Remember way back in the summer of 2009, when Sacha Baron Cohen's fashion/celebrity spoof Brüno sashayed onto the scene and was promptly greeted by a big "meh" from critics and the general public? Remember how it attracted the ire and/or disapproving glares of LGBT support groups everywhere? Remember how the Palestinian activist who was wrongly portrayed as a terrorist in the film sued Sacha Baron Cohen for defamation? Well, he has refiled his $110 million lawsuit and this time he's going after everyone in the entertainment industry: Sacha Baron Cohen, NBC Universal, actor/producer Jonah Hill, director/producer Jay Roach, David Letterman (who aired a clip on his show), Letterman's World Wide Pants production company, and CBS.

Ayman Abu Aita, the self-described activist who is refiling the lawsuit, claims that Brüno caused him to suffer: "death threats; shame; loss of reputation; loss of effectiveness as a community organizer and conciliator; depression and anxiety; loss of business to his family market; and fear for the well-being and safety of his wife, children, and his relatives." The refiling comes after NBC Universal and CBS filed a motion last month to dismiss the case, citing jurisdiction issues due to the fact that neither Cohen nor Aita is a U.S. citizen. Here's the sort of funny scene that started this whole brouhaha.

As enamored as I am of Cohen's humor -- the original Da Ali G Show was a comedy staple for me in college and I've greatly enjoyed both of his movies -- I am naturally sympathetic to the notion that comedians (and entertainers in general) have a moral responsibility to the public. Whether that means not putting out misogynist/racist/homophobic/ableist material or, in this case, simply representing people appropriately, pop culture can be hugely influential on social mores and so should be produced with an appreciation for that.

Besides, the reality that Ayman Abu Aita appears, in point of fact, to not be a terrorist really undermines the shock comedy value of the bit. If Cohen wanted to film an all-out fictional film, that would be one thing...but to present your film as a guerrilla realist avant garde comedy extravaganza and to then simply fabricate someone's identity strikes me as artistically (not to mention morally and, perhaps, legally) problematic.