Your wrestling HOT TAKES

[supremebve]

22 minutes ago, SirSmUgly said:

This is what you don't seem to be getting in my point here. The idea that "this thing is bullshit" doesn't come out of nothing or of only personal dislike. It comes from something not fitting the established narrative tropes of the company or cultural style. 

 

Except, that's not really the case.  If Hulk Hogan, Macho Man, and the Steve Austin started disappearing and reappearing, you probably wouldn't accept it.  It's only one person you would have possibly accepted this from and it happened outside of the company's established narrative tropes.  It only works because you decided to accept it.  You also decided it didn't make sense that Sting and Vampiro could do the same things that The Undertaker could do.  It's 100% a decision, whether consciously or unconsciously, that you made.  You could have decided the exact opposite and it wouldn't be because one was more logical than the other, you just decided to accept one over the other.  Seriously, if Bret Hart started hulking up when he started his main event run, would you have accepted it as being part of the established narrative?  I wouldn't.  That is not the bullshit I want from Bret Hart.  He has a whole different brand of bullshit that I want to see.  

[SirSmUgly]

15 minutes ago, supremebve said:

Except, that's not really the case.  If Hulk Hogan, Macho Man, and the Steve Austin started disappearing and reappearing, you probably wouldn't accept it. 

Right, because they were not presented as mystical characters under the WWF's narrative framework for mystical characters.

16 minutes ago, supremebve said:

It's only one person you would have possibly accepted this from and it happened outside of the company's established narrative tropes.  It only works because you decided to accept it. 

Wrong because I would also accept it from Kane, or even probably Papa Shango. The WWF had established a particularly cartoonish nature throughout the '80s, so when by the early '90s, they decided to add a character like the Undertaker to it, it was easy to accept. You can draw a line from the Ultimate Warrior asking the gods for the power to go on in his match against Randy Savage directly to stuff like the Undertaker. 

Quote

You also decided it didn't make sense that Sting and Vampiro could do the same things that The Undertaker could do. 

No, I didn't. WCW decided that for me by never establishing a consistently cartoony narrative approach. It's why people make fun of WCW for Robocop showing up or the Chamber of Horrors Match, whereas I bet the WWF could have done both of those things and it would have been much more accepted. 

Quote

It's 100% a decision, whether consciously or unconsciously, that you made.  You could have decided the exact opposite and it wouldn't be because one was more logical than the other, you just decided to accept one over the other. 

Incorrect because, again, I am guided by the style and narrative tropes that the promotion establishes in these cases. 

Quote

Seriously, if Bret Hart started hulking up when he started his main event run, would you have accepted it as being part of the established narrative?  I wouldn't.  That is not the bullshit I want from Bret Hart.  He has a whole different brand of bullshit that I want to see.  

Well, since Bret Hart specifically worked a gimmick meant to specifically contrast with the guys like Hogan and Warrior who do things like fire up after taking lots of punishment in an overtly theatrical way, probably not! This theoretical makes no sense because it would never happen, and it wouldn't happen because Bret himself decided to present his character in a more "real" way than the world of cartoon wrestling that he was inhabiting, a philosophy so important to him that he made it the subtitle of his autobiography.

I just don't think we'll see eye to eye on this one, but I would say that as much as I enjoyed your hot take, I think it discounts far too much what the actual creative heads are doing to prime a fan for suspending their disbelief. 

[twiztor]

2 hours ago, Godfrey said:

a consistent internal reality

^^this

both supreme and Smelly are correct in their initial takes. the viewer ultimately decides what is acceptable to themselves. Factors such as the way a promotion promotes itself, the characters involved, the specific angle involved all can factor in to that. And if an audience at large has accepted something (due to repetition or something else), that definitely helps the perception.

Also, i've always hated the Rock's People's Elbow. Yes, initially it was done as a tongue-in-cheek over-the-top gesture because Rock was a heel. And yes, even as a face it was still pretty much a showboating cocky representation of his persona. None of that matters to me. I'm still miffed that it got accepted by the audience at large. I just hate that move.

