|
LividLiquid posted:My wife's out of town, I have a half-gallon of whiskey, this is my only night off for the next three weeks and I want to watch some legendary wrestling from 1997 or later. What should I watch? 7-alarm wings and whiskey? If you're intent on hurting yourself that much, ECW is the way to go, friend.
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 06:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 01:04 |
|
|
LividLiquid posted:My wife's out of town, I have a half-gallon of whiskey, this is my only night off for the next three weeks and I want to watch some legendary wrestling from 1997 or later. What should I watch? *King of the Ring 2001: Street Fight - Kurt Angle vs. Shane McMahon *Fully Loaded 2000: WWF Title Match - The Rock(c) vs. Chris Benoit *Vengeance 2001: Hardcore Title Match - The Undertaker vs. Rob Van Dam(c) *In Your House: Final Four: Final Four Match for vacant WWF Title - Bret Hart vs. Steve Austin vs. The Undertaker vs. Vader *SummerSlam 1997: Intercontinental Title Match - Owen Hart(c) vs. Steve Austin
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
I gotta re-watch Rock/Benoit to see how it stands up.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
CombineThresher posted:7-alarm wings and whiskey? If you're intent on hurting yourself that much, ECW is the way to go, friend. Edit: And Kurt Vs. Shane was an awesome pick.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 07:26
|
|
|
I have to disagree with something here--"7-alarm wings, whiskey, and wrestling" DEFINITELY deserves it's own thread.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 07:34
|
|
|
In the early part of Benoit/Rock, between Benoit's gutwrench-gutbuster and Shane elbowing Rocky while he's under the ropes, what are the fans chanting? It sounds like LETS GO WRESTLING (  ??) or maybe even LETS GO BENOIT, but I can't make it out.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 07:38
|
|
|
Q: Why did Matt Striker stop wrestling?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 07:59
|
|
|
Red posted:Q: Why did Matt Striker stop wrestling? He was bad at it, plus he was really really good at talking. In another time he might have been a truly great manager.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 08:36
|
|
|
The Goog posted:He was bad at it, plus he was really really good at talking. In another time he might have been a truly great manager. If he was better at talking than wrestling than you would think watching him wrestle would cause brain hemorrhages or something.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 09:39
|
|
|
Has any promotion had a woman doing commentary/pbp for any significant length of time?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 15:44
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:Has any promotion had a woman doing commentary/pbp for any significant length of time? no.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 15:54
|
|
|
I'll go with SHIMMER on that, since you didn't specify major promotions only...
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 16:29
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:Has any promotion had a woman doing commentary/pbp for any significant length of time? Missy Hyatt in late 80s/early 90s WCW for awhile, I think.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 16:37
|
|
|
Wade Barrett has mentioned in interviews that it took him some time to get used to the North American style of pro wrestling. What's so different about the European style?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 16:56
|
|
|
Writer Cath posted:Wade Barrett has mentioned in interviews that it took him some time to get used to the North American style of pro wrestling. What's so different about the European style? It's all uppercuts, wristlocks and that 'lady in the lake' move. It's more of a technical style with less flash I believe. Very reversal heavy.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
Writer Cath posted:Wade Barrett has mentioned in interviews that it took him some time to get used to the North American style of pro wrestling. What's so different about the European style? He might have also been referring to WWE's specific style, which is a lot of bump-and-feed if you're a heel. A lot of WCW guys had trouble adjusting to that too.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 17:38
|
|
|
CombineThresher posted:He might have also been referring to WWE's specific style, which is a lot of bump-and-feed if you're a heel. A lot of WCW guys had trouble adjusting to that too. Seems likely. I don't think Wade's wrestled anywhere other than in the WWE system in North America either.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 18:46
|
|
|
british style wrestling is basically what someone like Regal wrestles. A lot of holds and reversals, very submission heavy. The kind of thing that got shown a lot on World Of Sport back in the day.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 22:01
|
|
|
One thing that always bothered me about the Invasion angle was how it ended. Steve Austin was the leader of the Alliance who's goal was to put the WWF out of business for good. The night after the Alliance lost the Survivor Series matchup where it was all on the line and had to disband made no sense whatsoever. Kurt Angle joined the Alliance a few weeks prior but it was all an act to assist Vince in making sure the WWF wins. Angle was the man who's plan successfully eliminated the invaders. For some reason on RAW, they depicted him as a heel. Ric Flair made his WWF return as the man Shane and Stephanie sold their company shares to, making him co-owner. Angle was to be given the belt as a thank you for saving the company but Steve Austin shows up, attacks Angle, takes his belt, and is suddenly a babyface. WTF? Was there an explanation given why Austin turned despite being the company's biggest hell 24 hours prior?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
