|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 27, 2007 12:30:17 GMT -5
I'm not saying that TNA has to be everything in your life. The problem is people doing anything and everything to give crap about TNA, even when it makes no damn sense. TNA fans aren't the problem. The people that complain mostly shouldn't be listened to cause they seem to hate EVERYTHING! Apparently, no one should be getting pushed except the guys who spent some time in ROH, no one of the favorites is allowed to lose, get beat up, or in general look human, Don or Mike mention the Rellik thing once a show, and all of a sudden it's ungodly repetition, and on and on and on. Why should anyone listen when your opinions change every 10 minutes, depending on what news story you hear or what third hand info you get? A lot of the stuff that people complain about aren't there, so they need to stop. Stop thinking that TNA wants to bury everyone who's young and want to push 60 year old wrestlers to the moon. There you go again... just because someone has something to say that isn't "TNA kills!!",.. it immediately must mean they hate TNA. They did put Bob Backlund over the MCMG's earlier in the year... As someone who isn't a ROHbot... I can say that TNA puts out 50/50 on the crap scale. 50% is still a failure... when one hour makes me happy to be a wrestling fan, but the other half makes me have flashbacks of 1998... something is obviously wrong. Dude, he's really not coming off like he's "losing it" or anything. I mean, just look around, anyway; there are constant "TNA is awful!" threads that tend to harp on the same unfounded points very, very often, and will slam anything TNA attempts, no matter what it might be. Honestly, people are SO desperate for a viable alternative to the WWE that they'll take whatever's out there and microanalyze the thing to death. TNA is silly entertainment with some solid action mixed in. Go into it expecting anything more, and you'll find yourself sorely disappointed. There are DEFINITELY things I'd like to see TNA change and/or improve on. Like I said, they really lack when it comes to building a killer blood feud, something ROH usually does very well. But TNA does silly comedy pretty well, presents some unpredictable matches pretty consistently, and has a deep enough talent roster to ensure that you rarely see "dud" matches on pay per view. It is what it is; a person can either take the parts they like and enjoy them, or say "too much of this show isn't my cup of tea, I'm walking away".
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 12:30:21 GMT -5
Remember WCW 2000? With all the heel/fact turns at the time, and all the endless "shoots," and everything else, it was near impossible to know what the hell was going on. But that wasn't what I would call confusing. If anything Russo's constant swerves actually made the show boring and predictable. I remember the storyline where Mike Awesome threw Chris Kanyon off the top of a cage. The next month was all about DDP wanting get revenge on Awesome for his friend. But Paige visiting Kanyon in the hospital and tear-filled promos, we all knew what was going to happen. I recall the PPV match where Paige and Awesome were going to fight, and Kanyon in his wheelchair supporting his friend, and I'm in a room full of people rolling their eyes saying, "Gee I wonder what's going to happen?" "I hope no shocking swerve takes place!" "I don't see this coming!" I realized with some shock that it would be more of a swerve if Kanyon didn't turn on DDP. I and everyone else in my section who attended LockDown in St. Louis would disagree with that statement. I used the qualifier 'almost always' specifically because I knew you would bring that up (it's scary how well I know you.) Anyway, the opening AND ending matches of Lockdown were amazing on PPV -- the opening match had what was essentially the TNA debut of the Motor City Machineguns!! And since any match between 3D and LAX was going to suck anyway, I don't think the 'electrified cage' ruined what would have otherwise been a good match. Only the blindfold stipulation ruined what would have been a good match otherwise, and Storm and Harris made up for it the following month.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Dec 27, 2007 12:33:08 GMT -5
2) Anyone who says there are 'constant' face/heel turns is wrong. Angle came in as a face, turned heel, turned face again for one match, then turned heel again where he stays today. Christian has flip-flopped more times than I can count. Scott Steiner was a heel, but suddenly became a face once he feuded with Team 3D; Kevin Nash was a face in the skits last year/early this year, turned heel with Angle, turned face against Angle, turned heel again with Angle, then turned face after Angle turned on him. I don't have any issues with these turns and aren't going to say they shouldn't happen, but they did happen and quite frequently. It's kind of always been the M.O. of Vince Russo. He's a mark for fooling marks. He's always thought it better to fool people for the sake of fooling them, then end something completely with proper resolution, then to follow a story, built well and logically to it's natural conclusion. If Russo wrote the original Die Hard, John Maclane