MovieChat Forums > Looking for Comedy in the Muslim World (2006) Discussion > Why not go to the Muslim world instead o...

Why not go to the Muslim world instead of India in Asia?

posted 18 years ago by globaldenizen
90 replies | jump to latest

Did not anyone stop Brooks and say hey bud (like the co-star Ms Sheetal Sheth, a Hindu); India is NOT a Muslim country but actually a HINDU country (officialy secular like the US) with almost 85% of the country as practicing Hindus? He did not go to the heart of the Muslim world, instead you went to a Hindu country in Asia.

Why didn’t he go to the Middle East or Africa? There many more Muslims in Africa and Middle East then there are in India?

Moreover he could have gone to Indonesia, and Malaysia in Southeast Asia where there are over 300 million Muslims, and yes they are East Asian looking (or more Chinese looking), but just like the millions of Muslims in the “stan” countries of central Asia, that’s the reality.

What Brooks et al did is worse then coming to America to study the Black world (there are 12% African Americans in the US which is the equivalent to the percentage of Muslims in India) or go to France to study the Muslim world (they have over 10% Muslims) or best yet he should have gone to Israel to study the Arab Palestinian Muslim world since Israel has a much higher percentage of Muslims then does India?

Why did he do this? The premise of the movie was to show how the US wants to learn about the Muslim world and dispel its ignorance to better deal with it. Yet he makes the ultimate ironic ignorant move and goes to a non-Muslim country counter to the title. Perhaps this was why Sony decided to stay away from this movie because the Title is wrong and a lie.

Why did Brooks, a Jew, do this? What he has done is a form of racism and not only does a disservice to Muslims but he has tried to detract from over a billion Hindus worldwide and in India. He shows women wearing their Bindis which is know world over that Hindus wear them and yet he tries to misrepresent those women as Muslims. Why?

Brooks simply ignored the facts and it seems he in particular but perhaps the West in general don’t care about accuracy and truth...simply lumping people together no matter the realities.

What America needs most is more accuracy and wider exposure to the myriads of peoples and religions that make up this world and not fraudulently misrepresented India and its majority Hindu people (as well as the turban wearing Sikhs) in the movie.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ladyconstance30 18 years ago

THEY FILMED THIS MOVIE IN INDIA BECAUSE IT IS THE FIRST COUNTRY THAT SAID "YES". NONE OF THE ARAB COUNTRIES WOULD ALLOW THEM IN, AND SINCE INDIA DOES HAVE A VERY LARGE MUSLIM POPULATION (I DISAGREE WITH YOUR STATISTICS) THEY WENT THERE. IT'S ALSO WRONG TO ASSUME ALL INDIANS ARE HINDUS. I THINK COMING TO AMERICA TO STUDY THE "BLACK WORLD" WOULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT THING TO DO IF YOU'RE GOING TO COUNT IN ALL AREAS OF THE WORLD. THE SAME GOES FOR INDIA - JUST BECAUSE IT'S NOT PRIMARILY A MUSLIM COUNTRY DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT WORTHY OF BEING ON THE LIST. I'M SURE THE MANY MUSLIMS IN INDIA WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THIS.

[–] globaldenizen 18 years ago

The data on the percentages of Hindus versus others in India come from the latest world data based by on CIA website and World Bank and Indian demography websites etc etc...I could go on...there is no debate with this these are well known numbers.

....Are you in line for a Muslim documentary set in Israel showing Jews and labeling them all Muslims? Or going to Saudi Arabia and filming the people there and calling them all Chrisitans or Jews etc? How about Sunday churches and going to the Pew and telling jokes to all of them as though they were Muslims or Jews or Hindus?

America needs world knowledge not ignorance about the multitude of peoples that make up the world...

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] eurodent05 18 years ago

15% of 1 billion = 150,000,000. Not part of the muslim world? That is more muslims than in Iran and Iraq combined.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ninac4116 18 years ago

Pakistan is the most liberated of the Muslim nations. Reread the sentance: "of the Muslim nations." I'm not comparing Pakistan to other Muslim nations. I'm comparing Pakistan to India. Women in Pakistan have less rights/freedom, compared to women in India.

PS: Just because a women is wearing Western clothes or not wearing a Hijab does not make them more liberated at all. Its so sad that it is a status symbol in the South Asian world to wear American style clothing. Wearing Hijabs/lenghas/salwars,etc is culture and should never be confused with lack of liberation! Just because one eats hamburgers compared to tandoori chicken does not make them more "free".

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

Sorry to be rude, but frankly your imbecile logic and reasoning would only work on your fellow idiotic Americans. Please go and worship the butts and boobs of some celebrity and quit wasting our time in this discussion group.

[–] skylinesea 18 years ago

are you an idiot? india is NOT a muslim country, and it's a fact. it's not just a "thought" or an "assumption". so get over it.

