wwerules60
El Dandy
"Bring what? a vomit bag? a fig newton?"
Posts: 8,999
|
Post by wwerules60 on Dec 21, 2007 23:05:27 GMT -5
Ok, since you know so much, who wrote tonight's Smackdown? This discussion isn't literally about which writer wrote which particular individual segment. I interpreted it more as which writing era was better - the "Attitude" era when it was primarily Russo, or the modern day "WWE" era which has been spearheaded by Stephanie. And once again, I say it's no coincidence that WWF immediately became watchable when Russo started writing, and immediately started going downhill when he left. What about WCW then?
|
|
|
Post by Raja Lion on Dec 21, 2007 23:06:43 GMT -5
Today, 80% of wrestling is lame ass humor. Even the main eventers like HHH and Cena are more concerned with making dick jokes than acting like they wanna tear somebody's head off. Thanks Steph. I wouldnt blame all of that just on Stephanie. It's the people they're hiring (keep in mind fat oily dancing guy is a writer) and the "style" they've gone. I would bet Stephanie personally writes very little and is more acting as the filter than anything else. The crap is more a result of Vince's ideology (as well as Steph's) to hire "real" "entertainment" writers, rather than wrestling writers, or at the least people who genuinely have an interest in wrestling. If you watch any sitcom these days with lead male characters, you're going to hear the same dick and fart jokes there that you will hear on WWE. The only difference is, the WWE version are more often than not castoffs from cancelled sitcoms, so its subpar to begin with. The constant recycling of storylines is more and more evident lately, and its the same with the sitcom mentality. How many times on Friends and other shitty sitcoms did you see similar stories year in and year out? Wrestling has long recycled storylines, but not at the rate they're doing now. I personally LIKE the entertainment aspect. I took a sabbatical from wrestling from about 92-96 and a big reason for my return was the storylines. The problem now is they don't have the true entertainment talent they did when Attitude exploded combining with good writing (Rock and SCSA at their heights, are lightning in a bottle), compound that with writers that have very little wrestling writing experience and you're going to get the subpar /generic storylines we've been getting since about 2002-03.
|
|
|
Post by Primal Scream on Dec 21, 2007 23:07:46 GMT -5
This discussion isn't literally about which writer wrote which particular individual segment. I interpreted it more as which writing era was better - the "Attitude" era when it was primarily Russo, or the modern day "WWE" era which has been spearheaded by Stephanie. And once again, I say it's no coincidence that WWF immediately became watchable when Russo started writing, and immediately started going downhill when he left. What about WCW then? What about it? Aside from the nWo, turning Hogan heel, pushing Goldberg and repackaging Sting, WCW was usually pretty worthless when it came to reinventing the business. If you're referring to Russo's time in WCW and shit crappy booking, well like I explained earlier, it was because he was no longer working with VKM's creative leash around his neck. They were indeed wrestlings version of Lennon-McCartney. And both floundered when they split up.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Dec 21, 2007 23:08:14 GMT -5
So in other words we're making assumptions and then debating them? I think I'll sit this one out.
Don't let me stop the fun, but I still say you're deluding yourselves if you really think you know what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Primal Scream on Dec 21, 2007 23:13:09 GMT -5
Today, 80% of wrestling is lame ass humor. Even the main eventers like HHH and Cena are more concerned with making dick jokes than acting like they wanna tear somebody's head off. Thanks Steph. I wouldnt blame all of that just on Stephanie. It's the people they're hiring (keep in mind fat oily dancing guy is a writer) and the "style" they've gone. I would bet Stephanie personally writes very little and is more acting as the filter than anything else. The crap is more a result of Vince's ideology (as well as Steph's) to hire "real" "entertainment" writers, rather than wrestling writers, or at the least people who genuinely have an interest in wrestling. If you watch any sitcom these days with lead male characters, you're going to hear the same dick and fart jokes there that you will hear on WWE. The only difference is, the WWE version are more often than not castoffs from cancelled sitcoms, so its subpar to begin with. The constant recycling of storylines is more and more evident lately, and its the same with the sitcom mentality. How many times on Friends and other crapty sitcoms did you see similar stories year in and year out? Wrestling has long recycled storylines, but not at the rate they're doing now. I personally LIKE the entertainment aspect. I took a sabbatical from wrestling from about 92-96 and a big reason for my return was the storylines. The problem now is they don't have the true entertainment talent they did when Attitude exploded combining with good writing (Rock and SCSA at their heights, are lightning in a bottle), compound that with writers that have very little wrestling writing experience and you're going to get the subpar /generic storylines we've been getting since about 2002-03. I completely agree. I also blame a lot of it on Vince's obsession with being accepted as a mainstream form of entertainment. They way he whores WWE out to the "Entertainment Weekly" crowd is sickening. I remember attending live events back in 1999, and the build up video to entertain the fans before the show started was an intense "Desire" video showing wrestling highlights and classic superstar moments. You know what they show to the live crowd now? A five minute montage of celebrities who've been on WWE. Now you see K-Fed, Arnie, Billy Gibbons, Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller before you see any WWE content. The lame ass interview segments on wwe.com where superstars "interview" rap stars and actors?! Who gives a f*** what Kat Von D is doing. She's not fit to lace Mickie James' corset. Trying to involve C-list idiots like John Secada in the show just creates more awkward moments, not to mention boasting about which local football team was given free ringside tickets that particular week. Using Daughtry and Fuel for PPV themes, it goes on and on. Get back to what it was and leave the mainsteam alone.
