Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

SomethingSavage

Members
  • Posts

    2236
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SomethingSavage

  1. I'm still knee-deep in these creator shoot interviews, and I instantly recall how exciting it was when the internet first popped off with a pedophile interviewing all our favorite wrestlers in front of faded hotel room curtains. I'm way late to the game on this stuff, but I don't care. That just means I've got a ton to look forward to hearing about. So many discarded pitches! DeMatteis wanted Nomad II to turn heel and assassinate Steve Rogers?! And then supplant Rogers with a Native American Captain America for awhile?! It's shades of Bucky Cap and more accurately Sam Cap, long before that sort of stuff was getting regularly greenlit. Michelinie proposed a story arc wherein Spider-Man's identity would be revealed on TV during the course of a battle with Venom?! Way before Civil War, there was this desire to explore the importance of secret identities and how key Peter Parker's loved ones are to the character. It even involved secret government ops, etc. and would've ultimately been resolved with a clean slate, provided by the Purple Man's pheromones rather than a deal with the devil. And, as far as resolutions and retcons go, I think I honestly prefer the Purple Man scenario to anything we actually got involving Mephisto. Tom DeFalco wanted to reveal Richard Risk to be the Hobgoblin?! Okay, I feel like I've read that rumor somewhere before (ages ago), but the guy confirmed it himself. Ron Frenz, too. Kingsley would've then been the Rose as a consolation prize to Stern's original intentions, maybe? I don't know. I *do* think that would've been the better path, to be honest. The Rose identity and moniker lines up well with Kingsley's more extravagant, affluent nature than anything Goblin related - although I must admit I dig the franchising of the supervillain marketplace he's done in recent years. It's a super fun spin on things & a great way to salvage the character. But one of my absolute favorite straight shooters so far has to be Gerry Conway. The man is just a BLAST to listen to in any setting. He's got a great sense of a humor, and he's such an engaging storyteller on top of that. I love his line of thinking about comic book characters and what makes them iconic. I don't want to paraphrase too much or take away from how he explains it, but I found myself nodding along in agreement throughout the whole thing. Basically, every mainstay character hits iconic status and should be reserved/reverted to that iconic state. It's something we see time & time again in comics. Characters can be changed and played with, but they need to be returned to the box in nearly the same condition they were found. Because if you deviate too much away from that, you risk detracting from their iconic status and what makes them so iconic to the fan base. The example he used was about Peter marrying Mary Jane, and why that was always the wrong move. He states that there's a reason the movies always make Peter a young high schooler or college-aged kid. That's his iconic status. Peter being a teacher or a lab assistant or a married man just isn't his iconic state of being. And when they aged him up too much, the character really took a hit. I agree with that. For the most part, there are key elements to most of the heavy hitter characters that should simply always remain intact. And it's selfish for creators or even readers to demand the permanent aging up of these characters just to stay in line with their/our own aging. The characters were iconic to us at a very specific time and age, just as they should be for new readers who come along after us. Demanding that they grow old or mature too much is selfish. If our tastes change, then perhaps our reading material should to. Otherwise, find other characters who are NOW more relatable to you than the high school kid. To be clear, I don't think this is ALWAYS the answer. But with the increased emphasis on legacy characters and derivative characters we are seeing EVERYWHERE these days, I do think it's a topic worth talking about. I think things like Secret Empire, Superior Spider Man, and even Knightfall are all stories worth telling and exploring. But, and rightfully so, the consequences of those arcs should come with the understanding that these creators are accountable for preserving the iconic status of these characters at the end of the day. There has to be a balance in that accountability. I think they've done a solid job of that, for the most part. Some characters can bend more than others. Hell, some can be broken and changed up entirely - often for the benefit of everyone. But there are a select few iconic characters that should be preserved, protected, and treated as almost timeless throughout history. I believe Spider-Man is one of those cases. It's why there was this obsession to separate him from MJ almost immediately. It's why Miles is so popular, because he's essentially iconic Peter. It's why Ultimate Spidey was a smash success right away - because it was placing Spidey back in his iconic trappings. The fact that he has now spent more of his publication history as a grown adult is fascinating, because creators and fans alike are perpetually chasing ways to return him closer to his iconic form anyway.
