2006's Top 20

First of all to compare Babel with Paul Haggis's hyper overated Crash is not only absurd, it's insulting! It's insulting for two geniuses (Guillermo Arriaga and Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu), who wrote and directed, respectively, a film about Humanity and it's endless complexity (and sometimes stupidity) with an incalculablely relevant message and no boundaries whatsoever (except for some people who still find it 'hard' to watch and enjoy a non-english language film). Insulting also to it's phenomenal cast. From Adriana Barraza and Rinko Kikuchi, both so incrediblely powerful and brilliant (I still can't help but laughing when I think of a certain pseudo actress who won an Academy Award and a Golden Globe instead of this two geniunely hearted acresses), to Gael Garcia Bernal's strangely disturbing character and Cate Blanchett and Brad Pitt, who needed a Franco-Mexican production to provide us his best performance of this decade.

Six years, three mastepieces. Inarritu is a masterful filmmaker. Unique and already unmistakable in his way of capturing essence and telling a story, which clearly can be inaccessible for some people. The multiple scenarios and supposedly unlinked characters, that comes back from the early days of Amores Perros are already a trademark of his own, and one of the reasons why I personally consider him one of the most gifted filmmakers of our short century. One thing I know, and no one will ever change: Babel is one of those films that I know I'll remember in years and decades to come.

BEST FILM Of 2006! Period.

"As the sound of the playgrounds faded, the despair set in. Very odd, what happens in a world without children's voices."

The future never looked this bleak. In a matter of 20 years time, the world overcome by its own excesses and greed. In Alfonso Cuarón's chilling dystopia Children of Men, we witness a world not different with the world we live in today, a world of violence, inhumanity, plague, environmental destruction magnified through a looking glass. With one pinning factor of hope deducted... children. How can one think, knowing that they are the last generation left on earth, with no one to look after? Death to the human race as we know it.



The film opens as a crowd gathers in a small cafe mourning the loss of the youngest person on earth, born on 2009, died 2027. This will be the catalyst for events to come, as Theo (Clive Owen) meets up with his ex-wife Julian (Julianne Moore), still mourning their own loss several years ago, they must both come together as they embark on a new journey that will spark hope to humankind's deadlock fate.

Cuarón, together with his go-to cinematographer Emmanuel "Chivo" Lubezki, have created a place as accurate one may think of in the near future. A world filled with violence, as people are more concerned with their own survival, one may even see similarities to events that have passed, as we witness our so called future. The forced deportation of illegal immigrants from the U.K. portrayed on screen recalls the Nazi Germany's crackdown on European Jews and other minorities during the early to late 1930s, well into the 1940s as Adolf Hitler enforced the Gleichschaltung, a doctrine that forbid individualism and free thinking and adhering to one ideology, and that period called for antisemitism.

Today, we have the Patriot Act in the US and Anti-Terrorism Law in dozens of countries throughout the world, in which ever fence of political ideology you may belong to, one cannot deny the countless objectionable provisions that are included, such as detaining and deportation of "suspected" immigrants of terrorist activities. More often than not, innocent people are detained. The so called "sneak and peek," where in any law enforcement agency can search a person's home or business without any warrant. All comes full circle on Cuarón's adaptation of the novel by P.D. James. We may be closer to the world portrayed here than we anticipated.

Amazing characters dot this film from Michael Caine's hope trotting hippie, to Pam Ferris, a hopeless reveler, even Charlie Hunnam seems to be out of whack, as Patric, a zealous member of the Fishes. Notice how the camera evokes realism through seamless tracking shots, as seen through the immigrant's ghetto, we follow Theo run and dodge bullets both left and right. Or perhaps, the claustrophobic aura in the car, as Theo, Julian and their group are attacked by a crazed mob, the camera swivels around them as the mob tries to get in the car. No music used on both climactic scenes, just a realization of dread.

It's highly plausible that an infectious agent will one day cause infertility to human reproduction, as seen in other animal species. Add in the myriad of other threats to our survival, indifference, social inequality, global warming, habitat destruction, natural calamities, widening gap between the haves and have-nots. All of these things come together in such a symbolic film. Children of Men has probably opened up more questions than it has answers. As viewers of the celluloid, we're given a choice: continue on towards our path to destruction or instill change while perpetual hope blooms. The choice is ours to make.

"For every shadow, no matter how deep, is threatened by morning light."

Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain is dozens of things, but primarily it's a film about love. Countless films address the same topic, or use it as a framework to tell a story, but few are as passionate and insistent in their focus. This isn't the superficial love of pop songs; it's not cynical manipulation. It's a naked, fearless film about Love and Forever, with strident capital letters, about a fierce, time-defying love that connects one couple through a thousand years of history. It's also a poignant mediation on how missed chances can echo forever. It's a bold artistic statement from a director who has never let a limited budget stand in his way. It might not always make perfect sense, but it's one of the best films I've ever seen.



Five hundred years ago, a conquistador named Tomas (Hugh Jackman) vows to the Spanish Queen Isabella (Rachel Weisz) that he will travel to Central America and find the Tree of Life so that they can live together forever. In the present day, a neuroscientist named Tommy Creo (Jackman) is frantically trying to find a cure for cancer to in time to save his wife Izzy (Weisz), who is dying of a brain tumour while attempting to finish a novel about the conquistador and his queen. In his desperation, Tommy turns to some bark from an "old growth" Central American tree, with surprising results. Five hundred years in the future, Tommy floats through space in a sphere containing a gigantic tree, travelling toward a distant nebula as the events of the past thousand years haunt him. According to the film, the Mayans believed that this nebula was their underworld; its location had helped Tomas find the Tree of Life; now Tommy is travelling there so he can be with Izzy forever. After 1000 years, Tommy has learned patience; he does Tae Bo in front of a blanket of stars, and tattoo rings on his skin to remind him of how long he's waited, and how he can wait a little while longer.

Some of the Eastern elements of future-Tommy's world are poorly integrated, and this prompted an involuntary guffaw when future-Tommy and past-Tomas' stories connect in an unexpected way. I wish the sap from the Tree of Life didn't look like Elmer's Glue. I wish Aronofsky hadn't gone with the cheap, artificial tactic of suspense-building music just before the beautiful scene on the roof in the snow. There are significant problems with the past segments of the film: Weisz seemed a little lost as the Queen, forced, as she is, to shoulder a little too much iconographic burden, and the segment lacks the kind of circular resolution that the other segments have. The love between Queen Isabella and Tomas the Conquistador would more properly be called worship, which is part of love but not all. What's missing is tenderness, which develops during the present-day segments. Whatever problems the film might have are all but forgiven here. Their scenes together are almost unbearably tender; it's as if we're intruding on private moments between them. Aronofsky's camera caresses Weisz; his adoration for her is palpable and catching. If she didn't seem up to the earlier segments, she blossoms here. And Jackman shines as well.

If Aronofsky owes a lot to other films, most obviously Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, the specific vision and scope are all his. Many of the amazing special effects were created not via CGI, which Aronofsky felt (rightly) would ruin the film's timelessness, but via micro-photography of chemical reactions in petrie dishes. That's just brilliant: first, because the resulting effects have a vivid three-dimensionality that CGI effects often lack, and second, because the very method of creating the effects ties in with the themes of the film. Aronofsky's limited budget, cut in half after an earlier attempt starring Brad Pitt fell through, is a blessing in other ways. The exteriors are limited, forcing creative transitions between times and places.

I feel like, unlike so many films, The Fountain rewards repeat viewings; there are elements here, thought out in incredible detail, that I missed the first time but I picked up on when I saw it again the next morning. I liked how even in the cold laboratory settings of the present-day segments, Tommy walks through pools of warm, golden light, tying together the torchlight of the past and the nebular light of the future. At first it seemed out of place, but made sense when I thought about it as future-Tommy working through his memories. I liked how the same triangular pattern of the star system with the nebula in the centre kept popping up in the set decoration and shot framings, and also how the starburst pattern from Tomas' shrine to his queen kept showing up in much the same ways. But most of all, I loved how it made me want to believe in forever. There's not a trace of cynicism here, just incredibly honest and emotional filmmaking that's not afraid to slip up in its pursuit of something beautiful, yet flawed. It's cinematic poetry in an age when poetry is considered quaint. It's the kind of film that makes me want to get up in the morning.

"Together we will live forever."

And so it came, almost out of nothing, an unexpected masterpiece. Unexpected because a few months ago I haven't even heard of Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, even though I'm a particularly enthusiastic follower of European Cinema. I guess I wasn't the only one caught by surprise with this stunning directorial debut.