|
|
|
Post by Raja Lion on Dec 21, 2007 23:15:08 GMT -5
I dont think leaving it alone is smart. I definitely think some of the additions are good for business, the problem more is its overkill. There can be a balance between wrestling and the entertainment world, but its gotta be balanced. Use the celebrity aspect on occasions and make it have an impact, not just for the sake of advertising revenue. Advertising will come if the product you're trying to sell (wrestling) is at the forefront, and it's been secondary for too long.
|
|
|
Post by Primal Scream on Dec 21, 2007 23:25:34 GMT -5
I dont think leaving it alone is smart. I definitely think some of the additions are good for business, the problem more is its overkill. There can be a balance between wrestling and the entertainment world, but its gotta be balanced. Use the celebrity aspect on occasions and make it have an impact, not just for the sake of advertising revenue. Advertising will come if the product you're trying to sell (wrestling) is at the forefront, and it's been secondary for too long. True, and you make some excellent points dude. But I think part of WWE's appeal pre-2000 was that it seemed to exist in it's own little world. It was like a bubble, not even part of America. The music was like nothing you heard on the radio, and you couldn't buy it in stores. Think of Jake Roberts theme, or the old Royal Rumble intro music. It seemed so much more "special" than Limp Bizkit and Drowning Pool. Similarly, you would never encounter somebody like Ultimate Warrior or Andre The Giant in your real life. On the other hand, you could run into guys like Matt Hardy, CM Punk and Gregory Helms (with their myspaces and blogs) in the nearest BestBuy. It seemed exclusive and underground. The costumes, the stories, the names, the stories. Now it's just generic, over exposed disposable trash thats right in there with Survivor, Jackass and Dancing with the Stars.
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,049
|
Post by repomark on Dec 21, 2007 23:27:02 GMT -5
Yeah.... Abyss went to jail for a few years for shooting his dad, then it turned out he was covering up for his mom, who had actually killed his dad, then Sting tried to convert him to Christianity. Oh, and he has another dark secret now as well. Man, that's all Russo. Well all you need to know is this: Russo began writing scripts for WWE in 1996, and he left in 2000. Coincidentally, 1996 was the year WWE slowly began getting watchable again. He was the main writer all through the Attitude era (the greatest era in wrestling crapory). And 2000 was the beginning of the end when storylines started becoming nonsensical and the wrong kind of wrestlers started getting pushed. That should say it all when it comes to the McMahon-Russo partnership. The fact is isn't 96 the year that wcw started destroying wwe in the ratings? It certainly was not the year wwe started turning around the ratings - that was 98. Anyhoo - beyond any shadow of a doubt Russo is the worst culprit here given that he is the only one that managed to make a company who has created storylines that have made the masses switch off to the extent of a company becoming non existant. Russo has made mistakes that cannot be fathomed. He has created incomprehensable storylines and ditched them before conclusion. The fact is, as was mentioned by a previous poster and by Mene Gene on the Monday Night Wars DVD, Vince Russo needed a Vince McMahon to keep his creative juices into some form of decipherable and watchable format. I don't know how much Vince Russo can be credited for the Attitude era. But I know Stephanie has not created an anarchic nonsensical situation that viewers flock away from to a capacity to render a company insolvent. However dull the current WWE product.
