SELF-deprecatory humour has a problem: Without the right props, it falls flat. That is the tragedy of Looking for Comedy in the Muslim World. In Albert Brooks' much-hyped comedy, which made its world premiere at the second edition of Dubai International Film Festival, the laughs do not come from the Muslim World. The epicentre of the filmís comedy is America and the Great American Fear Psychosis.
The US, according to Brooks' own portrayal, is indeed a strange world. His film endorses the American stereotype — almost in a Michael Moore meets Austin Powers sort of way — as its people being a bunch of terrified, over-reacting, low-IQ individuals. Indeed, even Brooks plays the absurd role of an actor, out to do the craziest thing he has ever heard of, only because he is lured by the thought of a coveted medal from the president.
All that, for a change, is fine. But if that was a strategy to build bridges with the Arab or Muslim World, sorry, it is a weak attempt at being patronising.
Brooks had a brilliant one-liner for a great film, which he goes all out and spoils. Do not approach Looking for Comedy as a cultural bridge; it is another American comedy that simply tries to cash in on the prevailing attention that the word, "Muslim," ensures. For all practical purposes, the film could have been named "Looking for Comedy in the Hindu World," and nothing would have changed about the filmís structure or narration. Indeed, here is a film that has the most misleading title ever in recent times.
Looking for Comedy, essentially, is a weak attempt at fun with an air of pretentious sarcasm. And whatever laughs that come are because Brooks looks vulnerable, lonely, and yes, sincere too. He strikes that right note of empathy in the opening reel (a mood accentuated at Diff, when the festival audience had the privilege of having Brooks, in person, introducing his film).
You somehow want to love this quirky comedy and the Dubai audience must have cheered up the directorís mind with their thunderous laughter, initially. Who wouldnít when Brooks had just wisecracked: "For all those who do not know who I am, I am really big in Hollywood."
But with the film, the gags soon cease to work. It is almost like a simulation of what happens to Brooks on-screen. Playing himself, an out of work actor being hired by the US government to prepare a 500-page report on what makes Muslims laugh, Brooks discovers that his attempt at stand-up comedy is not working because his jokes go over the head of an Indian audience. He takes the same jokes to Pakistan, performs them to a bunch of "budding comedians" who look more like menacing militants (and probably they are) and they work.
Brooks overplays the stress on "500 pages" of the report and his Muslim World is not in Arabia or in predominantly Muslim countries. His camera is confined to India, and offers a flimsy excuse for being there ... (it could most probably have been because of the ease in obtaining filming permissions).
While in India, he digs up some true moments of laughter though. One such is capturing the ridiculous nature of remote operated call centres. Brooks even overhears a male voice saying: "Yes, White House."
It is easy to take such potshots at India; the country has already learnt to laugh at itself. But to bring out more laughter, Brooks subjects his character to severe ridicule, overplaying the goofy American cliche.
He also loses a grip on the narrative strength the moment he tries to be politically funny. Bureaucratic over-reaction and suspicions make good comedy but the secret of packing a punch lies in being subtle. Brooke surely should know that.
Where Brooks surely succeeds is in portraying the fear psychosis of America; Looking for Comedy thus becomes a portrait of the vulnerable yet all-too-sure American. That is good enough for a quick laughter or two, but surely does not make great comedy.
So what was all that fuss about the ìMuslimî word in the title for? And what comedy does Brooks discover apart from rediscovering the fanciful fallacies of the ill-informed in the US? Pretty little.
That is sad because Brooks, indeed, could have set a new milestone, a new benchmark in employing comedy in cinema. Simply put, he squanders a fine brain-wave. How about a remake?
— Rajeev Nair
