jdw Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 Thought I need to explain myself. Anyway, a large chunk of Mike's fan base were kids under 10. I don't recall any other acts in the 80s having a bigger fan base in that age range. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoos Leg Posted January 20, 2010 Report Share Posted January 20, 2010 I stand by my point. Even if he missed Miami Vice's heyday, he was around for Nash Bridges. I never watched the show but I knew about it. And Stone Cold was a guest star and everything. Wrestling Crossovers! I just think Martin and his ilk are being purposely oblivious as to the guest hosts in some misguided attempt to look cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 From having several e-mail conversations with Todd earlier in the decade I believe he is 29 (maybe 28) again this man did not know what the A-Team was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Morris Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 It would probably help Martin better if he would argue that these guest hosts aren't always serving to connect with the fanbase that WWE wants to attract. Given that it's currently kids, he can argue that Don Johnson doesn't make sense. I'm not aware of any current project that Johnson is involved with that kids would know about. Jon Heder, on the other hand, does make sense because I know plenty of kids today are fans of the Napoleon Dynamite film and so they should be familiar with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 If you're born in 1980-82, it's quite possible to not know what the A-Team was. It ran from 1983-86. Owen Marshall: Counselor at Law ran from 1971-74. I was 5-8 years old while it ran. I know dick about it. I should know Arthur Hill, who was the lead in it. I've seen Andromeda Strain... but probably close to three decades ago, so even the face of Hill isn't popping into my head. Todd was quite young when some of this stuff aired. Again, I'm no defender of Todd as some probably could confirm. But people are being a bit goofy here on the old stuff. If he was 3-8 when some of this stuff aired, and the "8" came when the shit was falling off the cliff, it's easy for him not to have known what's what about the show. We all can live in our own bubbles. I actually think it's *easier* now than it was back in the 70s. We had three networks, and the local indy channels ran very little in terms of First Run series. When there was only three shows on at a time, it's easier to track. But even then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976%E2%80%93...vision_schedule I was 10-11 during that season. I don't remember much at all about Delvecchio. All's Fair? Christ, even with Bernadette Peters in it... I don't recall it at all. Executive Suite? I never watched Police Story or Police Woman, though I do recall Angie was the lead for Police Woman. It's funny, but Rich Man, Poor Man (from the prior season with it's sequal airing here) was a massive breakthough that completely changed the landscape of TV similar to Survivor and Idol... but I never watch it, and don't know what it's about. I know Peter Strauss from other things. I know *of* Rich Man, Poor Man from its historical impact, but that's it. Seriously... it's not a big deal not to know the stuff from the 80s when you were under 8. Nash Bridges... think about it a bit. He was a high school / college aged kid. That was a Friday at 10 PM show. Everyone raise their hands who was sitting around at home watching shows like Nash Bridges at that age? *looks around* Now Miami Vice was a Friday at 10 PM show while I was in college, and we *did* sit around watching. But that's a little different: after long week of hitting the books, MV was an excellent show to drink lots of beer and pull far too many bong loads to. It was quite entertaining to get loaded watching a hip show about Crockett & Tubbs chasing down... guys supplying stoners. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Not knowing the A-Team at that age is one thing, but a wrestling fan his age not knowing? Did he think Mr. T was riding the success of Rocky III for years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuttsy Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Not to mention I know where I lived in the Raleigh-Durham NC market that the A-Team ran in a decent time slot (usually 4 PM) in syndication for YEARS- I'd say well into 1991 or '92. It's not like some show that was on a year or two and then never heard of again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Yeah, I live in the UK and I'm about the same age as Todd, and I can remember watching reruns of the A-Team on TV. So I find it a bit strange that Todd wasn't at least aware of the A-Team even if he'd never watched it. That's by the by, the problem isn't so much Todd's apparent ignorance about past celebrity culture, but the attitude he cops to these