[–] Meldon1 18 years ago

I am Indian, and Muslim, and if you want to find comedy in the Muslim world, the country dosent need to be muslim, the people need to be. 150 million muslims in the same country, second only to Indonesia, might be why India was chosen, also, you can make a comparision between Muslims living in a secular goverment (India) and a religious goverment (Pakistan).

Of course, there is the fact that Arabs would probably not lower themsleves to talk to an American anyways (you know, considering the fact that america is hell bent on conquering all countries with oil)

[–] his6 18 years ago

"a religious goverment (Pakistan)"

^what makes you think that there is a religious government in pakistan? it is by far the most secular govt. pakistan has ever seen.

[–] hemantkhan 18 years ago

India has more muslims any middle eastern country. And Indian actors, President, politicians, cricket players or other sports players consist of muslims too. Who the hell r u idiots to make an opinion on their behalf. Even Indian tennis player Sania Mirza was told not to play tennis by some muslims leaders in the middle east, but she said she doesn't care wat they say. They just increase the bounds of religion to make things worse of themselves and others from their religion. This is liberalism, not wearing hijab and stuff. so grow up and be more friendly if u don't wanna complain abt people not comin to ur places to shoot a movie.

[–] skrekkur 18 years ago

I think you have a button stuck in called CAPS-LOCK, high caps text like this is unreadable and automaticly filtered by my brain like SPAM, check your keyboard/manners if you want someone to take you seriously

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ElleWoods7 18 years ago

I thought the same thing when I saw the trailer-like why in the world are they filming in India which is a predominately Hindu country?? It made no sense whatsoever to me. Now that I think about it, perhaps the poster above is correct in stating that predominately Muslim countries would not allow them to film there. I know last month Syria would not allow a journalist in their country simply b/c he had a Jewish last name. So that theory would make a lot of sense. In any case, Albert Brooks is not funny so who is he to ask the question. He should've called it "Looking For Comedy in an Albert Brooks' Film."

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." - Sir Winston Churchill

[–] LeekosVasilis 18 years ago

The largent Muslim population is in Indonesia, followed by Pakistan, and then India. While India's Muslim pop. is only 10% of the population, that accounts for more than 100 million Muslims (1/3 the population of the USA). That's a lot of Muslims, tho as not as concentrated as in Indonesia or Pakistan. I'm not arguing anything, just stating facts. As to why Brooks didn't choose Indonesia for the film... no idea.

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

As to why Brooks didn't choose Indonesia for the film... no idea.

===================

He didnt choose Indonesia because the people there are "chinese looking and yellow skinned".

In order to satisfy the CHRISTIANITY endorsed racial stereotypes that ill-bred Americans follow, mongoloid looks imply that they are atheists or Buddhists.

Therefore, he comes to the place where there are Brown-skinned people in order to satisfy these CHRISTIANITY endorsed racial stereotypes. Even if that means he has to LIE and spread CANARDS about the actual situation of some countries.

My other theory is, Albert Brooks could be a "left leaning" person and that explains his cunning, racistic mindset - to exploit these inherent racistic tendencies of the American Christian majority in order to gain fame and fortune for himself.

[–] sweetie1433 18 years ago

Drampire, it seems that you are anti-christian, and against this movie that stereotypes muslims, but if i'm not mistaken, i've read a couple of anti-muslim comments in your posts also... am i wrong?

just lookin for a clarification, thats all

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

Little girl,

I am a 23,000 year old Buddhist vampire ;)

Your labels of "anti-christian", "anti-muslim" mean nothing to me.

But, of course, I dont endorse death cults that spread hatred - Christianity, Islam and Communism.

[–] Soldierusa 18 years ago

You'd think a 23,000 year old Buddhist vampire would know Albert Brooks is Jewish -- not a Christian, nor Muslim, nor communist (although if you said socialist I would have given that to you). Twenty-three thousand years of knowledge and you missed the most important fact. Muslim countries didn't want a film starring a Jewish comedian doing a comedy about highlighting their culture to be shot in their backyard.

You'd probably feel the same way if Blade IV was being shot using your coffin as a prop.

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

Brooks Jewishness has nothing to do with this movie, just like my Buddhist predelictions have got nothing do with my views on Islam and Christianity. Infact, he could as well be a money-minded, greedy Arab and still would've falsely mischaracterized India as a "part of the muslim world" because the real money lies in PLEASING the racistic sensibilities of the Christian right in United States of America.

=======
"Muslim countries didn't want a film starring a Jewish comedian doing a comedy about highlighting their culture to be shot in their backyard."
=======

You yourself acknowledge that the "muslim countries" dont want a jew directing a comedy about them...

Apparently, you are aware that the actual muslim countries are elsewhere - in the greater middle east and north africa.

