Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Maybe Free Will and Self-Expression Through Creativity are Good Things


Recommended Posts

There are certainly a lot of words in this thread, all of which I can't be bothered to read, so I'll just try and comment on my general take about the company.

AEW is still very new and from the get-go it's been touted as a mainstream wrestling company by The Boys in the Back for The Boys in the Back that's an alternative to WWE so naturally it's going to lend itself to a lot of scrutiny and discussion. Digging into the nuances and inner workings of wrestling is kind of the point of this board, and is done so in a pretty civil manner (compared to most of the rest of the internet). However, it is possible to take in a show without needing to dissect each and every minute detail, and I think some people around here could do well to remember that.

It's very clear that AEW is built around being a place where the talent feel comfortable around one another, enjoy plying their trade as they see fit, and are treated fairly by management. Not all parts of it are going to be for everyone. The Brodie tribute is the only time I've made it through an episode of BTE. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad it exists, it's a nice example of audience engagement, gives the fans to see other sides of some of the wrestlers, and all involved seem to have a lot of fun doing it. I just don't find it funny and really don't care about the Young Bucks sitting around playing video games and indulging in inside jokes. No one is making me watch it so I can just ignore it and focus on the stuff I do like.

As far as the EVPs pushing themselves and giving their bag carriers/friends jobs, yeah it happens some but not to an egregious level. Cody tries way too hard to get himself and his entourage over and some of his choices are asinine (the throne smashing, etc) but again, it's not like he's monopolizing a great deal of the broadcast time. There's a lot of dead weight on the roster that could be let go - Luther, the Gunn Club, Cardona, Spears, Marshall, etc. Maybe some of these people have production or coaching expertise they're lending and more power to them, I just don't think they add anything to the in-ring product. That also ties into the trend they and WWE have of treating wrestlers like pokemon that they're trying to collect, regardless of if they have plans for them or roster space. I admire the ambition that Tony Khan et al have, but sometimes it looks like their eyes are bigger than their stomachs in regards to interpromotional feuds and expansions, roster size, and the like.

The women's division could use some work, but I think it's more a matter of it getting booked properly rather than more talent added. It's something that's getting better, but for a promotion that prides itself on inclusivity they could to better having some more fleshed out programs among the female wrestlers. Surely there are a few veteran women out there who they could bring in to help book it?

I'm pretty indifferent to the win-loss record. ROH tried doing records and rankings early on and phased it out as it stopped meaning anything. As others have mentioned, does it mean anything if some low card people rack up a bunch of jobber wins on Dark? Unless you start doing some Steiner Math about weighted wins and loses based on the rankings of opponents and how often someone actually wrestles it's going to be a flimsy metric. If and when house shows come back it's going to be even more irrelevant unless it promotes an angle. It wouldn't surprise me if it gets slowly phased out.

TL;DR - AEW is good in a lot of areas and could use improvement in others. While it's all well and good to share our thoughts, it's still a very new company which is still finding its footing. Not every little aspect warrants the same amount of critical thought.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sat out on this one to see how things were going also due to not knowing what to say.  But I think one thing we can agree on is we at least all like AEW and want it to succeed.  So we at least have that common ground but also very different ways to get there.  I honestly don't think there's particularly a wrong answer but I do think it might be well-intentioned yet naiive to assume people have to like it more than they may do.  We're all different and that's quite fine with me.

But if we're throwing out things they can do to improve I think there's some small things they can change booking-wise but it's not something that generally is an issue long-term.  Like the Brandi storylines if something doesn't work they do their best to course correct and move on.  Now when things get stopped cold as has happened then that I'm not fond of.  As for the seemingly bloated roster it's maybe too early to tell what their plan is for them right now.  With talks of a second show happening it's fine to have more than they need at the moment if it means they'll be used on that second show.  But I think I might have more to point out once that's been on for a while.

As for my reasons for liking AEW I can list particular reasons but I just like that they do their best to do right by their employees, wrestlers and fans.  When they say they care I don't sense much bullshit and I've been looking for that a lot especially when they started.  So unless something comes out to change my tune on that they'll have quite the fan in me for the long haul.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AxB said:

I suppose it's possible that, in terms of everyone enjoying things their own way, to some people the most pleasure they get might be from nitpicking and talking stuff down.

