CM Punk: Greatest Promo Ever

[El-P]

I don't say this too often, but I mostly agree with Dylan here. The anti-WWE guys have been awfully vague about what their specific problems with the current product is.

I think Jerome has walked through what he hates about WWE-style quite a few times since say 2003 and is probably as tired of writing a long, detailed post on it as people who love WWE-style are of reading it.

There is this.

 

There is also the fact that at this point, I've became a bit lazy.

 

And also, and I don't want people to think it's a cop-out because it isn't, there's the fact that English isn't my native language, and sometime, I happen to knock my head on vocabulary and grammar issues. Not that I need to translate any thoughts I have about wrestling from French into English, as a matter of fact when I think about wrestling I do it automatically in English because it's the only language I've ever used to talk about wrestling. Still, there is no complex or precise thinking process without mastering the language, and I do feel sometime my English isn't good and rich enough to totally express what I would like to. So I have to find ways of expressing some ideas in the most concise yet thruthfull way possible. I thought "self-conscious epic" was the perfect expression of why I didn't like most modern big WWE matches, and obviously, some people get what I mean. Again, not a cop-out, I'm mostly lazy (and not passionnate enough about WWE to take the time to deeply analyse their stuff), but I think it was fair to state that fact too, which makes me a bit repetitive sometime in my ways of expressing my opinions or thoughts.

 

About "self-conscious epics", I find most of what has been said quite true, especially the difference with a big theatrical match, but I'd like to add also that I take in account the way those modern matches are designed and forced-fed to the audience as "epics" from the get-go. It never feels like two wrestlers having a match developping into an epic, it feels like it's been laid out and carefully preplanned that this was gonna be an "epic", and sold as such to the audience. This goes along the hyper annoying "Wrestlemania moments" we have to suffer through each year now, as those are probably noted on the directors sheet as "Token WM Moment N°X". It's like those movies released as "The new cult movies of....". Well, it's not a cult movie because you decrete it's a cult movie. It becomes one because of what the audience makes of it. In modern WWE, there's no place for the audience, and I think it's a well known fact that the workers are told to ignore the audience, which is to me the exact opposite of what a pro-wrestler should do.

And I'll be totally fair in saying WWE are not the only ones guilty of this, although it's pretty systematical there. I remember hating the Kobashi vs Samoa Joe match as it just looked like Joe jerking off by hitting every AJ spot imaginable before the ROH crowd who ate every one of them and thought it made for a great match. One word : cosplay.

[El-P]

What's worse than that is "Me and my opponent are going to have a great match/MOTY" Kurt Angle is the king of that one

Yeah, Kurt probably is the Prince of Self Conscious Epics, riding them all the way into the WON HOF. I'd say Trip is the King of Kings of Self Conscious Epics because his are so methodically laid out and overkilled for drama / theatrics / etc. Kurt's tended / tend to be more spotfu.

 

There is probably something to say about this post-modern way of thinking that wrestlers have of going for an epic in a "smart" way of seeking snowflakes, which is totally wrong. Triple H is the King of Miserably Failed Epics.

[Gregor]

I got what Jingus was going for with his sandwich comparison, because that's kind of how I've felt when I've watched some of WWE's bigger matches from the past couple of years. I'll watch the match and think, "That was a good match - not something I'm gonna want to watch again, but they did a good job," and I can't really explain why it doesn't resonate with me. I'd watched Punk-Cena from Money in the Bank once before, and I just watched it again to see if I could explain why I had that reaction with that match in particular.

 

I don't like that many finisher teases or that many instances of a guy actually hitting his finisher in one match. I also don't like a lot of nifty counters to finishers, although there wasn't a whole lot of that in this match.

 

After a while, every two count was followed by at least ten seconds of inaction. I like selling, but you don't have to sit around for that long just because it's late in the match. To me, it felt like the two count was being sold more than whatever move had just been hit, if that makes any sense. More than anything else, this made it feel like they were trying to force a classic. The first Michaels-Undertaker Wrestlemania match featured this, too, and it was far worse in that one.

