It reminds me a bit of when Freddie Mercury showed himself after having had AIDS for a while.
Not suggesting Russell is seriously ill, but he looks ill. Pale, not smiling, just.. not right.
The only difference I've noticed is his lack of a beard. He shaved it off to make Arthur. He looks a bit different without the chin hair.
In an interview shown on Ch 5 OK TV last night, his beard was starting to return. I think the beard suits him. He does have quite a pale complexion without the beard.
His accent sounds the same. I don't think it's changed.
I don't mind his image change. I just think he's grown up that's all. He's in a new era of his life, he isn't the same Russell but that's all part of growing up.
I don't mind his image change. I just think he's grown up that's all. He's in a new era of his life, he isn't the same Russell but that's all part of growing up.
Yes, he's growing up and settling down. He's about 36 now, isn't he? I just hope he doesn't change too much, I love his energy.
He was accepted into 2 very famous drama schools in the UK, winning a scholarship into one of them, I highly doubt he is as awful as you claim he is. I know some incredible actors who haven't been accepted into drama school.
It's easy to confuse bad acting with bad direction.
It is a directors job to draw the actor out of themselves, they are supposed to create and bring this character to life together. If a director cannot do that with their actor, then the ACTING will suffer.
No, it's not bad direction. It's bad acting. I don't care where he studied. He's still rubbish at acting.
A slight problem with your thinking. Helen Mirren and the rest of the cast seem to be able to act well from the clips I've seen, it's just Russell that seems unable.
Also, what is the criteria to gain a place at most drama schools? To recite one Shakespeare speech and one modern speech, with a lot of practise anyone can deliver them convincingly. He may have been 'inspired' by DVDs and audio tapes of the speeches available to buy.
This is true, and I was actually going to add to my previous post, that a truly great actor would still be able to work with what a directors given them, regardless of what the strength of the director is, but from the clips I've seen, it is bad direction for the main character of the film, mixed with someone (Russell) who needs a very strong director. He is obviously a strong performer, from his comedic shows, and many comedians are actually actors as well...whether they're strong enough to take direction from a mediocre director...
Obviously this stops him from being a truly great actor, but I do think, and hope, that with a better director (and script...) we could see much better things from him.
No, it's not bad direction. It's bad acting. I don't care where he studied. He's still rubbish at acting.
Ok...I'd like to know your qualifications to judge that. You may not like his style, but I don't think anyone can say that after one film he has been in, which has been universally panned by critics, not because of his acting, but because it's just crap. Which would be the director, screenwriter and producers fault.
Acting in film is extremely difficult, incredibly subtle, very few trained actors can do it. Perhaps Russell is much more adept at performing in theatre. I think people give actors a very hard time without realising the work they have to put in especially for film. It's boring, repetitive, and you have to bring up every emotion again, and again and again, performing exactly the same, making sure continuity is ok etc. etc.
Both schools he briefly studied in only do theatre acting as far as I have researched, which as I previously stated is VERY different.
I just think it's very unfair to judge his acting skills when it has only been one film, which has been panned for reasons other than him not being good. I am normally the first to rip into awful acting but I just feel in this case it's not very fair, because he obviously does have talent.
I agree with what others have said.................if you see him in interviews now, he just seems completely dead behind the eyes................its almost eerie. The fun loving happy chappy is a million miles away from what we see now.
I think the next few months will see him slide down even further. Something defiently isnt right at the moment, be it illness, stress, or something else.
Did anyone see him on The One Show this evening? He looked a lot better with his beard growing back than he did last week when he was being interviewed by Piers Morgan.
Did anyone see him on The One Show this evening? He looked a lot better with his beard growing back than he did last week when he was being interviewed by Piers Morgan.
He was good. I suspect Chris Evans was a bit tired of him by the end of it.
Loved the wild haired, guy liner Russell - the whole image was so him and epitomised his flamboyant persona. Now without the height and the wild backcombing, and his new hair coinciding with his new tamer image, everything, quite literally seems flatter! The harsh dyed black hair (and eyebrows to match) against his pale skin, are so overpowering, that without the definition of his guyliner anymore , it makes his eyes look lost.