Being european, I grew up studying this film's subject in class rooms, so I was curious as to it's political and historical relevance. Even thought I'm not exacly a History expert, I'd say that this is an extremely relevant film, an essential look at a particularly important time of our recent past. A tribute to those (impersonated in Georg Dreyman) who fought for their ideals, for freedom of speech, for their secret dream of a united nation. And also an interesting look at the 'other side', at those who'd do anything they were told in the name of their loyalty. Ulrich Muhe's performance is absolutely phenomenal! Incredibly dubious, dark, sad and believable...

The 'Best Foreign Language Film' award is my favourite one at the Oscars. It has been for several years and I'm sure it'll always be. Probably because it's the only one that can still surprise me and make me forget, for a while, the triviality and previsibility of the cerimony iself. And of course, when we look at the nominees, there are always 5 top class films that are as good (or better) as the candidates to 'Best Film'. I mean, let's face it, when we have The Lives of Others and Pan's Labyrinth, both competing for the same award, we have to ask ourselves if the language is really that important. My opinion? NO!

Each year (if you think about it carefully you'll see I'm right) there is one american comedy that sets apart from all the rest, not only in the genre, but overall - Hollywood. Last year was Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, in 04 Sideways, in 03 The Station Agent, in 02 About Schmidt, in 01 Ghost World, etc... The point is that American cinema can make great comedy films, not simply stupid, Owen Wilson-Will Ferrel-Adam Sandler's style, but smart and funny films that also can be touching and above all unforgetable. Little Miss Sunshine is definatly 2006's 'winner'. Very clever script, done in that old school 'Road Movie' style. Always entertaining, and at times hilarious and with a perfect cast! From the firm dad (Kinnear), to the gay/suicidal uncle (Carrel) who is in my opinion one of the most brilliant comedians of our times. There were moments that I just couldn't laugh more, or I'ld probably die! Toni Collette doesn't desapoint either and Alan Arkin is brilliant as the cool grandpa. Paul Dano adds another great role to his short, but promissing career and in my opinion he's one of the best young actors out there. At last but not least, Abigail Breslin gives the film the innocence it needed, as a 'family film' the child actor/actress had to be present and I'm glad it was an 'anonimous' kid, and not Dakota Fanning...

Answering to someone's review that I saw here who said something like: "not as good as everyone is saying", yes it is as good as everyone is saying! Or even better... Definatly the best comedy of 2006 and a must watch! Ideal for a good time with family or some friends and with some "moral".

"Do you think the dead come back and watch the living?"

Mrs. Danvers, Rebecca (Hitchcock, 1940)

The answer to this question is no. The supernatural does not exist, only those who believe in it. Rebecca does not actually haunt Manderley. The characters in Rebecca only have their own demons they need to overcome.



The same thing can be said for Pedro Almodóvar's Volver. You can figure out that there is no ghost right from the start and yet, the characters are still haunted. It's been about two years since I first saw this film and I've really struggled to get a handle on it to review it rationally. My instincts told me instantly that this is the work of a master and I just as instantly fell in love with it. But why exactly? Wrapping the mind around that question is perplexing but also goes right to the heart of all that is wonderful about Volver.

The film stars Penélope Cruz as Raimunda, an industrious young woman who juggles an astonishing array of problems with family, friends and work and yet somehow never shows even a hint of self-pity. She just strikes forward, with plenty of humour and seemingly boundless energy. Cruz has never been better. I remember watching the film in the summer of 2006 (Spanish films are still one of the few that I can watch before most of the world) and knowing - just knowing - that an Oscar nomination was destined for her remarkable performance.

We first meet Raimunda at a cemetery, where she is cleaning the graves of her parents, who died four years earlier in a fire. Helping her out is her sister Sole (Lola Dueñas) and daughter Paula (Yohana Cobo). While there they run into their childhood neighbour Agustina (Blanca Portillo), who is tending to her own yet unused grave. The scene is fairly absurd, yet the naturalistic approach of the performers makes it play as perfectly reasonable. Immediately I started wondering if this was supposed to be a period or modern piece as Cruz's clothes and hair invokes the likes of a classical Sophia Loren. Cruz's natural charm and glamour manage to make this not seem like some sort of homage but simply a statement of the obvious: that she really is that stunning.

The film quickly storms through an introduction to the extended family. What follows is the quick dispatching of one of the film's very few men. Raimunda's husband Paco has taken a bit too much of an interest in their daughter, leading to his stabbing at Paula's hands. Raimunda wastes not a second on remorse, instead ordering her daughter to remember that "I killed him," and then figuring out how to clean up and dispose of the body. When a friend comes to the door and interrupts the process, he notices a smudge of blood on Raimunda's neck and asks about it. "Female troubles," she dismissively quips, quickly summing up the role of men in this film. Sure, you could argue the film's view of the sexes is lopsided but considering the overall scorecard in cinema, Almodóvar is more than justified. Considering the fierce personalities of his characters, it's hard to complain. It's not like the men were particularly missed.