  2. I could've done without some of the cheesy religious stuff, but I get that it's Jeff's personality. Jeff mentioning how Owen died on the same date his wife passed, then Conrad going all whisper somber with the, "It's all connected, man." got a cringe from me. Also couldn't help but get a kick out of how many times we heard him pronounce SHON Michaels' name. "That was Shon? What was Shon doin there? Why Shon?"
  3. So I've fallen down the rabbit hole of creator & artist interviews lately. Not sure at what point these became my go-to podcasts for commutes, but I'm immersing myself in these things and finding some fascinating details while doing it. Pretty sure you diehard comic fans already know all the stories behind the abandoned arcs, etc. But I was never keyed into that stuff as a reader. I read, I collected, and I consumed. I mean, I always enjoyed Wizard magazine like anybody else - but I never sought out interviews with the creators or anything back in the day. Besides Wizard articles/interviews and what we got from letter page columns, I didn't really care to seek out that stuff. By the time I reached an age where that sort of "insider knowledge" would've appealed to me, I had fallen out of comics and moved onto other interests. Fast forward, and here we are. I'm ravenously devouring these interviews and can't get enough. None of it is mind-blowing, but gah. It's seriously cool to hear things like DeMatteis talk about his plans to have Cap assassinated by Nomad II about two decades before Rogers was actually killed off. I also wasn't aware that Kraven's Last Hunt wasn't even designed with Kravinov in mind at all. That was a later change (and clearly an upgrade), because DeMatteis was going to introduce and promptly kill off a brand new character for that arc instead. Think about it: Kraven's breakout, most critical character development could've never happened for the poor sap. Claremont, in the thick of batting a thousand with his smash hit X-Men run, wanted to slowly start to ship Kitty and Logan. Apparently, the Kitty and Wolverine mini was intended to be the first step toward their relationship becoming a romantic entanglement over the long course of Claremont's time on the series. Thankfully, better judgment prevailed & the only significant change to come from that story was... I don't know. The Shadowcat codename, I guess? Again, I'm sure all this stuff is old news to you guys. But it's sweet, sweet tea for this lapsed fan who is just coming across a great fountain of fresh information straight from the sources themselves. Good stuff. I'm sure I'll eventually hit a wall with hearing these stories at some point, but right now it's really rekindled my interest in things.
  4. This is purely speculation, but I always got the sense Vince held JR accountable for that whole ordeal. Even reading it in Under The Black Hat, everything came across that way. Yes. Vince was pissed that Jeff took his shot, but it seemed like he held JR responsible for dropping the ball in the first place. Vince *does* always seem to appreciate guys with a backbone more though. I think that's a common quality in most elite executives or just people in positions of authority in general. You teach people how they're going to treat you. If everything is Yes, sir and No, sir - then you're easy and that's mostly no fun. But when you're challenging and demanding (about the right things, raising the right concerns) then it's more rewarding to engage those types of people. It also breeds competition and critical thinking within the workplace. So while I don't believe Vince loved losing that money, I do find it easy to understand how he'd appreciate the slick maneuvering that got Jeff to the pay window.
  5. Absolutely. Conrad is actually a pretty terrible tour guide for these shows, to be honest. The guy has great chemistry with his co-hosts at times, but he rarely even capitalizes on that by dragging any decent stories out of them anymore. Conrad's follow-through is lackluster, and he never really presses for any deeper answers anymore - the way he would early on with Bruce. His go-to these days is either referring to a previous episode that covered something, or he'll put a pin in the discussion by saying they'll cover it at another time in the future. Either way, it dampens the discussion and cripples the flow of the conversation completely - leaving us with the same, tired, routine talking points and very little else.
