Three years after the rousingly successful Borat, Sacha Baron Cohen returns to the screen with another of his original characters: Bruno. The gay, Austrian fashionista and host of the Funkyzeit comes to America with the goal of becoming rich and famous after he is blacklisted from the European fashion scene.

Bruno is filmed in a similar style to Borat as much of the hilarity is derived from fooling people into believing that Bruno is a serious TV show host and fashion critic. Many of the people are the stereotypical, uneducated Southerners who Cohen plays off of to create funny situations. This is never more evident when Bruno attempts to become straight by employing the services of a born again Christian minister who believes he can turn Bruno into a heterosexual—or show him the error in his “choice”.

Bruno also has the opportunity to interview Paula Abdul and Ron Paul, both of whom go along with the idiotic questioning and surroundings until they are put into overtly sexual situations. Cohen has an amazing ability to ask hilarious questions that seem like honest mistakes by an ignorant individual. He is also wonderfully quick on his feet, as he is able to ask follow up questions and interject with his own comedic tidbits. Later in the film, Bruno adopts a cause (because all famous people have causes) and attempts to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians who he believes only disagree over the nature of hummus which he has confused with Hamas.

Obviously, a large part of Cohen’s comedy is through his stereotypical portrayal of groups and cultures. Cohen shows the ridiculousness of bigotry through his situational comedy. He is not anti-Semitic or anti-gay but rather he shows how ignorant people are for holding their specific beliefs. However, whereas in Borat people with anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim ideologies were combated through Borat’s making such claims himself, Bruno makes social arguments differently.

Unlike Borat, this film largely relies on shock value revolving around homosexual stereotypes and raw sexual situations.  The film includes many scenes that include graphic actions between men and more nudity than any other film in recent memory. Although many times these scenes are humorous, Bruno doesn’t seem to really attempt to change people’s opinions about homosexuality. In all actuality, the film made both pro and anti-gay people cringe. Many people who support gay-rights believe that people should be allowed to do what they wish in private. However Bruno is overly sexual in public which makes the regular folks in the scene angry and upset while it makes many in the audience cover their eyes.

In one of the closing scenes, Bruno begins wrestling with another man and then proceeds to make-out with him. The crowd from the Deep South is shocked and appalled by the events unfolding in front of their eyes. Many begin to throw objects into the ring to try to physically harm Bruno and his new friend. This scene was the perfect manifestation of my fears about what the film would do to people who do not accept homosexuality—it would make them angry. Unlike Borat, which could seemingly make people rethink their bigotries after watching, Bruno could very well have the opposite effect—causing people to be grossly offended and galvanize their hatred.

Although Bruno is a funny movie, it will probably deservedly receive criticism over its content. In some respects, the film is lazy in some regards as Cohen relies too heavily on shock value in specific segments. Many people will be disgusted by particular scenes but there will also definitely be laughs. The movie going experience will be different for everyone and is largely dependent upon their personal stance on homosexuality.