2006-11-10 20:20:21 · 15 answers · asked by baobabjim 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
I think it's stupid. Everyone is taking advantage of their right to sue whoever they want. And plus, these idiots don't get the whole Borat thing.
2006-11-10 20:25:48 · answer #1 · answered by Just another nickname 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
It wasn't the brightest thing for the frat boys to do - but I think there are serious irregularities from the film company in 1) representing that the film would never be shown in the us 2) that it was a documentary going to a Kazach audience (everyone tailors their delivery to suit their audience) and 3) signing a consent form when drunk! Would you sign an employment contract or buy a house only after the other party had got you blind drunk? Thought not!
2006-11-11 04:32:04 · answer #2 · answered by Miss Behavin 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of how dumb, racist, sexist and completely of their own free-will those comments were by these guys, if they were indeed ensured that this"recording/documentary" would never be shown in the US then they are entitled to compensation as the terms of their agreement has been breached(Though this is of course what they say happened, we don't know that any promise was ever made).
Plus all those who appear and speak on film have to sign a disclaimer that gives permission to be filmed and have the footage used. Now all the details of how and where this film was to be broadcast would have been included in that contract, and to be honest, these lads don't seem like the kind of bright sparks that read fine print. They must have been given the opportunity to do so, but may have just signed whatever piece of paper they had to to get in front of the camera and fcuk about.
We'll see what happens.
2006-11-11 08:49:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well I basically think that they are trying to just get money out of a movie that has made a LOT of money and will keep making money! Is it Sasha Cohen's fault that they signed the release while they were drunk? NO! Was it Sasha Cohens fault that these jerks were racists? NO! I believe as part of the lawsuit they are also claiming that they lost their jobs as a result, well if that is the case you sue your employer for wrongful termination, not a filmaker for exploiting you as a rascist! I believe it is nothing more than a lawsuit of opportunity! Notice they didnt bother to sue until the movie became popular!
2006-11-11 04:32:33 · answer #4 · answered by Jim 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
People will do anything for a quick buck. That does include the media, making up crap stories.
I am pretty sure Mr Cohen would not have used the film of the two students without first having them sign a disclaimer, to avoid anything such as this happening.
2006-11-11 04:24:40 · answer #5 · answered by ashypoo 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
THey like so many in the movie got duped into doing something for this film they may not have normally done. However, they new what was going on and blaming being drunk is no excuse. I'm sure they had an idea on what was going on before they started drinking and had the opportunity to walk away then. So, instead of suing they should try and get their 15 mintues of fame, or is that what the lawsuit is for.
2006-11-11 04:24:17 · answer #6 · answered by Shawn 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
AsI was travelling to the cinema I had my car radio on and they were reviewing a film I hadn't heard of called Borat. On arrival I found Borat was due to start in only minutes so I bought a ticket and went it... £4-90 to sit and watch a long stupid film with no apparent story involved, just a collection of smut and childish attempts at humour. I would advise anyone who intends seeing this film to add another 10 pence to the price and give it to some deserving charity. Stand outside in the rain and get more for your money. To be more succinct, its a load of crap..............
2006-11-11 04:34:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I said right from the start that this film was a load of old crap, and suddenly some of the people who have found themselves in it unwittingly have decided to take action. GOOD.
Just remember, this is the bloke who illegally gained entrance to one of Prince Charles' parties, dressed as a tart. He still is as far as I'm concerned !
2006-11-11 05:15:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Brilliant film takes the piss out of every one, a joy for free speech and common sense
2006-11-11 05:31:44 · answer #9 · answered by mark F 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
its a dumb movie attempt and anyone who was filmed without permission has the right to sue and gain compesation by law.
its why on tv and some movies you'll see names, faces, etc blurred out...the person did not give persmission.
girls gone wild has gotten into the same legal issues.
2006-11-11 04:23:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