  6. JR is now the old guy who learns a new term and overuses it - often in the wrong context. Sometimes it can be amusing, but it's usually just awkward and out of place. The show will still get a listen from me every now & then, depending on the topic. But I've found that JR's stuff has already hit the same problem I have had with Bruce for a long time - it's just retelling the same stories over & over, again & again. If Triple H comes up, you're gonna get the anvil case contract story. If it's Foley, you'll get the meeting with Vince. If it's Cena, you're going to hear how JR discovered him and then Vince dismissed him by telling him to go home & shower. Do we really need separate years of Cena profile pieces just to hear JR tell that same gem every time? It's repetitive. There's very little left in the way of personal anecdotes or anything, and that's a shame. I guess it just feels like these guys often treat things like every episode is designed for brand new listeners. And so we often hear the same tales on repeat. It's one part of the reason why Conrad's formula grows very stale very quickly. Regardless of what paragraph he reads from the Observer, the host will only hear one or two names and then bust out their go-to story for that guy. Then it's onto the next Observer result. With all that being said, I am a little curious to find out if JR responded to Jarrett's debut episode at all. Not curious enough to listen to Jim retell his stories about drinking with Herd for the 15th time on that SuperBrawl episode, but curious enough to see if there's any rebuttal on the other side from Jeff this coming week.
  7. Absolutely. Their pitch for the Enforcers' own Netflix show was tremendous.
  8. Have you listened to the Screw It, Let's Just Talk About Comics (formerly actually titled Screw It, Let's Just Talk About Spider-Man) podcast? It's excellent, and the original premise was just two brothers covering the entire Stan & Ditko run. Tremendous stuff and just a fun listen in general.
  9. Appreciate that rundown, man. I'll just start with Smith's run and let it ride from there.
  10. Isn't there some stuff between Bendis' initial run and his longer, more "iconic" stuff that gets talked about? I'm on board for starting way back with Smith and Guardian Devil. I just wasn't sure if there was a lengthy trench in between that and the quality Bendis stuff that gets so much hype.
  11. Thanks, guys. Any thoughts on Waid's tenure with the lighter tone, new setting, etc? What about Soule? Regardless, I'm starting with Bendis (thought about giving Guardian Devil a shot, although I'm not real big on Smith) just for the sake of reading almost all the modern stuff in one big binge. But I may try to devour the prime selections first, and then go back to fill in the gaps if I've still got an appetite for more DD.
  12. JR's shows have felt like a slog the last few times I've checked in, but I gotta admit - there's something immensely enjoyable about hearing him cut scathing promos on technology and Twitter every now & then.
  13. Anyone check out the Verne Gagne episode? If so, how was it? Worth a listen or nah? I really dug Eric's episode highlighting his own AWA origins. I mostly only dip back into 83 Weeks for the TNA shows now, but I was thinking of giving this one a listen if it's worthwhile at all.
  14. You're not alone, brutha. I dug the story, but it *was* at a time when I was just reintroducing myself to contemporary Marvel comics, so maybe I just missed reading Cap and really enjoyed seeing him in such a unique setting for his solo series. I thought they tapped into some interesting themes, the art was amazing, and it all wrapped up neatly. I believe I have my immediate feedback somewhere in this thread a couple of years ago when I initially read the arc. Probably right before I dove into Secret Empire, if I recall correctly. I find that being outside the bubble really helps make these arcs more enjoyable though. I'm not plugged into a lot of what's happening AS it unfolds. I wait for trades, let the love/hate whiplash reactions die down, and give things a thorough read after the fact. I tend to view my wrestling and binge watch seasons of TV very much the same way. Anyway, I came here to ask you guys for some recommendations. I've caught up on a lot of modern comics over the last few years since getting back into things. There was just SO MUCH I missed out on during my time away. So, next up on the agenda is modern Daredevil. And by modern I guess I mean everything from Bendis on up to current day. Bendis seems to be the standard answer I get as to a starting point, but what do you guys say? Courtesy of podcasts like Geek History Lesson and Only Stupid Answers, I know Mark Waid's run is one I've got to check out soon, too. Can you guys point me in the direction of specific arcs/issues? I'm pretty much a blank slate when it comes to Daredevil, aside from the Miller stuff from the heyday of my fandom. I'm wide open for suggestions. Any recs are much appreciated.