Did anyone see him on The One Show this evening? He looked a lot better with his beard growing back than he did last week when he was being interviewed by Piers Morgan.
I only caught the end but it was great to see Russel back looking like Russel. The flat hair, clean face and ill fitting suit from the Piers programme are well rid.
As for the comments about dead eyes, I met him years ago and his eyes had that look then so I think that is just as they are and nowt to do with his recent 'Americanization'.
He does look better with a beard. I can't believe he and others are branding him as A-list though....for what? Although his new film does look watchable for once.
And the piers morgan interview was weired. Allot of people are saying it was brilliant but i have seen far better interviews of russell. Friday night with Jonathan ross for e.g
I just seen him on the one show today and it looked like he was trying to act too over the top..... not the same.
Even chris evans told him he had changed and the piers interview was different.
I guess i feel mean for judging but his eyes seem abit dead.
It makes me laugh how people are taken in by this Russell Brand idiot.
He's supposed to be intelligent with a 'fantastic command of the English language' yet if you hear him speak, he doesn't know when to use the word 'were'. :rolleyes:
He'll often say 'was' like the uneducated, stupid person he is.
And those oh so 'clever' big words randomly thrown in every other sentence to make him sound 'brainy'. I wish people would wake up, that there is a massive publicity machine behind him.
It makes me laugh how people are taken in by this Russell Brand idiot.
He's supposed to be intelligent with a 'fantastic command of the English language' yet if you hear him speak, he doesn't know when to use the word 'were'. :rolleyes:
He'll often say 'was' like the uneducated, stupid person he is.
And those oh so 'clever' big words randomly thrown in every other sentence to make him sound 'brainy'. I wish people would wake up, that there is a massive publicity machine behind him.
Like that other dope, Katie Price.
I don't care who's behind him, I know when I like someone. Russell is far from stupid. He's bright, sharp with a lightening repartee. Oh and I love his "Dickensian" speak, even if it is put on - it suits him and makes me laugh. Was watching a selection of old Russell clips last night with him on BBBM and his early JR interviews and they were hilarious.
It makes me laugh how people are taken in by this Russell Brand idiot.
He's supposed to be intelligent with a 'fantastic command of the English language' yet if you hear him speak, he doesn't know when to use the word 'were'. :rolleyes:
He'll often say 'was' like the uneducated, stupid person he is.
And those oh so 'clever' big words randomly thrown in every other sentence to make him sound 'brainy'. I wish people would wake up, that there is a massive publicity machine behind him.
Like that other dope, Katie Price.
In fairness, he often drops vowels and adopts an affected cockney accent where he uses grammatical inconcistencies such as "was" instead of "were" and "are" instead of "am." Although I agree with you, and find him needlesly verbose at times, surely it's a good thing that a celebrity has an appreciation of language and is proud of having a good vocabulary? It's a lot better than listening to Peter Andre or Katie Price squawking all over the TV. Also, being uneducated doesn't make you unintelligent, some of the stupidest people I met in my life I met at University.
It makes me laugh how people are taken in by this Russell Brand idiot.
He's supposed to be intelligent with a 'fantastic command of the English language' yet if you hear him speak, he doesn't know when to use the word 'were'. :rolleyes:
He'll often say 'was' like the uneducated, stupid person he is.
And those oh so 'clever' big words randomly thrown in every other sentence to make him sound 'brainy'. I wish people would wake up, that there is a massive publicity machine behind him.
Like that other dope, Katie Price.
Are you aware of his early career or seen his stand-up? His language style has always been as it is, nothing to do with any massive publicity machine.
The was/were thing is a product of an Essex background. It doesn't mean he is stupid or uneducated.
Comments
I agree. I'd like to add the word "distant" too.
i'm sure he's been told to play up on his accent in the states by some Hollywood P.R. to appeal to u.s. film audiences ,sound's very put on to me IMO
In an interview shown on Ch 5 OK TV last night, his beard was starting to return. I think the beard suits him. He does have quite a pale complexion without the beard.