 

It didn't seem like they were hurting each other all that much. I don't know if I can explain this well - it just seemed like the fatigue was being sold more than any kind of pain. Punk's knees to the jaw did look really good and painful, though.

 

How much of that is "WWE style," how much of it is "self-conscious epic," how much of it is the result of their having to work a very long match, how much of it is the fact that I don't regularly watch recent WWE matches, and how much of it is simply personal taste I don't know. I do think that it was a very good match. It also felt a lot more forced than (to name an example listed earlier in the thread) Michaels-Mankind. Again, I can't say for sure if that one aspect what turns me off it. I dunno - that's about the best I can articulate what I don't like about big WWE matches.

[Jingus]

And also, and I don't want people to think it's a cop-out because it isn't, there's the fact that English isn't my native language, and sometime, I happen to knock my head on vocabulary and grammar issues.

Seriously? Could've fooled me, I had no idea. I made a perfect score on my verbal SAT test here in America, and your posts are often better written than mine.

 

I remember hating the Kobashi vs Samoa Joe match as it just looked like Joe jerking off by hitting every AJ spot imaginable before the ROH crowd who ate every one of them and thought it made for a great match. One word : cosplay.

I don't agree with that one, for a specific reason: they worked that into the story of the match. Joe was deliberately ripping off a bunch of spots from the AJPW legends, and Kobashi responded by getting pissed off and beating the everliving shit out of this wannabe. I don't think I've ever seen Kenta stiff anyone so hard in the face as he was with those diving double-handed chops in the corner after the hundred-chop barrage. They intentionally made a point out of Joe marking out and doing cosplay spots, and that causing Kobashi to be all "what the fuck, you little punk? You haven't earned that!". Joe only took back over on offense once he stopped being a wannabe and went back to the faux-MMA stuff which was his calling card. Samoa Joe doing masturbatory "I can't believe I'm wrestling KENTA KOBASHI, holy shit this is the greatest day of my life!" e-fed spots and then paying for his hubris was the specific point of the story those two guys were telling.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I guess. I was there live and it was more like, "WOOOHOOO!!!! SAMOA JOE AND KENTA KOBASHI ARE LIGHTING UP THE FUCK OUT OF EACH OTHER AND I'M 4TH ROW!!!!. AWESOME!!!! " to me.

[goodhelmet]

OK, so I went and re-read the thread and the term "self-conscious epic" is stupid. Wrestlers have always been told to go long / broadway/ whatever. The ideal should be to give the fans their money's worth. It seems to me that this idea of a SCE is an excuse to slag styles of wrestling or wrestlers we don't like whether it is MITB or Edwards-Richards or Misawa-Kobashi or Flair-Windham.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Thanks for killing "self conscious epic" dead in the water. Every time I saw that over the last week or so I've wanted to punch people through my screen.

[El-P]

And also, and I don't want people to think it's a cop-out because it isn't, there's the fact that English isn't my native language, and sometime, I happen to knock my head on vocabulary and grammar issues.

Seriously? Could've fooled me, I had no idea. I made a perfect score on my verbal SAT test here in America, and your posts are often better written than mine.

Well, thanks for the compliment. But I can assure you I'm sometime stuttering mentally and not feeling comfortable enough to really get to the points with enough precision.

 

I remember hating the Kobashi vs Samoa Joe match as it just looked like Joe jerking off by hitting every AJ spot imaginable before the ROH crowd who ate every one of them and thought it made for a great match. One word : cosplay.

I don't agree with that one, for a specific reason: they worked that into the story of the match. Joe was deliberately ripping off a bunch of spots from the AJPW legends, and Kobashi responded by getting pissed off and beating the everliving shit out of this wannabe. I don't think I've ever seen Kenta stiff anyone so hard in the face as he was with those diving double-handed chops in the corner after the hundred-chop barrage. They intentionally made a point out of Joe marking out and doing cosplay spots, and that causing Kobashi to be all "what the fuck, you little punk? You haven't earned that!". Joe only took back over on offense once he stopped being a wannabe and went back to the faux-MMA stuff which was his calling card. Samoa Joe doing masturbatory "I can't believe I'm wrestling KENTA KOBASHI, holy shit this is the greatest day of my life!" e-fed spots and then paying for his hubris was the specific point of the story those two guys were telling.

