Who could have seen that coming?

A lot has been made about the hit movie Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. While boasting big numbers at the box office, some of those unknowingly filmed for the movie were outraged by their inclusion in the project. I haven’t seen the movie yet but am familiar with the character from Sacha Baron Cohen’s Prince Ali G show on HBO. My husband and I have spent hours cracking up at Borat’s adventures across the United States.

I always wondered why people didn’t know who he was or why they couldn’t figure out that he was pulling their leg. I understand their discomfort. No one wants to look like an ignorant fool but Cohen manages to fool them every time with humorous results. I guess it’s no surprise that in the land of lawsuits, participants in this movie are threatening legal action. On one hand, Cohen is deceptive but on the other, people need to ask pertinent questions before allowing themselves to be filmed or doing an interview. I’m having trouble feeling sympathy for them.

Cohen has come forward to explain his spontaneous madness to Rolling Stone by saying,” "I was surprised because I always had faith in the audience that they would realize that this was a fictitious country (sic) and the mere purpose of it (the film) was to allow people to bring out their own prejudices. The reason we chose Kazakhstan was because it was a country that no one had ever heard anything about, so we could essentially play on stereotypes they might have about this ex-Soviet backwater. The joke is not on Kazakhstan. I think the joke is on people who can believe that the Kazakhstan that I describe can exist - who believe that there's a country where homosexuals wear blue hats and women live in cages."

This would be fine and dandy if everyone was on this elevated level but that wasn’t the case in marketing this movie. It was positioned as high comedy but not necessarily a farce. They marketed it to the same 14-year-old boys who adore Jackass. There’s a big difference between this group and the ones who will understand these extreme situations as comedy. Unfortunately, the quality of humor has gone down in cinema. A truly gut-busting comedy without malice is hard to find these days.

Marketing in everything for a movie. The movie trailer tells you what type of movie it is and who it speaks to. Movie studios further sell the film to certain markets by deciding where the movie will be previewed. In other words, if it’s a chick flick you will see the preview during The Holiday not Spiderman III. Get it. If marketing a movie is everything, what happens to a movie that misses the mark? Below are some examples where the preview didn’t match the true nature of the film:

Cable Guy (1996)

This was a marketing nightmare. Everyone entered the theater looking for a slap-stick comedy featuring rubber-faced Jim Carrey but were presented with a sadistic dark comedy. It was funny but a bit painful to watch at times. It got a poor reception because people were expecting something completely different.

The Truman Show (1998)

Yet another misunderstood Jim Carrey movie. Here we were treated to a sentimental movie about finding your own will and way in life. No one expected the dramatic element to be so strong.

Closer (2004)

This movie is the ultimate mind-fuck. It raises more questions than answers. It’s provocative, honest and frightening. It shows the depth and angst that relationships can bring. You definitely can’t watch this with your loved one. I loved it. Loved it. However, it’s billing as a relationship movie only scratched the surface of its complexity.

The Break-Up (2006)

The previews promised us a hilarious romantic comedy. The movie delievered up a War of the Roses-style film that starred the bland Jennifer Aniston and a toned down Vince Vaughn. It was disappointing as a comedy but worked as a drama.

What other previews were deceiving?