Almodóvar has always been an eccentric filmmaker and this one is no exception, although it feels like his most settled and mature work to date. He sprays bright colours, particularly red, across his film with all the subtlety of a fire hose. Odd little details are crammed into all the corners like the rapid fire cheek kisses the women are always exchanging. The first time it seems cute but after about the fiftieth burst of kisses it takes on the air of lunacy. But then those who've met them, will realize that Spanish women really are like that. Similarly lunatic is the tangled history of Raimunda's family, up to and including the reappearance of her dead mother (Carmen Maura) in the trunk of Sole's car.

It's the attention to little details, particularly when they are arrayed in the middle of some seriously weird storylines, that gives the film its sense of authenticity. That surreal reality makes the whole affair feel really grounded no matter how far out Almodóvar takes the story. The uniformly spectacular performances of his cast only further help drive this story through what could easily be a grim series of elements like cancer, death, infidelity, incest and murder with a healthy dose of humour. It takes a confident hand to successfully play such dour subjects for laughs but Almodóvar seems able to breeze effortlessly through it, running everything through his own uniquely odd filter on life.

Almodóvar apparently based Raimunda on his own mother, attempting to capture with this film the feeling of how women talk when the men aren't around. Being a guy I'm not entirely sure if he succeeded or not but I did grow up amongst women too, and it did feel right to me. What he definitely does is explore how people are molded by the circumstances from which they were raised. It's often said that children grow up to behave exactly like their parents, no matter how much they may have reviled their parents' behaviour. Volver (which translates as "to return") shows that cyclical nature and its uglier side. But it gives Raimunda such resolve and determination that she can rush through that and find some sense of peace, hopefully dragging her family along with her.

Probably no other working director, possibly ever, has been more openly admiring and reverent of women as Almodóvar. In this film they are vibrantly alive, seeming ready to explode right off the screen. Particularly in the case of Cruz's impressively displayed cleavage. Almodóvar neither ignores that cleavage nor exploits it. It becomes a part of the film, made mention of for laughs or shot for purpose. It is a rare moment in film where I feel like I can openly appreciate a woman's cleavage and still not feel like I'm leering. But let's not get carried away, this is just a minor element, one I bring up only to highlight how much consideration Almodóvar has given his women characters. Every one of them is well-written and developed, giving his talented cast the best chance make them magical. And if that isn't a reason to love this film, I don't know what the hell is one.

First of all this is a Christopher Nolan film. Which means that you already expect it to be a dark, thoughfull masterpiece. I mean, this is the mind who created Memento, one of the most fascinating pieces of Cinema of the last 50 years... Being said this, there would always be a risk that The Prestige would not live up to the expectations. But it does! It's all there: brilliant script (wasn't aware of the book), stunning cinematography and the best cast that Nolan could possibly wish. If Christian Bale's performance is not Oscar worthy than nothing is. As simple as that! An actor can't get any better than that... Hugh Jackman is also amazing and Sir Michael Caine's character just couldn't be played by anyone else. The plot's complexity, though not in a confusing way, keeps you wondering till the last scene and the truth is that, being the film about Illusionism, the film itself has something of tricky (Nolan's touch), with that brilliant, shocking finale... But I won't say more. Just don't take your eyes of the screen of else you'll be lost... :)

So, I guess it's pretty clear that this is one of the greatest cinematic achievements of the year. I'm starting to think that I've said this a lot of times... Probably because 2006 may well be one of the recently richest years, as for quality is concerned...

One of the most bloody underrated films of cinema history! It still amazes me till this day how can someone not see the utter beauty of Marie Antoinette... The mirror of the work of a completely matured filmmaker called Coppola, Sofia Coppola.

A simply stunning debut! It's kind of impossible to pull off a better first picture then the one Rian Johnson did. A brilliant way of converting the cryptic communication and obligations of high school into an amazing mystery. A fusion between a '90s teen drug drama and a '30s noir. Fantastic!

"If our children can live safely for one more day it would be worth the one more day that we defend this island."

