The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Nov 20, 2007 23:31:39 GMT -5
How do you know? And how do you know CHIKARA guys don't read scripted promos? There's a lot of bias involved in this.
I'm not knocking CHIKARA, I'm just saying that there is no logical rationale for why McMahon's exploding limo was stupid but a CM Punk Chipmunk isn't stupid. As far as I'm concerned, people can like whatever they like but coming up with these lame excuses is just...well, lame.
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Nov 20, 2007 23:35:49 GMT -5
i love chikara. never really got into it until i started checking out these boards but i am very thankful i did.
as far as people being biased, or hating wwe if they did the same thing, how would you know? wwe rarely does anything the way chikara does so what are you basing this on?
|
|
|
Post by Psy on Nov 20, 2007 23:35:59 GMT -5
How do you know? And how do you know CHIKARA guys don't read scripted promos? There's a lot of bias involved in this. I'm not knocking CHIKARA, I'm just saying that there is no logical rationale for why McMahon's exploding limo was stupid but a CM Punk Chipmunk isn't stupid. As far as I'm concerned, people can like whatever they like but coming up with these lame excuses is just...well, lame. Bias : a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice. I'm curious as to how you think he's acting on bias here. It's pretty well-documented that WWE guys have the majority of their interviews scripted by writers. That's not to say that they can't ad lib, but most just don't. Hell, they started writing Cena's 'freestyles' for him. As for CHIKARA guys not reading scripted promos, I don't know. Maybe they write them themselves, I don't know. I think a better word would be "assumption". "You're assuming a lot of things."
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Nov 20, 2007 23:37:27 GMT -5
I think the word bias applies perfectly. Why not?
Although I'm certainly not disputing that a lot of assumptions are being made.
|
|
|
Post by Psy on Nov 20, 2007 23:40:44 GMT -5
It implies he has a predilection for one or the other, which he has not demonstrated. It's been said time and again that WWE Creative is somewhat strict with their performer's performances and how their characters are presented. I don't think him mentioning/alluding to this shows bias.
Edit: Nevermind, I can see what you mean by 'bias', but I don't think it's a strictly negative thing here.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Nov 20, 2007 23:43:12 GMT -5
Right, but it's the way that idea is being implemented into the discussion that shows bias. If a WWE wrestler is involved in a goofy angle it's not natural because it's being scripted, but if it's a CHIKARA wrestler it's better because it's just guys having fun.
That not only doesn't make sense, but it demonstrates a bias against WWE guys.
|
|
|
Post by Psy on Nov 20, 2007 23:45:39 GMT -5
Well, I think he makes a good point in it though. When you're on TV in front of millions you're less inclined to be so goofy all of the time. In those circumstances you have more motivation to be more 'mainstream'. It's sort of the same deal with small businesses that work a niche market, I think.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Nov 20, 2007 23:47:39 GMT -5
While it could be argued that things like bringing in Kevin Federline might be attempts by WWE to appeal to the mainstream, I don't see how that applies to goofy angles or whether or not they're stupid or just guys being goofy.
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Nov 20, 2007 23:56:31 GMT -5
so for anyone who thinks chikara fans would hate wwe for doing the same, can anyone give an example of a wwe wrestler with a chikara type gimmick?
|
|
|
Post by Timmy8271 on Nov 21, 2007 0:01:56 GMT -5
so for anyone who thinks chikara fans would hate wwe for doing the same, can anyone give an example of a wwe wrestler with a chikara type gimmick? Festus and Hornswoggle. I like Chikara but not for what everyone else like it for. I like that Quack has brought a lucha style to America in form of a promotion. It's one of the main reasons I can't get into ROH, lack of lucha. I can see why some people don't like it. The comedy stuff can get a little annoying after a while(sorry but I don't see the appeal in Hydra and yes I watched the videos.)