budreck posted:Was there an explanation given why Austin turned despite being the company's biggest hell 24 hours prior? I applaud you for actually re-watching that stuff or remembering it that well. I don't know if there was an exact explanation but the truth was, people still didn't want to boo Steve Austin. And they didn't want to cheer Vince McMahon. I think the WWF tried to treat the Alliance like any other stable instead of treating them like a wrestling promotion. At times it seeped through like RVD and Billy Kidman getting pops while X-Pac got booed, but that should have been it from the get go. The fans shouldn't have been expected to boo Diamond Dallas Page or Rob Van Dam. They should have faced off with a top heel from the WWF. Instead, everyone in the Alliance was supposed to be a heel and that's that!... until Kidman got big pops for facing X-Pac. Anyway, I get really angry and roll into tangents when talking about the Invasion. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 23:47
|
|
|
Red posted:*King of the Ring 2001: Street Fight - Kurt Angle vs. Shane McMahon *Spring Stampede '99: Blitzkrieg vs. Juventud Guerrera *Backlash '01: Hardcore Title Match - Raven vs. Rhyno *Souled Out '98: Raven vs. Chris Benoit
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
budreck posted:I rewatched the Jim Cornette guest booker on the Invasion angle and the way he lays it out makes me so much more pissed we didn't get anything even close to what he had come up with over a weekend. I've said it before but anyone interested in the invasion angle should watch it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVF2tYCx0Y The setup with Vince the character stating outright what Vince the alleged human being actually thought is genius. Plus you get stories like the Festus hilarity where WWE took him from OVW (which Cornette ran at the time) for a bit role in a dark match at a house show (or something) then sent him back with his head shaved. When Cornette called the WWE office to ask what they did to his top heel they replied that they wanted to see what he looked like bald. It's just magical to hear him rant about poo poo like this. maniacripper fucked around with this message at 05:40 on May 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 05:33
|
|
|
Which are the better (funnier or more informative/interesting) YouShoots?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 06:28
|
|
|
Matt Cruea posted:Which are the better (funnier or more informative/interesting) YouShoots? Sean Waltman's was good all around. Not sure how informative. Holly's was good. Informative and funny. Both of Cornette's were great and of course should be watched. New Jack's was alright. After that... meh.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 06:34
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:Sean Waltman's was good all around. Not sure how informative. Yeah, I just finished Waltman's which is why I asked. He comes off a lot better than I thought he would. Also he is very high. Cartridgeblowers fucked around with this message at 06:44 on May 29, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
Sandman's YouShoot had some pretty funny stories.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
Writer Cath posted:Wade Barrett has mentioned in interviews that it took him some time to get used to the North American style of pro wrestling. What's so different about the European style? Doesn't British/Euro wrestling have rounds?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 10:56
|
|
|
Red posted:Doesn't British/Euro wrestling have rounds? Classic British wrestling certainly does and some promotions still run with it. Here is a sample of that with Sheamus. A lot of other promotions are now influenced by the WWE and American wrestling though, so its starting to fade away.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 11:31
|
|
|
MisterGBH posted:It's all uppercuts, wristlocks and that 'lady in the lake' move. It hasn't been like that for a while, except for a few older guys floating around the micro-leagues and a few self-concious throwbacks. Now it's pretty much just a (literally) pale imitation of American indy style.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 13:41
|
|
|
Three words: Brawl For All
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 16:57
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:One thing that always bothered me about the Invasion angle was how it ended. Another loose end is how the story w s played out towards the end of the angle where Vince McMahon was certain that Austin would turn back to he WWE during the match and save it, he was absolutely certain of this from what I can gather despite Austin not even believing it himself. I've only seen the PPV chronology for 2001 recently so I probably missed a more in depth look at this on Raw/Smackdown but how did this particular story element develop? How did McMahon get the idea that Austin would turn back at Survivor Series and why was he so certain? During the video package for the match they also have an exert from a promo on Smackdown with the Rock and Austin where the Rock is presumably confronting Austin about McMahon's idea that Austin would turn at Survivor Series. What happened during this promo? It seems odd to me that the Rock and Austin were shaking hands despite being on opposing sides and both of them being skeptical about McMahon's soothsaying. I do love the exert they show for the SS video package where the Rock says 'The Rock will NEVER forget', and Rock Bottom's Austin, it looks so powerful. I'd love to see the promo in full if anyone knows what I'm talking about/can find it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 17:54
