Comments that don't warrant a thread - Part 3

[khawk20]

I don't get the righteous indignation about things like the fart gimmick. Wrestling has always been full of stupid stuff.

Everybody has their own personal line for stuff like that. Mine was the Papa Shango-Ultimate Warrior Voodoo angle, which put me off of watching pretty much any wrestling for two or three years at least.

 

Everybody's brain is wired differently in terms of the "this is too stupid even for me and I feel embarassed watching it" signal. We all have it, though.

[cm funk]

I don't get the righteous indignation about things like the fart gimmick. Wrestling has always been full of stupid stuff. If you're not watching RAW and Smackdown on DVR and fast forwarding through like 60-70% of it then you're doing it wrong. Smackdown has 2-3 legit good TV matches every week so I just skip to the matches, watch them, and then will occasionally stop fast forwarding through the other stuff if something looks interesting.

It bothers people because it's a second gen member of the Hart family, who worked and trained for years to be a serious female wrestler. If they gave the gimmick to one of the untrained models it would still be dumb, but nobody would really care.

[Russellmania]

My point is that it's easier than ever to just skip the bad stuff and watch only the good stuff.

[Coffey]

My point is that it's easier than ever to just skip the bad stuff and watch only the good stuff.

We shouldn't have to. Mostly because it's also easier than ever to just find something else completely that doesn't insult our intelligence or requiring fast-forwarding through the whole show to skip the parts that are shit.

[Marty]

The one ECW show I went to was in 2000 in Columbus, OH. The recap for the event says there were 980 fans in attendance and I can safely say there wasn't a single vagina in the crowd.

 

My wife is cool with wrestling. She's gone with me to shows. I wouldn't take her to RoH due to the fans and I probably wouldn't take her to ECW if it was still around.

Ditto mine. We just went to the house show on Saturday night and had a fun time. And she's got similar feelings as yours might, as when I'm watching something ECW-related, she doesn't want to be in the same room. Not a fan of blood, and that might be partly because she works in health care. Goes without saying that she prefers a lot of the PG direction of the WWE (especially seeing the kids in the crowd dressed as Cena, Rey, Punk or whoever). Likes a lot of the WWE DVDs I have that aren't ECW-related. Enjoys seeing the history stuff, including that of WCW and has even said, "If I watched back then, I probably would've watched WCW too." One of the first things she ever said when watching wrestling for the first time with me was how much she liked Jerry Lawler's punches (which made her a keeper!). Oh, and for what it's worth, she doesn't have much of a problem with the Natalya fart gimmick and the Eve hoeski act. The fart gimmick she writes off as being silly and she was actually entertained when Cena called Eve out for her actions and intentions.

[Russellmania]

My point is that it's easier than ever to just skip the bad stuff and watch only the good stuff.

We shouldn't have to. Mostly because it's also easier than ever to just find something else completely that doesn't insult our intelligence or requiring fast-forwarding through the whole show to skip the parts that are shit.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're growing out of wrestling don't pretend it's because it suddenly sucks. It has always been incredibly hit or miss.

[anarchistxx]

A fart gimmick just completely crosses the line in terms of being intelligence insulting and embarrassing. It's not funny, witty, leading to anything or even entertaining. The audience cringes, except maybe the preteen boys (and even that's not a given, think I'd have hated such an angle at that age).

 

I haven't seen the full thing, only the segment at Elimination Chamber, but if anyone came in the room while I was watching such a scene I'd be fucking mortified.

 

I think it goes way beyond the Attitude Era stuff (except maybe the Mae Young 'hand' incident), that was risque and often silly but not blatantly disgusting, demeaning, embarrassing etc etc. WWE and basement humour are the worst combination ever, and it's stuff like this (combined with the boring, formulaic nature of most of the 'serious' stuff) that stops people like me from ever watching anything apart from the pimped matches and stacked PPVs.

[Coffey]

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're growing out of wrestling don't pretend it's because it suddenly sucks. It has always been incredibly hit or miss.

And I guess what I'm saying is there's a big difference between watching Stone Cold Steve Austin when you're 16-years-old and then watching John Cena when you're 30.

 

EDIT: I guess I'm not growing out of wrestling as a whole though, because I can still enjoy CMLL or NJPW for modern wrestling. I even thought SMASH was decent enough. I liked Kana quite a bit. I guess I just want different things from my shows. WWE does not provide me with what I am seeking and neither does ROH. But I can go back and watch shit that is new to me from the 70's or 80's & still be thoroughly entertained.

