You could speak like that. Just go out on a Saturday night, get yourself totally trolleyed on alcahol, then at the end of the night tell your mates how much you love them, and start rambling about nothing in particular for the next half hour. All the while thinking what you are saying is extremely intelligent, but in reality is just a load of incoherent, babble.
Anyone can string a hundred words together. It's whether it makes sense that matters, and to me Russell Brand doesn't make any sense.
Fortunately he did make a lot of sense to a lot of people which made the interview all the more interesting.
You could speak like that. Just go out on a Saturday night, get yourself totally trolleyed on alcahol, then at the end of the night tell your mates how much you love them, and start rambling about nothing in particular for the next half hour. All the while thinking what you are saying is extremely intelligent, but in reality is just a load of incoherent, babble.
Anyone can string a hundred words together. It's whether it makes sense that matters, and to me Russell Brand doesn't make any sense.
Brand's eloquent and amusing , I first heard him on 6 music and enjoyed his comic ramblings. However I can't attribute great intelligence to him as he screwed up so many times in rather a stupid manner.
He can appreciate and cleverly articulate the mistakes he's made but it doesn't mean he's learning from them .
It's not often Paxman is dominated like that in an interview. I think he was struggling to keep up!
I think Russell made some brilliant points. His comments about the media attacking the BBC made a great deal of sense and I hadn't thought about it like that before. And the example Paxman showed him of the forms they now have to fill in highlights the restraints on creativity at the BBC now.
Of course you could perhaps argue how much of that was the real Brand and how much of it was an act but his points did make sense. We know this because Paxman kept chipping in and adding to the conversation. He wouldn't have done that if Brand was talking complete twaddle.
Very interesting interview. Bit like when Piers Morgan interviewed Paris Hilton and she dropped the mask for a while.
It's not often Paxman is dominated like that in an interview. I think he was struggling to keep up!
I think Russell made some brilliant points. His comments about the media attacking the BBC made a great deal of sense and I hadn't thought about it like that before. And the example Paxman showed him of the forms they now have to fill in highlights the restraints on creativity at the BBC now.
Of course you could perhaps argue how much of that was the real Brand and how much of it was an act but his points did make sense. We know this because Paxman kept chipping in and adding to the conversation. He wouldn't have done that if Brand was talking complete twaddle.
Very interesting interview. Bit like when Piers Morgan interviewed Paris Hilton and she dropped the mask for a while.
Haha I thought nice joke there at the end then realised you were serious. Fair enough, spose on occassion he must ask a decent question not about money and at some point in her ilfe she must have said something vaguely interesting.
Haha I thought nice joke there at the end then realised you were serious. Fair enough, spose on occassion he must ask a decent question not about money and at some point in her ilfe she must have said something vaguely interesting.
he couldnt really jusfity the andrew sachs thing by saying it was 'by accident.' at one point during the phone call to the answer machine he did have to make that concious decision to say what he said. unless he's suggesting he;s not in control of what he says or does?
just like the photographer took the decision to put the cam up katy perry's skirt. they're both the same act but he couldnt admit that. he's placing the blame away from himself
His innocent act didn't wash with me. He has never apologised to the young woman whom he humiliated on the radio show but is horrified by the photographers' disrespect to his girlfriend.
Sorry, but he is in the same camp as them, he has made a living out of being disrespectful to women and it is no use coming over all innocent now and claiming he would never offend anyone.
Besides all that, I kept wondering what he was on.
Not as tiny as a mind shrunken to the size of a pea by gargantuan coke, heroin (and god knows what else) use.
Have to laugh at people attributing his mile a minute ramblings as evidence of higher intelligence as opposed to a lifetime of heavy drug use. I would imagine Brand and Johnny Vaughan could have a talking competition to see who can rabbit the most for the longest. Now what is it they have in common again......?
......
Some of you lot sound like cult members. Where’s the kool-aid dispenser at?
Brand's eloquent and amusing , I first heard him on 6 music and enjoyed his comic ramblings. However I can't attribute great intelligence to him as he screwed up so many times in rather a stupid manner.
He can appreciate and cleverly articulate the mistakes he's made but it doesn't mean he's learning from them .
