• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
I will never understand the media interest in this no-talent oxygen thief, or why a certain strand of the female (and some aspects of the male) population is indecently drawn to this thin streak of piss.
 
Well, with David Icke now having passed his three score years and ten, perhaps the tinfoil hat brigade would like a new messiah a few decades younger to keep bestowing upon them conspiratorial largesse?
 
Ah but does Brand believe he is the son of God - because we only ever witnessed the public crucifixion of Icke on the Wogan show!
Give him a chance to start believing that. He has a lot on his plate. :chuckle:

public crucifixion of Icke on the Wogan show -

I saw that on the night.
The audience were whooping and Wogan said 'They're not laughing with you, they're laughing at you.'
Icke was obviously there to be set up as a joke. He was blissfully oblivious of the scorn.

I hated Wogan SOOO much. :chuckle:
 
Give him a chance to start believing that. He has a lot on his plate. :chuckle:



I saw that on the night.
The audience were whooping and Wogan said 'They're not laughing with you, they're laughing at you.'
Icke was obviously there to be set up as a joke. He was blissfully oblivious of the scorn.

I hated Wogan SOOO much. :chuckle:
I really disliked Wogan for doing that, actually.
He could be capable of nastiness at times.
 
Give him a chance to start believing that. He has a lot on his plate. :chuckle:



I saw that on the night.
The audience were whooping and Wogan said 'They're not laughing with you, they're laughing at you.'
Icke was obviously there to be set up as a joke. He was blissfully oblivious of the scorn.

I hated Wogan SOOO much. :chuckle:

I remember that too.
Probably the most cringeworthy piece of television I can ever recall.
But give it time. Perhaps Brand can go one worse.
 
Great post (#24)@Zeke Newbold.

Personally, I've never been able to get beyond a visceral and long standing dislike of Brand. Even in those instances when the message seems 'on' for me, any actual sincerity seems totally lacking; it all feels like an act. (And I still find it hard to get past Stewart Lee’s description of the Brand/Paxman interview: ‘…like watching a monkey throwing its excrement at a foghorn’.)

A couple of years ago I came across a memorable phrase - used to describe the legendary journalist Seymour Hersh's shift towards professional apologist for Assad and the Syrian regime: 'Twilight aberration'.

Giving Brand the benefit of the doubt, maybe this is his. I suspect it's not that unknown a phase in professional commentators lives – and maybe it’s just hit Brand early. People who wish to create are often told to explore what they know – and I can't help wondering if people who are paranoid about their careers maybe have a tendency to fall back on paranoia as inspiration. And I dare say for those who are accustomed to disseminating opinions, but have run out of ideas with which to reinforce them, the ease with which one can reach in to the bin for a fully prepared, boil in the bag conspiracy - with guaranteed click harvesting potential and no extra work required - is just too tempting.

Brand is becoming just another professional hystericist. He better be good at it, because it's a crowded field.

Stewart Lee on Brand again. Again - I can never look at Russell Brand without thinking 'cartoon pirate'. (I think Richard Herring - Lee's former comedy partner - is more sympathetic to Brand):

Fat sweaty Stu Lee he is up there with that angry man Frankie Boyle.... can't stand both.
 
Okay, does anybody have a comment on Brand's course of travel, current interests or likely destination?

Because a 'Let's Insult Russell Brand' thread probably belongs in CHAT.
His course of travel and likely destination is Hell in a wheelbarrow.....
 
Great post (#24)@Zeke Newbold.

Personally, I've never been able to get beyond a visceral and long standing dislike of Brand. Even in those instances when the message seems 'on' for me, any actual sincerity seems totally lacking; it all feels like an act. (And I still find it hard to get past Stewart Lee’s description of the Brand/Paxman interview: ‘…like watching a monkey throwing its excrement at a foghorn’.)

A couple of years ago I came across a memorable phrase - used to describe the legendary journalist Seymour Hersh's shift towards professional apologist for Assad and the Syrian regime: 'Twilight aberration'.

Giving Brand the benefit of the doubt, maybe this is his. I suspect it's not that unknown a phase in professional commentators lives – and maybe it’s just hit Brand early. People who wish to create are often told to explore what they know – and I can't help wondering if people who are paranoid about their careers maybe have a tendency to fall back on paranoia as inspiration. And I dare say for those who are accustomed to disseminating opinions, but have run out of ideas with which to reinforce them, the ease with which one can reach in to the bin for a fully prepared, boil in the bag conspiracy - with guaranteed click harvesting potential and no extra work required - is just too tempting.

