Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Any other longterm fans starting to feel alienated by the current fanbase?


rzombie1988

Recommended Posts

A decade from now, we will reflect back on matches such as Zayn vs. Nakamura and feel a strong sense of nostalgia. The same will be said for the Okada vs. Tanahashi rivalry and many of Cena's "PWG style" classics of recent years. Only a small percentage of fans truly have substantial minds for the business in real-time, and so time has to pass for the rest of them to reflect back and see the reality of the situations that they had missed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 343
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I love the Doctor Who comparison. Old school Who fans tend to hate the new shit that has better production values, acting, and presention. And it's because of child hood love of what made them a fan. I get it.

I'm not a huge Who guy, but I'm a Trek geek. I hated TNG at first. But then I stopped being a dummy and when TNG got good I fully accepted it was amazingly better than TOS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the Doctor Who comparison. Old school Who fans tend to hate the new shit that has better production values, acting, and presention. And it's because of child hood love of what made them a fan. I get it.

I'm not a huge Who guy, but I'm a Trek geek. I hated TNG at first. But then I stopped being a dummy and when TNG got good I fully accepted it was amazingly better than TOS.

The first two seasons of TNG are pretty rough, after that though it's some good stuff.

 

Deep Space 9 was even better though. The less said about Voyager the better and I seemed to be one of the few who liked Enterprise. I like TOS. It's campy and I enjoyed the various alien gimmicks.

 

Not a single bit of interest in seeing the new Star Trek movies though and from what I've read, the new TV series seems like it is really going to go out of its way with being over the top liberal, so I don't think that'll be for me either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the Doctor Who comparison. Old school Who fans tend to hate the new shit that has better production values, acting, and presention. And it's because of child hood love of what made them a fan. I get it.

I'm not a huge Who guy, but I'm a Trek geek. I hated TNG at first. But then I stopped being a dummy and when TNG got good I fully accepted it was amazingly better than TOS.

 

I loved both incarnations of Doctor Who, as well. I have a massive collection of the Classic Series on DVD, and loved the return - until Series 5 of the new show, when Steven Moffat starting ruining everything.

 

And I enjoy TOS and TNG pretty much equally, although Season 3 of TOS is pretty much crap, and TNG had a much longer run of good episodes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. To me, wrestling has to be believable. Al Snow put it perfectly in ROH Secrets of the Ring when he said something along the lines of... There is one story that both wrestlers absolutely need to be telling from the moment they step through the curtain until they go back through it... And that story is: That they are trying to win and also trying not to lose the match. Wrestling across the board from WWE to indies, to the internet darlings like NJPW and PWG, all I see is guys who don't look like they could beat anyone up taking turns letting the other person do moves to them. Whip someone into the ropes and I can clearly see that the guy being whipped is running on his own power. All that doesn't seem to matter to everyone watching wrestling these days. The Okada vs Omega reaction just kind of cemented it for me that I am in the twilight zone.. I just want to live in the wilderness and watch shoot style, ROH from 2003-2006, the 80s and early 90s WWF I grew up on and other good old wrestling that doesn't frustrate me..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen every episode of Star Trek ever made at least once, some many times. And the TOS/TNG movies. But I refuse to sit through the recent movies and find them offensive. Well I did start to watch one and thought it was complete shit. I'll give the new series a chance. It might be okay. Perhaps they'll inhabit an area of space where all the crew members gender and sexual orientation are in a state of continual flux from week to week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why Tommy End as Aleister Black is going to be a big deal. He's a killer combo of Bryan Danielson and CM Punk, treats most of his matches as if they were fights, and knows when to amp it up and reel it back.

 

Seeing the potential nerd hate of the new "overtly liberal" Trek raises questions about whether or not you understand the inherent liberal slant of the series as a whole (the Federation are commies), but I'm far from a Trekkie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen every episode of Star Trek ever made at least once, some many times. And the TOS/TNG movies. But I refuse to sit through the recent movies and find them offensive. Well I did start to watch one and thought it was complete shit. I'll give the new series a chance. It might be okay. Perhaps they'll inhabit an area of space where all the crew members gender and sexual orientation are in a state of continual flux from week to week?