[Matt D]

I don't get the righteous indignation about things like the fart gimmick. Wrestling has always been full of stupid stuff.

Everybody has their own personal line for stuff like that. Mine was the Papa Shango-Ultimate Warrior Voodoo angle, which put me off of watching pretty much any wrestling for two or three years at least.

 

That put me off wrestling too, really until 98 when the boom hit again and it became more socially acceptable, but that's because I was an easily scared kid and it was way too much for me.

[Marty]

Just adding my two cents to the fart gimmick: The problem I do have (which the wife does agree with me) is that it's a gimmick/act that you can't do anything with. I mean, there have been lots of gimmicks like that in the past, but still. At least with a manipulative woman gimmick like Eve has, it's something you can work with. Also, in spite of having variations of said manipulative woman gimmick, Trish Stratus, Lita and even Sable will still be remembered fondly by your average WWE fan. Natalya is on pace to simply be remembered for just another comedy act.

[Loss]

Wrestling angles and promos are crap now. That's not a generational thing. That's a wrestling-sucks-now thing.

 

Maybe the in-ring is still good, but if the wrestlers aren't protected, the championships they're fighting for mean nothing, winning/losing doesn't matter and there's nothing at stake, why should I care if a match is good or not? A steady stream of fun five-minute TV matches and three-star PPV matches is not enough incentive to keep following things so closely.

 

I realize not everyone sees it the same way, but that's my struggle.

[Coffey]

Wrestling angles and promos are crap now. That's not a generational thing. That's a wrestling-sucks-now thing.

 

Maybe the in-ring is still good, but if the wrestlers aren't protected, the championships they're fighting for mean nothing, winning/losing doesn't matter and there's nothing at stake, why should I care if a match is good or not? A steady stream of fun five-minute TV matches and three-star PPV matches is not enough incentive to keep following things so closely.

 

I realize not everyone sees it the same way, but that's my struggle.

This is actually genius because I think it sums up exactly why I feel the way that I do. I'm tired of hearing the arguments pimped that I just have rose-colored glasses or am waxing nostalgic because I thought things used to be better.

[Kronos]

Wrestling angles and promos are crap now. That's not a generational thing. That's a wrestling-sucks-now thing.

 

Maybe the in-ring is still good, but if the wrestlers aren't protected, the championships they're fighting for mean nothing, winning/losing doesn't matter and there's nothing at stake, why should I care if a match is good or not? A steady stream of fun five-minute TV matches and three-star PPV matches is not enough incentive to keep following things so closely.

 

I realize not everyone sees it the same way, but that's my struggle.

This is actually genius because I think it sums up exactly why I feel the way that I do. I'm tired of hearing the arguments pimped that I just have rose-colored glasses or am waxing nostalgic because I thought things used to be better.

 

Not to mention that WWE puts out 5 hours of TV a week (More if you watch NXT). Who has time to keep up with it all, even if you want to do?

 

Some of it may be bad quality. But at least there's a lot of it! (apologies to Groucho)

[Loss]

That's not to say -- at all -- that things were magical in a previous era. But I think everyone would argue that they did a much better job of emphasizing match results and making wrestlers seem like stars in pretty much every previous era.

 

Every era is a reaction to the one before it. In the late 90s, the in-ring started getting de-emphasized and match quality took a global downturn, which is what gave us hyper-purist feds like ROH. Now, once again, we're ready for a shift.

 

Hopefully, eventually we'll get to that great place where winning and losing matters, angles have long-term build and continuity, the wrestlers are produced like stars and do great promos AND the match quality is strong.

[Russellmania]

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're growing out of wrestling don't pretend it's because it suddenly sucks. It has always been incredibly hit or miss.

And I guess what I'm saying is there's a big difference between watching Stone Cold Steve Austin when you're 16-years-old and then watching John Cena when you're 30.

 

EDIT: I guess I'm not growing out of wrestling as a whole though, because I can still enjoy CMLL or NJPW for modern wrestling. I even thought SMASH was decent enough. I liked Kana quite a bit. I guess I just want different things from my shows. WWE does not provide me with what I am seeking and neither does ROH. But I can go back and watch shit that is new to me from the 70's or 80's & still be thoroughly entertained.

 

If you can't see that the biggest difference is about 14 years of growing up then I don't know what to tell you.

[anarchistxx]

You say that, but I don't think eleven year old me would dig John Cena in the way I dug Steve Austin at the time. It's not simply that we've all grown up and grown out of wrestling, if it was simply that then Cena and Orton would be getting the same pops as Rock, Austin and Mankind.

