Russell Brand

Discussion of various public figures

Russell Brand

Postby Gavin » 23 Jun 2013, 16:34

Russell Brand is a "serial vulgarian" (Dalrymple's words) who is currently much admired following his behaviour on US news programme. (I wonder how Brand is working in the USA actually, because I'm sure they rejected him at first because of the criminal record he acquired as a drug addict. Maybe marrying Katy Perry helped with that.)

Anyway, this particular clip has been viewed over seven million times already and everyone from the Daily Mail to the Telegraph seems to admire Brand (both journalists and commenters, universally). Indeed I think if you stopped the average person today and asked them for an example of a genius, if they didn't give you Stephen Fry they'd give you Russell Brand. They probably wouldn't be able to name any actual geniuses, either living or dead.

Brand's forthcoming tour is called "The Messiah Complex" and one can understand him having one, given how widely he is worshipped. But I've never heard him say anything profound and I even think he's a fake. I think underneath all the bluster and showmanship is a real person, but it's not someone I would want to get to know, given the smokescreen.

It seems to me that the Brand façade is the perfect poster boy for the current generation: irreverent, promiscuous, hyper-liberal, vulgar, pretentious, immature, left-wing, narcissistic, "spiritual" and ultimately superficial. As such he is tremendously popular, with men as well as women. Such is the tragedy of our time!
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Maxwell » 23 Jun 2013, 19:17

“The Rasputin Complex” would have been more apt.
Maxwell
 
Posts: 24
Joined: 19 Sep 2012, 21:08

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Caleb » 24 Jun 2013, 00:46

Someone push me off a bridge! In the first two minutes of that clip, no one actually managed to say a single thing. It's like virtually every conversation I have with people these days when I'm not conversing one-on-one. Then I thought they were kind of going to have a discussion, and then it just got worse.

I don't know whether Brand was going to say anything particularly deep and meaningful. Maybe his stand up tour would be better, maybe it wouldn't. I guess it would have been rather adolescent along the lines of "Yeah, fight the man!" People buy into that and then go home and go back to their normal lives.

What I find more interesting is the whole format of that show. Let's get all meta for a second. The people who run that show (not the people on that show, though maybe them also) probably have some idea of what they're doing, and why. I'm sure they have a whole lot of number crunchers upstairs looking at viewing numbers or something. I'm sure they also heavily research their guests, so they knew exactly what they were getting with Brand. I don't think it would have shocked them. It even seemed to me that they were encouraging him. I don't think he really mocked them at all. They didn't seem genuinely upset by what he said. They constantly deflected it, participated in it, and encouraged it. In fact, I'd say that the guy in the suit's normal role on that show is probably to be the square guy that everyone mocks. He's probably not even that stupid in real life. It's just a character. Listen to the bit where Brand mocks him for not being able to drive and listen to the radio at the same time. The guy volunteered that information about himself knowing Brand would be all over it and essentially calling him a moron. Really, can that guy seriously not drive and listen to the radio at the same time, or was he just putting that on? If so, why?

I know Brand is superficial, but I think the rest of them (except perhaps the English lady, who didn't say much) are too. I think it's like that on purpose though and they're probably not really like that. They're all just playing characters. I thought it was ironic that at about the two minute mark, Brand briefly explained how the figures he discusses on his tour are people who often get misappropriated. Yet that seemed to be exactly what happened to him. Like a Che image that has been co-opted by capitalism and put on a t-shirt, did anyone else notice that Brand actually got to say very little on his topic? Sure, he looked as though he controlled the entire tone of that interview, but they tricked him into playing "Comic Fool Brand" mocking the other people. He didn't get to play "Philosopher and Social Critic Brand" for more than a couple of moments.

Yet Youtube is replete with these kinds of videos and comments of the "LOL Brand totally pwned those idiots!!!" variety. Did he? Other than the pantomime of him "sticking it to the man", how was "the man" actually stuck? The same kind of people who love his shtick are the same ones who will ravenously consume everything the media and its advertising arm throw at them. In the modern parlance though, "Whatever!"
Caleb
 
Posts: 865
Joined: 20 Oct 2011, 04:44

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Mike » 24 Jun 2013, 04:20

My wife showed me that clip and invited me to admire it, thinking it was clever/off-the-wall/whatever. I thought it was typically juvenile.

And for Brand, of all people, to tick others off for a lack of politeness (towards himself, naturally) is just priceless. He really isn't worth the time of day.
Mike
 
Posts: 402
Joined: 01 Aug 2011, 11:08
Location: Australia

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Elliott » 14 Sep 2013, 23:09

Here he is accepting an award:

I have to admit that I found some of his jokes there funny, especially about Nazi uniforms flying off the shelves at the Hugo Boss factory. However, Brand is still an imbecile and, even despite his comments about sincerity, totally insincere. It is precisely by pretending to be so authentic that he destroys everything around him, making honesty impossible.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Gavin » 14 Sep 2013, 23:57

Yes, he's very fake and childish isn't he? He was nothing like this when I saw him in the reception of the Dorchester Hotel on Park Lane. He was very quiet and understated - thus it's all an act. In public he seems to suffer from a case of verbal diarrhea - obscenities inserted at random, no profound points. He does seem to be the definition of today's celebrity: famous just for being irreverent and not for actually doing anything difficult. Very shallow - thus the 7 million devoted Twitter followers. Do you still think he might have some kind of breakdown in the future due to his debauched and empty lifestyle?
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Elliott » 15 Sep 2013, 00:28

Oh yes.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Elliott » 17 Sep 2013, 20:56

A female's rather interesting account of being pursued by Russell Brand.
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Gavin » 17 Sep 2013, 21:26

The comments are certainly interesting...
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Charlie » 18 Sep 2013, 11:54

Judging from that picture in the Telegraph, Mr Brand seems unaware that his arm has been scrawled upon by a child with a biro.

