|
Post by golding on Aug 10, 2010 17:15:59 GMT -5
One of the most identical things I'm seeing between ECW and this PPV is that there are still people dedicated to hating the show. I remember how much ECW fans had to fend off people calling them "bush league", "garbage wrestling", and a lot of the same sort of stuff thrown around in the thread. I have a hard time understanding the mindset of people who watch a PPV they're so dedicated to hating.
Some people managed to reveal themselves with hating the FBI dance-off, or the hopeful Dreamer spot right before his loss. Even hating the anti-WWE rhetoric and defiant mockery of WWE's copyrights. These are things that were classic for ECW.
Overall, it was a good quality show. Nowhere even near the disaster some predicted it would be (or some are trying to still make it out to be). The main attractions of RVD/Sabu and Raven/Dreamer delivered, with Raven/Dreamer really standing out. Some wrestlers really impressed -- Too Cold Scorpio, Stevie Richards, and Sabu in particular. Al Snow's bit with BW2.0 had some of the best laughs of the night. Loved him asking Stevie Richards if he knew a good therapist.
Unprotected headshots could fill a completely separate thread, but my view on them is that if a wrestler wants to do it I won't complain. It's a striking visual, and again the shocking aspect of it is part of what made ECW alluring. I'm very big on personal responsibility, so I'm not going to hate on a wrestler for taking a hard bump. Wrestling is a risk in and of itself. It makes little sense to single out head shots. Now if a wrestler is TOLD to do the unprotected chair shot and is like "No, I don't want to", and has to do it anyway, that's something I'd have a problem with.
That there was no footage, that there were name changes, and that people were saying "that Philadelphia promotion" is really a petty complaint. We're not oblivious as to why, so to act shocked by it makes little sense.
The only major downside was the weak tribute to fallen wrestlers. I had to rewind just to make sure that was all they did. At least put names (real names, if you have to) of the people you're recognizing. I'm not sure why they did that. Sandman's appearance probably would have been better off in the run-ins during the Raven/Dreamer match. Probably would have made a little more sense, and would have made Sandman's role a little less empty feeling.
Comparing the show to the One Night Stands is a little bit tough. WWE had the benefit of not only the copyrights and video library to enhance the nostalgia, but they were also there as a competitor to ECW. That point of interest is something that TNA can't really get (and is something that WWE seems to be incapable of managing completely). The One Night Stands were really good PPV's. This was a good PPV too, given the obvious handicaps. Overall it was a fun show, and like some people have been saying that's what it's all ultimately about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2010 12:37:11 GMT -5
I would have minded the show less if it was actually the LAST stand.
I can understand a tribute show to a point, but for it carry on for months.....that just puts me off from the show.
|
|
dpg
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by dpg on Aug 11, 2010 14:46:48 GMT -5
It was a fun show, the dance off etc were exactly what ECW used to do, and as they were the one's booking it and not the usual TNA bookers they knew best really. The bit Spike Dudley tries to outwit Al Snow by doing the old fake chair shot, only for Snow to do the same back and have the ref confused when he got up was classic. Most of the matches were straight out of the ECW playback, especially Dreamer vs Raven. I enjoyed it immensely.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Aug 12, 2010 3:57:32 GMT -5
One of the most identical things I'm seeing between ECW and this PPV is that there are still people dedicated to hating the show. I remember how much ECW fans had to fend off people calling them "bush league", "garbage wrestling", and a lot of the same sort of stuff thrown around in the thread. I have a hard time understanding the mindset of people who watch a PPV they're so dedicated to hating. Some people managed to reveal themselves with hating the FBI dance-off, or the hopeful Dreamer spot right before his loss. Even hating the anti-WWE rhetoric and defiant mockery of WWE's copyrights. These are things that were classic for ECW. Overall, it was a good quality show. Nowhere even near the disaster some predicted it would be (or some are trying to still make it out to be). The main attractions of RVD/Sabu and Raven/Dreamer delivered, with Raven/Dreamer really standing out. Some wrestlers really impressed -- Too Cold Scorpio, Stevie Richards, and Sabu in particular. Al Snow's bit with BW2.0 had some