SLL Posted April 2, 2014 Posted April 2, 2014 At what point did MOVEZ become a prerequisite for a "good" match anyway? It's probably always been there. I think what happened is that, as time passed and wrestling and it's history became better documented, that standard became really hard to justify, because the standards of wrestling offense are always escalating. If you were a fan in, say, the 80's, and MOVEZ was a prerequisite to you...are any of the matches you liked then still any good to you now? Or is wrestling today from barely trained yarders who do shooting star presses through flaming tables so much better than the Flair matches you gave five stars to back in the day so impossibly good in your eyes that your head literally explodes when you watch them? The second you expand your scope of wrestling beyond the immediate, it stops making sense as a prerequisite, and it becomes obvious that there's something else more important. I tend to liken it to a teenager who watches a lot of Hollywood blockbusters and a few of your more "sound and thunder" artistic films like "Fight Club" and "Donnie Darko" (you may adjust accordingly for when you grew up), but is still squeamish about watching anything that came out before they were born, or a subtitled foreign film, or any domestic film that isn't all up in your area the way the kids seem to like it. I have a whole TL;DR essay in me about how the standards of aesthetic criticism of wrestling are incredibly poorly developed compared to the standards of aesthetic criticism of any of the major art forms...I don't think I'm gonna write it today, but I will point to MOVEZ still being a prequisite for good wrestling to to a large number of folks who consider themselves "smart fans" as evidence that it's true. Write it. One day, when the stars are right.
HumanChessgame Posted April 3, 2014 Posted April 3, 2014 I was trying to find their TPI match but this was all I could find on youtube-
T.Rex-n-effeckx Posted April 3, 2014 Posted April 3, 2014 The moves talk has on some level always been fundamentally bullshit.Hogan is a guy who was Taz like in throwing a bunch of suplexes. When you watch Stan Hansen and Dynamite Kid, Hansen is the guy with larger and more varied move set while Dynamite is pretty much a brawler with a bunch of highspots. If the old Mark Henry v Shawn Michaels threads were still around, one of the running jokes was people defending HBK (a guy with small body of moves and lots of execution problems) because of all his moves.When people mocked spotfest lovers like Dean or Schneider for liking fat guys with PUNCHES~!. They were mocking guys who liked moves executed well.guy with good punches is a guy with good execution, guy not blowing his (punch) spots.Over the years the majority of people who talk about "moves", use the term "moves" with very little thought about actual "moves" attached. I'd like to think that what has changed is people actually are being forced to talk about the moves and how they are used. People praising all of Richards big moves argue with people who think Richards doesn't know how to use any midrage moves to effectively fill time. These are move discussions not anti-move discussions. 1
Jingus Posted April 23, 2014 Posted April 23, 2014 Movez have their place. When HHH busted out a Tiger Suplex on Bryan at Mania, it warmed my heart a little bit. "Huh... I wonder who called that move? I'm leaning Danielson, but it wouldn't surprise me if Trips just wanted to subtly remind people that he has offense which don't involve knees or knuckles," But, whoa, how is Hogan comparable to Taz in this department? Taz had at least a couple dozen of different suplex variations. Hogan at best matches up to Kurt Angle with having like three or four good ones that he could rely on. This doesn't mean Taz > Hogan (although that would be a fascinating argument) but let's not exaggerate our claims. As for Richards, throw me on the "he's fine when he Knows His Place" bandwagon. I once saw a match between him and Low-Ki where, for once, Ki WASN'T the guy in his match pissing me off with gratuitous stiffness and no-selling. (Can you imagine Richards stooging like Ki did when he tagged with Bryan against Liger and Joe?) But then again I once saw a Richards/Kota Ibushi match which harkened back to the GOOD Dynamite/Tiger matches, back in their earlier days when they actually told stories and had clean finishes and kinda sold. The speed and precision and athleticism and intensity were just off the freaking chain. To put it in movie terms: Richards is a mediocre actor and a terrible writer, but he's a GREAT director.
Web Conn Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 vs Naomichi Marufuji https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE-xuj6t_vI&index=8&list=UUa-cuUnQJqBgSSYNEq6P_7w vs KENTA for the GHC Jr Heavyweight Championship https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l82tyWDVmc0&list=UUa-cuUnQJqBgSSYNEq6P_7w vs Bryan Danielson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUFF8cmMcBg&list=UUa-cuUnQJqBgSSYNEq6P_7w&index=2 vs Austin Aries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6xFpyY9iCY&list=UUa-cuUnQJqBgSSYNEq6P_7w&index=10 vs Tyler Black for the ROH World Heavyweight Championship https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv14u8fkNUY&index=9&list=UUa-cuUnQJqBgSSYNEq6P_7w
Recommended Posts