His accent sounds the same. I don't think it's changed.
He looks completely different to how he once did - I much prefer his hairy, dandy bohemian look.
But apart from his clothes and hair, something isn't quite right in his eyes.
Agree with this, it's actually quite creepy.
Yes, he's growing up and settling down. He's about 36 now, isn't he? I just hope he doesn't change too much, I love his energy.
My wife said he looks like he's had botox.
Worrying for a young man his age.
No, it's not bad direction. It's bad acting. I don't care where he studied. He's still rubbish at acting.
This is true, and I was actually going to add to my previous post, that a truly great actor would still be able to work with what a directors given them, regardless of what the strength of the director is, but from the clips I've seen, it is bad direction for the main character of the film, mixed with someone (Russell) who needs a very strong director. He is obviously a strong performer, from his comedic shows, and many comedians are actually actors as well...whether they're strong enough to take direction from a mediocre director...
Obviously this stops him from being a truly great actor, but I do think, and hope, that with a better director (and script...) we could see much better things from him.
Ok...I'd like to know your qualifications to judge that. You may not like his style, but I don't think anyone can say that after one film he has been in, which has been universally panned by critics, not because of his acting, but because it's just crap. Which would be the director, screenwriter and producers fault.
Acting in film is extremely difficult, incredibly subtle, very few trained actors can do it. Perhaps Russell is much more adept at performing in theatre. I think people give actors a very hard time without realising the work they have to put in especially for film. It's boring, repetitive, and you have to bring up every emotion again, and again and again, performing exactly the same, making sure continuity is ok etc. etc.
Both schools he briefly studied in only do theatre acting as far as I have researched, which as I previously stated is VERY different.
I just think it's very unfair to judge his acting skills when it has only been one film, which has been panned for reasons other than him not being good. I am normally the first to rip into awful acting but I just feel in this case it's not very fair, because he obviously does have talent.
If she is the hottest, I'd hate to see the worst.
I think the next few months will see him slide down even further. Something defiently isnt right at the moment, be it illness, stress, or something else.
Russ is on the one show right now 7 pm fri night,
looking quite normal, quite happy
( wonder where Katy is ? )
He was good. I suspect Chris Evans was a bit tired of him by the end of it.
I only caught the end but it was great to see Russel back looking like Russel. The flat hair, clean face and ill fitting suit from the Piers programme are well rid.
As for the comments about dead eyes, I met him years ago and his eyes had that look then so I think that is just as they are and nowt to do with his recent 'Americanization'.
I just seen him on the one show today and it looked like he was trying to act too over the top..... not the same.
Even chris evans told him he had changed and the piers interview was different.
I guess i feel mean for judging but his eyes seem abit dead.
He's supposed to be intelligent with a 'fantastic command of the English language' yet if you hear him speak, he doesn't know when to use the word 'were'. :rolleyes:
He'll often say 'was' like the uneducated, stupid person he is.
And those oh so 'clever' big words randomly thrown in every other sentence to make him sound 'brainy'. I wish people would wake up, that there is a massive publicity machine behind him.
Like that other dope, Katie Price.
I don't care who's behind him, I know when I like someone. Russell is far from stupid. He's bright, sharp with a lightening repartee. Oh and I love his "Dickensian" speak, even if it is put on - it suits him and makes me laugh. Was watching a selection of old Russell clips last night with him on BBBM and his early JR interviews and they were hilarious.
In fairness, he often drops vowels and adopts an affected cockney accent where he uses grammatical inconcistencies such as "was" instead of "were" and "are" instead of "am." Although I agree with you, and find him needlesly verbose at times, surely it's a good thing that a celebrity has an appreciation of language and is proud of having a good vocabulary? It's a lot better than listening to Peter Andre or Katie Price squawking all over the TV. Also, being uneducated doesn't make you unintelligent, some of the stupidest people I met in my life I met at University.
Are you aware of his early career or seen his stand-up? His language style has always been as it is, nothing to do with any massive publicity machine.
The was/were thing is a product of an Essex background. It doesn't mean he is stupid or uneducated.