people being on Raw, given the diverse demos Raw appeals to. When 30% of viewers are women and >50% are over the age of 35, his "I don't know who these people are so they shouldn't be on my TV screen" attitude comes off as childish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I can't remember if we've had a similar thread to this designed specifically for Scott Keith, but Todd Martin's apparent lack of knowledge of RAW Guest Hosts may have been topped by Keith's belief that Kristen Wiig of Saturday Night Live has never been in a motion picture before: http://www.rspwfaq.com/2010/01/20/macgruber/ This is actually the first time I’ve seen one of these “age verification” things where it lets you enter in a Canadian postal code without having to do the usual fake “90210” trick. Anyway, although the character kind of wore out his welcome after the first skit, this looks pretty damn funny for an SNL movie. A couple of jokes were pretty obvious (“You were wearing a bullet proof vest? Awesome!”) but Will Forte and Kristen Wiig deserve a shot at the big screen as much as anyone from that show and it definitely looks like they’re gonna give it the old college try. Plus I loved the bit with the wires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I don't think that's what he meant. I think he meant they deserve a star vehicle as much as anyone on SNL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Yea, that one is picking nits. Kristen Wiig hasn't really toplined a major motion picture before, besides Extract and Brothers Solomon, which is two movies that no one saw. And in both movies, she was the third wheel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Seriously... it's not a big deal not to know the stuff from the 80s when you were under 8. Agreed. There's just one problem: he's not under 8 anymore. When I was a little kid, one of the first shows that I started watching religiously was "Muppet Babies". It was a show with no shortage of references to things a 3-year-old kid would know nothing about. "Scooter's Uncommon Cold" is an episode-long spoof of "Fantastic Voyage", a movie I had never heard of. "Back to the Nursery" is an episode-long parody of "Back to the Future", a movie I had never heard of. "Journey to the Center of the Nursery", aside from the obvious references, gives a shout-out to "Undersea Kingdom", an old movie serial that's pretty obscure even to most adults who aren't hardcore MSTies. "This Little Piggy Went to Hollywood" references "Magnum P.I.", "Star Search", "I Love Lucy", and other shows and movies I'd know nothing about when I was three. When I was four, I got "The House That Muppets Built". I think I might have known who Indiana Jones was by that point, but the references to "American Bandstand", "Jaws", "Animal House", "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", and "The $10,000 Pyramid" were still going over my head. The title of "Elm Street Babies" references a movie my parents wouldn't have let me anywhere near when I was that age. They might have let me near "Plan 9 From Outer Space" - the only thing scary about that movie is how bad it is - but that didn't make "Plan 8 From Outer Space" any less obtuse of a joke to a 4-year-old. And it just goes on and on and on.... And that's just one kids' show. Rocky and Bullwinkle, Sesame Street, Animaniacs...lots of great kids' shows fired shots way above their intended audience and made no apologies for it. Kids ate it up anyway. I know I did. But yeah, you didn't get all the jokes when you were a kid. But then you grow up. And eventually, you start hearing about these things. You start to absorb knowledge about pop culture that may have been before your time, or that you're actively missing out on now, just because that stuff is floating around the pop-cultural canon and it eventually finds it way to you. I don't think I knew about the A-Team when I was eight. They were before my time. Even now, I think I've only actually seen one full episode of the show. But I know who they were, because even long after the show went off the air, it had made enough of an impact on people that I was eventually going to run into references about it and learn what it was. I'm probably far from the only person to have that experience. I watched about five minutes of "Napoleon Dynamite" before concluding that it was not even remotely funny and changing the channel. Never watched any of Heder's other movies. I still know who he is through pop-cultural osmosis. "with TV series, people don't tend to go back and watch them after they're off the air unless it's a really enduring sitcom like the Andy Griffith Show or the Brady Bunch. Thus at least to me TV references always seem much more dated. It's a more fleeting form of pop culture." This is a total cop-out, particularly in an age where seemingly every TV show ever is getting lavish DVD collections made available to a public