  15. Conrad assigning obligatory nicknames to past fixtures and friends of Tony still sounds better than Conrad humble bragging about the time he bought Arn's shoelaces or Tully's underwear at an auction or whatever though. Gotta pick your poison when it comes to weird Conrad contributions.
  16. This. Pro wrestling without characters to care about or compelling conflicts is just filling time. Pro wrestling is always, has always, and will always be at its best when it exists within those contexts - characters to care about in compelling conflicts with one another. If the spots and the in-ring stuff being presented ice cold is enough for you, then that's cool. But chances are you're already a fan and don't mind watching motion for the sake of motion. That simply doesn't appeal to very many people for a sustainable period of time without characters to care about or compelling conflicts. The question was raised about wrestling fans getting older and newer/younger fans not latching on, so that's what I was addressing. I'm not denying that there some of you who will watch just about anything related to wrestling - you've already bought in. We are discussing the hows and why's of the fan base dwindling and not being replenished. It's because there isn't mass appeal for fake fighting without storytelling, without suspense, and without that emotional component. It's those ingredients that combine together and make pro wrestling such a unique art form in the first place. People saying AEW stands a chance of doing it right sort of makes me sad. In early 2020, I might have agreed with that. But they really took some major missteps since the pandemic slowed things down. What once felt like a decent show worth following quickly descended into WCW 2000 territory for me. Line up Khan's football field and orange juice on a pole next to Russo's noteworthy contributions and nobody would spot the difference. Their shit is atrocious at times.
  17. Well yeah. Promoters are following Vince's lead, obviously. And McMahon is in the business of producing content. Sheer quantity. Everything is a victim to that mindset. Storytelling and characters don't need to be marketable when you're strictly in the business of marketing time-consuming, filler content. Hours upon hours of it. If we're talking storytelling, then of course they're capable of doing better. Hell, their documentaries are incredible devices for that. But their actual mainstream product is what sucks. It could be argued that great matches have never mattered less than they do now. It doesn't help that every single match up and down a card is designed and structured the same way. Everything is a Wrestle Kingdom main event. From the closer to the opening act, everything is near falls and counters and kickouts. It's awfully exhausting and all so hollow to the senses. It's all fireworks. You can watch it once or twice a year and never need to see it again at any point in between. There's no purpose or sense of fulfillment. It all just looks and sounds the same. Meltzer's star rating system is even indicative of great matches meaning less than ever. Reviewers and critics over the last 15 years created a scenario in which they'd all cried wolf so often that Dave had to go and shout, "Six stars! Wait, this one's SEVEN stars!" just to get folks to stop and pay attention or even give anything a second glance. And none of it really matters a week later. Bottom line - a match, no matter how great, is not going to make a star. It's not enough on its own. A match can push somebody over the top, but they've gotta already be on the verge of breaking through. It's gotta be Austin/Bret. It can't occur in an ice cold environment. Great matches just don't make that much of a difference in the end. In isolation, nobody gives a fuck. I remember awhile back when everyone was raving about this epic gauntlet match Seth Rollins supposedly had. Against better judgment, I had to see what everyone was talking about. And the match was okay. I mean, it wasn't actively bad. And it killed A LOT of time for them. It certainly did that. But really. At the end of the night, it accomplished nothing other than eating up some time. It was another match. It didn't "make" Seth like people were talking. He was no more (and no less) over than if the match had never even happened. A great match can push a guy over the finish line. The problem is, nobody is putting in the prep work to get the personalities over first. And that effectively means they've never even crossed the start line. They've never taken off. They're not even in the race. Personalities matter. Motivations matter. Story arcs matter. Otherwise, everything is just perpetual, meaningless, masturbatory motion. Wrestling is so far removed from the pop culture conversation nowadays, I'm not really sure what it would take to get them back to relevancy. But I can tell you that what they're doing will definitely make sure they don't get there. It's like a film franchise that follows up with terrible sequels and eliminates itself from the pop culture landscape. Instead of building up like the MCU or Fast and Furious, they've become the Terminator and just ran their reputation into the ground. Also similar to Terminator, they're suffering from a mean case of nostalgia poisoning - and it's their own doing. Instead of cultivating a new crop, they constantly rely on the Arnold's and Sarah Connors of their past. They prop up everything on the pillars of Rock N Wrestling and Attitude booms, because that's all they've got. So many problems with so many variables to discuss and deliberate obviously, but the simplest answer is to go back to basics and build from there. Advertise your personalities. Market your stars. Make them identifiable - as something, as anything. Create conflicts between them. And promote their fights. BUILD anticipation. PROMOTE payoffs. DELIVER outcomes. That's it.