would have been the one thrown off the building at the end and Hans Gruber would have survived, because, damn it, no one would see it coming!!! See, that's a huge issue with me. The storytelling goes nowhere. You have to look at wrestling as a story because it's always been told like one. Basic time-tested successful wrestling formula: A) bad guy attacks or betrays good guy, injuring him. B) good guy chases bad guy who barely escapes time and time again C) Bad guy is finally forced into a match wherein there is no escape, and good guy finally vanquishes him in decisive fashion. End story. Rinse, repeat with someone else. How Vince Russo probably sees storytelling: A) Two people with no issues are made tag team partners, just because. B) They win the belts (or all the belts) and continue beating everyone unrelated to their feud, who get no rub C) The guy you think should turn isn't the guy that actually does. SWERVE! D) They have a match in which 3000 people interfere and the ref gets bumped 5 times E) Someone else betrays the betraying wrestler in favor of the guy that was betrayed for no real reason. F) the first feud is over with no definitive conclusion and now wrestler B is feuding with the guy who betrayed him. But he'll need an ally! Enter the first guy who the betrayed guy who was betrayed first betrayed! And this time, he'll have forgot all about all the pain the guy caused him. And ya. That's the thought process of Russo.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 27, 2007 12:34:32 GMT -5
Wait, when has Christian "flip flopped"? He was face when he came in, and has been heel ever since.
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 12:36:40 GMT -5
Christian has flip-flopped more times than I can count. I stopped reading at this point. Christian came in as a face, turned heel seven months later and stayed a heel for A YEAR AND A HALF before his recent face turn.
|
|
metylerca
King Koopa
Loves Him Some Backstreet Boys.
Don't be alarmed.
Posts: 12,477
|
Post by metylerca on Dec 27, 2007 12:37:56 GMT -5
They did put Bob Backlund over the MCMG's earlier in the year... 1) Anyone who says matches on impact are three minutes long, and haven't gotten any longer since the switch to two hours is full of crap. 2) Anyone who says there are 'constant' face/heel turns is wrong. 3) I seriously question the intelligence of anyone who finds ANY wrestling show 'confusing.' 4) Russo sucks, and storylines like the shooting of Abyss' father have no place in company where the in-ring product is the focus. 5) TNA impacts can sometimes blow but the PPVS are almost always feature great matches I haven't seen the 3 minutes thing come up in a while, so that's moot point. And, about the booking, it's Vince Russo. Remember, this guy made SWERVE into something the announcers in WCW 2000 would say more than JR. says Glamazon. I haven't paid attention to the face/heel turns, but I have seen a lot of story archs that make no sense. The show can be very confusing if you go in expecting a wrestling show. What you usually get is more of a soap opera about wrestling, and before someone goes saying otherwise, there's a 20 page script out there circulating that has the show planned out word for word. Again, Russo sucks so much that it's almost depressing how much the talent's being wasted. And finally, it is very true that their PPV's have better matches, but that doesn't exempt them from throwing out shit on them, like ummm reverse battle royals? Another thing is that nobody's going to buy their PPVs if their television product is faulty. Their core audience is there, they get it, they understand, but it's stupid if someone who's uber-TNA gets pissed off if other fans of wrestling don't 'get it'. It shouldn't mean that the person is anti-TNA, they are just anti-Crappy Booking. -metylerca
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 12:40:39 GMT -5
I never accused anyone of being anti-TNA.
I just stand by all of my points. If you find any wrestling show confusing, there's nothing I can do to help you. You're on your own.
It's wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Dec 27, 2007 12:46:14 GMT -5
Wait, when has Christian "flip flopped"? He was face when he came in, and has been heel ever since. I think the thing is, for most of the top guys in TNA there seems to be no discernable reocognizable traits as a true heel or true babyface. Technically, what you're saying is true, but there's been a few times when Christian is programmed against someone also "unpopular" and suddenly he's briefly treated as a face or reacted to in such a way. And right now, he's a tweener. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, but it does get confusing. Look at Ted Dibiase. There was a heel. You were never supposed to cheer for him and he was never presented in a manner in which the crowds would. Today's wrestlers, in any company, seem to be blurred. I miss the days with one universally despised heel that everyone loathes. The closest thing to that was Edge, but even he gets babyface pops in Canada.
|
|
Agent P
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wooo
Posts: 18,180
|
Post by Agent P on Dec 27, 2007 12:47:35 GMT -5
You guys do realize that that script is for 2 different shows, right?