that apparently wants to go back and watch them. It's even more of a cop-out with "The A-Team", considering the motion picture is right around the corner, which would theoretically suggest that there is some demand from people who want to revisit that show. And while I know you're not really trying to defend him in any serious way, bringing up "Owen Marshall: Counselor at Law", "Delvecchio", et. al....that's a cop out, too. None of these shows left behind the legacy of "The A-Team" or "Miami Vice". It's not an appropriate comparison. Yes, if Simon MacCorkindale ever guest hosted Raw, and Todd Martin knew nothing about "Manimal", it'd be hard to blame him. But not knowing about "The A-Team" is a little odd. It's not unthinkable, mind you. I had a birthday party a few years ago. Before my pals arrived, I set out a little spread, including some Triscuits. Somehow, one of my closest friends had gone 20+ years without ever even hearing about Triscuits. I was a little dumbstruck. Triscuits seem kinda universal to me, something everyone knows about. He didn't. But now he did. We all accepted that he had missed out on a famous cracker for some reason, and now he knew better. That was all there was to it. Todd Martin is not nearly so humble as my friend. For him, it's not enough to admit that he didn't know about a pop culture phenomenon - one that admittedly was before his time - and say that now he knows better and carry on with his life. He has to justify his position and reaffirm that he was right all along. Put him in my friend's shoes and imagine him talking about how "crackers are a fleeting form of snack food culture" and continue to insist that most people nowadays have no idea what Triscuits are, even as everyone else at the party tells him otherwise, and watch how fast I show him the door. Not knowing about something is one thing. Being too much of an intellectual narcissist to admit when you got something wrong is embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Evil Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 You should watch the whole Napolean Dynamite movie. Sometimes it's just boring which may have been the five minutes you watched but other times it's hilarious in a way that other movies don't reach. It's not for everyone though. The humour some take to and some don't. Great movie though. And you should watch more A-Team as well. . Also, I'd like to go on the record as saying I have never heard of triscuits. Of all the times I've eaten crackers or been at wherever where crackers were served I have never heard the word uttered once. Ritz is what I think of when it comes to crackers. Maybe it's a US thing. Have they got Ketchup chips there yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 I don't think that's what he meant. I think he meant they deserve a star vehicle as much as anyone on SNL. Yeah, looking back, I mis-read that. Okay, back to the Todd Martin stuff... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 And while I know you're not really trying to defend him in any serious way, bringing up "Owen Marshall: Counselor at Law", "Delvecchio", et. al....that's a cop out, too. None of these shows left behind the legacy of "The A-Team" or "Miami Vice". It's not an appropriate comparison. Yes, if Simon MacCorkindale ever guest hosted Raw, and Todd Martin knew nothing about "Manimal", it'd be hard to blame him. But not knowing about "The A-Team" is a little odd. What is the legacy of the A-Team? Seriously... it meant nothing by the 90s when Todd was an actual thinking kid as opposed to a toddler. The legacy of the A-Team is Mr. T? You could get that simply from Rocky III. That "pity the fool" shit we see in commercials? It's right there in Rocky III. George Peppard as Hannibal? Folks think of Silence of the Lambs when you toss around Hannibal. Catch it on re-runs like us kids of the 70s would have watched Bonanza in re-run? The 90s morphed into dozens of channels with tons of first runs stuff, craploads more of live sports available, and loads more of that wrestling stuff we're fans of easily available on the tube. It is extremely *easy* not to pay attention to re-runs of a show that was on when you were a toddler if you don't give a shit about it. Especially a show that by the 90s literally meant nothing to anyone who didn't watch it when it was first on. The analogy to the Brady Bunch is horse shit. They simply aren't analogous in how there were viewed *after* they were on. The Brady Bunch went into the heavy syndication re-run rotation for more than a decade, and was targetted at a very specific age range. It was the Nick & Disney equiv of it's time. Freaking Marsha Brady had a longer shelf life as "someone to look up to" for tweens that the Olsen Twins and Hanna Montana. Perhaps we loose that today because no one back then knew how to market things as brillantly as we've seen since the Twins turned into a monster marketing