Borat sued.....again.

[mysterydriver]

From IMDB.com

Romanian 'Borat' Extras Taking Legal Action

British funnyman Sacha Baron Cohen has been threatened with legal action by the Romanian village which stood in for his comic creation Borat's native Kazakhstan in his hit movie. Gypsy citizens of Glod are outraged that Cohen ridiculed their lifestyle in Borat: Cultural Learnings Of America For Make Benefit Glorious Nation Of Kazakhstan, which has topped international box offices, and paid them a pittance to allow farm animals into their homes. Local leader Nicolae Staicu will meet with a public ombudsman today to formulate legal action against Cohen and distributor 20th Century Fox. Staicu accused the producers of paying locals just $4 to perform degrading acts, misleading the village into thinking filming was for a documentary and refusing to sign proper filming contracts. Resident Dana Luca, 40, says, "We thought they came here to help us - not mock us. We haven't got anything here. We haven't got running water. We can't even bathe. We are poor people, but we are still people."

Borat won't leave the news....

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

I' ve seen the trailer of this movie when I went to cinema lately and...

man, these 2 minutes were awful enough for me ! I think we found what illustrates best the word " disrespect ".

[spec]

Opportunism. They see the huge success the film is getting and they want a piece. They thought they were there to help them? How exactly does allowing farm animals into their homes help them? If they had a problem with any of it, they should've refused at the time.

[hollywood]

"Let them cry. Let them complain. Let them shout out into the heavens! All it does...is keep us in the headlines."

[dennisisevil]

Will they just shoot that dumbass and get it over with?

[shemmy86]

The age of the lawsuit, isn't it a wonderful age.

[A]

darklordofthepith said:

Opportunism. They see the huge success the film is getting and they want a piece. They thought they were there to help them? How exactly does allowing farm animals into their homes help them? If they had a problem with any of it, they should've refused at the time.

Yep, I was going to say the same thing.


They said themselves they didn't have the best facilities, this lawsuit could make them millions, in theory.

[mysterydriver]

If...IF...if Borat's crew lied and told them it was a documentary to get support from charity groups, I can see them letting animals into their homes so that they looked "more patheic."

Kind of how the commercials with starving kids show the ribcage showing children rather than the ones who do look undernorished, but not too bad.

[spec]

mysterydriver said:

If...IF...if Borat's crew lied and told them it was a documentary to get support from charity groups, I can see them letting animals into their homes so that they looked "more patheic."

Kind of how the commercials with starving kids show the ribcage showing children rather than the ones who do look undernorished, but not too bad.

Haha yeah, if thats the case then they were fine with looking more backward than they are if it meant donations, but now that they're being mocked for things that were a set up anyway its lawsuit time!

And as for this

Staicu accused the producers of paying locals just $4 to perform degrading acts

They could've just said no, its as simple as that.

[mysterydriver]

darklordofthepith said:

mysterydriver said:

If...IF...if Borat's crew lied and told them it was a documentary to get support from charity groups, I can see them letting animals into their homes so that they looked "more patheic."

Kind of how the commercials with starving kids show the ribcage showing children rather than the ones who do look undernorished, but not too bad.

Haha yeah, if thats the case then they were fine with looking more backward than they are if it meant donations, but now that they're being mocked for things that were a set up anyway its lawsuit time!

Basically yeah.

Consider this. What if you entered a "Fear Factor" type competition show and had to do degrading stuff to win a $50,000 prize. You sign papers to appear on the show and ect. At the end, they just point at you and laugh and say they are going to show the video online so that others can laugh at your stupidity.

You might be angry too...

/Devil's Advocate

[HMARK Center]

This is pathetic. What "denegrating" acts did the villagers do?

It's pretty blatant that a lot of this is oppurtunism. Doesn't change that this was the funniest movie to come out in years.

[shemmy86]

hitmanmark said:

This is pathetic. What "denegrating" acts did the villagers do?

It's pretty blatant that a lot of this is oppurtunism. Doesn't change that this was the funniest movie to come out in years.

Yes the lawsuit is frivolous much like some of the others dealing with this movie. You have to sign a release to be put on film. Calling this the funniest movies in years though? Grant it I have not seen this one yet, but having that "best" label attached to anything is quite subjective.