I mean when I read the spoilers for both this weeks show and next weeks show, they all pretty much appeared on this script.
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 12:53:09 GMT -5
I think the thing is, for most of the top guys in TNA there seems to be no discernable reocognizable traits as a true heel or true babyface. Again, I stopped reading there. Christian's last show as a heel was two weeks ago. He came out (I was there live) and told us he's not surprised we boo him because he is an asshole and a prick. He then insulted the crowd until we chanted 'you suck!' at him (The camera zoomed right in on me chanting). He's had two turns in almost three years. You said that's more than you can count. Two is more than you can count? Insulting the crowd isn't a reocognizable traits as a true heel? Wow.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Dec 27, 2007 13:16:55 GMT -5
I think the thing is, for most of the top guys in TNA there seems to be no discernable reocognizable traits as a true heel or true babyface. Again, I stopped reading there. Christian's last show as a heel was two weeks ago. He came out (I was there live) and told us he's not surprised we boo him because he is an asshole and a prick. He then insulted the crowd until we chanted 'you suck!' at him (The camera zoomed right in on me chanting). He's had two turns in almost three years. You said that's more than you can count. Two is more than you can count? Insulting the crowd isn't a reocognizable traits as a true heel? Wow. Well, do me the honors all high and mighty King of TNA and do a Pleb like me favor and read my entire posts. You know, when you're not digusted that someone not sitting in the Impact Zone dare have a view of a character that differs from your own. I only know what I've seen, and to me, Christian has always been presented as cool heel that is more appealing than hateable. Honestly, I respect your opinion. But I guess each person views the product differently. And guess what, not everyone sees it in as many blacks and whites as you do, my friend. I at no point buried TNA, but just stated that the writing and booking can be confusing, overwrought and disappointing to me. But hey, why am I continuing to write this paragraph when as you're wont to do, "You stopped reading at the part about Chriistian". Seriously, man. Knock that "I stopped reading" shit off. It makes you sound like an elitist dickhead.
|
|
|
Post by WHATAMANOOOVER on Dec 27, 2007 13:35:10 GMT -5
Whenever TNA takes a step forward (with a good match for example), they take two steps back. Whether it's with their convoluted stips, terrible play at comedy, lack of true main eventers, mindset stuck in 1999, killing of gimmick matches, etc.
TNA is never going to take that "next step" anytime soon. Whatever that step is.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,219
|
Post by Push R Truth on Dec 27, 2007 14:34:22 GMT -5
Sharkboy Rules.
I just thought that a 5 page TNA thread that lacked any mention of Sharkboy was just wrong.
Even though nobody cares, I'm a big WWE fan, but I'm not Anti-TNA. In fact, I go out of my way to watch it. I have not finished an episode of IMPACT in the last month. It's just not doing it for me right now. But I'm sure it will improve again, like it has in the past.
If not, oh well. Somebody else will come pick up the pieces. There will always be a clamoring to be a main alternative to the WWE. I don't care who it is, or what they do. Just as long as I am entertained.
|
|
|
Post by thereallybigshow on Dec 27, 2007 14:37:20 GMT -5
Alvarez is right!
TNA is over produced.
Part of being a good "Professional Wrestler" is you ability to sell yourself. Apparently TNA is retarding its own product by not allowing wrestlers to "sell themselves" to fans. Jake Roberts didn't read a script. Nobody handed Roddy Piper his lines.
