|
If I'm not getting UWF vs NJPW confused with something else, that whole show was pretty rad because half the matches were worked and the other half were shoot.
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:01 |
|
|
Serious question. Does anyone like TNA at all? In any way? Is it taken seriously, I guess is what I'm trying to ask in a less obnoxious way. Someone named Rockstar Spud just stumbled into a room full of people sitting at computers wearing t-shirts with "Bully Fears Dixie" written on them in 2014. And Ken Anderson is employed here. And the camerwork is horrible and all the music sounds the same, possibly because it's so badly mixed. Bubba Ray Dudley just said "house shows" within the context of a wrestling storyline. Jeff Hardy is dressed up in Tim Burton castoffs and Mike Tenay referred to him as "Jeff Hardy's Alter Ego". Man, it's just awful.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
I asked the same question in a TNA thread last year and only about two or three people admitted to genuinely enjoying the product. Some other people in PSP watch it even though they think it sucks though.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
What's wrong with talking about house shows?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
magnum_valentino posted:Serious question. Does anyone like TNA at all? In any way? I enjoy the fact that TNA comes to my small town for house shows from time to time, it's usually a good time. I don't enjoy a single thing about the television show. It makes me angry and sad to watch it. Everything about how bad it is is just magnified by the fact that WWE has been so good lately.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
Why don't they put Smackdown on live on like Saturday early-afternoon when the networks are showing like cycling or skateboarding or other such nonsense? I guess you couldn't do west coast shows too early in the day but it wouldn't affect their travel schedule too much otherwise. I know I'm a thousand times more likely to idly watch something on Saturday afternoon than on Friday night.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
epitasis posted:What's wrong with talking about house shows? It's really procedural. It's like talking about booking during the show. It's part of wrestling that exists outside of kayfabe, when scripted wrestling should still be within kayfabe. In-context, it seemed like a desperate way of having Bubba Ray say "we know what we're doing".
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Is there still an unspoken "rank" to WWE PPVs? I know Wrestlemania is still the big one, but are Summerslam, Rumble and Survivor Series still seen as bigger than what used to be the IYH events? I always thought that having two world titles would ruin the magnitude of winning the Rumble; did this happen?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
epitasis posted:Why don't they put Smackdown on live on like Saturday early-afternoon when the networks are showing like cycling or skateboarding or other such nonsense? I guess you couldn't do west coast shows too early in the day but it wouldn't affect their travel schedule too much otherwise. I know I'm a thousand times more likely to idly watch something on Saturday afternoon than on Friday night. It wouldn't be cost effective. Viewership is higher and more sought after my advertisers in prime time. Afternoon programming isn't considered as important.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
magnum_valentino posted:It's really procedural. It's like talking about booking during the show. It's part of wrestling that exists outside of kayfabe, when scripted wrestling should still be within kayfabe. That's crazy? People have to be aware of house shows if they're going to attend them. How does a non-televised contest break kayfabe when the origin of televised wrestling was to advertise live events.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
magnum_valentino posted:It's really procedural. It's like talking about booking during the show. It's part of wrestling that exists outside of kayfabe, when scripted wrestling should still be within kayfabe. Except House Shows are just non-televised shows, and exist in kayfabe. As in "there was a title change at a house show".