Clint Eastwood continues his WWII war drama with Letters from Iwo Jima, the counterpart of Flags of our Fathers. Shot back to back, this version shows the same battle from the viewpoint of the Japanese, and, when helplessly compared to Flags, this is a somewhat more heartfelt, personal story about the pride and honour of the defenders of Iwo Jima. It's also a much better film.



While Flags had its focus on the troops who participated in that iconic planting of the American flag atop a captured hill in Iwo Jima, and had the narrative actually leaving the battleground for a different battle - that for funds - back in US soil, Letters from Iwo Jima rarely leaves the field, only for moments of flashback to build its characters' backstories. And surprisingly, it doesn't influence the flow of the narrative, but rather helps to enhance your appreciation of the characters who are on that island, defending it for most parts because of faith and allegiance.

Face it, not everyone wants to be dumped into a forsaken land with limited resource, to fend off attackers throwing all their might at you. And for these soldiers forming the last bastion to defend a piece of land that would be used by the enemy as a launchpad to attack their homeland, it's their Alamo to fight to the last man in order to do so. And culture, face and pride ensures that this would be done, and watching events unfold, you can't help but feel sorry at times, at their inability to comprehend surrender when all else fails, and salute their honour and spirit in standing their ground.

Letters is played out through the eyes of the commanding officer General Tadamichi Kuribayashi (Ken Watanabe), and lowly footsoldier Saigo (Kazunari Ninomiya). It's interesting to note that the far ends of the spectrum are represented to flesh out the narrative, given their different backgrounds, one a career military man, while the other, a conscripted baker. On Iwo Jima their lives get intertwined, and their hearts, clearly elsewhere with their respective loved ones.

Ken Watanabe exudes a magnetic appeal as General Kuribayashi. Being appointed to the much shunted role in leading the Japanese Imperial Army in its defense of the island, he sets out to overhaul the entire defence mechanism, much to the disgust of the commanders on site. If you'd watch Flags, you'll understand what those tactics were, and nod in agreement that well, they do work, and the idea stemmed from being brave enough to break conventions. In fact, his daring out of the box ideas were actually what kept them holding the fort for a longer time than expected, though by breaking out of the comfort zone of his subordinates, it doesn't earn him much support. It's a battle of ideals as culture and tradition go up against being pragmatic. Kuribayashi walks the walk and talks the talk, and it is this kind of commanders that soldiers usually respect.

But amongst the detractors who think that General Kuribayashi's methods are weak, is Lieutenant Ito, played by Shido Nakamura. Asian Film fans will find him familiar, as the Japanese fighter who went up against Jet Li's Huo Yuanjia in Fearless, and starred in one of my favourite films of 2004 - Be With You<. Here, he embodies the traditional ideals of the Japanese soldier in offense mode, who cannot fathom the idea of defense, and is quick to apply ideals without putting things into perspective. He's not a bad hat per se, but one who represents soldiers who are misguided.

As with war films, there are moments where the brutal fighting takes a back-seat in order to ponder over the commonalities between soldiers at either end, that each is a son, brother, or father, and deep down inside if given a choice, neither would have wanted to leave their loved ones to end up being killed, or to kill. While the character backgrounds help to evoke sympathy for their predicament, it doesn't get too soppy or sentimental, just a tinge to think about, before it moves on.

I like the fact that there are attempts to portray the bad guys, and that they exist on both sides, the Americans and the Japanese, even though this is a film shown from the Japanese viewpoint. Eastwood deserves all the praise and respect in the world for this. The score worked wonders to the film. Simple chords, and with probably just one identifiable theme, it managed to enhance each scene it was played. I thought in this instance, there is beauty in its simplicity, and somehow brought about a sense of calm amidst the chaotic environment.

Clocking at 141 minutes, you hardly feel its length as you'll get engrossed with the narrative. I've always been a fan of Clint Eastwood's films (how can anyone not be?), and it's no doubt that Letters of Iwo Jima is yet another high-quality work from him, competing with Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby as the best he's directed since Unforgiven. If asked to decide which of this WWII double feature is the better one, my vote will go to Letters from Iwo Jima for the fact that it brought out its themes rather well, and for the cast's ability of making you feel very much for them. An essential film.

"I don't know anything about the enemy. I thought all Americans were cowards. I was taught they were savages."

"Say what you will about Gibson, he's a filmmaker right down to his nerve endings!"