Brand is becoming just another professional hystericist. He better be good at it, because it's a crowded field.

Stewart Lee on Brand again. Again - I can never look at Russell Brand without thinking 'cartoon pirate'. (I think Richard Herring - Lee's former comedy partner - is more sympathetic to Brand):

'Some twats in a place'... Hmm, reminds me of somewhere........
 
Okay, does anybody have a comment on Brand's course of travel, current interests or likely destination?

Because a 'Let's Insult Russell Brand' thread probably belongs in CHAT.
Yeah,. Cool it, people.

I wrote a post critical of Brand above - and many of you Liked it (for which thank you). I do wonder, however, how many of you actually read it properly - because my contribution was quite nuanced by comparison with some of the slingshots above (he's an `oxygen thief` with `no soul` who looks like `odbod` and so on and so on). I said some positive things about him and expressed a worry (which I still hold to) that he was just beconming another Jordan Peterson style ranting grifter.

But let;'s get things into perspective. He's a seedy celebrity - sure. But everyone's allowed to grow and to change. He's a womaniser - sure. But, to the best of my knowledge, he has never been one of these Hook Up Gurus who tell men how ro be the same as them. (In fact, he could probably make tons more money than he is if he were to do just that). And the kind of women that he hooked up with were just the same kind of vacuous celebs as he was - and no doubt he can tell a few stories about their behaviouf as much as they have done about him.

And here's some commendable things about Russell Brand: Many of his earlier Vlogs were cogent, involved interesting guests - and, above all, he sourced the material that he drew on so that you could check it (very few vloggers do the same). Also he specifically tried to get involved with dialogue with people that he disagreed with.

He was also promoting some positive values not so long ago: overcome your addictions. Use your head. Develope an enquiring mind. Be tolerant of differences. Educate yourself. Question everything!

I don't understand where all the hatred is coming from. Okay I know it's only words - and much of it is in jest, but there's a whiff of the lynch mob about it. (Nick Pope was subject to the same kind of abuse a few years ago - and I didn't get that either).

Russel Brand is NOT Andrew Tate!
 
Yeah,. Cool it, people.

I wrote a post critical of Brand above - and many of you Liked it (for which thank you). I do wonder, however, how many of you actually read it properly - because my contribution was quite nuanced by comparison with some of the slingshots above
I too thought it odd how some people who really hate him 'liked' your post. I've noticed this happening quite a bit on here recently.
Of course, you don't have to agree with a post to 'like' it, it could just be that you find it was a well written piece even if you disagree, but it does seem that people are sometimes not really reading posts properly.
 
I don't understand where all the hatred is coming from.
My low opinion of him comes from his manbaby act or whatever it is. I can't stand men who do that.
Nothing he could ever do would redeem him in my eyes; it'd all be in the effort to get his end away. :mad:
Like I said, women to men like him are vaginas on legs.
 
I have no real opinion on Russell Brand. He is a comedian known for a very specific kind of comedic delivery and persona. He does know how to promote himself. He has, imo, always been outspoken and expressed oppositional views to the mainstream thoughts of the day. This is his persona. I have no idea nor impression of who he may be as a person.

Nowadays people who want to be noticed and have an outspoken persona like his have to really be "out there" in their expressed views to get any notice.

He is a person who, imo, needs this attention. He is an addict and therefore, most likely, has addictive personality traits.

His followers will only follow as long as he expresses their views. He is an entertainer.
 
Last edited:
Yeah,. Cool it, people.

I wrote a post critical of Brand above - and many of you Liked it (for which thank you). I do wonder, however, how many of you actually read it properly - because my contribution was quite nuanced by comparison with some of the slingshots above (he's an `oxygen thief` with `no soul` who looks like `odbod` and so on and so on). I said some positive things about him and expressed a worry (which I still hold to) that he was just beconming another Jordan Peterson style ranting grifter.

But let;'s get things into perspective. He's a seedy celebrity - sure. But everyone's allowed to grow and to change. He's a womaniser - sure. But, to the best of my knowledge, he has never been one of these Hook Up Gurus who tell men how ro be the same as them. (In fact, he could probably make tons more money than he is if he were to do just that). And the kind of women that he hooked up with were just the same kind of vacuous celebs as he was - and no doubt he can tell a few stories about their behaviouf as much as they have done about him.

