Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

JULY 2019 WRESTLING TALK.


Recommended Posts

Is Low Ki 2019 having any matches on the Indies worth checking out?  MLW has him knocking out ppl in a particularly unengaging way, and I don't remember any of the matches prior being particularly strong - only been watching MLW since March or so.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we have a best matches of 2019 thread going ?  I'm wondering if we do.  Feel like WWE has been kinda awful for a while, and I don't remember any of the particularly great ones, if there's any.  There's gotta be some good NXT matches, right?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lawful Metal said:

Do we have a best matches of 2019 thread going ?  I'm wondering if we do.  Feel like WWE has been kinda awful for a while, and I don't remember any of the particularly great ones, if there's any.  There's gotta be some good NXT matches, right?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HarryArchieGus said:

Is Low Ki 2019 having any matches on the Indies worth checking out?  MLW has him knocking out ppl in a particularly unengaging way, and I don't remember any of the matches prior being particularly strong - only been watching MLW since March or so.  

I recommend the build up to Low Ki vs. Tom Lawlor and their title match.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Johnny Sorrow said:

Hey, when the talk comes up about who drew more money in wrestling, like folks do with Hogan and Austin, does anyone take into account inflation?  Like how Gone With The Wind is the biggest movie ever given inflation, who is it?  I'd think Bruno would be in the conversation if there had been merch back then,  but I think it'd still be Austin. And since I stink at math, if I'm wrong fill me in. 

I also wonder who drew the most on top just at live shows with inflation.  Where's Herrington? ?

I know with Hogan, lots of people take into account the fact that back in the day, you had to actually have a catalog, respond to an ad in the WWF magazine or go to a house show to get merch. Guys like Austin and Rock benefited greatly from people being able to get merch via the internet. I feel like Cornette talked about that in depth on one of his podcasts. IIRC, he talked about how Strangler Lewis and guys of that era were huge draws and should be included because when you took inflation into account, they were on par with Hogan, Andre, etc. 

Also, another thing to think about is just how much of a "machine" you have behind you. JCP had guys who could've been huge draws but their marketing and advertising were laughable compared to what Vince was doing at the time. I remember on the Horsemen dvd, they were clowning JCP making Horsemen vitamins as that was their crude attempt at marketing. Another example is Shawn Michael's title reign. He gets slagged for not drawing then and not unfairly so, but I've read the WWF really pulled back on advertising during his reign. There was an MSG show that drew horribly and HBK gets blamed for it but apparently the WWF didn't run any ads on their syndication in that market like they usually did for MSG shows. They barely advertised it at all and attendance bombed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I love this one. I'd gladly hang that in my living room or den.

The original work is in MoMA in New York City. They probably sell prints of it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I love this one. I'd gladly hang that in my living room or den.

Bedroom for me.  Whole image SCREAMS time to fuck.

I'm kidding but I have a giant poster of Sonny Chiba karate chopping a bull to death over my bed so I'm probably not kidding.

Edited by Tromatagon
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Burgundy LaRue said:

Is it, though? Is it art, is more sports-oriented than most account for? What are the percentages of each one?

Thinking about it, is there a consensus about what makes a good sports game? Because if there's an NFL game that finishes 3-0, most people would say it was a boring yawner and how many three and outs can you watch before you change the channel. But there'll always be that one person who really appreciates good defensive play and insists it was a masterclass in quarterback pressure. If a game finishes 90-84 in overtime, most people will be raving about what record breaking offence they'd seen and what incredible big plays et cetera, but some people will say "That's not American Football*, if I wanted to watch each team sprint down the field and score immediately I'd watch Basketball. Where's the tackling?". And so on.

I should have said entertainment is subjective. Because technically all pro sports are sold as entertainment, that's why they sell tickets and put them on television. Seeing talented people do impressive things is entertaining. So is shouting at talented people if they fail to do impressive things, it seems.

* More Americans should use the term "American Football". If you have no problem calling Ninja Warrior "American Ninja Warrior" or Gladiators "American Gladiators", what's the difference.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think sports aesthetics are similar to art. 

Some folks like high scoring offense. Some love defense. Hence Jonathan Wilson’s “goals are overrated.” 

Our society has people that are argue about scientific facts. Of course they were argue about intangibles. ? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AxB: We don't call it "football" because we already have a word for it that the Brits themselves supplied for us. 

I do use "soccer" and "football" with people from the U.S. and Canada and "football" and "American football" with people from anywhere else just for the sake of ease, though. Also, people get legit irritated if I use the wrong word for the wrong cultural vocabulary. ?

