|
Post by eJm on Dec 1, 2017 10:21:57 GMT -5
1. People were outraged before the match occurred. They were mad that race was used to make a bad guy look like a piece of shit. That newspaper article (don't remember which paper) was before the match happened. It was against the promo, not against the outcome of the match. I don't think anyone here, or elsewhere, is disputing that Nakamura should have won that match from a story perspective. 2. I blatantly said at the end of my post that WWE doesn't execute those angles well. It was merely an example of people getting mad at a bad guy being a bad guy ie a morally reprehensible person. I was discussing the promo itself, which WWE had to apologize for because people reacted like that was a real person stating his real opinion not a person playing a character on tv, not the match that followed. Maybe you weren't talking to me, but you did use my exact verbiage so I assumed the post was directed my way. 20 years ago, if Tiger Ali Singh said something similar to Taka Michinoku, the media wouldn't have blown up like it did with Jinder/Nakamura. Well, if we want to get super technical here, A LOT of companies and organisations were outraged at WWF during the Attitude Era. One of the reasons why, for all the money WWF was making, they were NOWHERE near advertiser-friendly as they are now.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 10:26:34 GMT -5
That is a little different.. since it was acting and a script.. no different then watching a movie. so those 2 are completey different things Movie standards change, too. Entertainment changes to reflect societal changes. Exactly, minstrel shows happened for a looooooooooong time.
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Dec 1, 2017 10:28:05 GMT -5
1. People were outraged before the match occurred. They were mad that race was used to make a bad guy look like a piece of shit. That newspaper article (don't remember which paper) was before the match happened. It was against the promo, not against the outcome of the match. I don't think anyone here, or elsewhere, is disputing that Nakamura should have won that match from a story perspective. 2. I blatantly said at the end of my post that WWE doesn't execute those angles well. It was merely an example of people getting mad at a bad guy being a bad guy ie a morally reprehensible person. I was discussing the promo itself, which WWE had to apologize for because people reacted like that was a real person stating his real opinion not a person playing a character on tv, not the match that followed. Maybe you weren't talking to me, but you did use my exact verbiage so I assumed the post was directed my way. 20 years ago, if Tiger Ali Singh said something similar to Taka Michinoku, the media wouldn't have blown up like it did with Jinder/Nakamura. Anyways, I say we stop talking about this. As seen in the Hogan and Warrior threads of the past, all this talk will devolve into a debate about political correctness and IIRC politics is banned from discussion here. Political correctness isn't entirely the same thing as politics.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 10:30:19 GMT -5
I'm not offended by the promo, I'm offended by him not seeing anything wrong with it.. in 2017. Good point, there are some things I'll agree on that we are too PC on, but that is not one of them. Lawler seems set in his ways, and I'm not surprised he doesn't see what would be wrong with it now. Though to be fair the whole basis of goldust back then would be pretty offensive now too, especially in 96 before he got marlena with his fued with Razor Ramon and Ahmed Johnson. Thing is, we're kind of getting a version of this in 2017, and people are loving it. Sexually ambiguous with homoerotic undertones? Based on another entertainment medium? Velveteen Dream is the 2017 version of Goldust.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 10:33:19 GMT -5
20 years ago, if Tiger Ali Singh said something similar to Taka Michinoku, the media wouldn't have blown up like it did with Jinder/Nakamura. Well, if we want to get super technical here, A LOT of companies and organisations were outraged at WWF during the Attitude Era. One of the reasons why, for all the money WWF was making, they were NOWHERE near advertiser-friendly as they are now. Yeah, another person mentioned how you couldn't have a porn star and a pimp... You couldn't back then, that's one of the reasons the RTC was created. They were bashing the moral crusaders while giving into them by repackaging offensive gimmicks.