He is very intelligent - he just doesn't seem to have any common sense.
Not as tiny as a mind shrunken to the size of a pea by gargantuan coke, heroin (and god knows what else) use.
Have to laugh at people attributing his mile a minute ramblings as evidence of higher intelligence as opposed to a lifetime of heavy drug use. I would imagine Brand and Johnny Vaughan could have a talking competition to see who can rabbit the most for the longest. Now what is it they have in common again......?
A devastatingly incisive observation that no-one, ever, anywhere has ever made a trillion times already.
Not as tiny as a mind shrunken to the size of a pea by gargantuan coke, heroin (and god knows what else) use.
Have to laugh at people attributing his mile a minute ramblings as evidence of higher intelligence as opposed to a lifetime of heavy drug use. I would imagine Brand and Johnny Vaughan could have a talking competition to see who can rabbit the most for the longest. Now what is it they have in common again......?
They are both comedians, who use that talent to which you attribute to a lifetime of heavy drug use - ie: Their wit and articulation - professionally. I reckon that might be more of an explanation of their 'ramblings' than your theory.
It's not often Paxman is dominated like that in an interview. I think he was struggling to keep up!
I think Russell made some brilliant points. His comments about the media attacking the BBC made a great deal of sense and I hadn't thought about it like that before. And the example Paxman showed him of the forms they now have to fill in highlights the restraints on creativity at the BBC now.
Of course you could perhaps argue how much of that was the real Brand and how much of it was an act but his points did make sense. We know this because Paxman kept chipping in and adding to the conversation. He wouldn't have done that if Brand was talking complete twaddle..
A lot of the hostile comments here are from people who had already made up their minds about RB and won't accept the possibility that he might have a point.
I've always thought of him as a rather shallow publicity seeker (he might still be that), but having seen the interview, and understood it, it is apparent that he has in fact thought a lot about his situation and has some very valid points. Of course, sounding like Frank Spencer does nothing to help him make his points, but putting that aside if that interview had been conducted with (say) a world leader, speaking half as fast, a lot more people would be willing to pay attention to what he said.
Although some of it could well have been him playing the role of "himself", he still had a depth of background to mine - such as the passing reference to Kerouac. That spontaneity and erudition couldn't have been scripted.
Although some of it could well have been him playing the role of "himself", he still had a depth of background to mine - such as the passing reference to Kerouac. That spontaneity and erudition couldn't have been scripted.
He’s read "On the Road"!! Is that really worthy of note these days? A book/author most teenage students namedrop in a tediously self-reflexive fashion in order to make themselves look cool to their peers. This was a cliché 30 years ago. The drug-use has clearly stymied his emotional development at age19, as witnessed by his predeliction for juvenile pranks and serial shagging.
He is no idiot, I was shocked, he sounded like one of the most intelligent men in the world with the use of language, never seems to pause for breath even, I never knew he could talk like that and was very surprised, I think Paxman was too. If anyone never saw it, I think the extended version is on the newsnight website, its really worth a view. I really wish I could speak like that and know all those words.
He's definately no idiot, but he seriously acts up in these interviews. I think he forgot he wasn't in America, which is where he normally tries to come across as a Dickens character.
From listening to tons of his radio shows where he's basically chatting with his mates, I doubt he acts how he does in that interview very often. Not completely, anyway.
EDIT: I'm talking more about the Paul O Grady interview than this one.
But he didn't say it, its was Jonathan Ross that said the infamous 4 words.
Not a fan of Brand at all, he's made a career out of being Captain Jack Sparrow, but I agree with this. Ross' behaviour over the Sachs thing was disgraceful, whereas Brand was just silly.
he couldnt really jusfity the andrew sachs thing by saying it was 'by accident.' at one point during the phone call to the answer machine he did have to make that concious decision to say what he said. unless he's suggesting he;s not in control of what he says or does?
As the Sachs incident was pre-recorded and could have been removed by the production team or the BBC at anytime before broadcast I don't hold Brand to blame for anything other than what he admits - it was a rude thoughtless thing to do.
The fact that there were only 2 complaints after the broadcast until the Daily Mail morons started hearing about it says it all really.
