Over the Edge 1999 Arguments

[Antacular]

Maybe because it's editing down the photosynthesis.

[Antacular]

Comparing 9/11, an event that changed the global poltical and economic climate for the past 13 years, to OTE99. I think we've truly reached the limits of the internet here.

If you are a younger fan and passionate about wrestling and you've read about this incident and how it was handled, etc... what's wrong about them watching it for themselves and forming their own opinion?

What opinion is there to be formed? A guy DIED. That's not a subjective inference, it's a fact. It was handled by continuing the event. You don't need to watch the actual event to know how it was "handled." Unless you feel the tone in JRs voice will sway them a certain way. Come on.

[Casey]

Ohhhh, he's one of those people. The kind that thinks the show shouldn't have went on. I think we just solved all of this.

[Hagan]

Oh man, that's a great question. Not to get all Quakenbush on wrestling as performance but I'll give my answer a shot.

 

Well, definitely some guys become better "story-tellers" in the WWF than they were in the indies or even WCW. The WWF was always less about flashy movies, and creativity, than in pacing, heavily protected spots and finishers, and matches that told a story. Even in the Hogan-era when the NWA had the stiffer matches, violence, and workers who were a bit more unshackled in what they could do, the WWF still managed to push a narrative in their matches that even the littlest kid in the back row could get.

 

Generally, with few exceptions, wrestlers are performing in front of crowds 4 or 5 times larger in WWF on a weekly basis so it becomes very much more about slowing things down and letting everyone catch up to the ride, rather than the rollercoaster in front of a smaller, but probably more rabid crowd.

 

Would ROH Seth Rollins and Daniel Bryan or, before the walk-out, Punk be just as over with WWE crowds if they were working ROH style, or even a more NJPW-pace. My hunch is not because I think the crowd would just get desensitized to it or they wouldn't understand the story because it would too fast or too flashy. It would be a spectacle when the WWE has tried to teach their fans to follow the plot.

 

To be fair, Bryan would probably be fine in any format.

 

I have often thought that the WWE should go that WCW route and just sign some super fast, flippy workers and have them go out for 20 minutes and see what happens. I mean, this is a wrestling audience that nearly shit their pants when John Cena got spiked by Punk with a pile-driver. How would they have reacted to a freed-from-limitation Mistico or a fresh from ROH Davey match? I think it would get over big initially and then just kind of die out. And the bigger issue is that then you follow with the main eventers doing 30 minutes, slower-psychology paced matches and you would get a jarring disconnect. I mean, as has been noted this week, Dolph Ziggler wrestles so fast that it's one of the reasons his act is dying. He's going so fast it's actually causing him to be a poor worker. And Dolph is still only about 80 percent at some of the upper-end indy guys.

 

When the WWE hit that 2000 or so era with Angle and Benoit basically ushering in the King's Road head-dropping era of main event matches, you had some absolutely incredible wrestling but it had the result of shortening a lot of guy's career, at best, killing them at worst, and resulting to the point where finishers were starting to get killed. 

 

So, when the slowdown happened around the Cena-era it definitely resulted in a bit of a letdown because guys weren't killing themselves as much, but they managed to retrain the audience to accept, like, a fireman's carry as a finisher, or Orton's chinlock as a viable spot.

 

Whether or not we think that Jericho's 1999 stuff holds up, and it was really rough early and he didn't have a lot to work with, there's no doubt that his best run was that heel run when he was with Shawn and became much more of a character-based wrestler. Say what you will about Kane but Kane's going to be remembered for a lot of great stories, and Jericho really only has the Shawn deal as a great story.

 

Actually, the whole idea that Kane isn't a good worker was always silly because basically everyone that has ever worked with him said he was, and  he's been perpetually over since 1997.