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
Nobody ever said house shows don't exist in kayfabe. Back when I was watching, Bully would occasionally even plug one of his matches on an upcoming card.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
TNA house shows completely exist in kayfabe. They've done title changes, parts of the Bound For Glory Series happen on them, they start or continue angles on them. Just recently The Wolves won the tag titles during one. I've enjoyed TNA to varying degrees over the years but right now with its recent loss of talent and no interesting stories going I've lost most all my interest. But you're not going to get many people speaking of being fans here. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 23:28 on May 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Yeah, TNA's terrible and I've been unable to watch more than 10 minutes of it when morbidly curious enough to try, but there's nothing wrong with mentioning the existence of house shows. Now if Bully had said "Hey fans, we've been practicing this match on the house show circuit, it's gonna be great!", that would be a problem but I'm assuming even they're not that stupid yet.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
St Evan Echoes posted:Is there still an unspoken "rank" to WWE PPVs? I know Wrestlemania is still the big one, but are Summerslam, Rumble and Survivor Series still seen as bigger than what used to be the IYH events? I always thought that having two world titles would ruin the magnitude of winning the Rumble; did this happen? The Rumble became the definite #2 PPV after the introduction of two world titles. It was helped because Wrestlemania kept becoming a bigger deal. In the 90s the prestige of Wrestlemania wasn't close to what it is now due to WWE's business declining so badly. In the 2000s the Wrestlemania brand kept growing and growing so the importance of the Rumble grew and grew. Whatever damage was done by having two titles or booking Rumble winners weakly was counteracted by the Road To Wrestlemania becoming a much bigger deal. These days in terms of business (which generally determines how important a show is) it goes: Wrestlemania Rumble Summerslam With a huge gap between Mania and Rumble and a smaller gap between Rumble and Summerslam. The next tier is: Elimination Chamber Money in the Bank Extreme Rules Hell in a Cell Survivor Series Elimination Chamber is generally the #4 show of the year. Money In the Bank has obvious storyline importance and does well business wise most years too, less because of the briefcases and more because they've hit gold on some main events two of the last three years. The next three are pretty interchangeable. They sometimes act like Survivor Series is a big deal but generally don't. It was at risk of being dropped from the schedule a few years ago. Cell for a couple years would be two weeks after another PPV which hurt it, but they usually act like they are booking it to be a big deal. Extreme Rules took on increased importance in recent years because they booked Lesnar for the show. This year not so much. Then you have the least important shows: TLC Payback Night of Champions Battleground Night of Champions used to be a somewhat major show. The gimmick of all the titles on the line drew interest from fans at first and they put some kind of important matches on the shows. As time went on they lost all interest in promoting it as a big deal and now it is just a show. Payback is just whatever they want to call the late spring PPV, Battleground is the same in the post SS build and TLC is generally not a big deal at all. Last year they booked a big match and did a good number but before that the show was pretty much an after thought.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:Really great PPV explanation I'm disappointed that KotR has been dropped, but even in the Attitude era there were some really bad winners (1999, what were thinking!) Did it just keep going downhill before being axed?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
The one that Regal won was actually pretty cool with how he set himself up to win it.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
St Evan Echoes posted:Wow, thanks a lot for this! It's good to hear that the Rumble is still a big deal. King of the Ring had the issue some wrestling concept shows have, if you don't know what the main event is it's hard to spend money on it. They had the same problem with Cyber Sunday/Taboo Tuesday and WCW had that problem with PPVs centered around Battle Bowl. Well, that and Battle Bowl PPVs were dogshit. The bad winners (They did nothing with Shamrock's win, then Gunn's was a bigger flop) only added to it. There was also the issue that if you have much of the tournament on the PPV there are too many short matches. If you don't do much of the tournament on the PPV it kind of defeats the purpose. Tournaments also require stars to lose to stars to be important and WWE hates doing that, so you'd get lots of DQs and count outs. So yeah, it kind of kept fading out until it got axed. They brought it back on Smackdown one year, then for a few three hour Raws and it didn't really increase ratings. It did give Booker his memorable King Booker run though.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
There's an easy solution to that. 1) Book just the Final Four on PPV and make the rest of the tournament a big deal on tv in the weeks leading up to build to the PPV. 2) Book a non tournament main event along with a few other matches to round out the card and give a nice sampling of your product. Sure, it sacrifices some of the appeal of a one night tournament but it does it for a good reason, to increase the quality of the matches and build for the tournament. I think an annual tournament is a wasted resource because even if it doesn't pop ratings or buy rates you can work it into the bigger promotional package and becomes an established means to push, turn, or repackage someone. Cyber Sunday's a tougher fix but that's just because its a bad idea built on a marketing strategy first. It would make more sense to do one of those on RAW every now and then and try and make it a really big deal so fans really get invested. Honestly, a lot of the discarded ideas like Battle Bowl or Night of Champions could be used on the 3 hour RAWs to help break up the monotony. Even if they aren't huge draws they're something different you can look forward to. Of course none of that addresses WWE's whole "people shouldn't lose" thing because there's no real solution to that.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