|
|
|
Post by Primal Scream on Dec 21, 2007 23:31:45 GMT -5
Well all you need to know is this: Russo began writing scripts for WWE in 1996, and he left in 2000. Coincidentally, 1996 was the year WWE slowly began getting watchable again. He was the main writer all through the Attitude era (the greatest era in wrestling crapory). And 2000 was the beginning of the end when storylines started becoming nonsensical and the wrong kind of wrestlers started getting pushed. That should say it all when it comes to the McMahon-Russo partnership. The fact is isn't 96 the year that wcw started destroying wwe in the ratings? It certainly was not the year wwe started getting watchable - that was 98. Anyhoo - beyond any shadow of a doubt Russo is the worst culprit here given that he is the only one that managed to make a company who has created storylines that have made the masses switch off to the extent of a company becoming non existant. Russo has made mistakes that cannot be fathomed. He has created incomprehensable storylines and ditched them before conclusion. The fact is, as was mentioned by a previous poster and by Mene Gene on the Monday Night Wars DVD, Vince Russo needed a Vince McMahon to keep his creative juices into some form of decipherable and watchable format. I don't know how much Vince Russo can be credited for the Attitude era. But I know Stephanie has not created an anarchic nonsensical situation that viewers flock away from to a capacity to render a company insolvent. However dull the current WWE product. Just because WWE was losing the ratings war doesn't mean it wasn't a watchable show. After the terrible 1994 and 1995 years, 1996 and 1997 were actually pretty damn entertainment. The rise of Stone Cold and his feud with Bret ,the awesome Hart Foundation-DX feud, Goldust, Mankind, HBK's very enjoyable title reign, Undertaker-Kane and the heel Paul Bearer. 1998 was when WWF hit it's creative stride, but to say that 1996 and 1997 weren't watchable is an injustice. "The fact is, as was mentioned by a previous poster and by Mene Gene on the Monday Night Wars DVD, Vince Russo needed a Vince McMahon to keep his creative juices into some form of decipherable and watchable format." - I agree with this 100%. My point remains the same - a creative fountain like Russo being filtered by McMahon is a WINNING TEAM. A creative team of B-level sitcom writers, led by Stephanie and filtered by McMahon has led to nothing but stale, repetitive feuds and BS college humor. Remember when Cena vs Edge and Cena vs Umaga were Raw main events week in and week out? Thats nothing but bad writing.
|
|
|
Post by Dick Foley on Dec 21, 2007 23:35:35 GMT -5
Stephanie is better but, I don't think she is as involved as all the NEWZ sites say she is. Whomever is planning the matches sucks. I think the current in-ring product leaves alot to be desired.
Russo is crap. If he was go great he would have saved WCW and TNA would be pulling down 4s in the ratings. Russo benifited from having the best roster WWF has ever had and having Patterson make the matches.
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,049
|
Post by repomark on Dec 21, 2007 23:35:59 GMT -5
I wouldnt blame all of that just on Stephanie. It's the people they're hiring (keep in mind fat oily dancing guy is a writer) and the "style" they've gone. I would bet Stephanie personally writes very little and is more acting as the filter than anything else. The crap is more a result of Vince's ideology (as well as Steph's) to hire "real" "entertainment" writers, rather than wrestling writers, or at the least people who genuinely have an interest in wrestling. If you watch any sitcom these days with lead male characters, you're going to hear the same dick and fart jokes there that you will hear on WWE. The only difference is, the WWE version are more often than not castoffs from cancelled sitcoms, so its subpar to begin with. The constant recycling of storylines is more and more evident lately, and its the same with the sitcom mentality. How many times on Friends and other crapty sitcoms did you see similar stories year in and year out? Wrestling has long recycled storylines, but not at the rate they're doing now. I personally LIKE the entertainment aspect. I took a sabbatical from wrestling from about 92-96 and a big reason for my return was the storylines. The problem now is they don't have the true entertainment talent they did when Attitude exploded combining with good writing (Rock and SCSA at their heights, are lightning in a bottle), compound that with writers that have very little wrestling writing experience and you're going to get the subpar /generic storylines we've been getting since about 2002-03. I completely agree. I also blame a lot of it on Vince's obsession with being accepted as a mainstream form of entertainment. They way he whores WWE out to the "Entertainment Weekly" crowd is sickening. I remember attending live events back in 1999, and the build up video to entertain the fans before the show started was an intense "Desire" video showing wrestling highlights and classic superstar moments. You know what they show to the live crowd now? A five minute montage of celebrities who've been on WWE. Now you see K-Fed, Arnie, Billy Gibbons, Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller before you see any WWE content. The lame ass interview segments on wwe.com where superstars "interview" rap stars and actors?! Who gives a smurf what Kat Von D is doing. She's not fit to lace Mickie James' corset. Trying to involve C-list idiots like John Secada in the show just creates more awkward moments, not to