 

Okay, so I went all over the map here, but...I think that the WWF has always had an idea of what its main event style should be, and with the exception of the dark reign of Kurt Angle, it's been pretty consistent. As wildly different workers as they were, Hogan matches, Bret matches, Shawn matches, Austin matches, Hunter matches, and Cena matches always had a very particular style, pacing, and story within them. I don't think that really existed in other companies devoid of WWF influence. I mean, Flair had his routine and his psychology, of course, but I'd take Hogan/Savage WM V over the Clash match that day because Hogan/Savage was a fucking epic operatic tragedy.

 

So, I just think that we, as fans, have been conditioned that WWE main event epic style is the right kind of wrestling, especially for a company playing to the millions and not the thousands. Of course, your mileage on this may vary depending on what you thought about the Mania sage of Shawn/Flair, UT/Shawn, UT/Shawn II, Hunter/UT II, and Hunter/UTIII.

 

I loved them all and think they're, basically, everything that story-telling paced wrestling should be, though I admit that the slow-motion epic selling starts to border on parody after a while.

[Niners Fan in CT]

Someone who is a 20-year old fan was 5 when this happened. They've read about the incident...  They've read everyone's take on it, why it was a terrible idea to continue on, etc..  Now if they choose to they can go watch it and post their own thoughts. I don't have an issue with someone wanting to educate themselves.

 

I don't want to see it, it doesn't make them a terrible person if they do..

[Hooks]

My two cents.........

 

Releasing it on DVD would have been a case of making money specifically off that one event.  Making it a part of the network seems lees sensational.  I would be willing to bet not one single person alive has said "They'll get my $9.99 a month but ONLY if they show Over The Edge."  Someone buying the DVD would be specifically buying it because of the event it was.  Paying for the network package is something people were going to do anyway.  If Over The Edge is on there some will watch it.  Others won't.  If it wasn't included, the same amount of people are going to subscribe.  I never like to state things in such black and white terms but this is something I'm 99.9% confident about.  It'll be one event buried amongst thousands of hours in the library.

 

And I've watched the Zapruder film.  You know, where you can see the president's head half explode.  I didn't watch it because I get off on death and gore.....I've watched it because it was something that happened in history before I was around.  Now, is Over The Edge as important as a president being assassinated?  Of course not. (And yes I highlighted that to make sure it isn't overlooked.) But it's one way to express my point.  Not to mention, watching the Zapruder film....there's only one thing to look for and see.  It's not like there are numerous other events present.  However, theoretically someone could watch and edited version of Over The Edge and see potentially 7 other matches that took place, including a world title switch. 

 

Will I watch it?  Probably.  Only because I remember watching it live.  I remember my roommate coming home late from work.....and me and my other roommate broke the news to him.  I remember how surreal the rest of the show was, but not clearly because I was just so stunned.  I'm curious to go back and see just how out of sorts it was and how much it changed the face of things.  Will I watch it again after that?  I'd say no. 

 

And will I be upset if it isn't offered?  No.  But if it is, I'll give it a viewing. 

[Antacular]

Ohhhh, he's one of those people. The kind that thinks the show shouldn't have went on. I think we just solved all of this.

You mean the kind who thinks AUSTIN/TAKER TITLE OOOOOHHHH DAMMMMMMNNN pales in comparison to an actual death just occurring? Yes. Yes I am.

[Hagan]

No? Read my initial posts, my issue was directly with WWE for posting the PPV, then others chimed in as to why it was acceptable. I don't know what's weird about finding a broadcast where someone died smack dab in the middle of it being available to the public after years of never seeing the light of day a digusting corporate move, but whatever.

 

But how is it a disgusting corporate move? Seriously, give us a reason why you think the WWE is releasing this event? There's no winnable answer for them, so the fact that they're releasing is, in and of itself, an exoneration that they don't have ulterior motives. If they've decided that, for better or worse no matter what happens in the future, the WWE archive will function as a complete archive of the ENTIRE WRESTLING INDUSTRY then whatever the fuck happened at this PPV or any other PPV is irrelevant. I swear to God, if Vince McMahon dropped dead at Gorilla during WM XXX, not only would the show not be stopped but they'd be rolling out that event for years as Vince's Last Stand.

