Skip to main content

Bruno amounts to a rather large penis in the face (13 July 2009)

bruno

everyman pictures

"Brüno" is not good for gays, but not for the reason you may suspect. Brüno is, ostensibly--is seemingly incontrovertibly--Sasha Baron Cohen as a über-feminine, frilly, flashy, fashion-obsessed, "girly-man" homosexual. But he is in fact more accurately understood as a hyper-masculine, phallic aggressor, phallic male, whose aim is to not so much to show up others’ prejudices, cruelty, ridiculousness, but rather to ridicule people in a way he can readily get away with, tear away at any self-dignity they claim for themselves, to, in effect, come as close to making him his "bitches," as he can.

Brüno may look to be someone a man’s man would abhor, would react to, just as the wrestling mob reacted upon finding themselves being duped into having cheered on a homosexual coupling. But natural queer aversion, isn't how best to account for the mob's reaction. The wrestling crowd was stunned and, in greater truth, traumatized by the reveal, because Cohen had set them up to look/feel like fools--colossal ones. He had “unmanned” them, made themhis "bitches"--a very cruel act, one no different in true intent than manipulating the high school' least popular into approaching/flirting with the good looking quarterback, to drive her to near suicide-level self-estimation--but one that operates under way better cover.

This bad for gay men? You betcha. Because while to the American public, gay men can be understood as the aggressors--"vampires," whose approach, whose near touch and breath, can leave you forever after affected/infected, what comes most readily to mind when they think of homosexuals is of themselves being made to seem ridiculously "girly"--"bottom-bitches," as they say. That is, humiliated, powerless, disarmed and in full surrender. And what Brüno most effectively communicates, in my judgment, is that there is no better remedy for feeling at risk of being made to feel akin to Brüno’s "bottom-bitch" (in the hotel scene, be sure that Cohen made sure he was the one caught with his penis up someone else’s rear end, not the reverse), note--not to Brüno, than to strut about swishing your dick in everyone else's face.

Not a satire. Not social commentary. Brüno is a paean to the hyper-masculine--to the penis-empowered, in full (and brutal) disregard of the lay "pussy" victim. If America turns on to this film, it will be because Cohen has convinced them there is in fact something to be said for finding your dick halfway up someone else’s anus, a disaster for the truly "girly"-seeming, wherever they're to be found.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...