  18. Ultimately though, if the discussion is about whether or not wrestling is attracting newer/younger fans, then storytelling still matters. Structure matters. Hierarchy matters. Plot development, satisfying arcs, progression, and advancement matters. No young person is going to stick around for very long (as a viewer and committed fan) without these things. Serialized storytelling is what's in. Colorful characters like Cena and New Day might draw in children. But young adults and teens aren't going to be swayed to stick around as fans for very long. The climate and pop culture are just different. Everything is trending toward serialized storytelling. And I'm not calling for wrestling to be the Attitude Era again, but simple & streamlined storytelling is crucial and absolutely called for if they want to engage a broader audience at ANY point. Without commitment to character, the turn of Hogan and subsequent birth of the nWo doesn't work. Without long-form planning, we never get the unstoppable force meeting the immovable object in Hogan/Andre. Without satisfying arcs we never get the Mega Powers exploding. Without hierarchy, we never get to experience the young lions maturing into the pillars. Without escalation, we never get the glory days of All Japan at all. Without structure, the rise of Stone Cold doesn't mean as much. Without anticipation, those cliffhangers on Raw don't lead to record-breakig ratings and thus the sheer excitement and the buzz surrounding the Monday Night Wars. I could go on & on. All these elements are severely lacking in today's pro wrestling. Everything exists as evergreen and utterly inconsequential. Every match happens for the sake of having a match happen. Everyone on the roster is on a treadmill. Outcomes result in nothing. Championships aren't used to elevate. They're used as an excuse to have (you guessed it) more matches. Nothing more, nothing less. Today's wrestling feels like an exercise of running in place. Nobody is elevated. Nobody gets anywhere. Everyone is interchangeable and totally replaceable. There's no reason to follow along week to week. It's all fireworks. You can watch it once or twice a year, get the jist of the experience, and never need to see it again until the holiday season or Mania season or whatever. You won't miss anything significant in between. Furthermore, I think today's wrestling has become more about giving the wrestlers what they want - rather than giving the audience what they want. It's like the wrong lessons were learned from history. Whereas hour broadways were used to create interest in repeat business before, now they're utilized as some sort of badge of honor with the boys. Hardcore matches, too. The emphasis is removed from competition and placed on how "entertaining" the fight might be. Let's watch the champ wrestle his challenger for an hour and never suggest he's being taken to his physical limit. Instead, let's use it to humblebrag about cardio and crossfit and other assorted horse shit. Literally NOBODY cares, except the wrestlers themselves. To the outside world, it just looks like a bunch of clowns gathering around and patting each other on the back. Matches now feel like they're booked so the wrestlers can show off or have long matches. The vast majority doesn't give a shit about a cold wrestling match that is six or seven stars. They're not going to sit around and waste an hour plus watching that shit. Like it or not (and I realize I'm the odd man out by saying this on a forum literally titled Pro Wrestling Only), but "great matches" aren't something that will appeal to a larger audience. The matches themselves are the endgame. They're not the hook. If promoters are wondering what the base line is for that stuff, then they've found it. You can assign a match ten stars if you want, but it's not going to be enough to entice younger/newer viewers and convince them to follow the product - especially when you consider that all ten matches on a card look, feel, and function like a clone of the one that came before it. Everything is long and drawn out. Everything is dives and thigh slaps. Everything is multiple kickouts and nearfalls. Today's wrestling is exhausting and a chore, to be honest. And, other than those of us who were hooked by the stuff when it was actually GOOD, nobody wants to stick around and keep coming back for that.