machine. The A-Team wasn't as big as say Dynasty - a #1 show. But by the 90s, who gave a ratshit about Dynasty other than people who watched it in the 80s when it was "hot". You could be a kid in the 90s and not know who Joan Collins is, and why anyone would care about her. Better analogy? Kids like me knew who Farrah and Bo Derek were. They're iconic to Dude of my generation. It didn't take long into the 80s before both meant literally nothing to *us*. Farrah never had another big hit for Dudes in her career after leaving the Angles. She had success with The Burning Bed, but that launched a career of being a Chick TV Movie Of The Week star. To guys born in 1976 rather than 1966, she wasn't a blip on the radar. They might be aware of her in some way, but they frankly wouldn't have a clue why guys of my age would still be waxing poetically in the late 90s about her poster and time on the Angles. Bo was red hot with 10... and then here career went to shit. Tarzan? Bolero? She became a joke. And I suspect people born in 1980 and beyond look at 10 and wonder, "WTF were people getting so hot shit about this chick?" I tossed out Owen Marshall and Delvecchio simply because they were there on the schedule. You ducked Rich Man, Poor Man. That was one that drawfed the A-Team, and literally changed TV which isn't remotely close to what the A-Team did. I really think people are wanking off on this when there are no doubt better criticism to be lofted at Todd. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Yeah, I don't get this obsession about him not knowing who these people are. I mean, I myself don't know a shitload of current or last decade "pop culture" personnalities who for most people are as familiar as family members. You could talk to me about characters from Lost, Prison Breaks or the Sopranos, I would look at you with a void expression in my eyes, as I would have no idea who you're taking about. Todd Martin has been a goof on many occasions about many subjects, but I don't see the issue with him not necesseraly knowing who those people are. Really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 To me at least the issue is that he obviously does know who these people are, and pretends not to in order to appear above all this nonsense taking place on his beloved pro wres show. I could give less of a shit if Todd Martin knows who Jon Heder is, but acting like the dude who played Napoleon Dynamite is somehow too low brow to appear on WWE TV is just begging to be mocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Morris Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 As I said earlier, the problem with Todd Martin is not that he doesn't know who these people are, but that his criticism should be focused on that the current audience isn't going to understand why these people are important. For example, with Animaniacs, there is one cartoon in which the joke is made "will someone stop that man from saying dragon" and an anvil is dropped on the man yelling "Dragon!" I did learn that is a reference to something, but can't remember it without looking it up. But why do kids laugh at it? Because you don't have to get the reference to get the joke. Evidently, on Raw, they made a Tubbs joke. Kids today won't get how the Don Johnson-Tubbs connection and thus won't get the joke. And that's where the problem lies. Especially since those kids who know about a "Miami Vice" are thinking about Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx and wondering what the connection is with this Don Johnson guy. It's all about putting things into a context so that it works for nearly any audience, not just a particular segment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 As I said earlier, the problem with Todd Martin is not that he doesn't know who these people are, but that his criticism should be focused on that the current audience isn't going to understand why these people are important. I would tweak that to say his criticism should be focused on the fact that these people aren't conducive to drawing the kids that the company markets its products towards. For all WWE's talk about how the company is more popular with kids nowadays, they draw less kids now than they did in the Attitude era when they were marketing to older fans. The age of Raw's median viewer is usually 38, meaning that half of their audience is older than 38 and the majority of their audience will get the Miami Vice tie in. For all I know Todd might not know or care who Zac Efron is and he would probably still complain if the celebrity GMs were people who could draw kids. I mean a week doesn't go by without Todd complaining about Hornswoggle being on his TV screen, even though he's a character that is popular with kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 The idea that no one will know who anyone is unless they're a star at this very moment is bogus. I know it's