of the best laughs of the night. Loved him asking Stevie Richards if he knew a good therapist. Unprotected headshots could fill a completely separate thread, but my view on them is that if a wrestler wants to do it I won't complain. It's a striking visual, and again the shocking aspect of it is part of what made ECW alluring. I'm very big on personal responsibility, so I'm not going to hate on a wrestler for taking a hard bump. Wrestling is a risk in and of itself. It makes little sense to single out head shots. Now if a wrestler is TOLD to do the unprotected chair shot and is like "No, I don't want to", and has to do it anyway, that's something I'd have a problem with. That there was no footage, that there were name changes, and that people were saying "that Philadelphia promotion" is really a petty complaint. We're not oblivious as to why, so to act shocked by it makes little sense. The only major downside was the weak tribute to fallen wrestlers. I had to rewind just to make sure that was all they did. At least put names (real names, if you have to) of the people you're recognizing. I'm not sure why they did that. Sandman's appearance probably would have been better off in the run-ins during the Raven/Dreamer match. Probably would have made a little more sense, and would have made Sandman's role a little less empty feeling. Comparing the show to the One Night Stands is a little bit tough. WWE had the benefit of not only the copyrights and video library to enhance the nostalgia, but they were also there as a competitor to ECW. That point of interest is something that TNA can't really get (and is something that WWE seems to be incapable of managing completely). The One Night Stands were really good PPV's. This was a good PPV too, given the obvious handicaps. Overall it was a fun show, and like some people have been saying that's what it's all ultimately about. I couldn't agree more. After listening to someone on Ring the Bell (a podcast on Angry Marks.com for those that don't know) go on a tirade, bitching about how this or that match wasn't advertised, and another person saying it was an "epic fail" for them to have the light saber spot, and to do a dance-off, and it just made them look silly, I have come to the realization that most people complaining don't have a clue about what ECW was like back in the day. To complain about the matches not being all listed or advertised seems silly first of all, since a lot of matches in the original days of ECW were just impromptu matches that came about after a promo in the ring. Also, how many matches from ONS in 2005 were advertised? I don't recall any being really listed, and I was all over that show before it happened. Also, the light saber and dance off thing was a part of what made ECW so different back in the 90's. Yeah, you had the hardcore violence and craziness, but like Taz said, you also had other things on the show, but people wanna ignore that. I recall a match where Simon Diamond was telling the ref to count faster, and when the ref didn't he asked why. The referee looked at him and replied, "You didn't say Simon says". Comedic things like that, which HAPPENED IN 1999-2000 WHEN THE COMPANY WAS STILL ALIVE are being criticized for making the legacy of the promotion look bad? Really!? I even remember a dance off at Hardcore Homecoming in '05. Were people seriously pissed off at that show too? I don't recall getting that vibe. I think too many people are just judging this show on what they expected it to be, and not what it truly was. In my honest opinion, it was NOT a bad show, by any means, for any fan who remembers true ECW and the style of matches that were prevalent there during it's heyday. I just don't understand the hate for it. Like you said in your post, Golding, there are outside factors getting brought up (like the unprotected chair shots or Tommy Dreamer's kids being at ringside) to take jabs at the show. Things like that just water down a person's argument that a show was bad or horrible.
|
|
|
Post by donners on Aug 12, 2010 22:57:34 GMT -5
To be fair, 1999-2000 is considered the decline of the promotion, so citing events from that time is not necessarily a positive sign...
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Aug 16, 2010 10:32:23 GMT -5
To be fair, 1999-2000 is considered the decline of the promotion, so citing events from that time is not necessarily a positive sign... The point was that this happened during the time period. Also, who considers it the decline? There were still plenty of positives during that time. Tajiri, Whipreck, Super Crazy, Guido, RVD vs Jerry Lynn, Mike Awesome vs Tanaka. And even before this time, there were comedy segments with The Public Enemy dancing around. Thanks for using my one example as "citing events from the decline of the promotion" though.