[Matt Rogers]

shemmy86 said:

hitmanmark said:

This is pathetic. What "denegrating" acts did the villagers do?

It's pretty blatant that a lot of this is oppurtunism. Doesn't change that this was the funniest movie to come out in years.

Yes the lawsuit is frivolous much like some of the others dealing with this movie. You have to sign a release to be put on film. Calling this the funniest movies in years though? Grant it I have not seen this one yet, but having that "best" label attached to anything is quite subjective.

It's been a slow few years for comedy though, in my opinion. As much as I loved a few of them, I still consider this better.

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

Why do people automatically take the side of Borat? I mean, this is the second lawsuit to come out this movie. Once is opportunistic. Two means that he did something underhanded.

Now whether what he did is legally wrong or just plain wrong is up for debate. He should have been honest with the village before hand and given them fair compensation. It's not like he was some poor comedian trying to break out before this. He already had one movie and a hit TV show. He could have given them some more money to begin with.

But people need to admit that maybe Cohen isn't the saint that everyone thinks he is. It's not like he lied to them just to get footage, he lied in order to make them, at some level (Yes, even if it's funny) made them look bad. Whether he's at fault in a lawsuit is a bigger question that I don't know, but at least he's being exposed for who he is.

[BD Punk AKA SUSPENDED!]

All of those people just need to shut the f*** up

[hollywood]

evilmasterbetty said:

Why do people automatically take the side of Borat? I mean, this is the second lawsuit to come out this movie. Once is opportunistic. Two means that he did something underhanded.

Now whether what he did is legally wrong or just plain wrong is up for debate. He should have been honest with the village before hand and given them fair compensation. It's not like he was some poor comedian trying to break out before this. He already had one movie and a hit TV show. He could have given them some more money to begin with.

But people need to admit that maybe Cohen isn't the saint that everyone thinks he is. It's not like he lied to them just to get footage, he lied in order to make them, at some level (Yes, even if it's funny) made them look bad. Whether he's at fault in a lawsuit is a bigger question that I don't know, but at least he's being exposed for who he is.

I'm glad some people are pointing this out. The movie's hilarious, don't get me wrong, but it's clear that he did a few underhanded things to get some of those people on camera.

[Drillbit Taylor]

hollywood said:

evilmasterbetty said:

Why do people automatically take the side of Borat? I mean, this is the second lawsuit to come out this movie. Once is opportunistic. Two means that he did something underhanded.

Now whether what he did is legally wrong or just plain wrong is up for debate. He should have been honest with the village before hand and given them fair compensation. It's not like he was some poor comedian trying to break out before this. He already had one movie and a hit TV show. He could have given them some more money to begin with.

But people need to admit that maybe Cohen isn't the saint that everyone thinks he is. It's not like he lied to them just to get footage, he lied in order to make them, at some level (Yes, even if it's funny) made them look bad. Whether he's at fault in a lawsuit is a bigger question that I don't know, but at least he's being exposed for who he is.

I'm glad some people are pointing this out. The movie's hilarious, don't get me wrong, but it's clear that he did a few underhanded things to get some of those people on camera.

but if you watch some early Borat Stuff from a few years ago he was there before and did not complain

[Bullhead]

*still waiting for Sacha Baron Cohen to do something funny*

[EvilMasterBetty, Esq.]

hotrod05 said:

hollywood said:

I'm glad some people are pointing this out. The movie's hilarious, don't get me wrong, but it's clear that he did a few underhanded things to get some of those people on camera.

but if you watch some early Borat Stuff from a few years ago he was there before and did not complain

To the exact same town, or a similar one?

Even so, he should have either been honest or paid them more. It's not like it would have killed them to do that.

[HMARK Center]

Why do people automatically take the side of Borat? I mean, this is the second lawsuit to come out this movie. Once is opportunistic. Two means that he did something underhanded.

Wha? Where's that logic coming from?

Two implies even more oppurtunism; it implies someone saying "Hey, someone else is suing him, let's go get him, too!"

Regardless, if they signed releases, forget it, they're not getting anywhere. On what grounds are the arguing, anyway? None of them did any "denegrating" acts, and it's not like the producers were under any kind of pressure to pay them millions of dollars for mostly working as extras.

And I do stand behind saying it's the funniest movie in years; I can't name another one that made me laugh this hard since God knows when.