  19. Pro wrestling getting into the streaming business earlier than some ultimately doesn't matter if what they're streaming isn't enticing. We are in an age of consumption and content. Viewers seek out shows to binge and burn through. Pro wrestling in 2021 isn't "binge-worthy" because it doesn't adhere to actual continuity. Canon is hit & miss. But most of all, there is no real suspense anymore. Eric Bischoff (I know, I know) said it best when he noted how wrestling thrives when it hinges on ANTICIPATION. Big money matches hinge on that sense of buildup and anticipation. Hell, fantasy booking - a niche within a niche - hinges on ANTICIPATION. Pro wrestling doesn't work without that excitement. Without suspense. Without anticipation. I don't see much of that in modern wrestling. It doesn't help that the characters are all so desperate and thirsty to be taken seriously. It doesn't help that they all want to seem "reality based" and dry as fuck. I don't need a bunch of wannabe MMA guys in my pro wrestling when only one or two will do, please & thanks. Wrestling needs characters with conviction - not a bunch of nerds playing parts. It needs defined rivalries. It needs milestones and marked tent-poles. As it stands, every show is just another show. For the sake of having a show. It's just this giant hamster wheel. It's a timesuck. Everything, every match, every segment, every half-assed attempt at an angle... They all exist to fill time. To kill time. Why? To get through this show. To get on to the next show. There are no cliffhangers. No suspense. No anticipation. There's no reason to watch another show after you've seen one. You're good. Because the next episode is just copy & paste. It's more of the same. It's rematches of rematches you just watched. It's Xerox copies of the characters and the finishes you just saw. It's bad acting and poor delivery. For every reason you hear people praise their favorite "binge-worthy" shows from other streaming platforms, pro wrestling feels like a relic from another time. And not in some fond, nostalgic sense. It's struggling to keep it's head above water and stay relevant anyway it can, but that would almost require a total overhaul of how it's presented at this point. And maybe the tide will change. Maybe the trends will shift. Maybe this "fad" of peak television will come to an end. But not anytime soon. And even if it does, I highly doubt the old model of repetitive, monotonous, meaningless filler television like pro wrestling will be the one to draw people back in like that. To summarize, pro wrestling needs a major editing overhaul. The matches need to feel like they mean something. The characters have to resonate and appeal to SOMEBODY outside their pre-existing, already established fan base. I don't see or feel like anybody out there is on the verge of doing that. I know some of y'all will tout guys like the Bucks, Page, Cody, or whatever. But nah. Outside their bubble, they don't connect and nobody gives a fuck. And I'm not saying they couldn't. I'm just saying - with the strategy they've chosen to employ so far - they never will. They're opting to play within the same sandbox as WWE and everybody else, instead of trying to find a new hook to grab interest. And it's not a complicated thing like reinventing the template from scratch. It's as simple as building their own world with cohesive stories, characters people can care about (meaning they'd have to value things like motivations and traits over shock value and turns), etc. Wrestling is simple and works best when it's kept simple. People's viewing habits are fairly simple, too. When something is appealing and enthralling, they'll watch. Pro wrestling is neither right now. I don't know if it's ever felt more irrelevant. Nothing matters. Results don't matter, because we've been educated that rematches will quickly undo everything we are watching anyway. The fan base is growing older because we are the only ones who knew it when it was worth watching more than once. Fans today would never know that. Because you can sit and watch one match and