 

You should rewatch the first Star Trek movie with the idea that Chris Pine is doing a loving tribute to Shatner's Kirk and you'll like it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I've seen every episode of Star Trek ever made at least once, some many times. And the TOS/TNG movies. But I refuse to sit through the recent movies and find them offensive. Well I did start to watch one and thought it was complete shit. I'll give the new series a chance. It might be okay. Perhaps they'll inhabit an area of space where all the crew members gender and sexual orientation are in a state of continual flux from week to week?

You should rewatch the first Star Trek movie with the idea that Chris Pine is doing a loving tribute to Shatner's Kirk and you'll like it better.

And then don't watch Into Darkness, because it is a lazy, slapdash piece of shit. I came around a bit on Beyond--it's not the smartest movie, but it's decently creative compared to the first two, more fun, and more confident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why Tommy End as Aleister Black is going to be a big deal. He's a killer combo of Bryan Danielson and CM Punk, treats most of his matches as if they were fights, and knows when to amp it up and reel it back.

 

Seeing the potential nerd hate of the new "overtly liberal" Trek raises questions about whether or not you understand the inherent liberal slant of the series as a whole (the Federation are commies), but I'm far from a Trekkie.

I see that combo for End (Black) and hope you are right that he has a bright future in the E for it. I am a huge Tommy End fan so I would hate to see them miss the boat on him.

 

 

I would agree that Trek is quite liberal on the whole, but it isn't because the Federation are Commies. I would actually argue that - at least TNG - the federation is framed as a neo-liberal utopia. It is a happily diverse organization that's primary mission is to go out and bring people into the fold, with express intentions not to colonize or even interfere (wonderful intentions, thought he execution is somewhat strategic and hit or miss). It is for sure a liberal narrative, one still rooted in fears of communism as a cultural/political phenomenon. I have always read many of the federations "enemies" as warnings against popular articulation of the "communist threat" (particularly the borg). It is a really pop take on these ideologies/economic models/political models with no exact one-to-one correlation, but the show doesn't focus enough on economic issues or production issues to really do much other than provide sort of vague cultural/political treatments of the issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an interesting quote in the latest Observer on this topic (in reference to Roode/Nakamura)

 

People have mixed views among old style world title presentation matches with the style becoming more and more about the number of big spots you can put together in your allotted time.

 

If I can make what is probably an overly broad generalization, I'd say that older wrestling was about having spots that fit the story of the match while the modern style is more about coming up with big spots and working backwards to build the story around the spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an interesting quote in the latest Observer on this topic (in reference to Roode/Nakamura)

 

People have mixed views among old style world title presentation matches with the style becoming more and more about the number of big spots you can put together in your allotted time.

 

If I can make what is probably an overly broad generalization, I'd say that older wrestling was about having spots that fit the story of the match while the modern style is more about coming up with big spots and working backwards to build the story around the spots.

 

I can buy that. The Abby vs Billy Robinson 1978 All Japan match I watched twice yesterday had two simpe backbreaker spots that fit the story, built on everything else in the match, and actually had meaning. In context, they were HUGE spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Watching the NJPW show yesterday and seeing the reactions online - man have I never been more out of touch with modern smarkdom. Everybody just watches these matches with a star rating algorithm in mind and then reacts according to the number of near falls and high spots and reversed finishers. The obsession with Meltzer star ratings is out of control. Every match feels like watching a movie that's desperately trying to get an Oscar nomination. They know the formula of how to get stars from Big Dave and that helps their business. I'm looking forward to Tanahashi-Billy Gunn. Lets see Gunn slow the match down and get heat on Tanahashi and then feed his comeback with a series of fast-paced bumps. I'm looking forward to Jinder holding Orton in a chinlock at MITB while the crowd chants "USA". I know I'm not saying stuff that hasn't been said here, but I've never felt this alienated. I do still like SD, NXT, CMLL, and CWF Mid-Atlantic. I'm going to go watch Casas-Dandy now.

 

I do get a kick out of the NJPW young lions. By not being allowed to do anything fancy, they just look really solid executing fundamental stuff and can pop the crowd with well-timed simple moves. They remind me of 90s NJPW style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The obsession with Meltzer star ratings is out of control. Every match feels like watching a movie that's desperately trying to get an Oscar nomination. They know the formula of how to get stars from Big Dave and that helps their business.

