lawsuits Tagged Articles at Cinematical

With the assumed exception of Isla Fisher and Olive Cohen, I bet there's no one that Sacha Baron Cohen wouldn't torment with his outlandish alter egos. He's nabbed the ignorant, the rich and famous, and the less fortunate. Just the other day, he firmly planted his crotch in Eminem's face at the MTV Movie Awards. But for the most part, it's always been bruised egos and relationships in his wake -- not physical damage.

But all that's changing. TMZ reports that a woman named Richelle Olson is suing Cohen, NBC Universal, and others after suffering serious physical injuries during one of his stunts at a Bingo hall in 2007. Using the guise of a celebrity who was willing to call numbers at the hall, Cohen showed up as Bruno -- who Olson accurately describes as an "extreme, outrageous, offensive caricature of a gay man dressed in sexually revealing clothing with an Austrian accent." He used offensive language, she tried to regain control of the mic, and a struggle resulted where she was "offensively touched, pushed, and battered." This sent her into tears. She then fell unconscious, hit a concrete slab, suffered brain bleeds, and now needs a wheelchair and walker to move around. Just to make it all the worse, TMZ followed up with Bingo friends who say Olson has lost a ton of weight, looks like she's aged 20 years, and continues to fall and hurt herself further.

Unsurprisingly, there's no comment to the allegations at this time, but the turmoil does ask an important question: Just how far should Cohen be able to push the line? Or, do you think there's any line he could cross where satire becomes cruel or inappropriate?

Here's a suggestion for all would-be litigants: read the agreement you signed before you decide to sue someone. Lawsuits brought against the makers of Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan by three individuals have been tossed out of court by a New York judge who said that "all three accepted money and signed agreements releasing the filmmakers from liability," according to an article by the Associated Press.

The lawsuits in question were initiated by a driving instructor and two etiquette schoolteachers. Judge Loretta Preska ruled that they all agreed to appear in a "documentary-style" movie. I'm sure the contract didn't say it would be a "documentary-style movie that might make you look like a fool," but I don't think the driving instructor, at least, came off that bad -- he looked sincerely helpful if befuddled, as I recall from my single viewing a long time ago. When Monika reported on the filing last December, she noted that he had been paid $500 in cash. He sued for $400,000.

Since its world premiere at the Toronto film festival two years ago, Borat has sparked so many lawsuits and rumors of lawsuits that it's difficult to keep them straight. There were the unhappy frat boys (later thrown out of court), someone who didn't even make the theatrical cut but was fearful about the DVD version, the man who ran away on the street, and probably others. The statute of limitations is longer than I thought it would be for this type of lawsuit.

The upcoming Death Race remake may look nothing like the original (nor have any awesome point collections like the original, which you can see above), but maybe that's because it isn't actually based on the classic cult movie?

The Hollywood Reporter posts that writer Adam Stone is determined to stop the release of Death Race, which is scheduled to hit screens this Friday. He's filed a copywright infringement lawsuit claiming that the film is based on a script he pitched to director Paul W. S. Anderson and producer Jeremy Bolt. He thinks that a copy of the script, Joust, was kept and worked into what seems to be a Death Race 2000 revamp -- one with at least 39 elements that are just like his refused screenplay.

Is this why the film is darker, less campy, and with a lot less reported civilian casualties? Currently, Universal has declined to comment and there's no word on what damages Stone is seeking from the lawsuit.

One lawsuit down and another to go for Sacha Baron Cohen. Just two days ago the Borat star was relieved of any legal responsibility for the two frat boys that appear in Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. Today, news has broken that Cohen will be sued by an individual who does not even appear in the film. Apparently, the character Borat was filming in a restaurant in South Carolina and in this particular instance; Borat was pretending to be the restaurant's toilet attendant. Hidden cameras in the bathroom captured Sacha Baron Cohen staring at the plaintiff while he used the urinal. The man is now suing Sacha Baron Cohen for damages -- particularly, invasion of privacy -- and to stop any footage from being placed on the DVD.

According to Internet Movie Database the footage of this incident has appeared on Comedy Central and has also been released on the Internet. I have yet to find the said footage but would be sure to find it amusing. Variety has reported that the plaintiff is not only suing Sacha Baron Cohen for damages but also the South Carolina restaurant owner for allowing them to film in the bathroom. All individuals -- including the restaurant owner -- claim that they were mislead by Cohen in order to sign release forms. Ristorante Divino -- where this particular footage was taken -- stated that they would not have allowed Cohen to film if they had known he placed undetectable cameras in the bathroom.

All of these lawsuits make me curious about what Borat's production said to get these distraught individuals to sign the release forms. Of course there had to be a level of fibbing in order to protect the character and the film -- but when one signs and thus releases their image to appear in any production, does it really become fair game? I say, yes. I would be incredibly hesitant upon signing a release form for any film project -- especially in a reality or documentary style basis -- without knowing exactly what the film was about purely for editing reasons. You can behave like a model citizen but the fact is -- you will become whoever the filmmakers want you to be purely in editing. So if you want your 15 minutes of fame you better be prepared that those 15 seemingly harmless minutes won't come back on a forty-foot tall screen to haunt you.