Comments
Fortunately he did make a lot of sense to a lot of people which made the interview all the more interesting.
That says more about you than it does about him.
He can appreciate and cleverly articulate the mistakes he's made but it doesn't mean he's learning from them .
Small minded
I think Russell made some brilliant points. His comments about the media attacking the BBC made a great deal of sense and I hadn't thought about it like that before. And the example Paxman showed him of the forms they now have to fill in highlights the restraints on creativity at the BBC now.
Of course you could perhaps argue how much of that was the real Brand and how much of it was an act but his points did make sense. We know this because Paxman kept chipping in and adding to the conversation. He wouldn't have done that if Brand was talking complete twaddle.
Very interesting interview. Bit like when Piers Morgan interviewed Paris Hilton and she dropped the mask for a while.
Haha I thought nice joke there at the end then realised you were serious. Fair enough, spose on occassion he must ask a decent question not about money and at some point in her ilfe she must have said something vaguely interesting.
It was a good interview.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU9ELwEW86I
Warning, you may throw up due to Piers content.
His innocent act didn't wash with me. He has never apologised to the young woman whom he humiliated on the radio show but is horrified by the photographers' disrespect to his girlfriend.
Sorry, but he is in the same camp as them, he has made a living out of being disrespectful to women and it is no use coming over all innocent now and claiming he would never offend anyone.
Besides all that, I kept wondering what he was on.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9053238.stm
A devastatingly incisive observation that no-one, ever, anywhere has ever made a trillion times already.
Not as tiny as a mind shrunken to the size of a pea by gargantuan coke, heroin (and god knows what else) use.
Have to laugh at people attributing his mile a minute ramblings as evidence of higher intelligence as opposed to a lifetime of heavy drug use. I would imagine Brand and Johnny Vaughan could have a talking competition to see who can rabbit the most for the longest. Now what is it they have in common again......?
......
Some of you lot sound like cult members. Where’s the kool-aid dispenser at?
He is very intelligent - he just doesn't seem to have any common sense.
urgh what a horrible OPINION.
They are both comedians, who use that talent to which you attribute to a lifetime of heavy drug use - ie: Their wit and articulation - professionally. I reckon that might be more of an explanation of their 'ramblings' than your theory.
I've always thought of him as a rather shallow publicity seeker (he might still be that), but having seen the interview, and understood it, it is apparent that he has in fact thought a lot about his situation and has some very valid points. Of course, sounding like Frank Spencer does nothing to help him make his points, but putting that aside if that interview had been conducted with (say) a world leader, speaking half as fast, a lot more people would be willing to pay attention to what he said.
Although some of it could well have been him playing the role of "himself", he still had a depth of background to mine - such as the passing reference to Kerouac. That spontaneity and erudition couldn't have been scripted.
Absolutely brilliant! Thanks for posting.
Really entertaining
He’s read "On the Road"!! Is that really worthy of note these days? A book/author most teenage students namedrop in a tediously self-reflexive fashion in order to make themselves look cool to their peers. This was a cliché 30 years ago. The drug-use has clearly stymied his emotional development at age19, as witnessed by his predeliction for juvenile pranks and serial shagging.
Russell slates the Daily Mail on Newsnight, then the next day they print an article calling his finance fat.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1317066/California-girth-Katy-Perrys-skin-tight-silver-dress-clings-wrong-places.html
From listening to tons of his radio shows where he's basically chatting with his mates, I doubt he acts how he does in that interview very often. Not completely, anyway.
EDIT: I'm talking more about the Paul O Grady interview than this one.
I'll take that as a compliment.
Not a fan of Brand at all, he's made a career out of being Captain Jack Sparrow, but I agree with this. Ross' behaviour over the Sachs thing was disgraceful, whereas Brand was just silly.
As the Sachs incident was pre-recorded and could have been removed by the production team or the BBC at anytime before broadcast I don't hold Brand to blame for anything other than what he admits - it was a rude thoughtless thing to do.
The fact that there were only 2 complaints after the broadcast until the Daily Mail morons started hearing about it says it all really.
That says more about you than Brand.
He is clearly a very intelligent articulate person