Is that why you slander the only non-muslim country in that region as a "part of the muslim world" ?

As if a measly 850 million Hindus, buddhists, sikhs, jains and parsees do not matter ?

[–] skylinesea 18 years ago

uhhh Islam does not spread hatred.

If you are really a Buddhist, you'd know that life is about peace and that is what Islam promotes.

Get yourself educated before you open your big mouth, you "vampire".

[–] ninac4116 18 years ago

India is NOT part of the Muslim world! I understand that it has the 2nd highest Muslim population, but that alone does not make it part of the "Muslim World". India is also the largest English speaking country in the world, does that make it part of the Anglo world? Overtown and Liberty City in Florida are almost 100% populated by African-Americans. Does that make it part of the African world? No!! It may have the 2nd highest population in the world, but it is still a minority in India.

The problem I have with this movie is after 9/11 many Indians were targets for hate crimes because ignorant people automatically assumed because they were "brown" they were Muslims. This only perpetuates stereotypes. If you do not know much about Indian culture and only know this movie by its trailor and title you will automatically assume that India is a Muslim country, which it is not! I wouldn't be surprised if more Indians are victims of hate crimes after this movie, and thats why this makes me sad!!

[–] mseclectic 18 years ago

ninac4116: THANK YOU!!! I COULD KISS YOU RIGHT NOW.

"Why is the rum gone?"
-Cpt. Jack Sparrow

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

I'm quite familiar with your "religion of peace", especially after our beloved Buddha statues were blown up by your "peaceful" Talibaan, thank you.

Islam is not about peace, its infact just a political tool for Arab domination of the world, just like Christianity is a guise for white supremacism.

[–] MissHoneybee 18 years ago

>I'm quite familiar with your "religion of peace", especially after our beloved Buddha statues were blown up by your "peaceful" Talibaan, thank you.<

truth is that, throughout the ages, men have used all excuses whether it be race, sex or religion to commit awful atrocities to other people. Islam is a peaceful religion, but like many religions some will use and twist it to obtain power.

and if you think that Buddhism is exempt from this rule-you might want to read this article about the Buddhist Army:

http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=3583

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

Your argument is a typically spurious one thats oft presented by liberals/left wing people.

You people just want to play "everyone is the same" card exhausting it to ridiculousness, extrapolating some genuinely compassionate notions from Hinduism and Buddhism to form senseless conclusions- Buddhists are no better than Muslims, Hindus are no better than Christians, Jewish victims are no better than Nazis, so on and so forth. Such tripe is merely a disingenous means to cover up the dirty deeds carried out exclusively by christians, muslims and communists against the rest of the humanity.

The great sense of "symmetry" in cultural relations that you people claim to strive for, is conspicuous by its absence in almost the entire course of history. How can you arrive at any such "symmetry" if you are dishonest from fundamental principles ?

For eg,

--> Buddhists havent USED their Buddhist SUTRAS to launch crusades and wars. The very nature of the teachings of that faith doesnt even bother about conversion of people and such trivial issues, which are obsessed over to a sickening extent by the evil triad- Christianity, Islam and communism- always competing with one another on who should win more converts for their cause.

--> Buddhist monks dont give out edicts like christian priests and Muslim Mullahs. They lead spiritual lives mostly staying out of politics. No one uses Buddhism or the name of Buddha to launch wars or blow up people.

--> Buddhists dont behead people because they are "kaffir" or ridicule people who dont belong to their faith as "hell bound heathens". Our Sangha leaders dont give out edicts saying so and so religions are "evil faiths", in order to specifically insult people belonging to certain religions.

And one ethnic group is now branded as terrorist and likened to Islamists because they are fighting against a dictatorship ? So, you side with the dictatorship now ? Does your argument also claim that they are using Buddhist Sutras in their quest for establishing a "buddhist" homeland ? I dont see how opposing a dictatorship constitutes a morally wrong choice in the first place, as long as they dont indulge in beheadings, colonialism, slavery, genocides, mass lynchings of ethnic minorities, and other barbaric behavior that Christians and Muslims are experts in, they are fine with me.

[–] Lucifer_nib_666 18 years ago

***
Your argument is a typically spurious one thats oft presented by liberals/left wing people.
***

Guess that makes me a Liberal Then. I rather be a liberal than a Conservative fascist.

Its Time To Rage Against The Machine

[–] calebo 18 years ago

23,000 year old buddhist vampire? i hope you arent serious. Buddhism hasnt been around for that long in once place, not to mention you complain about Americans stereotyping other people, yet what are you doing? stereotyping us. Pretty hypocritical.

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

23,000 year old buddhist vampire? i hope you arent serious.
============

You apparently cant get my sense of humor, and yet you people make fun of INDIANs being unappreciative of stupid Halloween jokes ?