|
|
|
Post by jimhelwigsdisciple on Aug 16, 2010 11:35:47 GMT -5
One of the most identical things I'm seeing between ECW and this PPV is that there are still people dedicated to hating the show. I remember how much ECW fans had to fend off people calling them "bush league", "garbage wrestling", and a lot of the same sort of stuff thrown around in the thread. I have a hard time understanding the mindset of people who watch a PPV they're so dedicated to hating. Some people managed to reveal themselves with hating the FBI dance-off, or the hopeful Dreamer spot right before his loss. Even hating the anti-WWE rhetoric and defiant mockery of WWE's copyrights. These are things that were classic for ECW. Overall, it was a good quality show. Nowhere even near the disaster some predicted it would be (or some are trying to still make it out to be). The main attractions of RVD/Sabu and Raven/Dreamer delivered, with Raven/Dreamer really standing out. Some wrestlers really impressed -- Too Cold Scorpio, Stevie Richards, and Sabu in particular. Al Snow's bit with BW2.0 had some of the best laughs of the night. Loved him asking Stevie Richards if he knew a good therapist. Unprotected headshots could fill a completely separate thread, but my view on them is that if a wrestler wants to do it I won't complain. It's a striking visual, and again the shocking aspect of it is part of what made ECW alluring. I'm very big on personal responsibility, so I'm not going to hate on a wrestler for taking a hard bump. Wrestling is a risk in and of itself. It makes little sense to single out head shots. Now if a wrestler is TOLD to do the unprotected chair shot and is like "No, I don't want to", and has to do it anyway, that's something I'd have a problem with. That there was no footage, that there were name changes, and that people were saying "that Philadelphia promotion" is really a petty complaint. We're not oblivious as to why, so to act shocked by it makes little sense. The only major downside was the weak tribute to fallen wrestlers. I had to rewind just to make sure that was all they did. At least put names (real names, if you have to) of the people you're recognizing. I'm not sure why they did that. Sandman's appearance probably would have been better off in the run-ins during the Raven/Dreamer match. Probably would have made a little more sense, and would have made Sandman's role a little less empty feeling. Comparing the show to the One Night Stands is a little bit tough. WWE had the benefit of not only the copyrights and video library to enhance the nostalgia, but they were also there as a competitor to ECW. That point of interest is something that TNA can't really get (and is something that WWE seems to be incapable of managing completely). The One Night Stands were really good PPV's. This was a good PPV too, given the obvious handicaps. Overall it was a fun show, and like some people have been saying that's what it's all ultimately about. I couldn't agree more. After listening to someone on Ring the Bell (a podcast on Angry Marks.com for those that don't know) go on a tirade, bitching about how this or that match wasn't advertised, and another person saying it was an "epic fail" for them to have the light saber spot, and to do a dance-off, and it just made them look silly, I have come to the realization that most people complaining don't have a clue about what ECW was like back in the day. To complain about the matches not being all listed or advertised seems silly first of all, since a lot of matches in the original days of ECW were just impromptu matches that came about after a promo in the ring. Also, how many matches from ONS in 2005 were advertised? I don't recall any being really listed, and I was all over that show before it happened. Also, the light saber and dance off thing was a part of what made ECW so different back in the 90's. Yeah, you had the hardcore violence and craziness, but like Taz said, you also had other things on the show, but people wanna ignore that. I recall a match where Simon Diamond was telling the ref to count faster, and when the ref didn't he asked why. The referee looked at him and replied, "You didn't say Simon says". Comedic things like that, which HAPPENED IN 1999-2000 WHEN THE COMPANY WAS STILL ALIVE are being criticized for making the legacy of the promotion look bad? Really!? I even remember a dance off at Hardcore Homecoming in '05. Were people seriously pissed off at that show too? I don't recall getting that vibe. I think too many people are just judging this show on what they expected it to be, and not what it truly was. In my honest opinion, it was NOT a bad show, by any means, for any fan who remembers true ECW and the style of matches that were prevalent there during it's heyday. I just don't understand the hate for it. Like you said in your post, Golding, there are outside factors getting brought up (like the unprotected chair shots or Tommy Dreamer's kids being at ringside) to take jabs at the show. Things like that just water down a person's argument that a show was bad or horrible. This 1000X. This is the same thing I was shouting the night of the show. I think half of the people criticizing it for not being ECW-enough haven't really watched ECW.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 78,699
|
Post by bob on Aug 16, 2010 13:17:15 GMT -5
did we ever learn the ratings for this?
|
|