Hollywood is full of some real bad asses, and we're not talking Colin Farrell. Some of these bad asses are of the cottage cheese variety. Paging Star Jones.

Celebs like Nicole Richie, Tara Reid, Ozzy Osbourne and others prove that just because you're well-known doesn't mean all of your parts should be.

Check out the photo gallery, if you dare.

Borat has traded his neon green thong bikini for a more modest James Bond-approved square cut bathing suit. High five!


Isla Fisher, who is engaged to Borat (aka Sacha Baron Cohen), picked up the tight La Perla powder blue swimsuit on Wednesday for her favorite faux-Kazakh, at trendy West Hollywood boutique, Le Bra Lingerie. The $89 trunks are the same body-hugging shorts that new 007, Daniel Craig, wore in the blockbuster film "Casino Royale." We liiike!

While Craig beautifully fills out his size XL man-kini, Sacha will have to be content making "romantic explosion" in a size Small. Wawaweewa!

Here's a situation: A reporter from Kazakhstan goes to Ohio and says he's covering the elections and making a documentary for his home country. One of the guys on the crew is named "Bolat." Needless to say, they weren't exactly welcomed with open arms.

In the wake of Sacha Baron Cohen's reign of chaos as bumbling Kazakh reporter Borat, it seems that real crews from the central Asian country are having a hard time being taken seriously. The crew that went to Ohio was contacted by State Department officials and the FBI before they were finally cleared. Even then, people were skeptical.

Now, people in the fashion industry are going on high alert as well. Cohen recently made a $42.5 million deal to bring another of his characters to the big screen -- a gay Austrian fashionista named Bruno. With the worldwide success of the "Borat" flick, some critics feel he might be too recognizable to fool people into humiliating themselves again. We're betting it'll work.

For a man usually observed in a state of superhuman animation, Sacha Baron Cohen -- aka Borat -- seemed supernaturally bored while waiting for his bags at LAX yesterday, and blissfully unaware that Borat's obsession with Pam Anderson may have inadvertently precipitated the Pam and Kid Rock breakup.

So just what is Cohen contemplating in this Rodin-esque pose? How he's going to once again dupe the world as Bruno, the gay Austrian fashionista? What to do with all the filthy lucre he's going to make from "Borat," which just crossed the $100 million mark in the U.S. box office?

Or, perhaps, how f***ing annoying air travel can be?

Sacha Baron Cohen showed his ping pong and disco skills to a horde of screaming fans last night at the Melbourne premiere of his runaway hit comedy, and hit Mel Gibson with a wild shot.

Saying that he wanted his Borat film to win an Oscar "for best anti-Jewish film," he added, "there is of course very fierce competition from your Melvin Gibson."

And as not to offend his Aussie hosts, said, "I am a huge fanny of your country."

TMZ has obtained a copy of the release agreement signed by the ordinary people who appeared in the "Borat" movie, but even more significant than the release is the standard cover letter.

Two frat boys who appeared in the movie have sued the film's producers, claiming they were defrauded. They allege producers promised them that they were appearing in a Kazakhstani TV documentary that would never be shown in the U.S.

The release agreement that TMZ obtained is difficult to read, and the participant who supplied TMZ with the copy says his original is equally hard to read. Nevertheless, it is a comprehensive, standard release which basically signs away your first born.

The cover letter is interesting. It almost seems like it's written by Borat himself. It begins, "Dear Film Participant." The letter continues, "Thanks very much for your interest in appearing in our Film. We're glad that you want to appear in the film to share your views or insights with the public."

And it goes on: "Attached is our standard legal consent agreement. You'll see it explains that in addition to the chance to appear in the Film, you will get an appearance fee of $___., in return for your letting us have unrestricted rights to use your image and voice in our Film. As the agreement makes clear, you will be waiving all claims in relation to the Film."

Harvey Levin's Z Spin

There's a debate raging in Hollywood over the making of the "Borat" movie and whether producers deceived the people who appeared in the film. Well, if there was deceit, it could cost FOX plenty, but it's peanuts compared to the money the studio is raking in.

Two frat boys who appeared onscreen in a drunken, racial rant are now suing producers, claiming they were told the movie was a TV documentary authorized by the government of Kazakhstan and that it would never be shown in the U.S. A driving school owner also featured in the film told TMZ exactly the same story.

Here's the deal. If someone lies to you to get you to sign a legal document -- in this case, a release allowing producers to include you in a film -- whatever you subsequently sign may not be legally binding. It's called fraud in the inducement, meaning someone induces you to sign an otherwise binding contract under false pretenses.

TMZ has done some digging, and everyone we've spoken with, who was featured in the film, told us the same tale of woe -- that they were all led to believe their fellow "US and A" citizens would never know what they did on camera.

This could be a fascinating case if it makes it to court. On the one hand, you have producers who could look like greedy, double-dealing schmucks trying to bamboozle ordinary folk. On the other hand, how's a jury gonna feel about two racist frat boys who expected that their prejudices would be a secret protected by the Atlantic Ocean?

