sevendaughters

Suwama is just one of those guys like Omori, Shiozaki, Goto, Nakajima, couple of others probably - really high class workers who are generally liked by the main fans but can't pop a rating/house for whatever reason. Plus I think it's good to have a bridesmaid/gatekeeper type around when you need someone to have a short reign or put over a future star.

excessively for VANILLA MIDGETS, jack!

I can certainly buy Kitamura as a Goldberg-type for sure

also YANO-SUZUKI is a bullrope match which should be hilarious

I largely enjoyed KOPW though a lot of intensive UWF watching has coloured my ability to get through hammy stuff like that Bullet Club/CHAOS trios match. I simply walked out of the room and came back when it was done. I was dying inside at the "TWO BOOTS!" shit. Wanted Akira Maeda to climb in and shoot on them all. Ishii-Naito easy MOTN for me. Born to work each other. Roppongi3K was a great bit and I think those two are going to kill it for the next year or so. Main event was solid and I still think EVIL is going to be great. Ospreay does little for me but I'll give him that he was nowhere near as cheesy as he can be and it was a good match in the end. Some of those moves he does are beyond stupid though. Good set-up to the Tanahashi-Ibushi match, which is something I'm really looking forward to. Solid 6.5-7 out of 10. KOPW is usually better than this though.

what's worth seeing from Kobe? I went for a long bike ride and missed the entire show.

the thing is a shoot-style promotion could in theory be the safest if everyone knows how to roll and throw safe strikes. you'd have to have great cardio but you could reduce the bump load exponentially and still have classic matches.

I gave Alvarez all of the last 3 and one of the opening ones, GGG had the middle stretch from like 5 to 9, the rest were open for debate. I think it is possible to score that as a Canelo win even though I had Golovkin. Byrd's card seems lopsided but it affects nothing, ultimately. Storm in a teacup and of the fights she's judged that I have seen I can see no pattern of dubiousness or wilful wrongness. She knows more than we do. All the more reason to have another go.

what I saw of Hiroshima was not hugely inspiring. SZKG have got to go. Tanahashi vs. Sabre Jr not in the same league as their G1 match. Desperado and KUSHIDA good in spells. I get it, they're B shows and they're keeping things calm ahead of KOPW and WK but I wasn't into it.

I just watched it (knew the result going in) and tried to score it as best I could even though of the two I prefer Alvarez (dunno why). I ended up with 115-113 in favour of Golovkin. But that's on a TV watch and is never perfect. What I would say is that GGG had 5 rounds for sure and Canelo had 4 and you can debate those other three and theoretically end up with a big GGG win, a draw, or a narrow Canelo win. So ultimately I don't think a draw is a total abomination - had Byrd gone Canelo by a narrower margin then I don't think we (the world who saw the fight) are having this conversation despite it changing nothing. It was a close and brilliant fight and a rematch would be awesome. A score of 118-110 to Canelo makes it seem super lopsided but it really can just be Byrd thinking that Canelo marginally took a number of rounds rather than whupped GGG. People who've seen Canelo fight a lot know that he likes to hug the ropes and lure his man in to hit with counterpunches. Sometimes this strategy worked and sometimes it looked, especially in the middle rounds, like survival. Byrd has judged Canelo fights before, agreeing with two other judges that he delivered a 120-108 whupping to JCC Jr and by the time of Canelo's knockout of Amir Khan, she was the one who had Canelo down a round. So I don't think she's a slam-dunk Canelo fan and think she called it as she saw it, a difficult sport with a lot of ways of interpreting superiority. Last week she was in the majority side of a controversial split in the Benavidez/Gavril fight where she and fellow GGG-Canelo judge Dave Moretti had Benavidez up 116 or 117 to 111 where the third judge had the reverse scoreline. I didn't see anyone asking for his head on that night.

that is a weird card too. christ. the Moose/Okabayashi tag team is pretty great sounding.

I think not having an accurate translation or intent is making this show what it is, please don't spoil it. Also: a rebirth of Inokiism? Yes please. I love New Japan with its sensible booking and workers who mesh seamlessly but I also want to see THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

it took me 15 minutes to stop laughing at the name of the show LIVING FUNERAL AT REQUEST OF THE PERSON and then when it transpired that the Muay Thai fight on the show features AN ACTUAL 14 YEAR OLD BOY I started off all over again. This is out RIZINing RIZIN. Incredible.

PRESENTING THE GREATEST CARD OF 2017 (or maybe of all history)

I think there's good to be said about all of the current crop of pre-excursion young lads (I haven't seen Narita). They know how to train people in a way so they know the basics and yet their natural charisma and characteristics shine through in time. You just know that Tanaka and Komatsu are going to look great when they return. If they poach Takeshita and Higuchi from DDT then the company have a blazing bright future. Destruction in Fukushima was a bad show, no two ways. Move on.

Kojima working a Mexican indy in 2017 is extremely MY SHIT

oh we're called Total Victory but we're not metal so would never sully this thread

they're doing an event for Takayama, a benefit, and there's going to be a paypal people can donate to. couple of anecdotes about how much they love the guy. Takagi is devastated too.

I think I could go for basically Fire Walk 2. The cast has slimmed down through death either real or in story. I'd like to know where Chet Desmond is and Audrey get the send off the character deserved, however opaquely.

