Russell Brands Documentaries

Welcome To

Russell Brands Documentaries

This topic is empty.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

Author

Posts
January 7, 2015 at 3:18 am

#683920
1

tryptameanie

@tryptameanie

Participant
Finally got round to watching this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH5MvZ0m9mw&spfreload=10

And thought it was pretty good. Also found out it was his 2nd documentary. Watched the 1st one he did and that was well argued as well. It’s here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9tyaJv01io
January 31, 2015 at 5:06 am

#839519
1

portmanteau

@portmanteau

Member
Brand used to annoy the piss out of me until all the flak he took for trying to help those people who were being evicted and all these idiots started calling him a hypocrite because he’s minted, what utter bollocks flawed logic, like nobody wealthy could possibly want to or even have the right to help those less fortunate ? Since then I have been watching his trews on bookface and TBh he’s totally won me over.. proper head screwed on, honest geezer. Really shows how wrong one can be when judging too quickly.. Will try to watch these when i get a moment or two
February 9, 2015 at 4:28 am

#839523
1

isocortex

@isocortex

Member
I’ll be honest brother I find it hard to understand what the fuck he is saying?
February 9, 2015 at 4:39 am

#839520
1

tryptameanie

@tryptameanie

Participant
Basically the drugs laws are doing more hatm than good and he’s actually seedming to makle a substantial effeort to get his, very well put arguments, to and ideas both to the public and the people in power and much as I always thought the man was a twat. I actually thought he did a very gpps job with the documentaries he made.

What don’t you understand and I’ll try answer?
February 9, 2015 at 12:10 pm

#839518
1

Garoldeep Singh

@garoldeep-singh

Member
Brand is still a douchebag, no matter what he says, still in bed with the dirty rothschilds and a total bigot.
February 9, 2015 at 12:51 pm

#839513
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
One of my criticisms towards him, is that given the demograph of the audience he is trying to reach out to – he far too verbose.
I love language and literature, but I think part of using language correctly, and most importantly, being a good public speaker, is to adapt the language you use to whome you are speaking to.

For example, your average working class folk, are going to look at this:

This attitude of churlish indifference seems like nerdish deference contrasted with the belligerent antipathy of the indigenous farm folk, who regard the hippie-dippie interlopers, the denizens of the shimmering tit temples, as one fey step away from transvestites /QUOTE]

and think…”eh?”
February 9, 2015 at 1:04 pm

#839521
1

tryptameanie

@tryptameanie

Participant
I think he has the right sort of attitude and the passion to get his message across pretty well. The older generation will never change their minds, sort of the same as every party in the commons (greens,labour and liberal) all wanted serious debate on the drug laws but the conservatives made sure that didn’t happen but it’s shows the amount of progress being made in this country and I’d rather have watched russel brand present it than any of the arseholes who’ve made every drug documentary using scripts from the daily mail.
February 9, 2015 at 1:38 pm

#839514
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
My point is, when it comes to politics, it is more important HOW you say something, compared to WHAT you say, content and context.

For example, when it comes to policies, the greens have the most popular policies, yet they do not do as well as parties like UKIP. Why is this?
Furage speaks clearly, concisely, he sticks to a few points and he makes sure he appeals to a large portion of the population by drinking booze and smoking fags. He gives the illusion of being amiable, reliable and strong.

Also, look at Stephen Fry. He is far more intelligent that Russell Brand, with a far better grasp on the English Language. Yet, if you see Fry in any debates, he speaks clearly, concisely with a serious disposition. – it works in his favour.
February 9, 2015 at 1:50 pm

#839515
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
@Tryptameanie 588327 wrote:

The older generation will never change their minds

It really does pay to appeal to the older generation, as most of them actually vote, and there is a high population of them.
A lot of them would probably re-think their opinion of drugs, if the person in the lime light debating drugs was dignified.
Neither of my grandparents would give Brand the time of day. He makes most of his speeches in his bed wearing a dressing gown and is notable for shagging around, bad acting and has talked about how many times he has ‘disgraced’ himself by overdoing the drugs.

Most importantly, when he was a ‘mess’ he was taking drugs. Now he is a ‘revolutionist’ he is clean, what message does that send across about drug taking?
February 9, 2015 at 2:11 pm

#839522
1

tryptameanie

@tryptameanie

Participant
@Izbeckistani 588332 wrote:

My point is, when it comes to politics, it is more important HOW you say something, compared to WHAT you say, content and context.

For example, when it comes to policies, the greens have the most popular policies, yet they do not do as well as parties like UKIP. Why is this?
Furage speaks clearly, concisely, he sticks to a few points and he makes sure he appeals to a large portion of the population by drinking booze and smoking fags. He gives the illusion of being amiable, reliable and strong.

Also, look at Stephen Fry. He is far more intelligent that Russell Brand, with a far better grasp on the English Language. Yet, if you see Fry in any debates, he speaks clearly, concisely with a serious disposition. – it works in his favour.

Politicians talk to politicians and politicians are supposed to serve the public which is everybody I don’t really see that Stephen Fry would have the same draw for the most receptive audience. And afaik all he’s one is admitted drug use to whatever extent to make a book more juicy, he hasn’t campaigned or said anything about the unfairness off the system.

I think Russell did good, better than I expected but if it’s a seripusly inteligent man with some serious power behind him then I’d Richard Branson has done more than anyone to change this shitty situation we’re in.
February 9, 2015 at 4:31 pm

#839517
6

General Lighting

@general-lighting

Moderator
Staff
@Izbeckistani 588333 wrote:

It really does pay to appeal to the older generation, as most of them actually vote, and there is a high population of them.
A lot of them would probably re-think their opinion of drugs, if the person in the lime light debating drugs was dignified.
Neither of my grandparents would give Brand the time of day. He makes most of his speeches in his bed wearing a dressing gown and is notable for shagging around, bad acting and has talked about how many times he has ‘disgraced’ himself by overdoing the drugs. [/quote]

round here the older generation (especially the indigenous farm folk) are mostly pro legalisation/decriminalisation. What holds them back is having seen their own friends or children have bad experiences or witnessing poor behaviour in public from substance users. In that respect the celebs often don’t help things as much; although there was one place Stephen Fry said he’d taken drugs where he shouldn’t (might have been in WC in some Royal building with Charles, the Queen etc present) which just made me burst out laughing and I thought “why be ashamed of that? I’d be fucking proud of getting away with it!”

in both their cases there are double standards; they still go on about shame and angst etc and request forgiveness for past sins rather than just stating “moderate use is OK and causes little harm”.

BTW Nigel Farage has supported decriminalisation but only as a “personal view” and UKIP remains an authoritarian party based along the lines of those found in countries like Malaysia – unfortunately his greatest appeal is because he wants to reduce tax and immigration whilst giving more power to the dominant racial group (which is what they do in Malaysia; their government is called Barisan National or National Front.)
February 9, 2015 at 6:21 pm

#839516
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
@General Lighting 588354 wrote:

in both their cases there are double standards; they still go on about shame and angst etc and request forgiveness for past sins rather than just stating “moderate use is OK and causes little harm”.

Exactly. I know many a drug user, who can balance drug use with other responsibilities. I find the way brand talks about drugs makes them sound detrimental.
Which makes me sad, because I have a soft spot for drugs.
Author

Posts

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.