I’m about two weeks late on this, so forgive me if it’s been pointed out already, but isn’t Bruno just a social experiment disguised as low-brow entertainment?

Bear with me. But first, a few points to keep in mind:

1. Bruno is not some plot-driven drama you can enjoy alone. You go to this type of movie with friends. Half the fun is sharing the experience with other people.
2. Fans of Sacha Baron Cohen will naturally be inclined to side with his character, even if they are homophobic bigots and even if Bruno is a walking, flaming gay stereotype.
3. A personal disclaimer: I have never seen Borat and have watched about four Ali G segments in my entire life, including the one where he interviewed Naomi Woolf. It made me cringe.

I watched Bruno at the Loews on the Common, the biggest theater in Boston, during opening weekend. The film was showing concurrently on two screens and ours was completely packed, so there were literally no open seats next to each other by the time the movie began (an important point to keep in mind for later). I was accompanied by Patrick, his German friend, and his friend’s boyfriend who is originally from Kazakhstan. Between the four of us, that makes one Kazakhi journalist and one German-speaking homosexual. Kind of ironic.

To understand how Bruno is a social experiment, one has to recognize that there are two audiences. There’s the audience in the theater, of which I was a part, and there’s the audience depicted in the movie. The former may be laughing at the reactions of the latter, but really, both of us are the butt of Cohen’s joke.

(SPOILERS AHEAD, though there’s not much to spoil, plot-wise)

Here’s why: The film makes it near impossible for any young, hip, and seemingly open-minded person to walk out. There are two instances in Bruno when members of the on-screen audience are so offended that they walk out. The first audience is a focus group for a television pilot that the protagonist has produced with the help of his Filipino lover, with whom he assumes various positions. There’s also a segment which I can only describe as “penis-spinning”. The second audience is a group of spectators who expect to watch a pro-wrestling match and wind up seeing Bruno making out with his assistant instead. Unlike the first group, which was merely outraged, the second actually threw things into the ring and had to be restrained from approaching the actors.

(END SPOILERS)

Though I personally wasn’t shocked by the movie (which probably speaks to how jaded I am), I’m well-aware that its graphic content and language is hardly the norm in American cinemas. Patrick later described the movie as “an all-out assault on good taste”, which is actually quite a compliment, though you’d have to understand Patrick’s views to appreciate it. What I think he really means (and what I believe) is that the movie is an assault on homophobia and American conservatism. Because the theater audience is compelled to side with Bruno and distance itself from the conservatism of the people he pranks in the movie, anyone who walks out makes their prejudices quite clear. This is especially true given the huge popularity of the film. There’s no way to leave your seat in a packed theater without being noticed. If most people are watching Bruno with their friends, then there’s also the added pressure of peer judgment, not just judgment from strangers.

The reaction from LGBT groups has been mixed, to be fair, and I can understand how one might be hesitant to endorse a movie whose protagonist embodies some of the worst beliefs about gay people. That being said, perhaps now is a time when an utterly unlikable gay character is actually a sign of progress. Bruno may be no Harvey Milk, but neither are most of my gay friends. That’s not to say that they’re all nymphomanic, trend-chasing fame whores, but they’re certainly not martyrs, so why does every other movie with a main gay character end in tragedy? Bruno is so unapologetic about his actions, so far from tortured or conflicted, and so fully in love with himself that his sexuality is almost secondary to his self-absorption. For that reason, I find the Bruno character far less offensive and more whole than other gay characters, most of whom are portrayed as either hate crime victims or accessories for single, white women.

It surprises me that people don’t immediately recognize Bruno for what it is and instead write it off as another crude attempt at humor. I don’t think my interpretation is a stretch in the least, given that Cohen is rather smart, even if not always funny. Though I would hardly consider Bruno the best film ever made, I do think this 81-minute mindfuck is rather genius for mainstream cinema. If nothing else, it’s better than anything involving wizards or vampires.