Yes, it's really unfortunate how much pleasure some people get from nitpicking and talking stuff down.

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

I can't express enough how much fun I had doing this. So many old bad takes, my own included! Seeing a time when piranesi had more time for us! Dolfan randomly coming into a DC thread with a Megan Amram tweet in 2017?? So much fun. 

Also, Titanic is Cameron's masterpiece and get off your high horse. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HumanChessgame said:

There are certainly a lot of words in this thread, all of which I can't be bothered to read, so I'll just try and comment on my general take about the company.

AEW is still very new and from the get-go it's been touted as a mainstream wrestling company by The Boys in the Back for The Boys in the Back that's an alternative to WWE so naturally it's going to lend itself to a lot of scrutiny and discussion. Digging into the nuances and inner workings of wrestling is kind of the point of this board, and is done so in a pretty civil manner (compared to most of the rest of the internet). However, it is possible to take in a show without needing to dissect each and every minute detail, and I think some people around here could do well to remember that.

It's very clear that AEW is built around being a place where the talent feel comfortable around one another, enjoy plying their trade as they see fit, and are treated fairly by management. Not all parts of it are going to be for everyone. The Brodie tribute is the only time I've made it through an episode of BTE. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad it exists, it's a nice example of audience engagement, gives the fans to see other sides of some of the wrestlers, and all involved seem to have a lot of fun doing it. I just don't find it funny and really don't care about the Young Bucks sitting around playing video games and indulging in inside jokes. No one is making me watch it so I can just ignore it and focus on the stuff I do like.

As far as the EVPs pushing themselves and giving their bag carriers/friends jobs, yeah it happens some but not to an egregious level. Cody tries way too hard to get himself and his entourage over and some of his choices are asinine (the throne smashing, etc) but again, it's not like he's monopolizing a great deal of the broadcast time. There's a lot of dead weight on the roster that could be let go - Luther, the Gunn Club, Cardona, Spears, Marshall, etc. Maybe some of these people have production or coaching expertise they're lending and more power to them, I just don't think they add anything to the in-ring product. That also ties into the trend they and WWE have of treating wrestlers like pokemon that they're trying to collect, regardless of if they have plans for them or roster space. I admire the ambition that Tony Khan et al have, but sometimes it looks like their eyes are bigger than their stomachs in regards to interpromotional feuds and expansions, roster size, and the like.

The women's division could use some work, but I think it's more a matter of it getting booked properly rather than more talent added. It's something that's getting better, but for a promotion that prides itself on inclusivity they could to better having some more fleshed out programs among the female wrestlers. Surely there are a few veteran women out there who they could bring in to help book it?

I'm pretty indifferent to the win-loss record. ROH tried doing records and rankings early on and phased it out as it stopped meaning anything. As others have mentioned, does it mean anything if some low card people rack up a bunch of jobber wins on Dark? Unless you start doing some Steiner Math about weighted wins and loses based on the rankings of opponents and how often someone actually wrestles it's going to be a flimsy metric. If and when house shows come back it's going to be even more irrelevant unless it promotes an angle. It wouldn't surprise me if it gets slowly phased out.

TL;DR - AEW is good in a lot of areas and could use improvement in others. While it's all well and good to share our thoughts, it's still a very new company which is still finding its footing. Not every little aspect warrants the same amount of critical thought.

 

Cardona was a one-off, and thankful for that.  Billy Gunn and Marshall do backstage stuff.  I think Luther might as well.  Spears makes a very good JTTS at least.

 

You're not supposed to like everything AEW does.  It's a Chinese buffet, with Jericho providing the COVID.

 

The wins/losses matter at times, it's a way they use to justify new teams getting ranked like the Acclaimed, so if they want to do a tag shot out of seemingly nowhere, they just let folks rack up a few wins on Dark.  At the very least, it's used to make the JTTS's seem less like total jobbers, which is necessary because they rarely do total squashes.   The main point of Dark is development and scouting, and to have the hardcore fans know who the up-and-comers are.  A lot of AEW's good new talent came through Dark, and guys like Starks who lose a lot on Dyanmite still come off as somewhat of a threat because of wins on Dark.