get the jist of the full experience. It's pointless to continue watching, unless you're just looking to kill some time. There's no investment to be made. I always go back to watching an episode of Raw in 2018 with my nephew. He was a HUGE wrestling fan. But I could tell, week to week, he was starting to lose interest. I kept watching along with him though, because it's just something we bonded over and could enjoy together. One week, he suddenly got up and walked away during a commercial break. He didn't care about seeing anymore of the show. When I asked what he thought about one of his favorite guys losing the match we'd just watched, he simply shrugged and said he didn't really care. I pressed him to find out exactly what he meant. And his answer was both innocent and telling in its absolute truth: "They're just gonna do the same thing again next week." And what do ya know. They did. We didn't watch anymore episodes together after that. Actually, to be fair, we tried watching an episode of NXT and Smackdown (out of sheer boredom) the week that Hurricane Laura struck us last year. It was fun seeing how much his tastes had changed, but otherwise everything felt like it had somehow gotten worse and even less interesting. People have too many options to stick with shit that has no hook, no sense of progressive storytelling, and ultimately no purpose.
  20. I haven't enjoyed much of anything Conrad has done in awhile, but I've got to say - I don't mind the Kurt Angle pod one bit. It ain't half as bad as I heard some people make it out to be. Kurt's not saying a lot of controversial shit or taking cheap shots, for sure. But hell. Compared to Bruce, he's spitting straight fire when he talks about how most of the modern product is devoid of characters or storylines. Doesn't hurt that it's true, too. (It's true.) What I particularly enjoy about the first four episodes with Kurt is that Conrad is willing to slosh and shuffle his formula around a bit. It isn't just analyzing a month worth of shows and reading a bunch of paragraphs straight from the Torch or the Observer for hours on end. It's actually closer to the original shows with Bruce, in that it's more conversational than "Conrad reads Meltzer, then host replies with brief statement, and repeat." It's not a total subversion of the formula, but it is focusing on isolated periods and particular programs. I kind of dig it. Plus Kurt's ad read for Chicken Snax is a more engaging promo than anything I've heard Seth Rollins say since 2014. Annnddd that's all I've got to say about that.
  21. I was digging Tony's ECW watch-alongs for a minute a few years back, but that's all I've ever cared for from his show. I might give some of the 86 stuff a shot, but I'm wary. How much Casio Kid is there? Because if the answer is any at all, I'm out. I feel like he brings even Conrad's worst tendencies to a new low with all the dick jokes and talk about his wife taking epic shits.
  22. That's really unfortunate, but it's not all too surprising. I know it was the new hot shit back in 2016/17, but I think Conrad's whole formula has just grown tired and exhausted. It still works with the right personality and storyteller, but it's tiresome to just hear the same topics talked about in the same format over and over. Left to his own devices, every Conrad show is basically just Conrad reading long pieces from the Observer or the Torch, word for word. His host will chime in with a one or two sentence commentary, and then they move on to the next long paragraph. Throw in an ill-timed LOUD fake laugh, and you've got a Conrad podcast in 2021. Bischoff can maneuver around things because he is a verbose mf who loves to ramble and talk, which allows the conversation to actually morph and weave into other avenues Conrad wouldn't explore on his own. Bruce occasionally does this, but it's become increasingly rare since his return. Kurt, like Arn, is probably the type to just fall into the trap of playing along with Conrad's reindeer games and simply responding and then marching along to the next Observer results reading.