FOX has simply said the lawsuit is without merit. Here's the reality: The studio may end up paying off some of the featured "performers." Maybe they'll each get 25 grand. Compare that to a movie that could rake in hundreds of millions of dollars. If that's the cost of doing business, then sign everyone up.

If FOX did the dirty deed, at the end of the day, the message to other studios is clear: Do whatever it takes to make a hit movie, because you'll score big-time in the end.

How's this for the beginning of a lawsuit filed today in Los Angeles County Superior Court? -- "Sacha Baron Cohen is a prankster."

Two anonymous plaintiffs are suing 20th Century Fox and One America Productions, claiming members of their college fraternity were interviewed to become part of the smash "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan" film.

The plaintiffs -- listed as John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 -- were allegedly assured the film would not be shown in the U.S. and their identities would not be revealed.

They were both selected to appear in the movie and, according to the suit, taken "to a drinking establishment 'to loosen up' and provided alcoholic beverages." They claim they signed the movie releases after "heavy drinking."

The suit claims both men were then taken to a motor home where they were filmed, all the while "encouraged to continue drinking."

The movie features a scene in a motor home where Cohen gets drunk with three frat boys who go on a racist rant about how they wished they had slaves and how minorities in the United States "have all the power."

According to the lawsuit, the frat boys only received $200 for the controversial appearance.

The plaintiffs claim they suffered "humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress, loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community..." because the movie was indeed released in the U.S.

The suit asks for unspecified damages.

Calls to 20th Century Fox were not immediately returned.

It looks like the Gypsy-Jew-Woman-Uzbekie bashing might be on hold for a bit.

Sacha Baron Cohen, who wrestled a naked fat man in his big screen hit, "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan," has taken a blade to his signature moustache.

The newly clean-cut comic enjoyed a nice, quiet lunch at Pat's in Los Angeles yesterday (not once trying to order a glass of fresh horse urine), proving that he can live a normal life despite his skyrocketing fame. Cohen was seen scooting around L.A. in his Mini Cooper on Tuesday.

Sick of traveling around in a cramped ice cream truck, Borat's alter ego, Sacha Baron Cohen, finally coughed up enough cash to fly the friendly skies this week.

For the first time in months, the actor broke character in public, replacing his famous bumbling walk with a confident stroll through LAX.

After smiling and waving to fans, the most famous reporter in all of Kazakhstan was escorted into a vehicle -- which, for a change, took off without help of several farm animals.

OK. "Borat" weekend haul was $26.4 million.

Let the glorious second-guessing begin!

So, is Fox a) an over-cautious bunch of milque-toast wimps, or b) a brilliant group of cinema strategists whose elan we pierce at our own peril?



Well, maybe the answer is "Both, simultaneously."

As the trades couldn't help but note, as did anyone else who covers media, the "Borat" per screen average was massive, $31,000 from just 837 screens. Almost too massive.

Observed The Hollywood Reporter, "Even after the film generated one of the highest per-screen averages on an 800-theater rollout in recent memory, many industry insiders still questioned Fox's strategy, with some speculating that the narrow bow left money on the table."

And Daily Variety groused , "Monday morning quarterbacks will wonder whether Fox could have captured even more B.O. dough had the studio rolled out "Borat" more widely."

After the way the studio utterly mishandled Mike Judge's brilliant-but-controversial "Idiocracy," one can't help but be predisposed to choice a) -- but there's lotsa good reasons to think the answer actually is b) as well.

Here's why: Released on too many screens, "Borat" could have easily devolved into "Snakes on an Anti-Semite," wherein it's media hype could never have lived up to expectations, and Sacha Baron Cohen would be the Howard Dean of comedy -- all fizz; no fermented horse urine.

Or something. Make up your own Kazahki analogy.

But by keeping demand pent-up in the face of amazing reviews, Fox has insulated itself against the painful, second-weekend drop-offs that typify so many movies, even good ones. Consider DreamWorks's "Flags of Our Fathers." Favorable reviews, but despite opening on 185 additional screens, it was down 38% over the weekend.

By contrast, given the word of mouth on the movie, can anyone seriously imagine a scenario wherein those turned away from sold out shows of "Borat" (including yours truly) won't show up next weekend when it's on 2,500 screens?

The flip side of the coin is that Fox was opening "Borat" against some lame-ass Tim Allen movie that is the sequel to a sequel so bereft of creativity, it may have physically damaged some children for life. (And as a friend of mine said about a Wall Street Journal's shock at "Borat's" success, "have they spoken to any American male between the ages of 30 and 55 who doesn't frequent the Council on Foreign Relations?") Was there really anything for Fox to fear?

Whatever the case, strategy or cowardice, Fox will probably 'make glorious benefits' next weekend. But you have to wonder if the motivation was keeping the movie on a slow boil, or just bracing for a crash landing that never happened. The truth is, we'll probably never know.