 

Has Meltz finally become the Robert Parker of pro-wrestling ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More like a hardcore Ebert. His word is widespread and has been helpful for aspiring talent for decades, promoters getting them bookings just because the WON said they were a good worker. With that level of influence inevitably comes a sense of dogma, no matter if Meltzer says it's just his opinion and not gospel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it fascinating that those who feel disconnected hyperfocus on Dave Meltzer and his star ratings. As someone that loves modern wrestling, and feels bad for those that can't realize we're in a golden age, I can say that Meltzer's stars mean nothing to a large quantity of people I interact with. What is Meltzer's influence? There are so many outlets and so many voices, why is Dave the one that people look at?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it fascinating that those who feel disconnected hyperfocus on Dave Meltzer and his star ratings. As someone that loves modern wrestling, and feels bad for those that can't realize we're in a golden age, I can say that Meltzer's stars mean nothing to a large quantity of people I interact with. What is Meltzer's influence? There are so many outlets and so many voices, why is Dave the one that people look at?

 

Why do you think pro wrestling is in a golden age right now? This would be the 4th (or 5th depending on how you want to look at pro wrestling history) golden age. I don't think we are there yet and only believe 3 (again see above) have occurred. Not trying to be a smart ass or anything, just genuinely curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Golden Age for hardcores maybe (and mostly if you're into indie style which has permeated WWE and NJ), but as far as being a thing in pop culture, pro-wrestling is as irrelevant as ever.

 

As far as match quality goes, I'd absolutely argue that the bar has been lowered during the last 10 years, because of both workratism and post-Benoit workrate guilt, which is why now everything is *great* and *MOTYC*, on both sides of the spectrum. This is why I'm told today that Will Ospreay or Roman Reigns (the two opposite sides) are great wrestlers. And I agree with neither of these statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Golden Age for hardcores maybe (and mostly if you're into indie style which has permeated WWE and NJ), but as far as being a thing in pop culture, pro-wrestling is as irrelevant as ever.

 

Ehh. Think you're totally off with that statement, to be honest. I mean, don't get me wrong. This ain't the Attitude Era we're living in - but wrestling is pretty widely accepted as a fun getaway and a fairly common hobby for a lot of people.

 

I know plenty of casual fans that will watch if it's on. Couldn't say that about the early nineties or, hell, even that shitty post-Attitude Era when they were doing some REALLY sleazy shit. I'm talking like 04-07 or whatever.

 

WWE has done well for themselves. I believe things like the Network and the decision to make their big PPVs into destination hot-spots were wise moves, as it opens up a gateway for a lot of folks to attend and get involved.

 

Wrestling's just not hot right now. You won't hear it getting brought up much in casual conversations or anything. It's not water-cooler talk. But it's not uncommon to find people that dig it either.

 

I know a lot of people on my Facebook feed attend shows and post pics whenever they go, as just one example. The chicks may just gush over Roman Reigns, the guys may just bitch about their favorites not winning enough or whatever, but it's at least acceptable to discuss.

 

There were a time & a place where wrestling fandom was like this borderline taboo fetish. We're not living in THAT age or anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehh. Think you're totally off with that statement, to be honest. I mean, don't get me wrong. This ain't the Attitude Era we're living in - but wrestling is pretty widely accepted as a fun getaway and a fairly common hobby for a lot of people.

 

The fact that it became mundane as opposed to shameful doesn't make it a Golden Age.

 

During Cena's heyday, which is hardly a golden age itself, there was kids in France wearing his merch in the streets. There's none today. Except a few lucha theme stuff (even movies) that has less to do with people actually watching, knowing or caring about lucha than the designs being cool, pro-wrestling is off the radar. But we live in a more and more geeky world, where geeky stuff are more part of the ordinary. And pro-wrestling is a "geeky" hobby.

 

For the hardcores though, yes, it is somewhat of a Golden Age, if only because of all the indies and access to footage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it fascinating that those who feel disconnected hyperfocus on Dave Meltzer and his star ratings.

 

Dave pimping things influences a lot of other people, especially people who don't watch that much or haven't been watching that long and unfortunately, it drowns out anyone like myself who have been watching that long and has seen that much.

 

Not thinking Omega is the greatest wrestler ever and not liking the Okada/Omega match is legit seen as trolling and "trying to be edgy".

 

The Omega/Okada thing was also a really special case due to Dave basically saying that this match was better than every other match in the history of wrestling. I wouldn't even feel comfortable giving you a list of the top 20 matches ever, yet alone saying something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...