|
|
|
Post by DoubleDare on Dec 1, 2017 10:43:32 GMT -5
Good point, there are some things I'll agree on that we are too PC on, but that is not one of them. Lawler seems set in his ways, and I'm not surprised he doesn't see what would be wrong with it now. Though to be fair the whole basis of goldust back then would be pretty offensive now too, especially in 96 before he got marlena with his fued with Razor Ramon and Ahmed Johnson. Thing is, we're kind of getting a version of this in 2017, and people are loving it. Sexually ambiguous with homoerotic undertones? Based on another entertainment medium? Velveteen Dream is the 2017 version of Goldust. Exactly, but so far at least, no heel has resorted to using those terms, because it is really wrong now. It's no different how the 2017 version of IT, Stranger Things, have bully characters that are clearly racist, but neither use any racist terms, since we are at a point, those words should never be used. Whereas the 1990 version of IT the bully did use very racist terms (which surprised me, considering it aired on ABC then).
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 10:51:56 GMT -5
Thing is, we're kind of getting a version of this in 2017, and people are loving it. Sexually ambiguous with homoerotic undertones? Based on another entertainment medium? Velveteen Dream is the 2017 version of Goldust. Exactly, but so far at least, no heel has resorted to using those terms, because it is really wrong now. It's no different how the 2017 version of IT, Stranger Things, have bully characters that are clearly racist, but neither use any racist terms, since we are at a point, those words should never be used. Whereas the 1990 version of IT the bully did use very racist terms (which surprised me, considering it aired on ABC then). Yeah, there's a way to do these things without being assholes about it.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Dec 1, 2017 11:14:37 GMT -5
'They've been doing it for years' is an atrocious justification for anything. America was burning witches at the stake for hundreds of years. The UK was castrating and imprisoning gays for centuries. That is a little different.. since it was acting and a script.. no different then watching a movie. so those 2 are completey different things Okay then. In theatre, all parts were played by men, for centuries. Women were not allowed to act. James Bond used to beat the shit out of women in films on a regular basis. How about the Black and White Minstrel show, which ran on British TV until the late 70s?
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Dec 1, 2017 11:18:30 GMT -5
Good point, there are some things I'll agree on that we are too PC on, but that is not one of them. Lawler seems set in his ways, and I'm not surprised he doesn't see what would be wrong with it now. Though to be fair the whole basis of goldust back then would be pretty offensive now too, especially in 96 before he got marlena with his fued with Razor Ramon and Ahmed Johnson. Thing is, we're kind of getting a version of this in 2017, and people are loving it. Sexually ambiguous with homoerotic undertones? Based on another entertainment medium? Velveteen Dream is the 2017 version of Goldust. I haven't been watching. Is Goldust a heel or face?
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 11:24:17 GMT -5
Thing is, we're kind of getting a version of this in 2017, and people are loving it. Sexually ambiguous with homoerotic undertones? Based on another entertainment medium? Velveteen Dream is the 2017 version of Goldust. I haven't been watching. Is Goldust a heel or face? Well, Goldust just loses lol Velveteen is a heel who has been stalking Aleister Black, wearing his clothes, making suggestive moves and wanting Black to say his name. The reaction's just been "this is the best feud going today".
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Dec 1, 2017 11:34:49 GMT -5
I haven't been watching. Is Goldust a heel or face? Well, Goldust just loses lol Velveteen is a heel who has been stalking Aleister Black, wearing his clothes, making suggestive moves and wanting Black to say his name. The reaction's just been "this is the best feud going today". Yeah, I saw Velveteen during Takeover. I got the idea that he's a heel who happens to be gay, while the original Goldust was a heel because he was gay. Not sure what you'd call Rico.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,076
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 1, 2017 11:55:56 GMT -5
Well, Goldust just loses lol Velveteen is a heel who has been stalking Aleister Black, wearing his clothes, making suggestive moves and wanting Black to say his name. The reaction's just been "this is the best feud going today". Yeah, I saw Velveteen during Takeover. I got the idea that he's a heel who happens to be gay, while the original Goldust was a heel because he was gay. Not sure what you'd call Rico. Given Dream was basically given the same "obsessed with other wrestler" feud they gave the original Goldust a few times, it could have gone very badly wrong. Rico was... Adrian Street by someone who knew nothing about Adrian Street.
|
|
|
Post by DoubleDare on Dec 1, 2017 12:09:59 GMT -5
And yet one year after that comment lawlers son would be doing the same gimmick being a heel using those tactics once he started teaming with scott taylor.
Tbf I thought the comment Lawler said seemed even out of place in 1997.
|
|
|
Post by chronocross on Dec 1, 2017 12:12:13 GMT -5
I remember going "Oh snap" he went there at the time when I watched it with my friends and yeah there's no way it would fly nowadays, along with a ton of other stuff from back then.
|
|
|
Post by The 1Watcher Experience on Dec 1, 2017 15:54:09 GMT -5
The “shorter” f word was one of Lawler’s go to insults for years down south. There’s a video on YouTube of him talking to Jimmy Valiant where he uses it and pops the crowd. He seemed to enjoy using the word. It got a reaction for him. It was a different era. There wasn’t social media and as much political correctness as there is now so people got away with a lot of inappropriate stuff years ago. I’m not defending him by any means. I’m fine with that word never being used again but are we going to constantly keep bringing up stuff that’s unacceptable now to bury everything and everyone in the past that we can? It seems to be going on a lot more often lately.
|
|
|
Post by GuyOfOwnage on Dec 1, 2017 16:05:52 GMT -5
If you're going to have a heel show prejudice or discrimination of any kind, they better damn well get every last bit of comeuppance for it by the end of the feud. Whether you intend to or not, if you have the bigot heel win that feud, you're telling your audience that you think that kind of behavior is okay and shouldn't be punished. And yes, I know that bigotry and hatred sadly win sometimes in real life, but wrestling should be an escape from real world bullshit, not an extension of it.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Dec 1, 2017 18:24:13 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not going to rant like I would like to about it but THAT word and others like it are NEVER ok. I don't give a damn if you're a "heel". Call me pc or whatever buzzwords people use but until it affects you personally you'll never know how deeply those words can cut. That's all I'm saying about it. ?? This is a narrative, where the heel is bigoted and either gets defeated or changes his ways. It is useful in all forms of fiction, and i see no reason why it should be any different from a film than a wrestling show. Now when the narrative is that bigotry is 'right' ala WM 19, that's a different manner. I even think that the bigot can win the blow off match, but it requires perfect handling, a truly great narrative and reason. The overall theme needs to be the bigot is wrong. But it can be done. As with every story in the WWE , it is very rarely the subject matter, it is always how it is portrayed and executed.
|
|
|
Post by chronocross on Dec 1, 2017 18:31:01 GMT -5
I believe Lawler won this match also over Goldust as it was a KOTR 1997 qualifier and the crowd cheered for Lawler over Goldust as well as they were in one of the towns Lawler ran in Evansville, IN. That's how the times were back then, not excusing it but that's how it was and it obviously would not happen today.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2017 19:00:22 GMT -5
I get what he's trying to say, I think he just worded it poorly. I honestly don't think King is sticking up for the idea of calling some dude on the street a f*****. I think he's just saying there was a point in time, as recently as 20 years ago, where pretty much anything and everything was fair game to try and get heel heat. Now alot of people don't see that as a character getting heel heat, they see it as a real person saying real things. Look at the Jinder/Nakamura thing, that entire segment was set up to show that Jinder was a hypocritical, sleazy, racist piece of shit but people completely lost their minds over it (ignoring the fact that the segment itself sucked, I'm just talking the content). I'm of the belief that damn near anything should be fair game in the entertainment business when handled correctly, but I'm also of the belief that WWE lacks the subtlety to pull stuff like that off. However, there are companies I would have faith in doing that. The problem with the idea of it is that the business has put way too much of reality into itself for anything to be fully separated from the real life person portraying it which WWE did to themselves.
|
|
Chuck Conry
Dennis Stamp
zombies DON'T Run
Posts: 3,726
|
Post by Chuck Conry on Dec 1, 2017 19:04:11 GMT -5
Anyone remember Owen Hart leading a WCW crowd into chanting this same F word at Rip Rogers back in the day? Different time. Doesn't make it right at all, but the word was tossed around a lot back then.
|
|