MRT has it right except Battleground is now in the build to Summerslam as the new July PPV.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Daniel Bryan posted:MRT has it right except Battleground is now in the build to Summerslam as the new July PPV. It might get more recognition when it happens this year because of that, but it's very hard to think of Battleground in respectable terms when it's such an  title and last year's debut Battleground was pretty loving lousy aside from the Shield vs. Rhodes to get their job back match. Even looking at the card now, the only part I can actually remember is it ending by Big Show coming out and punching everyone until nobody could do things anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
NotQuiteQuentin posted:That's the famous NJPW (strong style) vs UWFI (shoot style) feud.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Are there any good wrestling documentaries that you guys would recommend? I have seen Beyond the Mat, some history of WCW thing on netflix a while back as well as a CM Punk doc awhile back also. I am about to watch Barbed Wire City and I have Bloodstained Memoirs to watch after that. I know the WWE has a whole bunch of wrestler specific dvds and whatnot but are there any docs you guys would specifically recommend? I am open to any and all suggestions not just WWE stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
bullfights on acid posted:Are there any good wrestling documentaries that you guys would recommend? I have seen Beyond the Mat, some history of WCW thing on netflix a while back as well as a CM Punk doc awhile back also. I am about to watch Barbed Wire City and I have Bloodstained Memoirs to watch after that. The Daniel Bryan Journey To Wrestlemania and both Warrior docs (Self-Destruction and the recent one)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
bullfights on acid posted:Are there any good wrestling documentaries that you guys would recommend? I have seen Beyond the Mat, some history of WCW thing on netflix a while back as well as a CM Punk doc awhile back also. I am about to watch Barbed Wire City and I have Bloodstained Memoirs to watch after that. Heroes of World Class is fantastic, a must see. The Last of McGuinness is really good if you were a fan of Nigel McGuinness or kind of interested in the life of an indie wrestler. Memphis Heat is great and I've heard the Crockett documentary that came out last year was too. The best documentary about wrestlers will forever be The Smashing Machine but they probably aren't the kind of wrestlers you are interested in.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
This is half an answer and half another question: My buddy just got into wrestling and asked for docs and my curriculum for an intro to the business was as follows: History of the WWE Rise and Fall of ECW Beyond the Mat Greatest Rivalries: Bret vs. Shawn The Mania of Wrestlemania "The Wrestler" Jake the Snake's HOF speech I feel like that sets up the WWE foundation and follows through on some stories established in Beyond the Mat but as far as the American industry, I feel like there's not a definitive WCW doc. Really, the WWE should do one on Russo. Also my only Austin content is in the Mania doc. So if it's supposed to be a Wrestling 101 course and be more of an overview than about specific people, any jump out at you guys?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:The best documentary about wrestlers will forever be The Smashing Machine but they probably aren't the kind of wrestlers you are interested in. I actually totally forgot that i've seen this one. I'm a big MMA fan so I loved it. Edit: and wow thanks for all the suggestions so far. I will definitely look into all of these.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
bullfights on acid posted:Are there any good wrestling documentaries that you guys would recommend? I have seen Beyond the Mat, some history of WCW thing on netflix a while back as well as a CM Punk doc awhile back also. I am about to watch Barbed Wire City and I have Bloodstained Memoirs to watch after that. If you can find it Wrestling with Shadows the Bret Hart doc is pretty interesting if for nothing else than for a bunch of shots of backstage stuff up to and surrounding the Montreal Screwjob.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
I've always felt King of the Ring would've stuck around if they gave it an actual meaning, like the winner gets a Summerslam title shot or something similar. It wouldn't be that hard to build it up. TLC was poo poo last year because they had one stipulation match in the main event, where in previous years it had been a chairs match, a tables match, a ladder match, AND a TLC match on the card. Hell in a Cell is a stupid PPV because it's no longer a stipulation you challenge someone to when you hate them, it's just "Oh whatever, there's a PPV with that stipulation in the name so let's do this feud in a cell now." Survivor Series used to be my favorite when they had a bunch of teams, but now they can barely be bothered to do one "traditional" elimination match. With the amount of trios they have now they could easily put a new spin on it. epitasis posted:I feel like that sets up the WWE foundation and follows through on some stories established in Beyond the Mat but as far as the American industry, I feel like there's not a definitive WCW doc. Really, the WWE should do one on Russo. Also my only Austin content is in the Mania doc. So if it's supposed to be a Wrestling 101 course and be more of an overview than about specific people, any jump out at you guys? The Monday Night War The Rise and Fall of WCW Both are WCW-oriented. I've only seen The Monday Night War though, but it's great. They're making a Network series spinoff of it now.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:
The Rise and Fall of WCW is bad. MNW suffers from bias, but it's kind of good at what it does, especially for an early WWE doc. Rise and Fall just comes off as if it is made by people completely clueless of what happened. Not because of bias or malice, just incompetence.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
bullfights on acid posted:Are there any good wrestling documentaries that you guys would recommend? I have seen Beyond the Mat, some history of WCW thing on netflix a while back as well as a CM Punk doc awhile back also. I am about to watch Barbed Wire City and I have Bloodstained Memoirs to watch after that. Netflix also has Card Subject To Change which about the indies and also Lipstick & Dynamite which is about the history of women's pro wrestling. Minor spoiler but every story in the latter is "we would show up and wrestle and sometimes we got paid but mostly just raped".