 

If that's the case, then it went totally over my head. If I ever get to watch it again, I'll try to watch for this.

[El-P]

OK, so I went and re-read the thread and the term "self-conscious epic" is stupid. Wrestlers have always been told to go long / broadway/ whatever.

It's not the point at all.

 

The ideal should be to give the fans their money's worth. It seems to me that this idea of a SCE is an excuse to slag styles of wrestling or wrestlers we don't like whether it is MITB or Edwards-Richards or Misawa-Kobashi or Flair-Windham.

No. Saying the term is stupid when obviously it has been understood by many people is an excuse to not even try to understand the point that is being made.

[Herodes]

I actually like the term 'self conscious epics' but we should clarify the distinction between these kinds of matches and your standard 'epics'. My own opinion is that a SCE is a match that on the surface has all the aesthetics of an 'epic' - the near falls, the kicking out of finishers, the length - but beneath that surface it is not backed up outside of the most basic level by an equivalent story, human conflict or the insight and development of the characters engaging in the drama. Essentially - lots of fireworks without the narrative.

 

Take 2 WWF matches I would consider genuine 'epics' in that style - Warrior v Savage at WM 7 and Hart v Austin at WM13, and compare them to a SCE like Taker vs Michaels or Taker v HHH. Warrior / Savage has all the fireworks, but completely backed up with the narrative of revenge, Warrior looking to the gods to give him strength, the finality of his victory and his own redemption, Savage's redemption as he is abandoned by the whore but reunited with the princess in his lowest hour and time of need. It's an incredible piece of theater and when all is said and done, the players who came into the match have completely changed when they come out the match - the mark of an epic. Similarly Hart/Austin has the stage, the blood, the imagery - all the aesthetic epic traits - but also the conflict of the traditional hero vs the rebel, the moral ambiguity, the role reversal as the hero abandons his sense of right and the 'villain' shows the heroic traits of never giving up despite his dire circumstances. Again, great overblown theater and character metamorphosis in line with epics. The characters have changed as a result of the match.

 

To me, matches like Michaels / Taker and Michaels /HHH are not exactly missing any story, but there is a mismatch between the structure and the narrative. There are other comparisons I could makes outside of WWF of what I consider genuine epics vs SCEs eg Hokuto/Kandori compared to Toyota/K Inoue, 94 Misawa/Kawada and the 95 tag match compared to the later Misawa/Kobashis etc. So 'self conscious' because it explicitly ticks all the boxes for structure (near falls, kicking out of finishers, finisher reversals, using each others finishers, length, blood) but it is not backed up by a compelling story or character drama. Some may argue otherwise on their perception of the story, but that's just my take on things.

[Log]

While I agree that the term should not be something that enters into discussions here, I also agree that there is a such thing as a "self-conscious epic". Herodes mentions two that came to mind for me immediately: HBK/Taker (mostly the second one) and HHH/Taker.

 

To me, it's more to do with guys that say beforehand, "We're gonna go out there and have a great match!", instead of "I'm gonna beat you!" I kind of see this as a fairly new thing, and more worried with impressing "Dave" and Internet fans, etc.

 

I can remember Michaels, at some point leading up to the second Taker match, saying in a promo that he wanted to "tear the house down" (or something similar) and have another great match at Wrestlemania. That bothers me as just like when Angle or whoever does it. HHH and Taker did basically the same thing this last year. I'm not a big HHH-hater or anything, but it just felt like he had seen his buddy have these big, well-recieved matches the years before and wanted one of his own.