Upon closer inspection, the youthful doodles resemble those gold chocolate coins which one sees in Marks and Spencer at Christmas, but alas, the photographer took the shot before the nation's favourite wastrel realised what the child had done.
Charlie
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 19:43

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Andrea » 20 Sep 2013, 13:00

Whilst Russell Brand seems to attract the stupidest women in society and cause them to inexplicably (pardon the following vulgarity) drop their panties immediately for him, he causes in me a very different series of reactions:

- Fear: I think Russell Brand is frightening and makes me think of serial killers...especially Peter Sutcliffe.
- Disgust: he looks dirty, unkempt, and unhygienic.
- Anger: everything he says is juvenile and vacuous.
- Boredom: He's not funny, and I've never laughed at any of his so-called "jokes"
- Loathing: in much the same manner as Fry, this odious ubiquitous man's evil face is plastered everywhere.

I was celebrating my birthday at The Dorchester a few years ago when he wandered in quietly. I am still upset that my mother and my husband's parents were subjected to being in the same room with that lout, and breathing in the same air. I may seem a bit over-the-top, but such is my dislike of the man.

Personally, I can't wait until he just goes away.
Andrea
 
Posts: 158
Joined: 30 Jul 2011, 21:55
Location: England

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Gavin » 20 Sep 2013, 14:01

I think Andrea is saying she doesn't like the guy. Clearly his "magic" doesn't work on everyone.

One thing that strikes me about Brand is how PC he is. It looks like he buys into every fad, from tattoos to "spiritualism" - no doubt egalitarianism, feminism and socialism along the way, too. A lot of women fall for it - and him - sadly, but not all.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Charlie » 24 Oct 2013, 16:46

Ok, there is a video below which will rob you of 10 minutes of your life. I've used the verb "rob" because, as you can see, it features forum favourite Russell Brand up against Jeremy Paxman. If that sounds too horrible to contemplate, I understand. I wouldn't ordinarily be aware of such things, but some lefty acquaintances of mine on Facebook have been crowing about how Brand "owned" Paxman.

So, Russell Brand has figured out that the world is unfair and that we need a revolution. But how does he intend to make the world a fairer place? I should have guessed: socialism, high taxes and wealth redistribution.

That's not all - there are plenty of other car crash moments in the video, but the scary thing is that so many people take him seriously.

And why do broadcasting institutions give him so much airtime?

A better interviewer could and should have savaged him.

Anyway, here it is, if you can stomach it...

Charlie
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 19:43

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Elliott » 24 Oct 2013, 18:43

What a ridiculous, ridiculous man. I posted a running commentary on Facebook while watching this "interview".

Honestly, I can't believe this interview... Profit is a dirty word. He wants a Socialist egalitarianism (quel surprise, and look how well it's worked every time it's been tried). The planet is being destroyed. Massive wealth disparity is, in itself, a bad thing. I grew out of this stuff at the age of 20.

He's just full of waffle, cuddly sounding phrases, and puppy dog eyes.

LOL - centralised system but don't call it government! Call it "some'ink" else.

Let's see him redistribute his own wealth.

He was a drug addict because of the government! LOL!

Parliament is decorated like Eton and Oxford, and that's a bad thing. What an idiot. No doubt Brand would have the Mother of all Parliaments decorated with graffiti - strictly non-elitist graffiti, of course.

Systems that serve elites can't be allowed to survive. Oh dear, Russell... we're all the same, really, aren't we? I keep forgetting.

Lounge around on the chair, Russell. You don't want to look respectful!

The Occupy Movement's infantile 1% idea was valuable... Pfft.

He IS angry, because for him it's REAL. Rubbish. He's a trivial fool looking for credibility.

He's an actor, apparently.

Finally, the word is "authority" not "auffority", and the singular of "criteria" is "criterion". So much for being "a verbal duelist of the highest caliber". [how somebody else had described him further up the thread - and that person now replies... "Troll is obvious"]


One other thing... Am I mis-hearing this, or at 1:27 does Paxman say "if you can't be arsed to vote, why should we be arsed to listen to your point of view"?
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Russell Brand

Postby Charlie » 24 Oct 2013, 19:38

Elliott wrote:Let's see him redistribute his own wealth.


Ha! That was my first thought too.

And yes, I believe that Paxman did use the word "arsed" twice.

The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
Charlie
 
Posts: 435
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 19:43

Next

Return to Public Figures

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

User Menu

Login Form

This site costs £100 per year to run and makes no money.

If you would like to make a small contribution to help pay for the web hosting, you can do so here.

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 175 on 12 Jan 2015, 18:23

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Copyright © Western Defence. All Rights Reserved.