[zendragon]

a consistent internal reality is a good description of what made Lucha Underground work so well

[odessasteps]

Also because it's a TV show featuring wrestling and not a wrestling show on TV. 

[zendragon]

Made by people who understood writing a television show and wrestling

[supremebve]

1 minute ago, twiztor said:

Also, i've always hated the Rock's People's Elbow. Yes, initially it was done as a tongue-in-cheek over-the-top gesture because Rock was a heel. And yes, even as a face it was still pretty much a showboating cocky representation of his persona. None of that matters to me. I'm still miffed that it got accepted by the audience at large. I just hate that move.

It's so incredibly stupid, but that's also why I've always liked it.  It's why I've always liked all of this shit.  I honestly feel like all of this shit is based on the execution of the idea more than the actual idea.  Getting me to like the dumb shit is the game.  

[worldcupfever]

1 hour ago, zendragon said:

a consistent internal reality is a good description of what made Lucha Underground work so well

That's such a great point.  LU would never have worked so well if they had tried to play half of it totally straight and half of it in the Lucha universe.  You were willing to suspend disbelief because that's what you were used to from that world.

[Technico Support]

4 hours ago, BloodyChamp said:

Climbing the ladder slowly while straining or being confused is 1 that I’ve made make sense. Don’t ask me why lol! 

My house has cathedral ceilings and I use a 12’ ladder to change the smoke detector batteries.  You better believe I climb the same way.

[supremebve]

The speed in which I climb a ladder is based purely on how much the climb puts me in touch with my sense of mortality.  When I was 15, I'd climb damn near anything as if life was guaranteed.  At 43, I climb as if death is at the top and the quicker I climb the sooner I meet him.

[BobbyWhioux]

5 hours ago, twiztor said:

^^this

both supreme and Smelly are correct in their initial takes. the viewer ultimately decides what is acceptable to themselves. Factors such as the way a promotion promotes itself, the characters involved, the specific angle involved all can factor in to that. And if an audience at large has accepted something (due to repetition or something else), that definitely helps the perception.

Also, i've always hated the Rock's People's Elbow. Yes, initially it was done as a tongue-in-cheek over-the-top gesture because Rock was a heel. And yes, even as a face it was still pretty much a showboating cocky representation of his persona. None of that matters to me. I'm still miffed that it got accepted by the audience at large. I just hate that move.

there's a marked difference between when he first started doing it as a heel, when it was purely framed as an attempt to insult and humiliate his opponent [while The Rock Bottom remained his undisputed Finishing Hold], to when he became a face and then the crowd reaction to it led to them making it an earnest finishing move.

It's like if they had started having nobody be able to kick out of Jericho's COME ON BAYBAY one foot standing cover.

Edited January 10 by BobbyWhioux

[BloodyChamp]

Sounds like nobody had to ask me why 

[Curt McGirt]

If you hate the People's Elbow just remember that the Worm got (gets) a huge pop too. You just can't get people to not love stupid shit. 

[zendragon]

6 hours ago, BobbyWhioux said:

there's a marked difference between when he first started doing it as a heel, when it was purely framed as an attempt to insult and humiliate his opponent [while The Rock Bottom remained his undisputed Finishing Hold], to when he became a face and then the crowd reaction to it led to them making it an earnest finishing move.

It's like if they had started having nobody be able to kick out of Jericho's COME ON BAYBAY one foot standing cover.

Did he ever win a match with the People's Elbow without hitting the Rock Bottom first?

[AxB]

Bret Hart had a Hulk Up spot, it’s just his was the “Ha ha I was playing possum! Tricked you!” version.

Having a Hulk Up is an integral part of being the WWF/E top babyface. They all had one. Whether it’s Super Cena or Michaels Kip-Up, they all do it.

[twiztor]

5 hours ago, AxB said:

Bret Hart had a Hulk Up spot, it’s just his was the “Ha ha I was playing possum! Tricked you!” version.

Having a Hulk Up is an integral part of being the WWF/E top babyface. They all had one. Whether it’s Super Cena or Michaels Kip-Up, they all do it.