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Nov 21, 2007 0:03:47 GMT -5
so for anyone who thinks chikara fans would hate wwe for doing the same, can anyone give an example of a wwe wrestler with a chikara type gimmick? Festus and Hornswoggle. I like Chikara but not for what everyone else like it for. I like that Quack has brought a lucha style to America in form of a promotion. It's one of the main reasons I can't get into ROH, lack of lucha. I can see why some people don't like it. The comedy stuff can get a little annoying after a while(sorry but I don't see the appeal in Hydra and yes I watched the videos.) if you say so. personally i don't think either character is approached the way it would in chikara and think those are much more wwe style characters. i am not hating on either character.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 21, 2007 0:05:55 GMT -5
Right, but it's the way that idea is being implemented into the discussion that shows bias. If a WWE wrestler is involved in a goofy angle it's not natural because it's being scripted, but if it's a CHIKARA wrestler it's better because it's just guys having fun. That not only doesn't make sense, but it demonstrates a bias against WWE guys. I don't get what you're saying. What you just said should be true: there is an enormous difference between a "funny skit" that's totally scripted and one that's ad libbed or mostly played off the cuff. That's not to say there aren't times when something scripted works better, but when going for the kind of humor that tends to work well in wrestling, allowing guys control over their characters is usually the way to go. So...yes. If it's not scripted, it IS "more natural". That's the inherent nature of ad lib, it's natural. And, yes, its usually somewhat easy to tell who's performing a scripted promo and who's going mostly on their own.
|
|
|
Post by ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul on Nov 21, 2007 1:04:40 GMT -5
I have seen some of the stuff, promos and matches, and sometimes I laugh, sometimes I don't.
I get it, campy, goofy, some serious stuff, lotsa lucha. Yeah.
What will kill it for me, like most other stuff, will be the fans. I mean, we're discussing opinions, which aren't right or wrong, or even based on any fact outside of "I did/didn't like this." There is no need to be an apologist, you like CHIKARA, cool. I like wrestling in general, and if I like some particular promotion I will search out their stuff to watch. And if I happen to not agree with you, being dismissive of me isn't going to keep conversation going.
And I see that, I see the fans of particular brand be dismissive of people who aren't fans of their brand, or fans of another brand.
|
|
|
Post by I'm The Cool One on Nov 21, 2007 1:32:46 GMT -5
I have seen some of the stuff, promos and matches, and sometimes I laugh, sometimes I don't. I get it, campy, goofy, some serious stuff, lotsa lucha. Yeah. What will kill it for me, like most other stuff, will be the fans. I mean, we're discussing opinions, which aren't right or wrong, or even based on any fact outside of "I did/didn't like this." There is no need to be an apologist, you like CHIKARA, cool. I like wrestling in general, and if I like some particular promotion I will search out their stuff to watch. And if I happen to not agree with you, being dismissive of me isn't going to keep conversation going. And I see that, I see the fans of particular brand be dismissive of people who aren't fans of their brand, or fans of another brand. that also goes both ways as well. if you dont like CHIKARA then dont like it. it's all good. it's obviously not for everyone. people who like CHIKARA are the ones who enjoy it... if you dont enjoy it then you're not going to no matter how many times this point is argued. it's rediculous.
|
|
|
Post by ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul on Nov 21, 2007 1:51:31 GMT -5
I have seen some of the stuff, promos and matches, and sometimes I laugh, sometimes I don't. I get it, campy, goofy, some serious stuff, lotsa lucha. Yeah. What will kill it for me, like most other stuff, will be the fans. I mean, we're discussing opinions, which aren't right or wrong, or even based on any fact outside of "I did/didn't like this." There is no need to be an apologist, you like CHIKARA, cool. I like wrestling in general, and if I like some particular promotion I will search out their stuff to watch. And if I happen to not agree with you, being dismissive of me isn't going to keep conversation going. And I see that, I see the fans of particular brand be dismissive of people who aren't fans of their brand, or fans of another brand. that also goes both ways as well. if you dont like CHIKARA then dont like it. it's all good. it's obviously not for everyone. people who like CHIKARA are the ones who enjoy it... if you dont enjoy it then you're not going to no matter how many times this point is argued. it's rediculous. I was speaking in general. I said CHIKARA is hit or miss, and admittedly I haven't seen a lot. My primary point is that if you like something, and are a fan, then you will be an apologist for what you like, and as such... well you can't argue effectively against people who can't see what you see. Personally? CHIKARA is a mood thing thus far. Maybe after I get some DVDs that'll change.
|
|
Boku AKA Da Green Guy
El Dandy
WC's Resident Pirate Otaku and Official Scapegoat
Always and Forever, Hurricane.
