December 05, 2007
Borat Filmmakers Sued By Driving Instructor
The one guy who seemed kind of charmed by Borat's antics in last year's "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan" has joined the parade of people suing the fake Kazakh reporter. According to Reuters, driving instructor Michael Psenicska's suit against the film's makers and star Sacha Baron Cohen claims that he was tricked into participating in a film that he was led to believe was a "documentary about the integration of foreign people into the American way of life."Psenicska said he was paid $500 in cash to give Borat a driving lesson and described the experience as "surreal," saying Cohen drove erratically down residential streets, drank alcohol and yelled to a female pedestrian that he would pay her $10 for "sexy time." Psenicska is seeking $100,000 in compensatory damages and additional punitive damages for being misled, and for the emotional harm he allegedly continues to suffer. Psenicska said if he had known the true nature of the film, he never would have participated. The studio behind the flick said the suit had no merit and that Psenicska was a willing participant in the film.
What? How dumb is this? Why is the dude waiting THIS late to sue? Greed?
Since when is being dooped a criminal offense? I'm gonna sue the filmmakers as well because I thought the movie was a true story. Maybe I could get $300,000.
Fellas, what's up with this?
Posted by anthony at December 5, 2007 02:34 PM | TrackBackDidn't the Presbyterian minister and his wife already try to sue him? I don't think they got anything.
Posted by: Dave S. at December 5, 2007 03:11 PMI'm going to sue as well. When I heared Sasha Cohen had a new movie out, I was expecting the subject to be figure skating. Boy, was I surprised.
Posted by: Dan at December 5, 2007 06:12 PM"Since when is being dooped a criminal offense?"
Fraud is generally defined as a 1) deliberate deception 2) for personal gain 3) resulting in damage to the deceived, and is usually a criminal offense. It's not just the deception - it's embarrassment resulting from having been fooled into signing a release for a movie that pokes fun at you.
Posted by: tusc0n raider at December 6, 2007 09:50 AMtusc0n is right... he definitely has a viable civil case for defamation, particularly if he can prove it has hurt his business.
... although, in a weird way, it could probably help his business too.
Posted by: Brad at December 6, 2007 02:43 PM