 

Edited by alstein
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Yes, it's really unfortunate how much pleasure some people get from nitpicking and talking stuff down.

  Hide contents

I can't express enough how much fun I had doing this. So many old bad takes, my own included! Seeing a time when piranesi had more time for us! Dolfan randomly coming into a DC thread with a Megan Amram tweet in 2017?? So much fun. 

Also, Titanic is Cameron's masterpiece and get off your high horse. 

 

True Lies is Cameron's masterpiece.  

You dick. 

Spoiler

❤️

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, El Gran Gordi said:

Let's use Seinfeld as an example this time. The original premise of Seinfeld was that it was about life as a stand up  comedian. The show would start with Seinfeld doing a bit from his act, then you'd see what happened in his life that gave him the idea for that bit. People were always asking Seinfeld where he got his ideas, this show was going to answer those questions.

But, it quickly went in another direction. 

So, if we are on a hypothetical Seinfeld board, and a guy is going on every week about how "The Chinese Restaurant" or "The Parking Garage" are not about stand up at all... is that a good take?  Again, I'd argue that our hypothetical guy (or another hypothetical guy who keeps yelling about how Jerry, George, Elaine, and Kramer need to learn a lesson and hug it out at the end of every episode and why can't they understand that is how sitcoms work) are just pissing into the wind... those are bad takes, right? Those hypothetical guys are, I feel, missing out on the joy of some great TV comedy in favour of nursing a grudge.

I am in no way trying to argue that Seinfeld or AEW can't be criticized. I'm trying to argue that some criticism is interesting, amusing, valid, constructive, conversation-generating, or whatever, and other criticism is lazy, counterproductive and/or just pissing into the wind.

And, again, most of the takes here on DVDVR are the former. Pissing into the wind type takes are relatively rare, here.

Look at you, trying to turn our love of Seinfeld back on us. Very good!

So with regards to good takes vs bad takes, what's your idealized version of a space for conversation? Because universal agreement on what is a good or bad take is unachievable in any practical way with a property this large on a board dedicated to discussing professional wrestling in the English language. I know we'd all probably like to maximize our exposure to "interesting, amusing, valid, constructive, conversation-generating" takes and limit our exposure to things which are "lazy, counterproductive, or pissing in the wind." But one person's lazy and counterproductive may be another's constructive, valid or amusing. You're never going to resolve that.

And you yourself having acknowledged that you think "most" takes on here are "interesting, amusing, valid, constructive, conversation-generating, or whatever," isn't this entire exercise a kind of futile effort to solve something even you tacitly acknowledge isn't a great problem on this board? Shouldn't you be able to take that "relatively rare" bad take in stride, engage with it in conversation, or simply ignore it? Because by your framing of the issue, I see no reason for a discussion that seeks to push people toward a discourse that more universally fits your version of "good takes." And bans aren't going to be issued for just plain old "bad takes," so... I just wonder what's to be gained from going down this path (as much as I'm enjoying it). 

There are a lot of what I consider bad takes offered up on this board by people whose posts I generally enjoy reading. I'm happy to engage with some of those takes and even have a back and forth. That's fun. But I'm not sure what would be gained by trying to make the conversation at large more closely adhere to my standard for "good takes."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, El Gran Gordi said:

What we are talking about here is, "GLOW would be better if it was more of an Americanized GAEA. The matches need to be 15 minute plus,and harrowing in their stiffness and intensity." I'd argue that is an equally bad take. I love GAEA. I'd love an English-language GAEA-style promotion. Stiffness and intensity are good! But... that ain't what GLOW is. GLOW is never, ever going to be that. Arguing that, week after week, on some hypothetical GLOW thread, is just pissing into the wind. 

To make this analogy work, we'd have to imagine a version of GLOW that was founded by a bunch of star wrestlers from GAEA. In which case the criticism you're imagining doesn't seem quite as weird.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Look at you, trying to turn our love of Seinfeld back on us. Very good!

So with regards to good takes vs bad takes, what's your idealized version of a space for conversation? Because universal agreement on what is a good or bad take is unachievable in any practical way with a property this large on a board dedicated to discussing professional wrestling in the English language. I know we'd all probably like to maximize our exposure to "interesting, amusing, valid, constructive, conversation-generating" takes and limit our exposure to things which are "lazy, counterproductive, or pissing in the wind." But one person's lazy and counterproductive may be another's constructive, valid or amusing. You're never going to resolve that.