 

I still enjoy Attitude Era stuff, I went back and watched a couple of Raw episodes in 2000 and it was exciting, unpredictable and almost entirely entertaining, even if the matches weren't always up to much. Almost everyone on the roster was over. And it's not simply nostalgia, that period of 96-01 was lighting in a bottle for mainstream US wrestling, especially for someone like me who enjoys a fast paced, character and angle driven show with a hot crowd.

[Matt D]

There's so much stuff I haven't seen. years of the big two and whole decades of certain territories. So long as I watch the current stuff on my terms when I want to and how I want to, and very often in a split screen with something else on until something interesting comes around, I'm okay with it. I get to appreciate the good and dodge most of the bad,

[sek69]

I think a lot of people are seeing the fart angle as Vince/WWE humiliating a woman for no reason and that makes people leery based on history.

[Sean Liska]

The Natalya thing took about 30 seconds, whereas the Sheamus-Ziggler, Big Show-Henry, and Bryan-Orton matches took more like 45 minutes and was all really good stuff. I haven't found it too difficult to fast-forward every time I see a backstage skit that looks lame.

[Russellmania]

I don't get the righteous indignation about things like the fart gimmick. Wrestling has always been full of stupid stuff. If you're not watching RAW and Smackdown on DVR and fast forwarding through like 60-70% of it then you're doing it wrong. Smackdown has 2-3 legit good TV matches every week so I just skip to the matches, watch them, and then will occasionally stop fast forwarding through the other stuff if something looks interesting.

It bothers people because it's a second gen member of the Hart family, who worked and trained for years to be a serious female wrestler. If they gave the gimmick to one of the untrained models it would still be dumb, but nobody would really care.

 

LOL so it's ok to demean women who are shitty wrestlers, just not ones that are good wrestlers?

[Coffey]

I think a lot of people are seeing the fart angle as Vince/WWE humiliating a woman for no reason and that makes people leery based on history.

I seen it as a platform entirely used for a one-liner that Michael Cole said on Smackdown last Friday: "So you're saying all Harts are full of air?"

 

The Natalya thing took about 30 seconds, whereas the Sheamus-Ziggler, Big Show-Henry, and Bryan-Orton matches took more like 45 minutes and was all really good stuff. I haven't found it too difficult to fast-forward every time I see a backstage skit that looks lame.

But WHY does it have to happen at all? Can you explain that, logically for me? Remember that WWE is a publicly traded company too.

[Sean Liska]

The Natalya thing took about 30 seconds, whereas the Sheamus-Ziggler, Big Show-Henry, and Bryan-Orton matches took more like 45 minutes and was all really good stuff. I haven't found it too difficult to fast-forward every time I see a backstage skit that looks lame.

But WHY does it have to happen at all? Can you explain that, logically for me? Remember that WWE is a publicly traded company too.

 

I don't really know. But when you have Punk and Danielson as champs, Smackdown delivering good matches every week, and great hype for the Taker-HHH and Rock Cena WM matches, I don't get quitting WWE because of a gimmick that takes up a minute of the four hours they put out each week. But I'm a big fan of the current WWE product, so it would be harder for me to give up on it.

[Dylan Waco]

Jason Mann had me on his show to talk about WarGames 94. Pretty fun show and a cool concept for a podcast.

 

http://www.fairtoflair.com/post/1878862547...e-of-mediocrity

[Coffey]

I don't really know. But when you have Punk and Danielson as champs, Smackdown delivering good matches every week, and great hype for the Taker-HHH and Rock Cena WM matches, I don't get quitting WWE because of a gimmick that takes up a minute of the four hours they put out each week. But I'm a big fan of the current WWE product, so it would be harder for me to give up on it.

Because...it's not just that minute long segment? It's everything else added together and then that on top too.

 

Wrestling angles and promos are crap now. That's not a generational thing. That's a wrestling-sucks-now thing.

 

Maybe the in-ring is still good, but if the wrestlers aren't protected, the championships they're fighting for mean nothing, winning/losing doesn't matter and there's nothing at stake, why should I care if a match is good or not? A steady stream of fun five-minute TV matches and three-star PPV matches is not enough incentive to keep following things so closely.

 

I realize not everyone sees it the same way, but that's my struggle.

[Dylan Waco]

I don't blame anyone for coming to that conclusion but I think some of the complaints are exaggerated and I also think a lot of that is the result of monopoly/wrestling being live every week and shooting multiple shows with no-squash matches.

 

Having said that if I were to have given up watching wrestling when angles/promos started to die for me I would have quit watching after the U.S. v. Canada angle in 97.