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
IYH House: A Cold Day in Hell is on the network right now and its funny seeing Mankind beat Rock like some jobber. Also how many people were in the Nation? Theres like ten dudes out there.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:The Rise and Fall of WCW is bad. MNW suffers from bias, but it's kind of good at what it does, especially for an early WWE doc. Rise and Fall just comes off as if it is made by people completely clueless of what happened. Not because of bias or malice, just incompetence. I watched Rise and Fall, and while I was sure they were leaving stuff out, there was a lot of outrageous stuff in WCW's later history. Would you mind briefly going over its failings?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
Jim Crockett Promotions: The Good Old Days is great, but probably not for someone who isn't already a fan of at least WCW. There's almost no clips because WWE owns everything. They even bought the home recordings used for the documentary. Memphis Heat is good and has a lot of TV footage, so you don't have to know all the people going in.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I watched Rise and Fall, and while I was sure they were leaving stuff out, there was a lot of outrageous stuff in WCW's later history. Would you mind briefly going over its failings? One of the biggest failings is it is way too short. They are trying to tell a 30 year story in less than two hours. In terms of the details, early on it portrays Georgia Championship Wrestling and Jim Crockett promotions as the same thing. They heavily imply it was JCP that was on TBS at the advent of cable, except it wasn't. They start off with a quote from Jim Jr about how other promoters didn't understand how important cable would be, then talk about Turner and what became WCW Saturday Night, then start talking about Mid Atlantic/JCP growing into a national promotion. The way it is presented you think they are talking about the same thing, except they aren't. From there is just kind of rushes from point to point, the NWA title (with only a 3 second explanation of what the NWA is) the idea of touring talent, then they briefly talk about St. Louis and how hot it was, then off to Starrcade. So they spend like, 8 minutes of time on the period from where Jim Jr took over to Starrcade. Why even bother? This rushing about becomes an issue when Black Saturday comes up because they've just been talking about JCP. They also had Vince say he got the show from the NWA and Jim Crockett when it wasn't Crockett's show! Mike Graham even says that Crockett wanted his station back which is completely wrong. Then they talk about the expansion and act as if running shows all over the country was the reason the company ran out of business without going into the PPV war, Dusty burning through ideas, etc and skip over that to the company being broke and selling to Turner. They play a few talking heads about how if they stayed regional they'd still be in business which just isn't true. Nearly two decades of history gets less than half an hour, and the story of the creation of WCW with the sale has zero detail. There's tons of little errors from there with wrestlers having lovely memories but from this point it gets a bit better. Partially it is because now you have Jim Ross who can talk about the company so at least you have one person who knows what he's talking about. They never really get into the big issues on stuff like Watts instead just talking about the little trivial stuff but hey, at least it is kind of accurate at this point. If you are interested in the story of WCW it's really bad. If you want to hear some guys associated with the company say things the company did they thought were stupid, well, I guess it's ok.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Survivor Series and KOTR would be important if there was enough competency in the overall writing to maintain its importance. If you build up some feuds after Summerslam and incorporate 3 or 4 extra dudes in it, you've got survivor series matches that make sense and aren't just 5 dudes vs 5 dudes.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Wow. It is admittedly confusing that a different southern territory had a show called "World Championship Wrestling" on TBS before JCP was bought by Turner or used that name for their programming, but that's a pretty basic and crucial thing to get dead wrong. Black Saturday was a pretty big thing from what I've read, you'd think the people involved in wrestling at the time would at least get it mostly straight.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:I've always felt King of the Ring would've stuck around if they gave it an actual meaning, like the winner gets a Summerslam title shot or something similar. It wouldn't be that hard to build it up. The one in 2002 actually had this, iirc.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Nut Bunnies posted:The one in 2002 actually had this, iirc. That's the thing, they tried basically everything. Some shows had more tournament matches, some had less. Some were for title shots or had the winner get one quickly thereafter, some were for up and comers. Some had established stars win, some had major gimmick matches, nothing seemed to work. Oh and my favorite story about the WCW DVD: They pissed off 70s/80s star Manny Fernandez by making it seem like he was the Manny Fernandez who lost to Goldberg. Manny was pissed at the implication he ever worked for WCW.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 05:01 |
|
|
Nut Bunnies posted:The one in 2002 actually had this, iirc. Yeah Brock won it and earned a title shot against Rock. This was one of the things that led to Summerslam 2002 being a really good show. I remember it fondly, but haven't seen it in a few years.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 05:52
|
|