Hell, in NWA/WCW even Sting and the Road Warriors had a version where they would no-sell something and (usually) hit a pose behind their opponent's back. 

[tbarrie]

8 hours ago, zendragon said:

Did he ever win a match with the People's Elbow without hitting the Rock Bottom first?

At least a few times, I think. Afraid I can't point you to specific examples, but I remember it being a point of contention online.

[Stefanie Sparkleface]

I can't hate the People's Elbow after the time Rock did it while wearing dress shoes and slid the last couple of feet rather than take another step.

[supremebve]

1 hour ago, tbarrie said:

At least a few times, I think. Afraid I can't point you to specific examples, but I remember it being a point of contention online.

I remember it being very contentious at one point.  It was during the time of my life when I first realized that some people don't enjoy fun.  The further we get from the late 90s early 2000s online wrestling discourse, the more I realize that it was overrun by the people you avoid at parties. 

Now that I say that, I have a legitimate Hot Take.  The Main Event at Wrestlemania is not where we should be doing cameos and other bullshit.  I don't think all wrestling needs to be super serious and treated like a legitimate sport.  I actually think the exact opposite.  With that said, the Main Event of Wrestlemania is the place I would argue needs to have some sort of gravitas.  If the match that you theorectically spent an entire year building can't hold the crowd's attention without bringing in random retired wrestlers for no real reason, you're basically admitting that you did a terrible job building the match.  When wrestling is done right, you really don't need anything but the two top guys in the company standing across from each other in a ring.  

[tbarrie]

25 minutes ago, supremebve said:

I remember it being very contentious at one point.  It was during the time of my life when I first realized that some people don't enjoy fun.  The further we get from the late 90s early 2000s online wrestling discourse, the more I realize that it was overrun by the people you avoid at parties. 

Now that I say that, I have a legitimate Hot Take.  The Main Event at Wrestlemania is not where we should be doing cameos and other bullshit.  I don't think all wrestling needs to be super serious and treated like a legitimate sport.  I actually think the exact opposite.  With that said, the Main Event of Wrestlemania is the place I would argue needs to have some sort of gravitas.  If the match that you theorectically spent an entire year building can't hold the crowd's attention without bringing in random retired wrestlers for no real reason, you're basically admitting that you did a terrible job building the match.  When wrestling is done right, you really don't need anything but the two top guys in the company standing across from each other in a ring.  

For clarification: laughing at the first paragraph only. The take in the second paragraph seems reasonable to me.

Edited January 10 by tbarrie

[BloodyChamp]

HBK’s kick up is the GOAT “real” one of these IMO. It’s 1 motion that happens immediately upon his new burst of energy, resistance, etc. It’s human nature to do something like that as soon as it’s on. We all do it even though it’s not usually that dramatic.

[supremebve]

13 minutes ago, BloodyChamp said:

HBK’s kick up is the GOAT “real” one of these IMO. It’s 1 motion that happens immediately upon his new burst of energy, resistance, etc. It’s human nature to do something like that as soon as it’s on. We all do it even though it’s not usually that dramatic.

I mean, as a kid I Hulked up all the time.  I'd fall off my bike, start taking deep breaths, shook my head and gave the asphalt the "no, no, no" finger.  It worked every time.

[Godfrey]

I don't know about Hulking up but I've definitely done the Kawada "try to no sell but realize you can't a few seconds later"

[supremebve]

5 minutes ago, Godfrey said:

I don't know about Hulking up but I've definitely done the Kawada "try to no sell but realize you can't a few seconds later"

I've done this 100% of the time that I've ever stubbed my toe.

[BloodyChamp]

2 hours ago, supremebve said:

I mean, as a kid I Hulked up all the time.  I'd fall off my bike, start taking deep breaths, shook my head and gave the asphalt the "no, no, no" finger.  It worked every time.

I ain’t saying I didn’t do other stuff a time or 2. I also invented bicycles and was the first person to ride one. I chose that over playing bass in Bill Haley and the Comets.