El-P

I've seen more than I can remember. Some that disapeared quickly, some than gave birth to a new consensus. It' was pretty interesting, pretty informative, and also, sometime, pretty embarrassing. Oh, I can remember some grumpy people thinking all of a sudden I (and a few others) thought Backlund was great because JDW pimped him.

How the movie was judged back then is not required knowledge to judge it now. However, it is valuable knowledge if you're interested in movie reviewing history and how perception evolved. However, someone thinking in 2009 that "Night of the Hunter" is a bad movie should not be dismissed as having a "dated idea". It's stupid. He's probably got his own argument, maybe some which share points with ideas people have had back then, but in no way that means it's "dated".Much like thinking Takada is a great worker in 2009 isn't a "dated" idea just because there was a consensus 10 years ago that he was a great worker. There's no consensus anymore? Fine. Does that means that people thinking like the consensus 10 years ago have "dated ideas"? No. Don't be naive, you know how it works. Of course it's coming from the fact that footage showed up. But it also comes from the fact that there are some trendsetters and a large flock of seagulls following the ship, especially at DVDVDR. I've been around for more than 10 years, I've seen it work that way more time that I can remember. Not that *everyone* praising Fuji or Lawler does it because they are followers, but the fact that a consensus seems to emerge often comes from the fact that people follow trendsetters. Like I said, it's the same things in movie or music. Reviewers are influencials. Thanks. Doesn't mean that my ideas are dated for disagreeing with the people with the "new views" either. Plus I didn't say to Dan that he was *following* a trend. I said that the Fujiwara and Lawler pimping as all time great is trendy. Like MJH said earlier, the use of the term "trendy" is not automatically dismissive. But you seem very defensive to have it thrown at you for whatever reason. Nobody was pimping Dustin Rhodes ten years ago. No one. Lot of his old matches in the early 90's were thought as restholds dullfest. Really, there was absolutely no consensus about Dustin being this great worker in the 90's. After the Dustin of the Day he became second only to Terry Funk it seemed like. It was funny as hell. I always liked Dustin, even in his hated early Goldust days, but I never had the impression that I was in any kind of consensus. People talked bout how HHH was carrying Dustin back in 97. I've already answered this earlier. I don't want to sound rude or anything, but at this point you're clearly putting way too much though in dissecting the meaning of every word I type. I'm not writing an essay when I quickly reply in a discussion on a pro wrestling Internet board. You want to know my train of thoughts ? First of all it was "Well, maybe it's dated, but that doesn't make it less valuable", then after reading Tom's stuff about "holding onto 93 opinion", which pretty much meant "dated opinion" too, I just thought, "Well, it's just silly anyway.". I mean, I just told you that. I'm not trying to be a smart alec, it really was my train of thoughts about that, not that I spend a whole lot of times asking myself questions about this particular topic anyway.

Tom makes my head hurts. Oh, I forgot that glorious "Arguing with Dan Whalers, El Patoume or Zach Arnold just feels beneath me." Glorious I tell you. And not nice to the people who don't feel beneath them to argue with me.

I guess with the Wellness, as bullshit as it may be, they have to cut down a little bit on the gas. I do remember Rey being roided up to the grill in the mid-2000.

"Maybe" is very hard to read as "no, that's silly". Ok, want to play quote game. You quoted me saying : You just forgot to quote what I said just afterward : Ok? First reaction to the "dated" stuff is : "Maybe. And what is the point?" Several posts later my second reaction is : "Wait a minute, it's just silly."

Compare Rey when he came up in WCW and Rey now. It's monstruous. Rey roided up before coming to the E, but it has gotten ridiculous. What for? Does that help his ability to work good match ? No. Does that make any difference to his appeal toward kids and latino? I don't think so. The mask and crazy outfits are more than enough. Sure, Rey would look even more midget in the HHH/Batista world (Universe) without the roids, but frankly the difference in his appeal would be none. It's totally ridiculous how this company just encourage the roiding up of its workers.

Depends of who you're talking about. For instance Neil Young is still amazing at his age and after his accident. That said, Tenryu was never better than after he passed 40.

You're missing John's dry sense of humour. And I echo what Jingus is saying. Especially when getting up the ass is both natural and enjoyable (supposedly), while getting your forehead sliced up by a razorblade or getting launched in the air and landing on your hip is neither. Of course you could make analogy with old rock bands writing the same song 20 year after their hits period, but it doesn't work as well and the physical side of the activity we're talking about. Porn is about as accurate a comparison you can make.

No, I said I found the idea of it being "dated" was silly.

Wait, where is that 60 year old Ginger Lynn money shot picture so we can get the right comparison idea?

Talk about old stuff. At this point I really have no time or energy to get involved into over detailled argument about this or that worker. Really, I've got past that point. But I do follow what's said, what's liked or not, and if something seems right, wrong, interesting, intriguing or just plain stupid I'll drop some thoughts about it. Some recent trends have delivered some interesting points or enlightments about somes workers, others seem quite bizarre to me. Plus, there's a point when you have to agree to disagree. I know me and Dan will never see eye to eye on some stuff. Ditto Dylan, with whom I can't share his love for the current WWE product, no matter how hard I try to watch and try some positive stuff to say about it. Lawler, I'll have to watch ever more Memphis than I did but I highly doubt that my opinion will change very much at this point (although I do like him a lot more now than 10 years ago). I've never watched wrestling with a more open mind than I do now actually. I find other thing to enjoy than what turned me on 10 years ago. Still, some trends of thought, some insane pimping of certain workers, I just don't get, and I won't get shy about pointing it whenever I feel like it. I don't take offense to the fact that Dan would say that Marufuji is everything bad about puroresu right now for instance. I've cooled off a whole lot over the years. If people took exception to my use of the term "trendy", well, too bad. I re-read those old thread, and I admit I found pretty amusing that my not-so serious post were dissected with such detailed attention.