GOOD WIFE! My gf is unpredictable taste-wise. She got into club stuff when she was at university and remains so, mainly dark techno and house. Fine. She is just completely unaware of p much anything guitar based aside from the heavyweight hitters of the last 15 years, so like Coldplay (she doesn't like them but is aware of them). So I'll play stuff on shuffle and she'll be like "this is good, who is this?" or "this is shit can you turn it off?" with what seems like no rhyme or reason - two bands that sound similar in my head will get wildly differing responses. Anyway, this came on shuffle and I started to dart to turn it off and she burst out laughing and then said it was the best thing she'd heard in years and then went and bought it.

My favourite* take on this on Twitter, since deleted, was that Suzuki had crocodile tears because the cameras were on and if Takayama has been injured so long why didn't they do this sooner. There are just not enough socks filled with horse manure sometimes. *least favourite ever

I respectfully disagree. But I'm not the kind of person who thinks that not going along with Lynch into his outer fantasies renders you an idiot. I'm a film academic (dodges rotten egg) and there are people (like one of my bosses) that have tenure and who have written dense tomes on maddeningly obscure bits of cinema who are just not on board with what they see as fancy-ass art bullshit. I just disagree. I particularly disagree on internal logic. Now I know there's a difference between the internal logic of a constructed world like, to use a touchstone we're all familiar with - pro-wrestling - and the internal logic of the auteur. This is kind of like knowing the difference between "a pro-wrestling thing" and "a Vince thing". The worlds are co-morbid, co-existing mostly harmoniously until the generic conventions of the former chime with the personal vision of the latter. So if you're expecting something to make sense like idk not booking Roman Reigns so hot because the crowd don't like him much actually (internal logic to wrestling convention) then once you're on board with the auteur you get used to them upending it (booking him hot regardless bcs big sexy Samoan) and carrying on lapping up whatever they offer despite the people who got off the bus a while back going "what the fuck is this shit?" So if there's one thing Lynch can't be pulled up on, unlike so many other shows where multiple writers and networks running interference is nakedly visible, it is not pursuing the thing that makes sense to him regardless of how it makes anyone else feel. So if people are out on Vince I am like "well fair fucks" and pretty much the same for Lynch (though I really think he's a sincerist at heart, I do not think he is a troll or fucking with anyone ever). And I think he's successfully played with multiple identities for the last 25 years to the point where you just get on board or you're going to be disappointed. I take the point on conventional narratives and it was never really his strong point. I expect he'd argue the same. His most narratively sound film, The Straight Story, is able to be so because it is the linear progress of one man over a short time frame and features very little - if any - sideroads or narrative complications. I also think he did a good job in this series of offering up a vast and baffling suite of disjointed geographies and persons and connecting them bit by bit, even if some were red herrings, so we got the sense it was narrowing and closing and eventually pinpointing back on where it all began over a number of episodes. To pull the rug from under that in the latter half of 17 and all of 18...well, that is just going to piss people off. You have to accept it, fan or not. On reflection I do think some critics have a point regarding the picking up and putting down of certain characters, characters who were never highly developed anyway, to serve obtuse purposes; pretty much all of the Hornes, the character played by Balthazar Getty that I was sure was going to be a Hank-type, Becky & Stephen, etc. I could go on. But to balance that I thought the trio of Gordon, Albert, and Tammy was excellent - fuck if it was egotistic that Lynch gave himself a bigger role. Cole was always one of the best walk-ons in S2 and the film. And once I had a handle on Dougie and read him as a Chance Gardener type, I just knew he would never be in any danger and would blissfully navigate everything and it all just became incredibly joyful to me. I never saw as a 'stumbling' character at all, rather a distillation of the purity of Cooper. I also think some of the worst criticism of Dougie (not here) borders on disablism, which is a constant theme in Twin Peaks too, btw (Leo, Elaine Hayward, Nadine, etc.) I've gone on way longer than I expected here, sorry. Lynch isn't even one of my total favourites so I'm not a slam dunk on him at all times (I don't really like Mulholland Drive, Rabbits, or On The Air). But I've watched a lot of television. I used to have a night job where I could basically watch TV for 12hrs a night (worse than it sounds!) and as such I've seen pretty much every rated or semi-rated longform drama from the period 1998 to 2011. So it was just nice to see the new Twin Peaks take a left-turn against its own conventions, because so many quirky and criminal dramas that came after Twin Peaks borrowed so heavily from it that its own rhythms and devices felt a bit...ordinary. I enjoyed it a lot (except one of the later episodes, the first one with Audrey, that was like a weird hell version of this series) and think it is a worthy cap to the original stuff that powers past the dross in series 2 and brings us somewhere new and interesting and unforeseen.

someone on 4chan (for clarity, I don't post there) posited that Laura is the dreamer and the action unfolds in her dream and is a dream that gives her life significance in the face of the abuse she's suffered. it's the kind of simple analysis that i am resistant to - not least because of all the things that happened independent of her existence or the flip between dramatic object in the original series and dramatic subject in the film - as i'm just generally fine with non-sequitur and irresolution. but the theory does at least go beyond simple scrutiny. i get it if people are upset that Chekhov's Gun has been flouted with, say, Sarah seeming to have a hell-portal in her face or Audrey waking up in a white room and neither being developed - or that the idea we were asked to invest their emotional energy in Cooper as a white knight against the darkness and it actually just collapsing in neither heroic victory or glorious defeat. it's tough to deal with.

my band played with these lads the other week and FVKK ME they were good

read this thread, didn't feel I needed to contribute. *****+ TV for me. do I get it? no. but I felt something.