censorship

Or sports too I suppose for that matter.

Campaign
Battle cry
Battle plan
Bullseye
War Room
Targeted Ads
Targeted Candidates
Easy Target
Gunning for
Reconnaissance
Advance Scouts
Plan of Attack
Attack Ads
Ads aimed at...
Opened Fire
Sitting Duck
Lame Duck
Range War
Shock and Awe
Scattershot
Hammering your opponent
Cutting your opponent's legs out from under them
Cutting your opponent off at the knees
Crippling
Decimate/Destroy
Bullets
Bulletproof
Hard fought
Shot across the bow
Arsenal
Brutal

...

John Jones easily won his election campaign last night after a hard fought battle using a series of targeted ads designed to hammer his opponent. His plan of attack was a rousing success in crippling Congressman Pete Peters using attack ads portraying him as an out of touch partisan.

Jones began gunning for the now Lame Duck Congressman early in the primaries with a shot across the bow airing ads aimed at the two term Congressman rather than his primary opponents. "We had a war room dedicated to scouring Peter's record and hounding the man at every step. It was easy to cut him off at the knees with his poor record of plundering the treasury," Jones Campaign Manager Paul Palson, the man Jones called his best soldier, reported after the close of this brutal voting season.

"Our arsenal was bigger than his, we had more bullets. The man was just begging to be taken out. It was a weak campaign. He was a sitting duck for our style of fighting" an anonymous staffer was quoted as saying.

The race was widely regarded as the most vicious in the state...

Note to America:  These.

Dover Photo-Op

 Not these.

Vets, Public & Press censored by BO

No dissent. 

Only useful service. 

- with Hugo Estrada.

As a mid-twenties single white male, I represent the target demographic for Sacha Baron Cohen’s new movie “Bruno.” The mockumentary about an Austrian fashion designer was promoted as a follow up to the irreverent character chicanery in Cohen’s hit film “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan.” However, after viewing the film and conferring with other theatre goers I want my money back.

The film follows “Bruno,” an Austrian Fashion designer on a quest for fame and acceptance in the United States. Interspersed with a grab bag of licentious smut, Cohen uses footage of mainstream celebrities who have been tricked into granting “Bruno” what they think are authentic interviews. Other Americana, such as a Fred Phelps anti-gay protest and a lewd craigslist swinger’s party are portrayed with mirthful indifference.

Mocking stereotypes may have its place in the arts, but “Bruno” is unredeemed proof that anything goes for entertainment if it can put a viewer on the edge of their seat. Yet it may not be anticipation of the next scene that has viewers on the edge of their seats in this case; many are getting ready to walk out of the theatre.

Bruno opened on a Friday night with strong box office returns, yet ticket sales quickly fell 39% on Saturday—a sign that viewers immediately warned their friends against the hype. Scrambling in the UK, “Bruno” producers have re-released a censored version of the film this week in hopes that underage viewers will not be turned away.

Though it appears Universal Picture’s profits are secure, the movie is not the blockbuster that opening night indicated. After one full week in theatres, ticket sales are down 73%. I have to hope and wonder: has my generation turned the corner and started to reject entertainment that flaunts our sense of tolerance by shredding public decency? The box office results of Sacha Baron Cohen’s flick “Bruno” would indicate yes.

The critics aren’t helping either. Owen Gleiberman in Entertainment Weekly writes that, “the movie is a toxic dart aimed at the spangly new heart of American hypocrisy: our fake-tolerant, fake-charitable, fake-liberated-yet-still madly-closeted fame culture.” Yet if Bruno is a toxic dart, then it is poisoned with the same base hypocrisy that Cohen pitches as humorous.

If Sacha Baron Cohen’s film contains a lesson about our culture, it is that humor has been exchanged for disgust, beauty for titillation, and decency for blind tolerance. There is almost nothing left for an irreverent comedian like Cohen to criticize.

Can a tolerant generation survive if it does not censor itself? It will be up to us twenty-something’s in the target demographic to answer this question. Many of our politicians practice democratic morality when they argue about same-sex marriage, abortion, dope, war, peace and taxes, while our pop-culture applauds anything with shock value. But I am afraid that this paradigm cannot last; we are trying to stitch the fabric of a tolerant society together with the cord of a lit fuse.

After all 88 excruciating minutes of Mr. Cohen’s film have passed, the viewer should learn at least one thing from the character “Bruno:” don’t just aspire to be rich and famous, ask for your money back once in a while.