I want the same analogy with Shawn Micheals. And Hulk Hogan.

I wonder what kept Lawler from getting more major programs in the WWF, especially in the mid 90's. I guess size and shape. He was getting serious heel heat, and he could very well have been a good opponent at the WWF title level from 93 to 95 against Bret or Diesel. Seems like Vince never saw him as anything more than a special attraction, which in a way is sad. I'm not sold on "Lawler is one of the greatest US worker ever" at all, but for one I thought he was terribly misused in the WWF setting.

Holy shit.

Holding onto 93 opinions? What? If I believe right now that Takada was a great worker, that makes my opinion "dated". I find this pretty silly. Anyway, denying trends of thinking is pretty silly to me too, there are trends everywhere, in every domain. Music, cinema etc... At this point, I'm more interested in seeing of those trends are evolving rather than debating workers to death. Wrestling analysis historiography entertains me more than wrestling analysis itself these days. Then, there are some new line of thinking that I will agree with, and others I won't. I don't see what the problem is.

Is it wrong to study Althusser when you're studying philosophy ? Of course not. (for those who don't know, Althusser was a structuralist philosopher, who ended up strangling his wife). Is it wrong to enjoy Robert Blake in "In Cold Blood" and "Lost Highway" ? Of course not. Is it wrong to listen to Noir Desir, arguably the best french rock band ever ? Of course not. (leader Bertrand Cantat killed his girlfriend actress Marie Trintignant, although he hit her without wanting to actually kill her) There are tons of instances like those, in pretty much every domain you can think of. Trying to erase Benoit from wresting history is pretty stupid to me. What if we erased everything Phil Spector produced ?

The last really entertaining match I can remember from Lawler was the SummerSlam brawl with Bret. Everything I've seen in the WWF since then from him has been mostly mediocre to downright embarrassing. Ok, so... Dustin Rhodes or Shiro Koshinaka ? Raven or Sandman ? Abdullah the Butcher or Bruiser Brody ? Shane Douglas or Eddie Gilbert ? Sid or Kevin Nash ?

Of course it's trendy. The Dustin Rhodes stuff was trendy too. Don't get me wrong, it had a lot of positive (like all the DVDVDVR sets), but there's always the will to get the vaunted "forgotten great worker" from under a rock, and it leads to hyperboles. Same things with music and cinema. Burn what you worshipped and get some new Gods. It's human. I don't think objectivity and measure are prevalent in wrestling analysis.

Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable. The idea that Fujiwara was one of the greatest workers in Japan is very trendy. Doesn't make it more valuable than the other. It has became trendy to praise Fujiwara and Lawler. I echoes the feeling MJH expressed early in the thread, I'm absolutely not convinced by Lawler's case, and although Fujiwara was ridiculously underrated for a long time, I don't see the "greatest japanese worker ever" argument at all, just like I don't see the "Takada wasn't a great worker" argument at all.

Man, this is a comparison that no longer means much to people. Their loss. It's funny how out of fashion certain things go while others become the talk of the day.

Ok folks, Hulk Hogan or Dusty Rhodes ? Steven Regal or Fit Finlay ? Marty Jannetty or Davey Boy Smith ? Atsushi Onita or Mick Foley ? Mima Shimoda or Takako Inoue ?

What a tragedy that was. TAKA was one of the 10 best wrestlers in the world in 96. The WWF killed his work ethics and will to have great matches. The WWF killed the work ethics and ability out of a whole lot of workers. It's been apparent in every era of the promotion.

Hansen was already great in the 80's, carrying the no-selling Brody to great tag matches by doing the workload. He carried old Baba to super matches in the early 80's. Hansen was basically excellent for 15 years, from the late 70's to mid 90's. Vader has been great for a few years in the 90's (90/95 and then good again in AJ but not nearly as good as Hansen was there for 15 years). Don't get me wrong, I like Vader a lot, but I also agre with some of the criticism that he'd bump too easily and that he'd try to cram to much "big spots" for the sake of it. How is that a criteria, especially for a guy for worked basically his entire career in Japan? Hansen beating the shit out of Luger in 90 was fun. But like Dan says, and I mostly agree, Vader worked basically the same way everywhere, including UWF-I. People that are big on stuff like Rey adapting greatly to the WWE style should hold against Vader the fact that he couldn't adapt once he was deprived of working super stiff. Not that I would personnaly agree, but it seems like a big criteria these days.

I knew you'd catch me on that one Dan. Rey has become an efficient but typical WWE worker. Kudos for him for adapting to this dull style (and getting roided to the grill in te process). Doesn't mean I have any interest watching any of his stuff.

Hansen, easily. Longer prime, better matches, better seller, better psychology. Eddie easily. Rey WWE stint is obscenely overrated (ok, send the hate;). Eddie was better than Rey pretty much at every point of his career. Bret easily. Shawn is one of the most overrated worker ever, right next to Kurt Angle (althougyh much much better than Angle and has been excellent in his prime). Marufuji. Much more creative, in a good way, which is rare, than KENTA and more a total package in term of being able to work with difefrent kind of opponents.