 

I'm just saying that whether or not you like the term "self-conscious epic", it does describe something that some wrestlers do. Like I said, it seems to have developed over the last few years. I don't think Warrior/Savage and some of the old broadways by Flair and others really fall into this category. I don't think Punk/Cena from MITB does, either (haven't seen Summerslam, yet). In the case of the former, it was more of a matter of putting on a "main event". It's Savage's retirement, it's a Flair defense in your territory, etc. It needs to be big. I've never watched a Flair draw and thought it was all, "Hey! Look at how good I am." It's more, "I can't put this guy away, but I'm not giving up my title" (or something like that).

 

I don't know. It's hard for me to explain, but some big "epics" just seem more organic. HHH/Taker (the most glaring example) seems to just have been put on for no other reason than to have a "big" match, thus making it a little more "self-conscious".

[Dylan Waco]

OK, so I went and re-read the thread and the term "self-conscious epic" is stupid. Wrestlers have always been told to go long / broadway/ whatever.

It's not the point at all.

 

The ideal should be to give the fans their money's worth. It seems to me that this idea of a SCE is an excuse to slag styles of wrestling or wrestlers we don't like whether it is MITB or Edwards-Richards or Misawa-Kobashi or Flair-Windham.

No. Saying the term is stupid when obviously it has been understood by many people is an excuse to not even try to understand the point that is being made.

 

There is no point being made because it is only applied to matches/wrestlers people don't like. It is a blanket way to dismiss a company/wrestler/match without pointing to any real flaw.

[Loss]

You do understand what it means though, right? Surely you can point to matches where guys go 30+ minutes and do all the stuff that's supposed to make a match great like tons of kickouts and blood, but the match is annoying because the guys involved just aren't good enough to pull that off. Self conscious epics most definitely exist. I don't think Cena/Punk was one, but we have seen them.

[Dylan Waco]

I understand the concept in theory and may have even used the term itself in the past. The problem is it has become a term used to dismiss matches/wrestlers without actually pointing to specific problems in the match. I also feel like it is being applied selectively. Herodes to his credit made a quality post discussing the term, what it means and why certain things qualify and others don't. I don't agree with him necessarily but it actually came across as something written with purpose of forwarding discussion rather than cutting it of.

[MJH]

Yeah, because the posts go "Punk/Cena? Nah. Self-Conscious Epic. Next."

 

At this point, I'm honestly not sure how much further you expect Punk/Cena or HBK/Taker or [...] to be "broken down".

[Dylan Waco]

Yeah, because the posts go "Punk/Cena? Nah. Self-Conscious Epic. Next."

 

At this point, I'm honestly not sure how much further you expect Punk/Cena or HBK/Taker or [...] to be "broken down".

I don't expect anyone to break them down any more than they want to, but if you read Jerome's post the "self-conscious epic" line is pretty much tossed out there as a blanket condemnation without any detailed commentst. You've gone into more detail to your credit even if I do disagree with you (and I do).

[FLIK]

Sorry if I sound like a bitter old man, but there's nothing for me to watch on these shows I haven't seen before done a shitload better without the terrible WWE taste.

You do sound like a bitter old man. I would honestly prefer to hear about what you do like because most of your recent posts are all about your hatred for WWE. Create a thread of awesome matches El-P would like us to watch.

I know, I realize that. Blame me stumbling on MitB and having my brain trying to get around the fact people actually enjoy this stuff. I shouldn't even try to watch it, WWE does no good for me, and then I'm playing an unviable role.

I did contribute to the yearbook threads with positive comments though, although not as much as I would like to for various reasons.

 

Pft, what you really need to do is get back to pimping old school FMW and ripping matches. I need more Sambo Asako in my life.

[FLIK]

RVD/Lynn did have a "we're gonna put on a good show" vibe, but it's not like they kicked out of each others' finishers ten times and deliberately tried to do a MOTY. RVD and Lynn spent enough time in Japan and probably watched plenty of other stuff, they knew how to do 'epic'. They kept it at "two good athletes trying hard" and it worked.

RVD's a bad example for the subject at hand I think since he was blatantly doing "self concious epic" on purpose. The entire premise of his character was a cocky "whole f'n show" look how awesome I am attitutde, look at all the cool shit I can do, stop, point at self, cheer me bitches. And it 100% worked too and made him the most popular guy in the company by a large portion at his peak.