I personally agree with Alvarez. When I watch Tna TV it feel "over-scripted" Nothing seems to be simple on a TNA TV Show. I actually went out of my way to watch the big 2 hour TNA debut. I was totally shocked at how crappy the show came off. If it weren't for the young wrestler that do way to many risky spots or the name wrestlers they BUY and bury TNA would have failed a long time ago.
|
|
|
Post by Long A, Short A on Dec 27, 2007 14:51:31 GMT -5
I laughed at the mental image of Alvarez reading the script with his buddy like they were rehearsing a play. I listened to that show and it was quite funny. I have noticed a small trend going on with TNA fans, myself included, versus those who have a problem it week in and week out. Many TNA viewers were WCW fans, while the people who think it's horrid are either WWE loyalists or indy purists. I was a WCW fan from 92 till the bitter end and I think TNA can be horrid. Mater of fact, I feel I would be able to enjoy TNA more if I had not have watched WCW back in the day.
|
|
|
Post by thereallybigshow on Dec 27, 2007 15:08:20 GMT -5
I laughed at the mental image of Alvarez reading the script with his buddy like they were rehearsing a play. I listened to that show and it was quite funny. I have noticed a small trend going on with TNA fans, myself included, versus those who have a problem it week in and week out. Many TNA viewers were WCW fans, while the people who think it's horrid are either WWE loyalists or indy purists. I was a WCW fan from 92 till the bitter end and I think TNA can be horrid. Mater of fact, I feel I would be able to enjoy TNA more if I had not have watched WCW back in the day. I agree TNA does not compare to WCW in many ways. Just look at Tna 1st 2 hour show. Did even come close to being as important as the 1st Nitro? No? Excuse the pun but TNA makes no "Impact" ever. If it weren't for them buying top stars they wouldn't have ANY.
|
|
|
Post by mysterydriver on Dec 27, 2007 15:26:18 GMT -5
I listened to that show and it was quite funny. I was a WCW fan from 92 till the bitter end and I think TNA can be horrid. Mater of fact, I feel I would be able to enjoy TNA more if I had not have watched WCW back in the day. I agree TNA does not compare to WCW in many ways. Just look at Tna 1st 2 hour show. Did even come close to being as important as the 1st Nitro? No? Excuse the pun but TNA makes no "Impact" ever. If it weren't for them buying top stars they wouldn't have ANY. That's true. The first match of WCW Nitro: Sting vs. Ric Flair with the shocking debut Lex Luger. The first match of Two-Hour TNA Impact: Black Reign vs. Rhino with run-ins by Abyss, Raven, Havoc, Jim Mitchell, and Sting. Followed by the beginning of "Kurt Angle is stalking Sting's son!" WCW had a much more effective "Here we go" moment, in my opinion...
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 15:48:02 GMT -5
Seriously, man. Knock that "I stopped reading" crap off. It makes you sound like an elitist dickhead. I don't mean to sound elitist, but in 2007, TNA had two top heels, Christian and then Kurt Angle. Both of them changed their ENTIRE character when they turned heel (although Christian turned heel far longer than a year ago). Their entire personalties changed when they turned heel. They started bashing the fans, cheating, started entire stables to interfere on their behalf, changed their catchphrases, Angle changed his entrance.... it goes on an on. I don't think I'm better than you or anything, and opinions can vary, but if you don't think Christian, and then Angle were clear cut heels in 2007, you just don't know what you're talking about. No offense. And this time I read your whole post, K?
|
|
Ace Diamond
Patti Mayonnaise
Believes in Adrian Veidt, as Should We All.
mmm...flavor text
Posts: 36,043
|
Post by Ace Diamond on Dec 27, 2007 16:07:27 GMT -5
I never accused anyone of being anti-TNA. I just stand by all of my points. If you find any wrestling show confusing, there's nothing I can do to help you. You're on your own. It's wrestling. And if you question the intelligence of the people you're trying to "help" or "enlighten" you come off as a douchebag. So let me quote Vito DeNucci, former professional wrestler and one of the co-hosts of Between the Ropes: "If your match stipulation takes longer than 10 seconds to explain, it's too confusing" So yes, Reverse Battle Royals are too confusing, I'm so sorry.
|
|
|
Post by thestinger on Dec 27, 2007 16:21:27 GMT -5
And if you question the intelligence of the people you're trying to "help" or "enlighten" you come off as a douchebag. To you. Anyone who finds a wrestling show that they follow regularly 'confusing' has my sympathy, but they have much bigger problems than what I think. I do stress the part "that they follow regularly." If a person watches impact and they haven't followed TNA for a year and a half, I can understand them going, "Wait, AJ's a heel? Scott Steiner's a babyface? Booker is in TNA?" I personally have a friend who hasn't watched TNA for two years and he recently said, "It sucks that AJ Styles has no personality or character at all." But any intelligent person who pays attention should be able to comprehend a wrestling show.
|
|