Posts: 8,371
|
Post by Boku AKA Da Green Guy on Nov 21, 2007 2:08:43 GMT -5
One that confuses me...
CHIKARA is a comedy based fed. And WWE prides itself as a serious fed.
Yet CHIKARA can have serious guys & feuds within the comedy. But WWE can't have goofy gimmicks like Santino & Little Bastard?
It's more of a devil's advocate question than anything but the logic hypocrisy in there is glaring.
|
|
|
Post by I'm The Cool One on Nov 21, 2007 2:32:27 GMT -5
that also goes both ways as well. if you dont like CHIKARA then dont like it. it's all good. it's obviously not for everyone. people who like CHIKARA are the ones who enjoy it... if you dont enjoy it then you're not going to no matter how many times this point is argued. it's rediculous. I was speaking in general. I said CHIKARA is hit or miss, and admittedly I haven't seen a lot. My primary point is that if you like something, and are a fan, then you will be an apologist for what you like, and as such... well you can't argue effectively against people who can't see what you see. Personally? CHIKARA is a mood thing thus far. Maybe after I get some DVDs that'll change. alright. i must have misread your post then. i agree with you on the apologist thing. i just wanted to make sure it was stated that it's not just the CHIKARA fans but it's seemingly everyone in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Nov 21, 2007 7:18:54 GMT -5
One that confuses me... CHIKARA is a comedy based fed. And WWE prides itself as a serious fed. Yet CHIKARA can have serious guys & feuds within the comedy. But WWE can't have goofy gimmicks like Santino & Little Bastard? It's more of a devil's advocate question than anything but the logic hypocrisy in there is glaring. Again, what you're attempting to do is compare apples and oranges. The comedy presented in CHIKARA is completely different from the comedy presented in WWE, and given the nature of both kinds of comedy (ad lib/spurred on by the wrestlers themselves vs. written by the whichever show's writing team), there's no point in trying to find many similarities between them. The fact is that CHIKARA has no writers (for good or ill), and WWE relies heavily on their's. Ergo, you won't see the same kind of comedy or presentation in either promotion, and comparing the situations of the two is pretty fruitless. I'm not saying one's better than the other (though I always prefer ad lib in wrestling), but, again, apples and oranges, they're too different.
|
|
|
Post by I'm The Cool One on Nov 21, 2007 11:32:26 GMT -5
One that confuses me... CHIKARA is a comedy based fed. And WWE prides itself as a serious fed. Yet CHIKARA can have serious guys & feuds within the comedy. But WWE can't have goofy gimmicks like Santino & Little Bastard? It's more of a devil's advocate question than anything but the logic hypocrisy in there is glaring. by that same token though... why is it that Richard Pryor is funny as hell. Yet Billy Crystal sucks? They're both comedy, shouldn't the both be funny? I personally like CHIKARA and give them more leeway with the gimmicks and the like sheerly because I find it funny. Alot of what I see with Santino and Hornswoggle is just not funny to me. Therefore, IMO, it sucks. Alot of what I see in CHIKARA is funny to me. Therefore, IMO, it dosen't suck. You're trying too damn hard to base people's opinion on some kind of loose system of facts. You just can't do that. Some people like it and some people don't. That's all there is to it.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Nov 21, 2007 12:35:19 GMT -5
One that confuses me... CHIKARA is a comedy based fed. And WWE prides itself as a serious fed. Yet CHIKARA can have serious guys & feuds within the comedy. But WWE can't have goofy gimmicks like Santino & Little Bastard? It's more of a devil's advocate question than anything but the logic hypocrisy in there is glaring. by that same token though... why is it that Richard Pryor is funny as hell. Yet Billy Crystal sucks? They're both comedy, shouldn't the both be funny? I personally like CHIKARA and give them more leeway with the gimmicks and the like sheerly because I find it funny. Alot of what I see with Santino and Hornswoggle is just not funny to me. Therefore, IMO, it sucks. Alot of what I see in CHIKARA is funny to me. Therefore, IMO, it dosen't suck. You're trying too damn hard to base people's opinion on some kind of loose system of facts. You just can't do that. Some people like it and some people don't. That's all there is to it. That's pretty much what I was saying. You can't really try to find some kind of logical rationale to somehow "prove" your opinion, especially when it's all just conjecture.
|
|