[MJH]

The Living Dangerously Van Dam/Lynn match works because it's a "heel" RVD gloating at how great he is gradually realising as Lynn pushes him further that this guy isn't a pushover. The matches after that? Eh...

[S.L.L.]

I understand the concept in theory and may have even used the term itself in the past. The problem is it has become a term used to dismiss matches/wrestlers without actually pointing to specific problems in the match. I also feel like it is being applied selectively. Herodes to his credit made a quality post discussing the term, what it means and why certain things qualify and others don't. I don't agree with him necessarily but it actually came across as something written with purpose of forwarding discussion rather than cutting it of.

I don't even know that I understand the concept anymore. "Self-conscious epic" is a term I might have used for HHH matches, or Davey Richards matches, or post-collapse main events from the big puro feds. The praised post-'04 WWE matches are not the same things, but are getting labelled with the same term. So, no, apparently I don't understand the concept. The closest I can come is looking at "self-conscious epic" as a reference to Patterson-style booked matches, but this is supposedly something that was more frequent in WWE since '04, and Patterson-booked matches have been in the company as long as Patterson has.

[Jingus]

"Self-conscious epic" is a term I might have used for HHH matches, or Davey Richards matches, or post-collapse main events from the big puro feds. The praised post-'04 WWE matches are not the same things, but are getting labelled with the same term.

You still get them occasionally in modern WWE, just not very often. I'd argue that HHH/Taker counts as one. It felt like a rather transparent attempt to recapture the magic of the two Taker/Shawn matches, except that Trips just isn't nearly as good as Michaels when it comes to playing that sort of role. HHH looks silly trying to play the unbeatable ace against a guy like Undertaker, but he's not very good at playing the underdog either. Shawn himself sometimes toed the line at making SCEs, the matches with Angle come to mind, but the only time I think he fully jumped into look-at-me wankery is when he's doing those incredibly long matches against HHH. The difference in quality between most of their singles matches and the triple threats with Benoit is pretty big, imo.

[NintendoLogic]

I've thought about it for a while, and I think what sets a Self-Conscious Epic apart is the deliberate attempt to stuff the match with as many of the, shall we say, accoutrements of a good match as possible. That usually means that there isn't really an overarching story to the match. Rather, there's a bunch of mini-stories, and the match resets after each one ends. What happens at the five minute mark has no relation to what happens at the 25-minute mark. Some matwork to open the match? Once the punches start flying, it may has well have never happened. A segment centered around working a body part? It'll be forgotten once the finishing stretch begins.

[MikeCampbell]

I know people shit on Davey Richards, but I actually hate watching Eddie Edwards more.

 

John

Why is that, John? From what I've seen of them both, in singles and tags together, Eddie usually looks like the better of them.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Honestly? It's just the wording itself that's annoying as fuck. Let's face it, "Self-Conscious Epic " just sounds and reads like something that if said by someone in an actual spoken conversation would make me want to brain someone with a hammer.

[jdw]

I know people shit on Davey Richards, but I actually hate watching Eddie Edwards more.

 

John

Why is that, John? From what I've seen of them both, in singles and tags together, Eddie usually looks like the better of them.

 

Eddie's selling is even worse than Davey's. He has a stunning ability to get hit with something and a minute later be perfectly fine because he has to hit his own cool shit. Just staggeringly bad seller every time I've seen him live. It's almost laughable: Eddie can get nailed with something and you can litterally say, "Don't worry... Eddie's okay..." and BAM! Eddie is up hitting something.

 

As a reference point: Hoback is about as happy-go-luck fan as there is. Tolerant of just about every worker, and style (other than say over-the-top garbage wrestling). Not at all the negative cranky bastard that I am. He's tolerant of *Davey*, for example. I can't think of very many wrestlers that he's actually loathed watching over the years. He HATES Eddie. Did from the first match we were at where Eddie worked. When I said we might be watching Eddie three times on Saturday, it sent him into a funk.

 

About the only think I like about watching Eddie live if watching/listening Hoback suffer.

 

John