And here's some commendable things about Russell Brand: Many of his earlier Vlogs were cogent, involved interesting guests - and, above all, he sourced the material that he drew on so that you could check it (very few vloggers do the same). Also he specifically tried to get involved with dialogue with people that he disagreed with.

He was also promoting some positive values not so long ago: overcome your addictions. Use your head. Develope an enquiring mind. Be tolerant of differences. Educate yourself. Question everything!

I don't understand where all the hatred is coming from. Okay I know it's only words - and much of it is in jest, but there's a whiff of the lynch mob about it. (Nick Pope was subject to the same kind of abuse a few years ago - and I didn't get that either).

Russel Brand is NOT Andrew Tate!

I thought you made a lot of very fair points @Zeke Newbold as you often do, so I liked your post.

I haven't seen much of Brand for some years but what I did see of him, or at least the character he was assuming as a media persona made me uneasy although once or twice he made some quite thoughtful comments.

I saw him in the George Cole “spiv” role in the St Trinians remake where there was no acting involved unless it was to maintain that persona.

It is that persona that I don't like in the same way that I don't like the David Walliams persona (and he's a children's author as well!) They “feel wrong” and whatever their ideas, if I met them in person I'd probably want to avoid them. (“Seem fair but feel foul” I think Tolkien said)

I've no way of knowing whether either reflects their true character but as they must both be media savvy I assume either that they are or that there are a lot of people who find those character traits attractive.

I guess I'm also cynical about self promoting slebs who latch onto various subjects in order to get some publicity. Myleene Klass (“What you get when you spell class with a K” - Stephen Fry) was everywhere a few years ago proclaiming interest and enthusiasm for all sorts of things. Classical music as she was a “trained pianist” - it was some minor certificate. Astronomy, “she would always go up on the roof of a venue with her telescope”. Where the heat from the building distorts the image so much as to be useless.

If Brand has a genuine interest in Fortean subjects then OK, I think he may have the intellectual ability to present some balanced material (Walliams is no idiot either, I'll reserve judgement on Klass :thought:) But please lose that annoying persona or get some tips on having a little more gravitas. Which btw doesn't mean losing the humour.
 
My low opinion of him comes from his manbaby act or whatever it is. I can't stand men who do that.
Nothing he could ever do would redeem him in my eyes; it'd all be in the effort to get his end away. :mad:
Like I said, women to men like him are vaginas on legs.
What's a 'manbaby' then?
 
. an oily nonce; like the creepy uncle at the party who always wants little Susie to sit on his lap.

maximus otter
Fiddle about, fiddle about?
Uncle Ernie.jpg
 
Yeah,. Cool it, people.

I wrote a post critical of Brand above - and many of you Liked it (for which thank you). I do wonder, however, how many of you actually read it properly - because my contribution was quite nuanced by comparison with some of the slingshots above (he's an `oxygen thief` with `no soul` who looks like `odbod` and so on and so on). I said some positive things about him and expressed a worry (which I still hold to) that he was just beconming another Jordan Peterson style ranting grifter.

But let;'s get things into perspective. He's a seedy celebrity - sure. But everyone's allowed to grow and to change. He's a womaniser - sure. But, to the best of my knowledge, he has never been one of these Hook Up Gurus who tell men how ro be the same as them. (In fact, he could probably make tons more money than he is if he were to do just that). And the kind of women that he hooked up with were just the same kind of vacuous celebs as he was - and no doubt he can tell a few stories about their behaviouf as much as they have done about him.

And here's some commendable things about Russell Brand: Many of his earlier Vlogs were cogent, involved interesting guests - and, above all, he sourced the material that he drew on so that you could check it (very few vloggers do the same). Also he specifically tried to get involved with dialogue with people that he disagreed with.

He was also promoting some positive values not so long ago: overcome your addictions. Use your head. Develope an enquiring mind. Be tolerant of differences. Educate yourself. Question everything!

I don't understand where all the hatred is coming from. Okay I know it's only words - and much of it is in jest, but there's a whiff of the lynch mob about it. (Nick Pope was subject to the same kind of abuse a few years ago - and I didn't get that either).

