty quick, but Cohen fuses it with some grounded observations through his interviews or interactions with people. Bruno is gay (hello!) and Cohen loves to flaunt that in everyone’s face. By everyone’s face I mean like Christian homosexual conversion experts, to terrorists, to Muslims, to swingers, and to what? Ron Paul, conservative Republican and ex-Presidential candidate? Yes, even him, and why not try to make a sex tape with him? Bruno is out of control in a very hysterical way.

Beneath all of the laughs, and trust me you will laugh hard, Bruno‘s plot is almost verbatim Borat‘s. Almost beat for beat, too, and that might turn a few people off to the humor. It’s the only aspect to this film that feels tired. It’s minor, but it makes the film feel like a formulaic sequel. Bruno’s hit show is canceled after a debacle he had with a top runway show, and fearing that his status is slipping away, he embarks on a mission to America to become uber-famous. An assistant comes along too. Sounding familiar? Cohen might have been on a suicide mission creatively, but in the end Bruno is a balls-out (pun intended) comedy that overcomes it’s story structure copy cat syndrome. The humor is offensive, yet sly, as Cohen’s humor always was. Bruno as a character represents the “big gay menace” we (and meaning not all of you, but America at times as a whole) fear. He throws himself in impossible situations, all for the sake at exposing someone’s bigotry or homophobic feelings. It’s satirical and it’s damn genius to teeter on the tightrope he walks, never going too far to incite a hate crime and never playing it too safe, as just to be broad and generic.

Bruno is for Sasha Baron Cohen‘s audience, so if you’re not hip to him by now, you won’t be after this. Bruno is Cohen playing with America as his medium, and for whatever the film lacks in plot originality, it makes up for it with it’s humor. It’s beyond funny, and earns it every step of the way.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

Source: Cinema Blend

Some of the latest reviews say:

John Hiscock of the Telegraph

“With Borat, Sacha Baron Cohen seemingly pushed the boundaries of cinematic bad taste and outrageous humour to the limit. With Brüno, his gay Austrian fashionista character, he goes further. Much, much, further. Gross and downright offensive at times, this movie is not for the squeamish, but it is impossible not to laugh while at the same time wincing with embarrassment at the lengths to which Cohen goes.”

Steve Ross of the Guardian

“Beneath the idiocy, Baron Cohen is also a politically astute agent who’s devised an ingenious way to confront and expose serious social issues — and indulge his own exhibitionism.”

Gordon Smart of the Sun

“The film follows the camp presenter’s bid for fame in LA after he is sacked from his beloved fashion show on Austrian TV for bringing a Milan catwalk show to a standstill with his all-in-one Velcro outfit. The scene is utterly brilliant and wipes the smiles from the faces of the snooty fashion world.”

Source: Gold Derby

Well without further adieu check out the latest clip for Bruno HERE !!

Meinspace Vassup!

Source: Latino Review

Bruno opens nationwide July 10, 2009

Source: Slashfilm

Check out Universal Studios twitter page here!

Source: Slashfilm

Originally the film was entitled: Bruno: Delicious Journeys Through America for the Purpose of Making Heterosexual Males Visibly Uncomfortable in the Presence of a Gay Foreigner in a Mesh T-Shirt. How great would that have been right? The title still cracks me up, but unfortunately the film will only be titled Bruno now, as the original title was leaked incorrectly by The Hollywood Reporter.

It was also previously announced that he would be on the television show Medium, as the shows star Patricia Arquette, who has already publicly stated falling for the funny mans antics during filming.

Source: SXSW

Here’s hoping the film does not go through, but is currently being written by Peter Baynham, who was one of the screenwriters on the smash hit Borat and the upcoming Bruno, starring Sasha Baron Cohen again.

Source: Variety

The Film:

Religion is perhaps the only subject one cannot talk bad about or joke about, unless he or she wants the wrath of a believer up their ass. Bill Maher on the other hand doesn’t care. It’s true that he is an out-spoken opponent of organized religion so is the film biased towards that view? Sure, but at least it isn’t a preachy film. He has a clear agenda, a thesis he develops throughout the film, and it works on that level. Can one subjectively review a film like this? I think most won’t but as a critic you should try to divorce your personal views on the politics of a film, but we’re human.

So with that, let me say I was born Catholic, much like Maher, but am I a practicing Christian? No, I got lazy, so perhaps with my lax point of view, I can accept Maher views rationally. He desperately wants you to believe that he is right and seriously, I don’t think the film will change a believer over the course of its running time. My mom has told me stories about her Catholic school days on how she was punished or slapped for questioning the nuns. Maher takes it a step further than questioning ideas in religion; he down right says that religion is a bogus establishment used to make people orderly.

It is true, if you can separate whatever beliefs you have. One believes in something that has no scientific facts or truth and they don’t question it. Maher has clearly stated he is not an atheist that he believes in a God of some sort, but not the God of religions. The film is directed by Larry Charles (Borat) and it follows Maher as he interviews random people to top people in religion sections. Not only do the Catholics get most of the examination, so do the Mormons, Judaism, and related sects.

Sprinkled throughout the jokes and laughs, are some interesting revelations about the Mormons, gays and Creationism. Maher says, if you were part of a club or political party that supported putting women down, against gays, racist, and was corrupt, you wouldn’t want to be apart of that. Who would? Maher states, apparently all of the people in religious groups. He has a good point. You we are quick to laugh at anything related to the wackiness of Scientology but we don’t laugh at some of the absurd aspects of Christianity.

I know a lot of people are in an uproar about the film. Good. Even if you have strict points-of-view, one should not be guilty of the questioning, but then again faith asks not of questioning. Maher brings up some great ideas and questions and this film should create conversation either way. While there are some questions he should have asked himself, like what is it to have faith, and explore that angle, he just quickly dismisses the notion as being ridiculous. While it is his film, he had a clear agenda even if you don’t like the idea of what Religulous (this is a portmanteau of religion and ridiculous) is asking, so you can’t fault someone with a solid idea with a good, strong argument. Look, he raises some interesting questions worth looking into, no matter what side of the God coin you believe in.

The DVD:

Audio/Video: As being a documentary, the film is mostly compiled of archival footage with film interviews. So, don’t expect it to be eye-popping, but it’s good for what it is. Audio is mostly dialogue driven, so surrounds and bass are near moot. This is a fine presentation, regardless of what materials they used.

Commentary: Maher and Charles come in for a chat that is as funny as one would hope. We get some good Maher stuff, so if you enjoyed the film this is the bonus to view, if you didn’t, then you won’t like this track.

Monologues from Around the World: This runs about 18 minutes and is mostly footage of him talking for scenes in between the footage. Some are extended takes others are new. Decent watch.

Deleted Scenes: running at 21 some minutes, most of these were cut probably due to length or importance. These are as good as any interviews from the feature itself and are worth watching.

Conclusion: If one believes in something so much, they’ll be so blinded to actually understand why they believe so strongly in it. So Maher asks the questions most would be too afraid to actually ask. I enjoyed the doc a lot actually, so for me it’s an easy recommendation. For those, unease of the subject matter, well, that’s a personal choice to decide if you need to see the film. My opinion? Yes you need to see this film.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars