Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:36:23 GMT -5
It goes to show that you can still get yourself over. But it also proves why they've stopped so many trying to do that. Because no matter what you do, some people will rag on you because you're not who they wanted to see get pushed. The girl is a lifelong wrestling fan. She got her break in the big time and she knocked it out of the park first chance she got. She deserves every bit of the spotlight and criticism of that whilst acceptable, is still sour grapes. NEWSFLASH: many women wrestlers are wrestling fans since childhood. Not just AJ. Having a problem with her character depth is not "sour grapes." It's a valid criticism. Just like criticizing every character is acceptable and beneficial to understanding the product-at-large.
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Jul 30, 2012 22:38:38 GMT -5
This goes to the "Tropes Are Not Bad" example. Stock characters work because they are tried and tested and they tend to work. And again, the "AJ is a bad actor" argument just doesn't hold water in a company where the entire roster is hardly up to Meryl Streep levels of talent. No, tropes are NOT bad, and the manipulative bitch is a trope in and of itself. What I'm saying though is that she's playing a role that does not require any substantial level of talent, which opens up the question as to her depth as a performer. Though from what I remember, she plays the manipulative role pretty well, so that'd be right up her alley. And I do suspect that's what they're doing with her. Of course it requires talent. AJ's physical mannerisms alone are a talent that has played a big part in getting her over and established as a character. If it requires no talent, why is AJ so much more over than, say, Eve?
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Jul 30, 2012 22:39:28 GMT -5
It goes to show that you can still get yourself over. But it also proves why they've stopped so many trying to do that. Because no matter what you do, some people will rag on you because you're not who they wanted to see get pushed. The girl is a lifelong wrestling fan. She got her break in the big time and she knocked it out of the park first chance she got. She deserves every bit of the spotlight and criticism of that whilst acceptable, is still sour grapes. NEWSFLASH: many women wrestlers are wrestling fans since childhood. Not just AJ. Having a problem with her character depth is not "sour grapes." It's a valid criticism. Just like criticizing every character is acceptable and beneficial to understanding the product-at-large. Quite uncalled for to take that tone with me. Appears I struck a nerve with my sour grapes comment. I think that says more about you than it does me. I said criticism is always acceptable; but the arguments put forth in most cases are obvious sour grapes that she came from nowhere and got herself over. If you think there's another reason why she's been put in that position then please enlighten me.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Jul 30, 2012 22:39:45 GMT -5
She needs to wear glasses! I don't care if there's no lenses in the frames or they have one of those novelty oversized noses and hairy eyebrows attached to the frame. She just needs a pair of glasses. ¬_¬ www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxQCKz91qEs
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:41:47 GMT -5
No, tropes are NOT bad, and the manipulative bitch is a trope in and of itself. What I'm saying though is that she's playing a role that does not require any substantial level of talent, which opens up the question as to her depth as a performer. Though from what I remember, she plays the manipulative role pretty well, so that'd be right up her alley. And I do suspect that's what they're doing with her. Of course it requires talent. AJ's physical mannerisms alone are a talent that has played a big part in getting her over and established as a character. If it requires no talent, why is AJ so much more over than, say, Eve? Well...a couple reasons. Eve has never played a character type that interests most people, or been able to play the manipulative bitch-archetype well enough to get her over. Also, personally, I don't consider Eve to be very good as a performer, but that's neither here nor there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:43:04 GMT -5
NEWSFLASH: many women wrestlers are wrestling fans since childhood. Not just AJ. Having a problem with her character depth is not "sour grapes." It's a valid criticism. Just like criticizing every character is acceptable and beneficial to understanding the product-at-large. Quite uncalled for to take that tone with me. Appears I struck a nerve with my sour grapes comment. I think that says more about you than it does me. What exactly was uncalled for about his post?
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Jul 30, 2012 22:44:37 GMT -5
Quite uncalled for to take that tone with me. Appears I struck a nerve with my sour grapes comment. I think that says more about you than it does me. What exactly was uncalled for about his post? The aggressive tone in my opinion. Then again it is 4:45am here so perhaps I misinterpreted it.
|
|
RPD88
Team Rocket
Posts: 844
|
Post by RPD88 on Jul 30, 2012 22:46:16 GMT -5
All this is immaterial, what the hell was that man doing in AJ's GM office!
|
|
PKO
King Koopa
Posts: 12,603
|
Post by PKO on Jul 30, 2012 22:46:51 GMT -5
I think AJ is a pretty shoddy actress in general.
I think she is a fantastic actress for wrestling.
Her line delivery needs work (she's caught between naturalistic acting and the mandatory pauses required for WWE) but she has some flashes of greatness. She's head and shoulders above half the roster in my estimation, and I really didn't like her acting when she started on NXT. Since the beginning of the year she has really improved, and I hope that continues.
She's no Paul Heyman, but she's lightyears away from being as bad as Zack Ryder (seeing as someone mentioned him).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:49:02 GMT -5
NEWSFLASH: many women wrestlers are wrestling fans since childhood. Not just AJ. Having a problem with her character depth is not "sour grapes." It's a valid criticism. Just like criticizing every character is acceptable and beneficial to understanding the product-at-large. Quite uncalled for to take that tone with me. Appears I struck a nerve with my sour grapes comment. I think that says more about you than it does me. I said criticism is always acceptable; but the arguments put forth in most cases are obvious sour grapes that she came from nowhere and got herself over. If you think there's another reason why she's been put in that position then please enlighten me. No, I think that's very much undercutting other women. Natalya's a lifelong wrestling fan. So's Beth. But that doesn't automatically entitle them to a greater role on the show... or does it? And that's certainly up to you if it does or doesn't, though in my opinion, I don't think so. In that sense, I don't see how that contributes for AJ either. How long they've been a fan doesn't matter. What matters more, IMO, is how they can contribute to the product. Right now, AJ is doing alright, which is why I'm fine with her currently. But what I am saying is that the depth of her character in the long-term is very questionable right now if she can only get over playing a character that's guaranteed to get over no matter who it's given to. Because she can't be that character indefinitely. Eventually, it will have to be retooled. And if she fails at retooling, she'll go the way of all the other divas.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 30, 2012 22:49:25 GMT -5
She is better than Zack I'll give her that.
And I'll concede she may just need to grow into the role; my estimation of her 'sucking' is right now she's awkward.
Perhaps she'll pull a Vickie and really improve over time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:51:53 GMT -5
What exactly was uncalled for about his post? The aggressive tone in my opinion. Then again it is 4:45am here so perhaps I misinterpreted it. Yeah I use words in allcaps sometimes. But...please, before you do that with someone who has a quick temper, don't accuse someone of trying to be confrontational. This is an internet forum and I'm not trying to offend anyone, just stating my opinion. And if you do the same, that's cool with me.
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Jul 30, 2012 22:52:12 GMT -5
So you agree that it does require talent to play that kind of character, then?
Because if it didn't, Eve would have knocked it out of the park instead of being decent with it at best.
You don't get really over just because. It takes some sort of talent to get over to that degree. Well, talent and a fair chance, of course. AJ was given that chance, and then AJ got over by getting the fans invested her as a character. Not just by skipping, as you would have us believe, but by consistently presenting her character through her mannerisms, interactions, and dialogue night after night. She successfully generated sympathy and later, gleeful confusion from the fanbase through her ability to emote without even saying a word, an important talent for someone in her role. She is successful because when she needed to deliver, she did.
That's all there really is to it.
"Guarenteed to get over no matter who played that role" is an absolute BS statement, and incredibly disrespectful to her as a worker.
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Jul 30, 2012 22:55:07 GMT -5
Quite uncalled for to take that tone with me. Appears I struck a nerve with my sour grapes comment. I think that says more about you than it does me. I said criticism is always acceptable; but the arguments put forth in most cases are obvious sour grapes that she came from nowhere and got herself over. If you think there's another reason why she's been put in that position then please enlighten me. No, I think that's very much undercutting other women. Natalya's a lifelong wrestling fan. So's Beth. But that doesn't automatically entitle them to a greater role on the show... or does it? And that's certainly up to you if it does or doesn't, though in my opinion, I don't think so. In that sense, I don't see how that contributes for AJ either. How long they've been a fan doesn't matter. What matters more, IMO, is how they can contribute to the product. Right now, AJ is doing alright, which is why I'm fine with her currently. But what I am saying is that the depth of her character in the long-term is very questionable right now if she can only get over playing a character that's guaranteed to get over no matter who it's given to. Because she can't be that character indefinitely. Eventually, it will have to be retooled. And if she fails at retooling, she'll go the way of all the other divas. Okay I understand what you're saying and I agree to an extent. I get where you're coming from regarding the other divas but it appeared to be quite obvious that they were deliberately segregating AJ from the divas division. I think there is a reason for that no doubt, because I guess Vince sees her potential and has seen the way she's gotten herself over. I don't know what other way to put this, but I guess she's regarded by management as being "above" the divas division. Beth and Nattie are brilliant in the ring, but neither have much to give outside it. AJ whilst not fantastic can go in here ring, but has shown her ability to give so much more outside of it. Sure the GM character will always be over because of its very nature. However will some tweaking, I honestly could see it as a long term installment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 22:56:13 GMT -5
So you agree that it does require talent to play that kind of character, then? Because if it didn't, Eve would have knocked it out of the park instead of being decent with it at best. Which character? I said Eve couldn't play the manipulative bitch character. AJ hasn't really been tested with that character on the main roster. That's a character that takes more depth to play to get over. The "crazy" character gets over guaranteed, as long as the person playing it isn't stone cold bored-looking. It never fails. Ever. Mainly because it's exceedingly easy to play. Emoting "crazy" is easy because there's not as much logic to it. Which is why I'm questioning its longevity.
|
|
|
Post by Widow's Peak on Jul 30, 2012 22:58:30 GMT -5
I can understand not being a fan. But it is absolutely ridiculous to act like she is where she is through no merit of her own. She is in a spotlight because she got over. Because she was given a chance and didn't drop the ball with it. At least this thread hasn't had people accusing her of blowing Vince yet. Wait... I guess I might be grading her on a curve since I've seen so many worse, far worse Diva's getting pushes and mic time. Imagine Kelly Kelly in her spot. Or either Bella. She's not the greatest thing in the history of things, but she's not god-awful either. Sometimes, she can actually be pretty good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2012 23:01:16 GMT -5
"Guarenteed to get over no matter who played that role" is an absolute BS statement, and incredibly disrespectful to her as a worker. Crazy Victoria: GOT OVER. Crazy Mickie: GOT OVER. Crazy AJ: GOT OVER. It's not taking anything away from any of those three, but it's a gimmick that requires minimal input and yields maximal benefit. People love crazy. That's why Attitude got so over for so long.
|
|
r.
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bye
Posts: 16,458
|
Post by r. on Jul 30, 2012 23:01:17 GMT -5
To think I missed AJ as GM when I picked the olympics over raw tonight. My life is incomplete now. {Spoiler}Sarcasm btw
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Jul 30, 2012 23:01:47 GMT -5
Sorry dude, that's just not true.
It takes talent to play crazy just like it takes talent to play ANYTHING well. All three of those women didn't get over just because, they got over because they were talented. You say you're not taking away anything from them, but you absolutely are.
You are making up facts to "prove" her accomplishments in getting her character over are meaningless and easy, and I find that to be really distasteful.
And AJ's mannerisms and emoting were top quality before she was "crazy" too.
|
|
|
Post by Ecks Ecks Ringout Ecks Ecks on Jul 30, 2012 23:04:42 GMT -5
I don't want AJ as GM.
I no longer want anyone as GM, face or heel. I want the "vindictive, meddling, micromanaging matchmaker" concept to die in blazing fire so that we might return to the halcyon days of Jack Tunney and his ilk, before the success of Mr. McMahon made it a rule that we must always have an authority figure who constantly reminds us that he or she is still there.
There was a time when pro wrestling got by just fine without that sort of omnipresent character, where the president or championship committee or what-have-you would interject only when it was important to the story. Outside of that, you'd never see hide nor hair of them. The angles were still good, everything still made sense.
If the WWE braintrust could remember how to write their product that way, maybe they could throw a bone to their wrestlers who have nary an angle to their name, given the cumulative time that would be freed up on the shows.
|
|