|
|
|
Sorry for the double post, braking up the all of ext.Merlot Brougham posted:Three words: Brawl For All
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 17:56
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:I do love the exert they show for the SS video package where the Rock says 'The Rock will NEVER forget', and Rock Bottom's Austin, it looks so powerful. I'd love to see the promo in full if anyone knows what I'm talking about/can find it. Probably one of my favourite promos ever. The Austin & Rock singing to each other: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKcc_7KInyg&feature=related
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:Sorry for the double post, braking up the all of ext. I BELIEVE it was mostly JR's idea as a way to get Steve Williams over as a bad-rear end, so it was a legitimate boxing/wrestling contest with filled with mid-carders and they earned points for take-downs and such or you could knock someone out. Anyway, since it was not fixed people actually got pretty hurt and Williams actually got eliminated and it was won by Bart Gunn who faced Butterbean at WM 15 and got knocked the gently caress out so hard he left the WWF. Really the whole thing seemed like a flawed idea to me now. There weren't really any big stars I remember in it because you couldn't have Steve Austin getting whoopped by Marc Mero and wrestling fans watched RAW for the wrestling, not for boxing. And boxing fans wouldn't have bothered to watch RAW for boxing, they'd just stick to actual boxing. I think it was chalked up as a lose/lose situation all things considered.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 18:15
|
|
|
Jim Cornette put it best in that wrestling works so hard to convince fans that fake is real that when you give them something legitimately real, they are just going to think its fake. It's also what has been my issue with hardcore wrestling. I don't want wrestlers to hurt each other. I want them to perform and make me think they are hurting each other.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 18:20
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:Probably one of my favourite promos ever. The Austin & Rock singing to each other: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKcc_7KInyg&feature=related I think what I love most about this promo is how Stone Cold reacts to the audience saying what all the time. He panders to the audience but every once and a while he looks over to try to shut them up. It's fantastic.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:Probably one of my favourite promos ever. The Austin & Rock singing to each other: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKcc_7KInyg&feature=related Thank you so much for sharing the link, I really appreciate that. The promo is incredible, it goes through am entire spectrum of emotions. It also pointed out something from the attitude era that's missing today that I don't often notice although watching a video like that makes it really obvious, you don't get segments like that with layers of purpose and tone. I can't think of the last time I saw a promo that was intentionally comedic but still made an important point relevant to the feud it was part of, expressed depth of character and story and didn't detract from the drama driving the angle. Ironically as WWE seems to attempt to head further down the entertainment rabbit hole it seems to have only served to alienate it's tone from it's programming. Watching that raises a question I've been curious about for some time, how do the arena capacities compare for Raw and Smackdown in 2001 Vs 2011?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 20:46
|
|
|
Sue Denim posted:Watching that raises a question I've been curious about for some time, how do the arena capacities compare for Raw and Smackdown in 2001 Vs 2011? I was at a SmackDown taping in 2001 and 2009. The 2001 taping was absolutely packed with signs and a nuclear hot crowd. The 2009 taping had the entire top level darkened (the TV side was where everyone was moved up there) where seats were not sold. The crowd was also not as into the show as the 2001 crowd was. Someone might have been to a show this year, I'm going to RAW in August, I doubt things have changed that much. The big thing though is crowds from 2001 where MUCH more into a show and participated a lot more.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
All right, thanks. It's just watching the link that I commented on a couple of posts ago the arena looks gigantic compared to some of the arenas they've been running weekly shows in recently. It looks a class or two of arena above some of the smaller ones they've run in recently like the University stadium they ran the draft show this year from for example. Maybe the difference is more pronounced when comparing Raw, being the A show and all.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 01:04 |
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0055 posted:I was at a SmackDown taping in 2001 and 2009. The 2001 taping was absolutely packed with signs and a nuclear hot crowd. The 2009 taping had the entire top level darkened (the TV side was where everyone was moved up there) where seats were not sold. The crowd was also not as into the show as the 2001 crowd was. Someone might have been to a show this year, I'm going to RAW in August, I doubt things have changed that much. It's kind of why when people say the crowd was hot for Rhodes vs. Bryan I kind of sit there and say, "Really?" and it's because I remember when Road Dogg would wrestle Droz in 2000 and the crowd would explode in pops and boos.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2011 21:27
|
|