SirEdger Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 Edit: Apparently, she's gonna work on the Trump re-election campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 11 minutes ago, SirEdger said: Edit: Apparently, she's gonna work on the Trump re-election campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 35 minutes ago, El-P said: Sorry but, WTF does it has to do with anything ? First, it's only one of the most in-famous matches of one the hottest period ever in US pro-wrestling, so yeah, most people of that generation probably have seen it. Second, it did kill the golden goose dead, Goldy never recovered. Sure got a pop, and the match sure was pretty good. And ? What's the point ? Charlotte got a big pop ? Sure. She's terrific and she's over. And ? So what ? It's still useless to put the belt on her. You can go the reverse with this too. Goldy never recovered? So what? We have that moment, and it's an incredible moment. Most people ignore this when they talk about the match. There is this trend with wrestling to just follow the business narratives and ignore what actually happens on screen. I think that's short sighted and ignores the actual good parts of what is the wrestling experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 Leaving aside the can-you-criticize-without-watching question for a bit (as it's so self-evidently true that's scarcely worth arguing), as someone following what actually happened on-screen, Goldberg-Nash sucked and the finish was idiotic (both the idea of Goldberg losing at that time, and the manner in which it was carried out). Both then and when I watched the '98 Yearbook. Booking for a singular "pop" is Vince Russo bullshit. You always have to know where you're going to go tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 5 minutes ago, PeteF3 said: Leaving aside the can-you-criticize-without-watching question for a bit (as it's so self-evidently true that's scarcely worth arguing) Would you criticize the end of the Sopranos without watching the entire series?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 I have no criticisms of the end of The Sopranos, so no. The criticisms of the end of Lost, though, have led me to not bother binge-watching the series after the fact since it all seems like a waste of time. Dexter also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 9 minutes ago, PeteF3 said: I have no criticisms of the end of The Sopranos, so no. The criticisms of the end of Lost, though, have led me to not bother binge-watching the series after the fact since it all seems like a waste of time. Dexter also. And this totally invalidates any critique you would make of those endings since you never watched the series. Imagine just seeing the end of the Sopranos and thinking "that's terrible!" Totally unwarranted criticism since the end provides no context for the rest of the series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 "The ending to Dexter was terrible" is possibly the least-controversial take in the history of television, or at least tied with "The Simpsons went through kind of a decline after Seasons 9 & 10." I'm on fairly safe ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 I thought the entire concept of Dexter was terrible, so I avoided it entirely and what's more, I don't even comment about it on the internet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coffey Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 36 minutes ago, PeteF3 said: Goldberg-Nash sucked and the finish was idiotic (both the idea of Goldberg losing at that time, and the manner in which it was carried out). Both then and when I watched the '98 Yearbook. Booking for a singular "pop" is Vince Russo bullshit. You always have to know where you're going to go tomorrow. I didn't even get the internet until 1999. One of the first things I remember looking up after getting a modem was pro-wrestling. I found my way to a message forum back then, wrestlinggames.com or something, and I remember being genuinely confused at all the people shitting on Kevin Nash. I thought he would be a lot more popular in the online wrestling world. Maybe that was me being naive. It was a learning curve. I watched Starcade 1998 with a group of friends when it aired live. Friends that were only wrestling fans at the time because of the popularity of the Monday Night Wars. They were all nWo fans. They all marked out for Nash winning. They all booed Goldberg. I didn't get it. I didn't see the need to end the Streak, I didn't like the cattle prod finish, it just seemed really lame. I also didn't like how it was basically good guy vs good guy. Those same fans/friends weren't watching at all a couple of months later. Meanwhile I watched WCW die while they all switched to MMA. When I was in high school, I was known as "the wrestling guy." So when people had questions about wrestling, they asked me. I graduated in 2000. Again, didn't get internet until 1999. So it's not like I had all the answers... They just knew that I had been watching wrestling forever & was watching before Stone Cold or the nWo. I never hid my fandom. So I had like VHS tapes of ECW shows & shit from where I used to record the PPVs or old WWF shoes & I would loan out tapes to other fans if they asked so they could see other things besides Monday Night wrestling. But when people would talk to me about wrestling, or ask me questions about wrestling, it was always like "yo, did you see Miss Hancock's ass last night dancing on that table?" They didn't care about wrestling as anything more than just a TV show. They wore the shirts simply because they sold them in JCPennys in the mall, not because they were big fans. I hated the Starcade '97 finish. I hated the Starcade '98 finish and by the time they got the Starcade '99 the finishes didn't even matter anymore. The problem with booking for the casuals is the casuals leave. They don't give a fuck. They're only there to watch it because it's popular, the same way they'll watch Seinfeld or The Sopranos or nowadays Game of Thrones when that's the only shit people at work are talking about. They're not sustainable. This "it was great in the moment" is revisionist history bullshit. It was fucking awful in the moment. And it's fucking awful with hindsight. Even before the Fingerpoke of Doom. Even acknowledging that Kevin Nash probably should not have even won World War 3 to begin with. Or ending Wrath's streak when he was catching fire. Or any of the other countless stupid decisions they did. Pete is right. You don't book for a moment. Look at current WWE. They're all about "making moments" and the product is awful. You book for the long term, you tell stories, you get fans invested in characters & stories. What did Kevin Nash beating Goldberg do for WCW? What does Charlotte beating Asuka do for WWE or Wrestlemania? It's all short-sighted nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 15 minutes ago, Coffey said: This "it was great in the moment" is revisionist history bullshit. It was fucking awful in the moment. nse. Okay, this is the definition of revisionism. If you watch the footage, the crowd goes from an 8 to a 10 when Hall brings out the cattle prod and it's fucking glorious. Not a single person in the audience cares what this means for "business". And why would they? They're getting their money worth and then some. Would have loved to have been there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 A big crowd losing their shit over a World title change, thus irrevocably proving that drawing a singular pop outweighs the larger needs of the business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 1 hour ago, peachchaos said: You can go the reverse with this too. Goldy never recovered? So what? Well, it tremendously hurt WCW. Which is much more important than "It got a pop". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 2 minutes ago, El-P said: Well, it tremendously hurt WCW. Which is much more important than "It got a pop". This is fake news. A false narrative. None of the booking hurt WCW half as much as what happened behind the scenes at Turner. The company was doomed to fail no matter what they produced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 17 minutes ago, PeteF3 said: A big crowd losing their shit over a World title change, thus irrevocably proving that drawing a singular pop outweighs the larger needs of the business. A pretty straight forward booking move to build towards Starrcade. It all makes sense storyline wise. A great moment, for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 Just now, peachchaos said: This is fake news. None of the booking hurt WCW half as much as what happened behind the scenes. The company was doomed to fail no matter what they produced. Can we not go into "fake news" when talking about bad pro-wrestling booking ? Yeah, WCW losing a historical amount of money because of their incompetence has nothing to do at all ever with the fact they went down. Yeah, it's *all* about evil fusion and shit, Bischoff & Russo say so, so it must be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 Just now, El-P said: Can we not go into "fake news" when talking about bad pro-wrestling booking ? Yeah, WCW losing a historical amount of money because of their incompetence has nothing to do at all ever with the fact they went down. Yeah, it's *all* about evil fusion and shit, Bischoff & Russo say so, so it must be true. I edited my post to include the term "false narrative", which is more accurate. Read the Nitro book if you haven't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 David Arquette winning got a pop. And mainstream media presence. It was great. Anyway, it's just ridiculous at this point. And really, people moaning about shitty WWE booking have every right to do so. Moaning about moaning won't get anyone anywhere, as showed by how far from the initial subject we have strayed, talking about Goldy vs Kevin Nash being a great moment for WCW and shit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 If '99 WCW wasn't such a colossal shit show that killed their one remaining Golden Goose, then even if the AOL merger meant their death on Turner was inevitable, then maybe maybe *maybe* they could have lined up a TV deal elsewhere. Like, say, the suddenly-needing-inventory USA Network. Maybe not, but the company being so aesthetically and financially terrible sure didn't help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 6 minutes ago, El-P said: Moaning about moaning won't get anyone anywhere Accurate. Better to just ignore the noise at this point since the haters are gonna hate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomethingSavage Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 Just for clarification, I don't read reviews or synopses of the shows. I *do* keep up with things via clips, recaps, and highlights a lot though. I'm seeing moments. I'm following closely. I'm watching promos. And I'm selecting certain matches to watch in full (like the recent gauntlets). I don't know who the "you can't criticize if you only read results" line was aimed it, but that bullshit missed me by a mile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 8 minutes ago, peachchaos said: Accurate. Better to just ignore the noise at this point since the haters are gonna hate. Honestly, yeah. I mean, I don't pay attention to posts that talk about how New Japan is MOVEZ and crossfit-wrestling and whatnot. I mean, whatever good you can get out of the WWE stuff, good for you. Some of us are gonna bitch, other are gonna ignore, well, it's just pro-wrestling in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 I get the same enjoyment out of WWE as I do New Japan or OTT or F1RST or any of the current products I dig. None of them are similar and I judge them all accordingly on their own merits. It's just me though. I just want every wrestling fan to be happier! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 I'm going through the NJ Cup right now and I'm happy as can be as a pro-wrestling fan.  And pretty excited about the insane amount of insane (literally, with 2 Spring Breaks) shows next week too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMJ Posted March 29, 2019 Report Share Posted March 29, 2019 14 minutes ago, SomethingSavage said: Just for clarification, I don't read reviews or synopses of the shows. I *do* keep up with things via clips, recaps, and highlights a lot though. I'm seeing moments. I'm following closely. I'm watching promos. And I'm selecting certain matches to watch in full (like the recent gauntlets). I don't know who the "you can't criticize if you only read results" line was aimed it, but that bullshit missed me by a mile. To some people, unless you watch every single match on every single show, you're not a "real fan" and are just trying to spoil there fun. These are the people that need to listen to every album cut from every Nickelback or Imagine Dragons record before they dare disparage these bands or say it isn't for them. Hearing their radio singles? Seeing their videos? Not enough apparently. You can't criticize anything you don't have absolute knowledge of. If you asked them if they like the taste of dog food, they'd have to admit that the answer is "maybe." The smell or look wouldn't be enough to know. They'd have to eat a can. Of every variety. I watch the Network specials in full. I watch clips on YouTube from the TV show. In the old days, this would make me a die-hard, but they produce so much TV, I've probably seen less than 30% of what they produce. I've still seen enough WWE wrestling in my 35 years on Earth to judge/criticize/praise what I like on a wrestling forum and feel like I can defend those positions.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.