Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006)

Director: Larry Charles

Borat, as I’m sure you’ve heard, is pure comic gold. Sacha Baron Cohen, plays the loveable yet offensive Kazak reporter as he travels America searching for love and that cultural piece of apple pie to take back to Kazakhstan. About the time the movie premiered in London I actually got to see the Kazakhstan amabassador to Great Britain speak. With all the uproar coming out of Kazakhstan about the movie at the time, he was of course questioned about it. He replied that he’d gone to see it and found it quite funny. His view was that it made fun of Americans not Kazaks, and he’s right. Of course, I’ve found that alot of people over here think thats whats so great about it, and granted it had great political timing, but it ought to be remembered the same movie could have been made in the UK (complete with the racists).

Law to make benefit:

1. Borat while recieving a driving lesson is admonished that it is against the law to drink and drive and also to yell and cuss at other drivers.

2. Borat interviews numerous law makers in Washington, D.C. including Bob Barr (former representative from Georgia and also a lawyer) and also Alan Keyes a prospective republican presidential candidate and political scholar.

3. Later in this same vein he sees Charles Pickering (House – MS) preaching to a Penecostal revival meeting. In his sermon, Pickering targets, the teaching of evolution in schools.

4. Borat is at one point given advice on how not to look like a Muslim Terrorist. This might be handy in case of some racial profiling.

5. This movie has spawned a lot of litigation. Khazakhstan reserved the right to take legal action against Borat, and numerous people have filed suit claiming damages to their reputation, job etc. Most notably the two fraternity boys (suit dismissed) and the etiquette coach in Alabama. He has even been sued by the Romanian village he used as his home town at the beginning of the film. Poor Borat, he just can’t get a fair break can he.

IMDB
Rotten Tomatoes

The King (2005)

Director: James Marsh

The last of my in flight films from those harrowing Delta flights, and what a way to go out. I think that the director of this film said to himself “Let me see if I can fill this movie full of stereotypes. Yes, yes, I can make it the stereotype menagerie. Muhahahaha.”

No really, this movie sucks, I thought I was going to get some good Elvis references, but instead I got an ex-navy sailor named Elvis. He hunts down his father (who has never seen him and has become an evangelical preacher) to say hello or something. Once he is faced with his father’s rejection he seduces his teenage half-sister, kills his half-brother, and makes the viewer miserable for close to an hour.

The law:

1. The preacher’s son (the legitimate one) is giving a speech and he holds up a dollar bill and says “this is the legal tender of the United States.” He also points out that it says “In God We Trust.”

2. The point of the boy’s speech is that he is trying to convince the school board to sanction the teaching of intellingent design instead of or along with evolution. He get’s denied by the school board.

3. There is an absolutely piss poor police investigation.

IMDB
Rotten Tomatoes

Heart of the Game (2005)

Director: Ward Serrill

This is a decent documentary about a girls high school basketball team in Seattle and its wild coach. It follows the team over three or four seasons documenting its struggles to win that covetted state championship. It has got a good focus, but still manages to drag at times. As a general rule the conflicts in it are very real, but on occasion it makes a big deal out of high school girls and their bickering.

Law please:

1. The coach is a tax law professor, and there is even a riveting moment from inside his classroom (its short though . . . I think the director realized that footage like that could suck up his movie real fast).

2. One of the star players is molested by her private coach. In the film she reads out her court testimony. The private coach pled guilty and got 40 months in jail.

3. Another star player misses a year due to pregnancy. When she returns to the team the WIAA (Washington Interscholastic Activities Association) denies her that eligibility. It claims that she must demonstrate a hardship that made her miss a year and that pregnancy was a voluntary decision and not a hardship. So off to court we go.
There is a great scene where the WIAA attorney requests that the film maker not video an injunction hearing, which of course is then filmed from the hip. The WIAA loses at the hearing. It then attempts to appeal this decision and loses. All the while the team is moving on up through the brackets. The WIAA threatens to go to trial. The head of the Association tells the cameras: “I made my decision, and a judge decided he could make a better decision.” (I guess no one ever bothered to tell him that that is what judges are paid to do). The case, though, (as portrayed in the film) seems to be highlighting the double standard applied to males and females, in that if a male has a child he can continue playing, but not so with a female.
The WIAA drops its case after the state championship . . . but I won’t tell you who won.

IMDB
Rotten Tomatoes