|
Post by lockedontarget on Mar 19, 2009 11:13:12 GMT -5
Yes, actually, it IS art. Pro wrestling is indeed an art. And art is subjective. Which is why fans are often too harsh in nitpicking about "suspending disbelief"- which shouldn't really be a criteria as far as judging wrestling. Why not? Obviously the "rules" of wrestling aren't completely grounded in reality, but it's not ridiculous to want some sort of standard of realism. Irish whips I can take, but magical midgets running through walls and guys shooting lightning bolts I can not. There's a middle ground.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Mar 19, 2009 11:20:57 GMT -5
Pro wrestling is indeed an art. And art is subjective. Which is why fans are often too harsh in nitpicking about "suspending disbelief"- which shouldn't really be a criteria as far as judging wrestling. Why not? Obviously the "rules" of wrestling aren't completely grounded in reality, but it's not ridiculous to want some sort of standard of realism. Irish whips I can take, but magical midgets running through walls and guys shooting lightning bolts I can not. There's a middle ground. It has more to do with the styles that some wrestlers work. It's clear that the Hogans, Cenas, and Mysterios don't wrestle believable styles, and I feel they shouldn't be condemned for it considering how good they are at stirring up excitement in the audience. I'm not saying "all attempts at realism should be abolished", because some wrestlers like to (try to) make it look realistic, and that's their right. Those that don't, however, get too much grief.
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Mar 19, 2009 11:34:09 GMT -5
I actually think Rey's style makes a lot more sense than people give it credit for.
I mean, he's small and quick. He NEEDS to be constantly running around, using his speed and momentum. I don't see why his offense is mocked so much.
|
|
Randy Barber 4-Life
Hank Scorpio
I have received an email from RAW's anonymous General Manager. And I quote: "No play for Mr. Gray!"
Posts: 5,001
|
Post by Randy Barber 4-Life on Mar 19, 2009 12:12:58 GMT -5
I actually think Rey's style makes a lot more sense than people give it credit for. I mean, he's small and quick. He NEEDS to be constantly running around, using his speed and momentum. I don't see why his offense is mocked so much. In my case at least it's because a lot of his offense depends on the other guy setting himself up and/or helping with the move. Sometimes it almost looks like the opponent is doing a move to himself and just happens to be holding Rey. Or a guy suddenly attempts a move he's never done in his entire career because Rey has a flashy reversal or can use it to put him on the second rope. This is admittedly true of a lot of wrestling moves but it just seems a lot more obvious with Mysterio.
|
|
Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Mar 19, 2009 12:24:24 GMT -5
that's gotta hurt. Honestly we always have the right to complain, we are the consumer. If you aren't being entertained you can complain.
|
|
|
Post by Danimal on Mar 20, 2009 15:54:03 GMT -5
It's a wrestling-discussion forum, there is going to positive and negative input, without one of the other it just becomes a circlejerk of likeminded folks.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Mar 20, 2009 18:27:03 GMT -5
Whenever you want, its a free country
|
|
Space City's Own
Don Corleone
I am literally the greatest person to ever live.
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Space City's Own on Mar 20, 2009 18:30:01 GMT -5
Not if I have anything to say about it.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Mar 20, 2009 19:57:27 GMT -5
Everyone has the right to complain, but I think the argument of if you don't like it, don't watch is a bad one. It's based on all the wrestling fans that I've known throughout my life, and how many don't watch anymore.
Honestly, their opinions mean the most. The opinions of hardcore fans on the net mean the least I feel because usually they have a bad opinion or personal bias put in there, or they want it done a certain way which would be counter productive for the product. The best opinions are the disenchanted fans who used to be really in it (maybe not to our degree), but ended up going away from it. And little things can do that.
It's weird, WWE wants this big angle to come in and bring the ratings up, but it will never happen. They need to do the Kevin Sullivan approach. Build, put all the pieces slowly into place, and bring it up eventually. And also, little things like continuity, realism, and stuff like that will kill a fan's interest, like any other tv show.