Stereotyping AmeriKKKans is a natural response, you should be thankful that the spiritual temperance of Indian culture curtails any violent predelictions and confines our protests to peaceful means only.

You better not make such mistakes with the Islamic world though, they'll have your heads for it.

Problem with you people is your desert-based, tribal religion that only teaches you self indulgence, violence and racial supremacism.... which is plainly evident by the actions of your "cult" members.

[–] annaelizabeth15 18 years ago

He didn't choose Indonesia because it is funnier to have it be India, a country that is not strongly associated with Islam, because it highlights how stupid the American government can be.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] andy-895 18 years ago

Hi there Leekos - India is no.2 in Muslim Population - just checked up the facts. There are more muslims in India than in any other country except Indonesia.
At the same time i agree that they could've shot the movie in some islamic country - which'd have been a better representation of the muslim world.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rslssp 18 years ago

Isn't the movie a satire? Making this only part of the point...

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wankothewizard 18 years ago

Because, i don't think it would be a very smart idea for a jewish film maker to go and shoot a movie about muslims in Pakastan do you?

[–] Trivian 18 years ago

Mr. Brooks didn't get permission to go to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia to make his film. India ia a good choice because there are large, stable Muslim communities there, with histories spaning centuries. There are more Muslims in India than there are in Pakistan. - Trivian

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] eurodent05 18 years ago

Actually, Muslims make up 15% of the Indian population, northern india is ALL Muslim (which is why Pakistan was created). Hindus are about 80% of the population, and there are Mosques in every major city. It is the second biggest religion in India, I don't think that you can say with any accuracy that India is not part of the Muslim world.

Where did you get your percentages? Did you make them up?
Look at the CIA world factbook, 15% Muslim.

15% of a country of 1 billion + is a HUGE number of people! 150,000,000 - half the population of the United States, larger than the total population of most other countries.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] snow_leopard45 18 years ago

the person who started the post is either indian and non muslim and embarrassed that india is labeled as a muslim contry , or is from a muslim country and is embarresd that a asian country is labelled a muslim country, or none of those and sticking there nose in something that is completely irelevant to them

[–] ags28 18 years ago

The title of the movie really does make no sense...in the trailer, they show Albert Brooks performing a routine to an unamused Hindu audience, making a really bad joke about Gandhi (a Hindu).

Where are the Muslims in this "Muslim world?" Why doesn't the trailer include scenes of Brooks interacting with Muslims? It's true that India has a huge Muslim population...so where are they? The majority of the characters the trailers show Brooks interacting with are Hindu.

This probably is a decent movie, but it seems like one of those movies with a catchy title (aimed at grabbing publicity) that isn't true to what actually transpires in the film.

[–] DrampireXIV 18 years ago

Eurodent...

Northern India has a Hindu majority of roughly 80%-90% and they typically vote for Hindu right wing parties, who are for "genuine" secularism based on non-communist principles of tolerance. South and East India, unfortunately, vote to the left.

By the way, Muslims happen to make up 12-13% of France, there are mosques everywhere in the suburbs of every major city in France. Most of them came as foreigners some generations back, but now, they are all French by birth.

Going by your logic its time to push France into the Islamic world too ?

or, maybe that will never happen since they are racially similar to Americans and because of the christianity endorsed racial stereotypes - white=christian world ?

[–] mak2675 18 years ago

i think albert brooks was definitely playing the stereotype card and he knew he could exploit the american ignorance for the muslims population. But what also baffles me is why, after being 'forced' to film in India since the Arab countries wouldnt take him in intially or whatever the story is on that, WHY DIDNT HE CHANGE THE TITLE OF MOVIE to something like lets see....Looking for Comedy in the Indian World?

To put it in one sentence, he wanted to commercially exploit or MAKE MONEY from the blissful ignorance of Americans of not knowing who they think they know.

Sure maybe its supposed to be satire, but trust me its probably only really partial and a lot of the message seems to convey that the movie literally thinks its meaning India is the muslim world. That is to say people walk away still thinking they just saw the Muslim world and i doubt Albert Brooks gives a damn.

[–] MrC_the_Amazing 18 years ago

Wow, the joke really just soared right over your head...

"Sure maybe its supposed to be satire, but trust me its probably only really partial and a lot of the message seems to convey that the movie literally thinks its meaning India is the muslim world."

Why exactly should I trust you on this? Could you tell me the names of the people you personally know who worked on making and distributing the film? Or maybe your own film credentials and "inside knowledge" of the American film industry (not Hollywood, since this was independent).

Sorry to quote this one more time, but it's deserving:
a lot of the message seems to convey that the movie literally thinks its meaning India is the muslim world."

THAT'S THE JOKE!

Many Bothans died to bring you this information.