mention boasting about which local football team was given free ringside tickets that particular week. Using Daughtry and Fuel for PPV themes, it goes on and on. Get back to what it was and leave the mainsteam alone. Have to make an additon here. The fact is - if anything the WWE/F was more obsessed with celebrities and the mainstream prior to the present in previous times. Wrestlemania 1 saw Mr T, Liberacce (forgive the spelling there), Muhammed Ali. Wrestlemania 2 saw even more celebrities. The Attitude era saw Mike Tyson as guest referee at Wrestlemania 14. As for "get back to what it was and leave the main stream alone" it could very reasonably be argued that Vinnie Mac/Stephanie is trying to go with the same old formula he always did. Hard to "get back to what it was" when you never strayed from the same old ideals in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Primal Scream on Dec 21, 2007 23:44:00 GMT -5
I completely agree. I also blame a lot of it on Vince's obsession with being accepted as a mainstream form of entertainment. They way he whores WWE out to the "Entertainment Weekly" crowd is sickening. I remember attending live events back in 1999, and the build up video to entertain the fans before the show started was an intense "Desire" video showing wrestling highlights and classic superstar moments. You know what they show to the live crowd now? A five minute montage of celebrities who've been on WWE. Now you see K-Fed, Arnie, Billy Gibbons, Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller before you see any WWE content. The lame ass interview segments on wwe.com where superstars "interview" rap stars and actors?! Who gives a smurf what Kat Von D is doing. She's not fit to lace Mickie James' corset. Trying to involve C-list idiots like John Secada in the show just creates more awkward moments, not to mention boasting about which local football team was given free ringside tickets that particular week. Using Daughtry and Fuel for PPV themes, it goes on and on. Get back to what it was and leave the mainsteam alone. Have to make an additon here. The fact is - if anything the WWE/F was more obsessed with celebrities and the mainstream prior to the present in previous times. Wrestlemania 1 saw Mr T, Liberacce (forgive the spelling there), Muhammed Ali. Wrestlemania 2 saw even more celebrities. The Attitude era saw Mike Tyson as guest referee at Wrestlemania 14. As for "get back to what it was and leave the main stream alone" it could very reasonably be argued that Vinnie Mac/Stephanie is trying to go with the same old formula he always did. Hard to "get back to what it was" when you never strayed from the same old ideals in the first place. Yeah but in the case of WM1 and WM14, the celebs were there to bring the worlds eyes and the global media to view the event and guarantee successful PPVs. WM 1 and WM14 were pretty much 'make or break' PPVS, and by all accounts if they had failed, then WWF probably would've gone out of business. It just smacks of desperation these days. The John Secada thing is a perfect example. And as I mentioned before, the opening video that they show at the live event just smacks of "hey, look how many celebs we've been able to attract" and scraps from the masters table when they should be concentrating on their athletes and their sacrifices.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Dec 22, 2007 0:01:43 GMT -5
Russo is crap. If he was go great he would have saved WCW and TNA would be pulling down 4s in the ratings. Russo benifited from having the best roster WWF has ever had and having Patterson make the matches. Again, I think the point a lot of us are making are that Russo and McMahon made a hell of a team. They challenged each other, canceled out each other's flaws, and made some damn compelling television. And the Russo era having the best roster era? It was incredibly sparse in comparison to 2000 or even today. Sure, you had Austin, Rock, and Foley coming into their prime, but the undercard was nothing to write home about. Russo helped make a lot of those guys stand out the way they did. He's probably one of the best character creators in the business. It was mentioned earlier in the thread, but Russo's biggest fault is that he can write very difficult scripts to bring to life unless the production team and talent get behind it fully. It doesn't surprise me he wasn't as successful in WCW since the company was in shambles by the time he got there.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 78,328
|
Post by bob on Dec 22, 2007 3:22:32 GMT -5
Stephanie for one reason: Katie Vick was her idea
|
|
|
Post by Hensley on Dec 22, 2007 5:56:33 GMT -5
Steph, Russo had his glory period, though it's likely to never return again...
|
|
HRH The KING
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS
Posts: 15,079
|
Post by HRH The KING on Dec 22, 2007 5:57:04 GMT -5
Stephanie is worse
|
|
|
Post by Avalanche Alvarez on Dec 22, 2007 11:10:44 GMT -5
Easy. Stephanie. Even at Russo's worst (and where did he get some of those ideas from in the first place?), the writing in the WWE is stale as all Hell and they're doing NOTHING to change that.
|
|
doytch
Trap-Jaw
hahaha
Posts: 298
|
Post by doytch on Dec 22, 2007 11:24:42 GMT -5
stephanie have job for boobs, not write
|
|
|
Post by Dynamite Kid on Dec 22, 2007 11:31:58 GMT -5
...yes because obviously people get behind-the-scenes jobs in their father's company for their racks.
|
|
|
Post by strykerdarksilence on Dec 22, 2007 11:36:05 GMT -5
I`m quite the Russo apologist, Stephanie hasn`t written anything that has compelled me to keep watching.
|
|