And you yourself having acknowledged that you think "most" takes on here are "interesting, amusing, valid, constructive, conversation-generating, or whatever," isn't this entire exercise a kind of futile effort to solve something even you tacitly acknowledge isn't a great problem on this board? Shouldn't you be able to take that "relatively rare" bad take in stride, engage with it in conversation, or simply ignore it? Because by your framing of the issue, I see no reason for a discussion that seeks to push people toward a discourse that more universally fits your version of "good takes." And bans aren't going to be issued for just plain old "bad takes," so... I just wonder what's to be gained from going down this path (as much as I'm enjoying it). 

There are a lot of what I consider bad takes offered up on this board by people whose posts I generally enjoy reading. I'm happy to engage with some of those takes and even have a back and forth. That's fun. But I'm not sure what would be gained by trying to make the conversation at large more closely adhere to my standard for "good takes."

Oh, I am not dumb enough to think I am going to change anything. And, I don't particularly want to change anything. I like this place, and the discussion that takes place here. A lot. It has genuinely played a role in helping me get me through some pretty crazy times this past year. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

So, what is the point of this thread? Enjoyment and discussion. Hopefully that's enough.

Also, for me personally, to help me hash out some ideas that have been bouncing around in my head a lot. And to get some alternate takes on those ideas.

And also the fun of having an ouroboros/meta discussion where I criticize criticism of AEW that is coming from a place of wanting AEW to be the best AEW it can be where my criticism of that criticism is coming from a place of wanting that criticism of AEW to be the best criticism of AEW it can be. And then people criticize my criticism of that criticism, coming from a similar mindset of wanting my criticism of the criticism to be the best it can be. And then I respond to that....I'm sincerely enjoying this so far. It's been more  than I'd hoped for. 

23 minutes ago, MapRef41N93W said:

To make this analogy work, we'd have to imagine a version of GLOW that was founded by a bunch of star wrestlers from GAEA. In which case the criticism you're imagining doesn't seem quite as weird.

Good Lord, that could have been amazing! Maybe SHIMMER could have come close, too? 

There's still a big backlog of posts I wanna respond to. Including (ironically??) Andy/John's long responses... but my wife is working late at the Hospital and my mother in law is off taking care of stuff in Wakayama, so it's up to me to spend the day playing Taiko no Tatsujin with my daughters. I'm still gonna do my best to respond to everyone who posts here, eventually. 

Edited by El Gran Gordi
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, El Gran Gordi said:

And also the fun of having an ouroboros/meta discussion where I criticize criticism of AEW that is coming from a place of wanting AEW to be the best AEW it can be where my criticism of that criticism is coming from a place of wanting that criticism of AEW to be the best criticism of AEW it can be. And then people criticize my criticism of that criticism, coming from a similar mindset of wanting my criticism of the criticism to be the best it can be.

I feel like there's a decade-old Inception meme about this.

Quote

There's still a big backlog of posts I wanna respond to. Including (ironically??) Andy/John's long responses... but my wife is working late at the Hospital and my mother in law is off taking care of stuff in Wakayama, so it's up to me to spend the day playing Taiko no Tatsujin with my daughters. I'm still gonna do my best to respond to everyone who posts here, eventually.

No rush at all. Take care of stuff that actually matters, my nonsense will still be here later. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Yes, it's really unfortunate how much pleasure some people get from nitpicking and talking stuff down.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I can't express enough how much fun I had doing this. So many old bad takes, my own included! Seeing a time when piranesi had more time for us! Dolfan randomly coming into a DC thread with a Megan Amram tweet in 2017?? So much fun. 

Also, Titanic is Cameron's masterpiece and get off your high horse. 

 

Not entirely sure what you think you've accomplished here, but at least you enjoyed yourself. 