The worst though is when people complain about guys like Lance Storm complaining about a show, like, that boggles my mind. A guy who has so much knowledge, a current trainer, and someone who actually booked before should be the one watching, and people should be listening to him, because he knows what he's talking about. And people bitch at him for complaining.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Mar 20, 2009 20:05:50 GMT -5
Yes, actually, it IS art. Pro wrestling is indeed an art. And art is subjective. Which is why fans are often too harsh in nitpicking about "suspending disbelief"- which shouldn't really be a criteria as far as judging wrestling. Definitely disagreed here, and I wanted to respond to this. I was talking to a chick who I'm really into, and she used to be really into wrestling. She asked me if some people are still in it, and then she brought up Kane. I said yeah, but he doesn't have a mask anymore. And she was dumfounded. She was asking, but I thought he was burnt? Wasn't he burnt? And I told her that he only thought he was burnt in his head, and she said, that storyline is ridiculous. I've mentioned as well about Bret Hart's niece tapping out to a skinny model, and that friend said that's why she doesn't watch anymore. Nitpicking on little stuff is something people should do, because it's the little stuff that turns people away. And to be honest with the Kane thing, I personally thought it was a good explanation. But I feel her opinion is better, because it's one reason she doesn't watch anymore, because it got stupid. It's like with Jim Cornette and going to his dentist. His dentist isn't a fan of wrestling, but his dentist will watch because Cornette was on. And it was OVW. So, he asked his dentist about the show, and the dentist asked, why didn't this guy hit that guy after a run in? And Cornette thought, I don't know, why did it happen like that? Maybe I did it wrong (or it went something like that). So, these fans who are just watching and if something is a little out of the ordinary, they may balk at it, and turn it off, because they don't care about wrestling as much as we do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2009 20:11:34 GMT -5
When Vince McMahon won't stop stealing your Pop Tarts
|
|
Sonic...SonicTruth
Team Rocket
?You can?t eat it, you can?t f*** it, and it won?t get you into heaven...BROTHER?
Posts: 930
|
Post by Sonic...SonicTruth on Mar 20, 2009 20:33:15 GMT -5
When do I have the right? Whenever I damn well please, thank you very much.
|
|
|
Post by parder on Mar 20, 2009 20:43:16 GMT -5
Pro wrestling is indeed an art. And art is subjective. Which is why fans are often too harsh in nitpicking about "suspending disbelief"- which shouldn't really be a criteria as far as judging wrestling. Definitely disagreed here, and I wanted to respond to this. I was talking to a chick who I'm really into, and she used to be really into wrestling. She asked me if some people are still in it, and then she brought up Kane. I said yeah, but he doesn't have a mask anymore. And she was dumfounded. She was asking, but I thought he was burnt? Wasn't he burnt? And I told her that he only thought he was burnt in his head, and she said, that storyline is ridiculous. I've mentioned as well about Bret Hart's niece tapping out to a skinny model, and that friend said that's why she doesn't watch anymore. Nitpicking on little stuff is something people should do, because it's the little stuff that turns people away. And to be honest with the Kane thing, I personally thought it was a good explanation. But I feel her opinion is better, because it's one reason she doesn't watch anymore, because it got stupid. It's like with Jim Cornette and going to his dentist. His dentist isn't a fan of wrestling, but his dentist will watch because Cornette was on. And it was OVW. So, he asked his dentist about the show, and the dentist asked, why didn't this guy hit that guy after a run in? And Cornette thought, I don't know, why did it happen like that? Maybe I did it wrong (or it went something like that). So, these fans who are just watching and if something is a little out of the ordinary, they may balk at it, and turn it off, because they don't care about wrestling as much as we do. I'd still say believability is always going to be a very dependent on the context in wrestling. Once you've seen a fair bit of MMA and realise what a genuine shoot looks like, you realise hardly any pro wrestling looks like a real fight, aside from some of that UWF stuff from mid-90s Japan. A lot of it comes down to the workers