A responsibility to the participant implies the need for informed consent, and a responsibility toward the audience is the necessity to вЂњguarantee the truthвЂќ (Sanders 546) throughout the documentary. Ruby states that in fulfilling the responsibility toward the film, the filmmaker should produce an image that is a вЂњtrue reflection of the intention in making the image in the first placeвЂќ (310)-in other words, a filmmaker should be faithful to the message they intend to convey. Jay Ruby, a leader in the field of visual anthropology, assigns the responsibilities of a documentary filmmaker to three parties: responsibilities toward the film, toward the participant, and toward the audience. Since Pryluck first began discussing the expectations of documentaries, the perceived standards have greatly expanded, covering areas beyond informed consent.

As one of few ideas upon which scholars of documentaries can agree, informed consent has provided a foundation for documentary ethics for quite some time. Almost forty years after Pryluck began writing about informed consent, Willemien Sanders, a professor of media studies, acknowledges that the notion is still regarded as an essential part in creating ethical documentaries. Calvin Pryluck, one of the first scholars to discuss documentary ethics, would agree, claiming that вЂњconsent is flawed when obtained by the omission of any fact that might influence the giving or withholding of permission.вЂќ In other words, subjects who had given their consent may not have done so if they had known the full extent of the project to which they consented. In the words of Randolph Lewis, a professor of cinema studies, informed consent represents the вЂњnotion that producers must divulge the full nature of the project to the people being interviewedвЂќ (80). While ideas regarding documentary ethics differ from scholar to scholar, there exists a general accord about concepts such as informed consent. However, rather than discredit the film, its blatant disregard of ethical limitations suggests that the expectations we have of documentaries are too restrictive, and that they limit the filmmakerвЂ™s freedom to create what is ultimately a form of art. Despite the somewhat ambiguous boundary between what is ethical and what is not, notably in documentary filmmaking, Borat pushes so many limits that it would be nigh impossible to deem it a morally-upstanding film. These criticisms all stem from the notion that, as a documentary, Borat neglects the numerous ethical obligations suggested by scholars of documentary filmmaking. Many also find fault in the filmвЂ™s misogynistic and racist portrayal of Kazakhstan, as well as in BoratвЂ™s frequent anti-Semitic remarks. Many people, including several featured in Borat, decry the filmmakersвЂ™ lack of informed consent in that they purposely kept secret the fact that Borat was an invented character. The results of this misinformation constitute many of the filmвЂ™s most offensive and, consequently, most criticized scenes.

Much of the film is dominated by awkward and downright absurd interactions between Borat and several Americans who are unaware of BoratвЂ™s fictional nature. Throughout his journey, Borat finds himself at odds with American culture, and vice versa. In the film, renowned comedic actor and writer Baron Cohen plays the role of Borat, a news reporter from Kazakhstan who travels across America вЂњto learn a lessons for Kazakhstan,вЂќ which he proclaims in a fake вЂњKazakhвЂќ accent. Ultimately, this paper will argue that instead of defining more explicit guidelines, we should consider documentary filmmakers as artists and their documentaries as art, and allow them, within moral reason, the creative freedom that these titles imply.Д«orat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, a documentary by Sacha Baron Cohen, does not simply cross lines it plays hopscotch with them.

Rather than denounce the film along with its critics, this paper will use Borat as a conduit for a discussion of the greater issue of the ethical guidelines of documentaries and how they are currently ambiguous and unnecessary. Drawing upon the expectations of documentary filmmaking as defined by scholars such as Calvin Pryluck and Jay Ruby, this paper will first introduce the subject of documentary ethics and then delve into Borat вЂ™s position in relation to the defined ethical limitations. This paper will explore the many criticisms of the film Borat and the flaws in the standards on which these criticisms were based.

Borat 2006 full movie download