Also, feel free to actually argue the points of any of my old posts, if you don't agree with them. Because if your whole board gimmick is to write a dissertation every time you post, just quoting a bunch of old posts and saying "These are bad takes" (without actually taking issue with any of them specifically) is kind of like you're trying more to make a personal attack than actually have a discussion. Which, if you want to trade insults and have a flame war, just start one with someone else. Block me or something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all the "this is why AEW sucks" takes could be concentrated in this thread, that would be SWELL. Leave the other threads to people who like what they're seeing, or at least don't expect the perfect show booked exactly to their ultra-specific personal tastes. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AxB said:

Not entirely sure what you think you've accomplished here, but at least you enjoyed yourself. 

Also, feel free to actually argue the points of any of my old posts, if you don't agree with them. Because if your whole board gimmick is to write a dissertation every time you post, just quoting a bunch of old posts and saying "These are bad takes" (without actually taking issue with any of them specifically) is kind of like you're trying more to make a personal attack than actually have a discussion. Which, if you want to trade insults and have a flame war, just start one with someone else. Block me or something. 

I didn't say they're bad takes. Shit, I probably agree with most of them. I'm making it clear that you are also perfectly capable of "nitpicking" and "talking stuff down." I even bolded the part of your post that I was addressing! Maybe I should have written more for you. But since your new board gimmick is feigning illiteracy, I didn't want to overwhelm you.

I don't care about whether I agree or disagree with any of those takes. But you should realize that the "nitpicks" you complain about in this section of the board are beliefs as sincerely held by any of the nitpickers as your takes are by you. And you'd not respond well to anyone insinuating that any of your feelings on any of those matters is less valid or don't have a place on the board because it's "talking stuff down."

You come in here and talk about fun and humour and enjoyment. And I take all that in the spirit that you want more positivity. Yet you're coming in here and slagging people off for their beliefs. You're being a massive hypocrite and spreading as much negativity as anyone. And worst of all, you're being shallow as fuck and making zero effort to address any point. If you have no interest in what's happening here, that's fine. But instead of scrolling past this thread or putting in any effort or addressing any point, you've taken the other option of just talking shit while pretending you want more positivity. It's goddamn sad. 

You accuse me of making a personal attack rather than wanting to have a conversation. Nah. I take aim at you because you're capable of the same "nitpicking" and "talking stuff down" you'd slag some of us off for, and I was keen to demonstrate that. You've made it clear you're not interested in engaging in the conversation because you don't want to be involved in an "essay contest." Which is fine. I'm just incredibly disappointed that you'd feel compelled to talk down people who want to have this conversation. 

I'll leave it there. If only because I'm worried that from your perspective four short paragraphs might look like War and Peace.

2 hours ago, christopher.annino said:

If all the "this is why AEW sucks" takes could be concentrated in this thread, that would be SWELL. Leave the other threads to people who like what they're seeing, or at least don't expect the perfect show booked exactly to their ultra-specific personal tastes. 

I don't want to be the bitter old man pointing at people and laughing wrongheadedly at how they need a safe space. But this sure makes it tempting. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, christopher.annino said:

Imagine a We Love Ice Cream thread and the same few people constantly post about buying Neapolitan and hating the fact that there's strawberry and not just more chocolate.

We don't have a We Love AEW thread. We have an AEW discussion thread and weekly Dynamite discussion threads.

Spoiler

DB69-ljUMAADfWK.jpg

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to respond to a couple points I saw in this thread. 

 

I did, then it was pointed out to me that I'm rambling. I've been up for a day and a half with a sick little boy. He's fine. I'm tired. I'm not typing any more today.

Edited by just drew
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, just drew said:

Is it necessary for co-workers/teammates to like each other in order to succeed at the highest level? Not at all. In fact, there have been incredible achievements in art, culture, sport, and science by people who flat out hated each other. This goes back even to the writing of the New Testament and the spread of Christianity all over Asia and Europe. The Apostles Peter and Paul couldn't be in the same room together, yet between them they wrote the bulk of what would become the New Testament.

sir this is a Wendy's

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Casey said:

sir this is a Wendy's

That's fair. I've been up for 38 consecutive hours with a sick infant and my ability to navigate potential tangents is completely done for the moment. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, there wasn't anything wrong with it, I was just having a little bit of fun with ya. At least it wasn't a thesis on how AEW is fuckin' up because they booked Luther in one main event match.

??

Edited by Casey
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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