  23. Yeah. Of course I'll give it a shot, but I'm not exactly excited about a podcast with Angle. I just know Conrad can't wait to remind him about AJ Styles' age and then promptly cover Unforgiven 99 for the tenth time for some reason. Actually, if they go the Bischoff route and explore some TNA shows, then I'll be all over that. Absolutely. I was also hoping for something with Heyman or Foley, but I knew that'd be a long shot. The issue with Arn's show just seems to be that he's too casual and too kind. He doesn't have a whole lot of interesting stuff to talk about, and Conrad doesn't seem willing enough to lead him there. Every now and then, Arn will step up and serve up something juicy. But it's rare. Guess you could put me in the mi ority though, because I find the more interesting stuff on Arn's show to be about his role as Cena's agent. He's given a few good stories about Harper, Dolph, Cena, Alberto, etc. I get that folks probably prefer hearing about his heyday, but I don't know. I guess I lose interest quickly because it's all nostalgic waxing that we've heard before. Plus it quickly devolves into Conrad bragging about whose underwear he's bought at an auction or whatever, with Arn usually recounting tales about this one killer steak he ordered at a restaurant with good service back in 1987. So yeah. Given the two options, I guess I'd rather hear him talk about match layouts or how Dolph got chewed out for using a superkick too soon after Shawn's retirement instead.
  24. I may be misremembering the specific details of the angle to some degree, but I recall enjoying the entire Christian/Joe series as a whole. I *think* that's the feud where Christian kept finding ways to escape definitive defeats at the hands of Joe - with it all culminating at BFG, where Joe could finally corner Christian and force him into submission. I need to revisit this match soon, for sure.
  25. Ayyyy! You guys FINALLY got around to one of the two cage matches. Really dug the latest episode, even if I would've liked more love from Marty on the Anderson/Angle topic. A lot of valid points were made from both sides, to be fair. But yeah. When we're listing personal favorites, this one cracks my top five for sure. I just love the grudge and the basic "bare necessities" approach to the match. It felt like a traditional cage template, updated with some of the more modern moves (even then, nothing too stunt-happy or outrageous). I've reviewed that cage match a couple of times here on the board, and it always ends with me gushing over the sense of finality and hate in the finish. Love it. But let's talk BANGERS. I mean, is Samoa Joe the uncrowned king of energetic sprints or what?? He's GOT to be near the very top. The opener with Aries from Slammiversary. The Sabin decimation. The Daniels angle with the bloody towel. The heated brawl with Brock from Balls of Fire or whateverthefuck. Heck, even in that funky 2014-2015 phase when TNA was taping shows in New York, Joe had some super fun sprints with both Homicide and Low Ki - two guys who unfortunately had VERY FEW solid Impact matches on their resume. Joe just almost always has this tendency of bringing the energy and the intensity to these short sprints. Especially as his body has aged, I think it might be his sweet spot as an in-ring performer. Glad that Jarrett got some significant discussion, too. Double J is a weird one for me. I've outright despised him at times - like the Chosen One and WCW World Champ horseshit. But then there are times I've absolutely enjoyed the absurdity of his heel character. The original WWF "woman beater" angle. The Planet Jarrett shtick cosplaying as some sort of Triple H tribute act. The Double J Double M A submission specialist stuff. All of that was genuinely great in its absurdity. But, in the ring, he's always been sort of dry and bland to me. I think the Hunter comparison is very apt, actually. However, Jarrett occasionally taps into something extra as an in-ring babyface. Out of the ring, I don't know that I've ever felt or cared or sympathized with Jarrett as a character babyface. (And that's wild, considering the whole widowed survivor story bit sort of writes itself.) But the in-ring babyface Jarrett can be quite tremendous. Similar to the way I feel toward Sting, I find Jarrett's fired up comebacks to be strangely exciting and captivating. The guy brings the excitement level up to eleven and just fires the fuck up at precisely the pitch perfect moment in time to GRAB you. There's something about those key, critical babyface comebacks that feel super-charged and frenzied. It's something AJ managed to master during his time there, too. As a viewer, you know it when you see it. But you also feel it. It's the type of comeback that will send goosebumps down your arm or have you punching the air, kicking the wall, and shouting Fuck yeah to the gods for gifting you such glorious choreographed combat.
×
×
  • Create New...