Russel Brand is NOT Andrew Tate!
I stand by my claim he is a no-talent oxygen thief. His whole reason of being is to be a sleazy weirdo, hungry for attention....

Whatever your opinion of him is your opinion, and everyone else has expressed their opinion, even if it doesn't answer your question....
 
I stand by my claim he is a no-talent oxygen thief. His whole reason of being is to be a sleazy weirdo, hungry for attention....

Whatever your opinion of him is your opinion, and everyone else has expressed their opinion, even if it doesn't answer your question....
I concur, Captain. :nods:
With the added clause that were you and I to meet him, we would both be beneath his contempt as we're no good for a shag. :chuckle:

He'd wonder what we were even for. :dunno:
 
Brand's always come across as far more intelligent than his act leads you believe. I always thought he was pretty sharp, very "Marmite" but a cultivated persona. Now, he seems to me as if he's seen the cash that's available to grifters who align themselves with whatever conspiracy theory is popular atm and become a kind of alternative version of Alex Jones (bit much maybe but . . . .). The sight of him recently posting with Don Jnr and his awful wife was pretty sickening. Grifters gonna grift
 
Yeah,. Cool it, people.

I wrote a post critical of Brand above - and many of you Liked it (for which thank you). I do wonder, however, how many of you actually read it properly - because my contribution was quite nuanced by comparison with some of the slingshots above (he's an `oxygen thief` with `no soul` who looks like `odbod` and so on and so on). I said some positive things about him and expressed a worry (which I still hold to) that he was just beconming another Jordan Peterson style ranting grifter.

But let;'s get things into perspective. He's a seedy celebrity - sure. But everyone's allowed to grow and to change. He's a womaniser - sure. But, to the best of my knowledge, he has never been one of these Hook Up Gurus who tell men how ro be the same as them. (In fact, he could probably make tons more money than he is if he were to do just that). And the kind of women that he hooked up with were just the same kind of vacuous celebs as he was - and no doubt he can tell a few stories about their behaviouf as much as they have done about him.

And here's some commendable things about Russell Brand: Many of his earlier Vlogs were cogent, involved interesting guests - and, above all, he sourced the material that he drew on so that you could check it (very few vloggers do the same). Also he specifically tried to get involved with dialogue with people that he disagreed with.

He was also promoting some positive values not so long ago: overcome your addictions. Use your head. Develope an enquiring mind. Be tolerant of differences. Educate yourself. Question everything!

I don't understand where all the hatred is coming from. Okay I know it's only words - and much of it is in jest, but there's a whiff of the lynch mob about it. (Nick Pope was subject to the same kind of abuse a few years ago - and I didn't get that either).

Russel Brand is NOT Andrew Tate!

Authoring an eloquent post will justifiably garner several "likes", irrespective as to whether everyone agrees with the stated viewpoint.
I started this thread simply because of the conspiratorial/Fortean angle, with Brand having apparently relaunched {re-Branded?) his initially libertine character as the new conspiracy king.
I do, however, note how he's providing material to offend a wide section of us here.
@escargot has persuasively stated why he makes her flesh creep. Others have described their particular dislike of him.
For me, it's his dangerous and or repugnant views, notably about covid vaccines and for his apparent sympathy for Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine.
We all love a bit of conspiracy (isn't that why we're here?), but when people suffer or die because of it, doesn't the fun stop?
 
Last edited:
He was also promoting some positive values not so long ago: overcome your addictions. Use your head. Develope an enquiring mind. Be tolerant of differences. Educate yourself. Question everything!
To be honest I don't really take a lot of notice of famous people, obviously I've heard of most of them but more often than not when they come up for discussion on here I haven't got a clue what you lot are on about. It just seems to me that fame is a problematic condition that some can handle better than others.

However as regards RB what little I'd seen of him I'd found irritating and as a woman creepy, in much the same ways as mentioned by others above. Then there was the Sachs prank call and as I'd already found Jonathan Ross an annoying oik that put the lid on any respect I may have been able to find for him and I managed to ignore him for a long time after that.

Then as Zeke mentioned he seemed to be talking a bit of considered sense for a while until once again he fell of my radar. I thought maybe I'd missed something which is why I clicked on this thread. Nobody is all bad after all none of us is perfect and I like to give people the benefit of the doubt ... but there is just something unwholesome about him, I'd not like to meet him IRL.
 
Back
Top