Couldn't agree more with Peter Traver's review! Apocalypto may well be one of the most amazing, breathtaking films of the last couple of decades! Of all times maybe... It's highly entertaining, lots and lots of adrenaline will run through your veins untill the very last minute, that's for sure! But than again, it's so much more than an action film. The real, ultra fast paced action only begins in the second part of the film, after the pyramid scene, with the chase. - The greatest chase sequence since The Fugitive? - before that there is a deep, realistic, brilliant and even funny at times, look at a civilization that lived 500 years ago. No matter what, you just can't ignore and not admire what Gibson did! He reinvoked and portrayed the Mayan culture in a way that probably was never done so far. I pretty much travelled in time, of how involved I was... But more importantly, what he did was a reflection on 'civilization' itself. The fact that eras come and go. That life on Earth is always on constant change. As for 'evolution', don't really know... The violence, that the 'professional critics' called excessive or ridiculous, for me was one of the best parts of the film, and one of the reasons why it is so stunningly realistic. There are some scenes (like the pyramid one) that you just can't believe your eyes, of how bizarre and primitive what you're watching really is... And still, I couldn't help finding it strangely fascinating and brilliant.

It's pretty clear Gibson's fascination (or obssession) with Human nature and suffering. He just loves to shake people up, to make them jump off their seats! The way he shoots impersonates that. My doubts were taken: digital cinema IS definitely the future! The cinematography here is nothing less than perfect! And so is the acting! I still can't believe that this was Rudy Youngblood's first acting job and Carlos Emilio Baez ('Turtles Run') is just adorabe! :)



When I got home from the theater, I came straight to Flixster and immediately added Apocalypto to my 'Best of 2006' list! Something tells me I'll watch this film many times in my lifetime...

POST SECOND-VIEW THOUGHTS:

It only made me love it even more! F#%$&'n BRILLIANT!

With clear reminders of Sam Mendes's American Beauty and Todd Solondz's Happiness, Little Children manages as well (even if not with the same brilliance) to capture that sordid, twisted american middle class daylife.

Somewhen last year, when I heard of this film called Blood Diamond that would come out later in 2006, my reaction wasn't very enthusiastic. I didn't expect much more than another Hollywood film. I'm glad I was wrong! It's one of 2006's best, that's how wrong I was. The more than 2 hours don't get in the way. The film flows very naturally and the end comes up very quicky. It reminded me of Hotel Rwanda, that didn't get the same kind of recognition (except for Don Cheadle's ultra deserved Oscar nomination). The main difference lies in the fact that Blood Diamond can be an 'entertaining' film at times, even though it deals with serious issues and has some graphic violence that obviously was essential.

I was never exacly a DiCaprio 'fan' but I have to admit that I find it hard not to after watching Danny Archer on screen. The accent, the 'anti-americanism', the greed, the arrogance... Just brilliant! If it wasn't for Forest Whitaker, I'm sure he would take the statue home on the 25th. Djimon Hounsou is also brilliant encarnating Solomon Vandy. He's just so powerfull and intense! Jennifer Connelly doesn't desapoint either but I kind of wished her character had a little more relevance.

Blood Diamond achieves what very few Hollywood films do. It's an action film, no doubt about that, but the action is used to tell a story (not the other way arround), an important and relevant one, something that Edward Zwick has done before with The Last Samurai. The truth is, I know that in the future, whenever I see a diamond, I will remember this film and it will remind me of what allowed that diamond to go into anyone's finger or neck...

BEST COMEDY OF THE YEAR! And probably one of the best of the last decade. I honestly don't think I've ever laughed this much with any other film! There's always a certain risk with this kind of films (through sketches), but it ends up working perfectly! It never loses the interest and even though it is extremily unconfortable at times, it doesn't have one single moment that doesn't make anyone laught their brains out! People (some american purists) will say that Cohen's humour is "easy" or offensive but in my personal opinion he is nothing but BRILLIANT! I mean, think about it, he uses a character from a "third world" country to mock and ridiculize western (well, let's face it, american) society. The "greatest country in the world". How ironic/brilliant is that? The most amazing thing about Cohen is that he never, never loses his composture. Even in those sometimes painfully unconfortable moments, he never loses it... And the fact that all those characters (Borat, Ali G, the Austrian gay fashion guy) all came from his mind make him a comedic genius!

Like I said, the best comedy film of the year and one of the most hilarious ever made! The highly deserved triumph of a brilliant mind over Hollywood...

One last thing... About that whole thing of people not knowing what was really going on, thinking that the interviews were real. So, if it was to be shown on the Kazakhstan TV, to show the poor little third world people the american greatness, it was ok. But when it comes to the actual WORLD seing it, that's a whole diferent story... How about that?