 

The whole thing really boils down to that there's no good reason to broadcast this show except for the fact that the Network's mission statement is to function as a complete archive. Thus, that is a just, acceptable answer. Everything else is just noise.

 

And let me rephrase to hit this point better.

 

WWE: We intend to have a Network that shows 100% of our owned PPVs

Me: so does that 100% includes ones you selectively decide not to include because they'll paint your company in a bad light, featured a tragedy/accident of some kind, highlighted a murderer, steroid user, many alleged rapists, pedophiles, drug pushers, guys that died directly due to your lax drug uses or that were actively encouraged by the owner to do drugs himself.

WWE: Well, you bring a good point but 100% actually means 100&.  All that will certainly make us look like fucking assholes but the mission of the Network is be a complete archive for our wonderful WWE Universe.

Me: Do you want to have a moral debate about the justness of this?

WWE: No, we can certainly see the moral issues of this, unfortunately our wonderful WWE Universe has long demanded and sought complete, unfiltered access to our wonderful Sports Entertainment library not only from the WWE, but also from our other wonderful libraries. Thus, for better or worse, it'll be 100%, though, of course, an event like Over the Edge will be edited to avoid mentions or references to the unfortunate off-camera tragedy that happened.

Me: Oh, so someone that clicks on it will just have to watch a shitty PPV that avoids any reference to the event that made it infamous

WWE: hey, we're putting GAB '91 uncut on there too. December to Dismember as well. Some people are into watching terrible wrestling PPVs.

[Antacular]

I'll say this for the tenth time: Putting up OTE will add ZERO to the bottom line. Conversely, by NOT putting it up, it will have ZERO effect on the bottom line. So, as I said before (contrasting with the crow situation), there's no reason at all from a financial perspective to include an event that up until now HAS NEVER BEEN RELEASED, NOR SUBJECT TO FAN DEMANDS TO BE RELEASED.

And again, unless a person should have a serious mental defect, were the E to decide not to air it, and state that "We've put up every PPV we own except for the one that featured a tragic death as intermission," everyone would be understanding of it. But since they didn't go that route, and are putting it up, everyone it pulling rationales out of their asses after the fact as to why it's an acceptable decision.

[Big Fresh]

You're all unethical!!!!!

[Big Fresh]

[Craig H]

Look, we all know you feel strongly about this and you're never going to see eye to eye with someone with a differing viewpoint. If you do feel this strongly though, then your efforts and words are better served by writing to WWE. I'm sure there are plenty of others who share your point of view and they can join you in an effort to pulling the PPV. No one in here is going to change anyone else's mind though, and I think any efforts to do so are pointless.

[Cobra Commander]

if we're talking movies that involved people dying, i'd imagine that the Twilight Zone movie would have a lot more blood on their hands than the Crow.

 

But the idea of just jumping from Snow/Holly to Jarrett/Debra-Venus/Bass is slightly dodgy since there would be people unaware of the events who'd wonder why the tone of the show changed so drastically between those two matches

[Antacular]

By that logic, there would be no point in anyone posting on the internet ever. I don't care enough to write to WWE or form some sort of club against it to get the event pulled. I just take issue with sycophants praising the Es decision to do so, when NO ONE has ever claimored for its release before this.

[Hagan]

I'll say this for the tenth time: Putting up OTE will add ZERO to the bottom line. Conversely, by NOT putting it up, it will have ZERO effect on the bottom line. So, as I said before (contrasting with the crow situation), there's no reason at all from a financial perspective to include an event that up until now HAS NEVER BEEN RELEASED, NOR SUBJECT TO FAN DEMANDS TO BE RELEASED.

And again, unless a person should have a serious mental defect, were the E to decide not to air it, and state that "We've put up every PPV we own except for the one that featured a tragic death as intermission," everyone would be understanding of it. But since they didn't go that route, and are putting it up, everyone it pulling rationales out of their asses after the fact as to why

it's an acceptable decision.