wrestling, but if that's a legitimate concern with your audience, why not aim higher in the audience you're trying to attract? The 80s/retro fad right now is way bigger than the wrestling fad. Kids way too young to remember the 80s wear vintage t-shirts of things from the 80s. When I was a teenager, potheads quoted Jim Morrison and listened to the Grateful Dead, and other people wore ironic John Travolta Saturday Night Fever t-shirts and the like, and I'm only 30 years old. Hendrix was popular, the Beatles were popular, Pink Floyd was popular. People loved The Godfather and Molly Ringwald movies, all of which were from a previous generation. Michael Jackson died this year and little kids who weren't alive for any of his peak were mourning him. I realize there's a difference between the most famous pop star in history and Mr. T, but people in all forms of entertainment make references to things that aren't popular anymore all the time. I've always thought this is a worthless criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 The poll on if you'll buy the Dragon Gate PPV includes every conceivable option other than "I have seen Dragon Gate and didn't like it." WRESTLING FROM THE FUTURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 And while I know you're not really trying to defend him in any serious way, bringing up "Owen Marshall: Counselor at Law", "Delvecchio", et. al....that's a cop out, too. None of these shows left behind the legacy of "The A-Team" or "Miami Vice". It's not an appropriate comparison. Yes, if Simon MacCorkindale ever guest hosted Raw, and Todd Martin knew nothing about "Manimal", it'd be hard to blame him. But not knowing about "The A-Team" is a little odd. What is the legacy of the A-Team? Seriously... it meant nothing by the 90s when Todd was an actual thinking kid as opposed to a toddler. "Legacy" was probably the wrong term to use, but I think you're being willfully obtuse here. "The A-Team" was not exactly a super obscure TV show. It was before his time, and he didn't know about it. It was before a lot of people's time - including mine - and a lot of those people do know about it, even if it's modern day relevance is minimal outside of an upcoming movie. It's not Owen Marshall or Delvecchio. Not knowing about it will make some people look at you oddly. Not knowing about it and proclaiming that no one else in your age group knows about it either will make some people think you're out of touch. It's one thing to not know about something that's before your time, but if you're going to speak for a majority, you may want to actually know what the majority thinks. I tossed out Owen Marshall and Delvecchio simply because they were there on the schedule. You ducked Rich Man, Poor Man. That was one that drawfed the A-Team, and literally changed TV which isn't remotely close to what the A-Team did. I ignored Rich Man, Poor Man, because I didn't feel the need to go over each show you listed individually. Admittedly, I didn't know much about it. It was before my time, and the pop culture collective unconscious never sent it my way like it did with The A-Team. In reading about it, it seems to have been a pretty big deal. And I can admit to it being a big deal and having been ignorant about it. Todd Martin can't. That's the point, and that's what you ducked. It's not really about what TV show had the bigger impact. It's not about whether or not Martin has familiarity with Old TV Show X. It's about Todd being too much of a pompous blowhard to admit that he misread people's familiarity with an old TV show. If Todd said "apparently, a lot more people knew about the A-Team than I thought, but it was before my time, and I never really heard of it until now for whatever reason," this argument doesn't happen. "TV is a fleeting form of pop culture" starts an argument because it exposes him as a jackass who didn't like getting knocked off of his soapbox, even if it was over something as petty as whether or not the audience would be familiar with the A-Team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Martin is also a HOF voter. One who doesn't know why the 1st WM was so big, apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Well, it's probably a running gimmick at this point whether he knows the person or not, but I'm guessing his parents didn't let him watch TV because every kid I knew bargained with their parents to stay up and watch the A-Team. He has a point about TV shows, though. Pop culture osmosis is one thing, but it's not the same as living through it. My sister is six years younger than me and she wouldn't know shit about what happened in the 80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Martin is also a HOF voter. One who doesn't know why the 1st WM was so big, apparently. It's not like Dave hasn't repeated that story several times in the Observer either. 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.