Anyway, I've seen people argue legitimately that LeBron's game is ugly, and he's a top-ten all-time basketball player at worst, so as @odessastepssays, people will argue about what is entertaining or beautiful to them all day. I happen to be sympathetic to Jonathan Wilson's arguments about the aesthetic value of a well-organized defense on a soccer/football field myself. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked the question because for me, wrestling is a lot like figure skating. There's an artistic component to it that I don't deny, and that is certainly subjective depending on one's likes and dislikes. But there's also a technical side. That obviously differs from wrestler to wrestler. But no matter the wrestler, we expect some level of athleticism and skill based on said athleticism.

It goes back to my mention of Ricochet. He's clearly a great high flyer. He has strong technique, there's no denying that. Whether you like that style is subjective. Him being good at it, IMO, is not. If we have someone who falls every time they attempt a flip, they're bad. That's not for debate. 

If wrestling is considered sports entertainment, is it not fair to break things down into those two levels and acknowledge both as their own standard of merit? They are two halves that tell the whole story. They can't be separated, but they can be evaluated in a way to give them semi-autonomy.

It's not cut and dry. And even for me proposing it, I'm not saying the idea doesn't have gaps. But even one sees it as pure art, there's a process to the art that, in theory, develops into a match. For me, any foundation laid is objectively poured on which the subjectivity can be built.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Dewar said:

Between the Roman stuff and posting a subscriber's name on the board for no reason, Dave is having a bad weekend so far. 

This is what I try to get at when I talk about Roman. Like him, that's great. Hate him, no problem. But the narratives that surround him, like this Meltzer stuff, goes beyond his character and wrestling. At least it does in my most of wrestling social media travels, even now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, L_W_P said:

All of this.

Reigns and Rollins in particular could do with an update.

I do like the "Burn it Down" hook Seth has but after that it's bland as hell. Roman's music sound like a heel theme. It's no wonder the initial reaction is to boo.

Agreed

Downstait (who did Miz, Ziggler, Alex Riley, & Cody's current themes) made a song for Seth a couple years ago but apparently was never intended to be used as his theme.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Roman, and his push not taking, a lot of it is on the company trying to make him something he isn't, and a lot of it is on WWE fans who've decided that booing the top babyface is the most fun you can have at a WWE show. But then arguably that's also on the company, because ultimately if people don't enjoy what you're selling, sell them something they do want instead. And I know that there's no consensus and every fan has a different favourite, but still. Aim for the bigger target, it's harder to miss.

They tried to push Stone Cold as a heel when the fans wanted to cheer him, and eventually he became a top babyface. They tried to push Rocky Miavia as a babyface when the fans wanted to boo him, and eventually he became such a good heel that it got him over as a face. They tried to push Triple H as a main eventer when they fans thought he was bland and boring, and... well, eventually he did get over as a main eventer. But he was a bland and boring one most of the time.

But even when they've tried to hijack Roman's anti-popularity, like with the Bray Wyatt 'Anyone But You' thing, that hasn't worked either. Making Bray the proxy for the fan's negativity didn't make him the hero to those fans. And it probably should have.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Killswitch Engage did this interview a couple years ago,

“We’re not actually not even supposed to talk about it, but we have two wrestling theme songs in the works right now," the bassist said on Jon's Untitled Podcast "One [song] I believe is finished… The first one is done and then the second one we’re going to start recording in like two weeks," he continued.

Mike D. explained one will be used by the WWE and the other by a separate company. He noted that the song for the WWE was "really complicated" because the wrestling organization sent Killswitch a track to cover with the instructions to "cover this as best as possible or as close as possible" and the bassist lamented, "It’s not a good song."

The group "had a tough time" with the song and Mike D. admitted there was some backlash from other members who didn't want to take on the cover. "And I get it. I understand. If it’s a really crappy song, if we've got to put our name on it, we don’t want our fans thinking we wrote something terrible," he added. "So we got this song to where we’re comfortable and we’re going to start recording it soon.”

-

The other song turned out to be intended for Marty the Moth in Lucha Underground, but I wonder if we'll ever find out what the WWE one was?

Edited by DreamBroken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/18/2019 at 1:57 PM, AxB said:

What is X-Pac's career highlight, since he started using the name X-Pac? Because other than becoming a synonym for the wrong type of crowd scorn, I can't think of one. Arguably he was salvageable the whole time, but he never did get salvaged, did he? 

Probably not exactly what you're looking for but he had a really good match with El Generico at Chikara's King of Trios weekends in 2010.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...