 

Okay.

 

1) Why do you think that they're putting it up then?

 

And I don't think anyone is arguing that there's a moral imperative for the event to be up. What everyone is arguing is, because it is featured, that the probable reason is that the Network is supposed to be a complete archive. That's not a fact that can be argued.

 

If Nascar announces that they'll be offering on-demand videos of every Daytona 500 would anyone criticize them if the one featuring Dale Senior was apart of it, or would you insist that that one be scrubbed from memory?

[Hagan]

And no one this board has "praised" the decision. We've all just analyzed it from enough different angles to attempt to see the rationale behind, or at least what the rationale could be

[Craig H]

Yeah, I'm not sure who was praising this decision.

[Hooks]

And no one this board has "praised" the decision. We've all just analyzed it from enough different angles to attempt to see the rationale behind, or at least what the rationale could be

 

This, over and over.

 

 

Not one single person here has said they are anxious for it or would be mad if it's left out.  Just that if it's included, it won't be the end of the world and doesn't seem like a cheap ploy. 

 

Now, if they start advertising it as "The WWE Network featuring Owen Hart DYING!!!!" then yeah, I can see being outraged.  But that's hardly the case here. 

[Big Fresh]

Not one single person here has said they are anxious for it or would be mad if it's left out.

I am now considering saying it just to keep this going.

[E.J.]

 

Not one single person here has said they are anxious for it or would be mad if it's left out.

I am now considering saying it just to keep this going.

 

 

[Go2Sleep]

I watched the show last year when I was re-watching the Austin era (literally every Raw, SD and ppv from Survivor Series 97 through 1999), so that's one non-morbid reason someone might watch the show. Still, I was dreading it going in, and didn't feel any better after watching it or the Owen tribute Raw. And good luck editing it, after it happens, you can tell everybody else on the show is affected by it. There's at least two backstage promos where he's mentioned, The Rock makes a tribute to him mid-match, and the Union/Corporate Ministry match is just unsettling as fuck because you can tell during the long announcer silence when they got the news.

 

Anyway, since I did watch all of 1999 WWF, I find the Kane/Jericho discussion much more interesting. Kane had the surprisingly good WM match with HHH and some fun tags with X-Pac (w/Chyna vs. X-pac/HHH at SVDM and w/ X-Pac vs. Taker/Show at Summer Slam are the most notable). He did also have some terrible matches with Show (the KOTR match was particularly dire). Jericho really had nothing to show in the ring. His promos and character work were great, but his only big feuds were Road Dogg and Chyna. The Armageddon match against Chyna is way better than it should've been, but still hard to say it was better than average. It comes down to how much your weighting promos and gimmicks in your analysis. If you favor them heavily, then Jericho probably still edges out Kane as he was much easier to watch week to week. If it's in-ring only, no doubt Kane had better matches (and worse matches) than Jericho, so while both guys didn't have much to write home about, Kane would get the nod there I think.

[Uncle Coaster]

Nah, they're just as sharp with the tongue as I am with the keyboard. But seriously. Go ask a non wrestling fan for their opinion on the matter, and see if you aren't viewed as a perpetual creep in their eyes from that point forward.

 

Just talked to some people in my office about it.   I told them it was the pay per view where the wrestler died, they were editing it to try to remove as much reference to him as possible, and that I'd probably get around to watching it eventually.  They had no real opinion on the matter and their view of me was untainted.

 

Seriously, I wonder if other people have run into any non wrestling fan that is absolutely against it.

[Raziel]

Ya'll realize you're arguing ethical behaivor with someone that called someone a sociopath for bringing his kids to a movie where they didn't sit perfectly still and quiet, right?

[Antacular]

Next time someone else busts out a glock during the coming attractions, you'll be thanking me for my public service.

[Raziel]

Christ you are one narcissistic prick.