using the right kind of psychology (combined with logical booking) to tell such a great story in the ring that they don't care whether any of this would really happen in real life. A good example is pro wrestlers (particularly heels) with leg submission finishers. The standard piece of storytelling here is to work the babyface's leg, so that they can barely stand up and then lock in the submission hold (classic examples being the figure four leg lock perfected by Ric Flair, or variations of the Boston crab). But I have never ever seen an instance in an MMA bout where the fighter who specialises in leg submissions tries to dismantle the other guy's leg before locking in a submission. And when you think about it, if it takes that much of an attack on the other guy's leg before they will even consider submitting to your finisher then you'd begin think it was a pretty crappy submission manoeuvre, particularly since in Flair's big matches his opponents hardly ever submitted anyway, even after Flair had done all that damage. Yet no one ever thinks that about Ric Flair's figure four, for example, because Flair the character was so good at making you believe in all of this. Instead of being considered rubbish Flair was considered the most formidable opponent during the 1980s NWA, even when he showed cowardly heel tendencies. And then on the other side of the coin people here tend complain how other wrestlers tap out so easily to Cena's STF. In that instance, he clearly hasn't done enough to make you believe in what he's doing (either because of his character, his level of legit wrestling background, or just his execution of the hold). Oh and to get back to the OP's question, I would have thought with this being the Wrestlecrap forums you'd get your fair share of comment about what they think is crap in pro wrestling . But I think in the end, if you're a genuine wrestling fan who cares about the sport, and your complaints are well thought through, you can complain whenever and how ever much you like.
|
|
|
Post by Single H on Mar 20, 2009 21:47:39 GMT -5
If they have illegally downloaded a DVD or PPV and it's sucked bad. They have no right to complain.
If they don't have access to the channel due to being to cheap to fork out when its a good show they cant complain
Of coure in both of these arguments in no way Iam I referring to myself ;D
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Mar 20, 2009 22:29:02 GMT -5
When I'm trying to smuggle pudding into a WWE event and it spills in my pants and makes it look like I pooped myself. Why don't they just let me have my pudding?!!
|
|
|
Post by maniacmike on Mar 20, 2009 22:32:33 GMT -5
I always have the right to complain, no matter what. When I'm paying money for a PPV that "looked good on paper" but then failed, I especially have this right.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Mar 20, 2009 22:36:48 GMT -5
Whenever somebody complains about Raw or the WWE product in general the first counterpoint I always see is "Well then don't watch it," which while I suppose a fair suggestion, is pretty much shutting down all debate about the topic at hand. Don't get me wrong, I use it all the time too, but I was just wondering is it ever okay to just complain about something that you watch? I see it the same way I see comics. I currently have stopped reading DC comics who I'd been a loyal reader of my entire life, because they raped the Batman universe. I still feel I have the right to complain about it because I'd spent thousands of dollars on their product over the years, as have others, and that's how they thanked us. WWE is the same way. People have sank hundreds of millions of dollars into WWF/E for decades, therefore giving them the right to complain. At the end of the day, that Comic Book Guy quote is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Crazy Diamond on Mar 20, 2009 22:42:52 GMT -5
When you disagree. However, sometimes when people complain they tend to complain about tiny details instead of much bigger issues. I find the same problem with comic book fans on the net. They won't complain when a story is poorly written with wooden dialogue, but they'll have a fit if a favorite character dies.
|
|
Magician under the moonlight
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Always Beaten To The Punchline. Always.
A magician and a thief. That's Badass
Posts: 15,727
|
Post by Magician under the moonlight on Mar 20, 2009 22:57:47 GMT -5
Freedom of speech?
|
|
|
Post by Drink Up Me Cider on Mar 21, 2009 3:58:24 GMT -5
When you payed £15 for The Great American Bash 2005.
|
|