|
|
Post by The Goob, phd (is Jobbing) on Nov 25, 2009 5:10:03 GMT -5
WWE/WWF will be referred to as WWE.
WWF (That f***ing panda) will be referred to as WWF.
Right, how many people are sick of this blurring shit? At best people don't mind it, and at worst people like me f***ing hate it. It's actually put me off donating to the WWF. Who the hell is getting the two mixed up. One is grown men in underpants fighting, the other is a wild life fund. Are uninterested parents really buying their kids WWF figures instead of WWE. And besides, why blur it from WWE programming. As if WWE is actually advertising WWF on their OWN show as opposed to WWE itself.
f*** you, WWF, f*** you.
(P.S Feel free to cut the swearing out if it's too much, I'm just really frustrated)
|
|
|
|
Post by oafman on Nov 25, 2009 5:37:17 GMT -5
It's terrible yes, but they have to, otherwise you're not getting reissued footage at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jimichiro Likes Erick Rowan on Nov 25, 2009 7:16:30 GMT -5
I don't even notice it anymore.
If the match you're watching isn't good enough to draw your attention away from the old blurred logos, I think there just might have a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by oafman on Nov 25, 2009 7:18:58 GMT -5
I don't know man.
It's AWFUL on the reissue of Wrestlemania 2000.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magnum DA on Nov 25, 2009 8:01:45 GMT -5
The other night, I was watching the Undertaker box set, when he took on Rock at KOTR '99 for the WWF Title.
That match has been hacked to bits because of the WWF editing. Granted, that match was overbooked and pretty lame, but sometimes those blurs can be bigger distractions than the match themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Peoples Elbow on Nov 25, 2009 10:16:37 GMT -5
Here's what I don't understand. They had the logo featured backstage on Monday night. It wasn't blurred out at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gopher Mod on Nov 25, 2009 10:22:02 GMT -5
Here's what I don't understand. They had the logo featured backstage on Monday night. It wasn't blurred out at all. Wrong logo. They can still use the first and second logo (the old block-style WWF logo), but they can no longer use the third logo (the scratch WWF logo) due to the lawsuit from the World Wildlife Fund. Also, if you heard Jesse Monday night, they can still use the full name of the company but never by its original initials ever again. |
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Nov 25, 2009 10:39:38 GMT -5
I don't even notice it anymore. If the match you're watching isn't good enough to draw your attention away from the old blurred logos, I think there just might have a problem. I've gotta disagree. I normally don't notice it because most of the old stuff I watch is from the pre-Attitude era, so there's little to no blurring at all and only occasonal censoring when the announcers would use the letters WWF. I get far more annoyed when I hear generic/stock entrance themes instead of the original music that the wrestlers originally used. But there's a lot of stuff from the attitude era (Particularly around 1999-2002, give or take), where the old scratch logo was all over the place -- on all 12 turnbuckles, giant scratch logos all over the ring aprons, hanging from the ceilings, the titantron, entrance, etc. They have to blur out so much of it in that footage that it does become distracting and makes the footage nearly unwatchable. That all being said, they have no choice. They lost the case. I remember reading that the wildlife fund offered to let them continue using the logo on old footage or something like that for something like 90 million dollars, or something along that line (I could have the details wrong, as I haven't read about it in years), but Vince refused. That might seem like a very high price to pay, but I wonder if it would have been worth it in the long run. |
|
Fiddleford H. McGucket
El Dandy
My Mind's been gone for 30-odd years! Can't Break what's already broken!
Posts: 8,748 
|
Post by Fiddleford H. McGucket on Nov 25, 2009 11:01:10 GMT -5
While I think I understand the basic gist of the World Wildlife Fund's argument (WWF/WWE wasn't going to expand to certain parts of the world, and the use of the domain name "WWF.Com") and the fact that WWF/E did in fact expand there. I'd bet good money that most intelligent people could tell a difference between the two companies.
The Estate of Hubert H. Humphries isn't going to sue because of the use of the term "HHH"
The Estate of Ed Sullivan isn't going to sue for the use of "Big Show"
The folks at Prudential are probably smart enough to realize that thier company and Dwayne Johnson are 2 seperate entities.
It seems like The Panda Folks simply dropped the ball and thought so little of thier consumerbase as to believe them dumb enough to confuse the two companies that they HAD to sue. If the suit had any REAL merit on the future, the old-school logo should be blurred as well. Seriously if it's just aboyut the 3 letter term, then Roth has a few Pissed-off Irishmen to deal with and the WWE needs to worry about a few folks that are "Straight Outta Compton"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2009 14:29:44 GMT -5
After about the third time it came up I stopped paying attention. Really have no trouble at all tuning it out personally.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 42,383
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Nov 25, 2009 14:52:12 GMT -5
Some of the first stuff they blurred was really bad.
They've gotten the hang of it now and it's not as distracting.
I wish they didn't have to do it, but hey.......I want that old footage.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,228
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Nov 25, 2009 15:32:02 GMT -5
Why would you donate to the WWF. It is groups like that that say that polar bears are going extinct even though the number of polar bears have increased in the last few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trip Fisk a.k.a. Foley is Good on Nov 25, 2009 15:47:04 GMT -5
Why would you donate to the WWF. It is groups like that that say that polar bears are going extinct even though the number of polar bears have increased in the last few years. Embroidered tote bags. |
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 25, 2009 16:03:59 GMT -5
While I think I understand the basic gist of the World Wildlife Fund's argument (WWF/WWE wasn't going to expand to certain parts of the world, and the use of the domain name "WWF.Com") and the fact that WWF/E did in fact expand there. I'd bet good money that most intelligent people could tell a difference between the two companies. The Estate of Hubert H. Humphries isn't going to sue because of the use of the term "HHH" The Estate of Ed Sullivan isn't going to sue for the use of "Big Show" The folks at Prudential are probably smart enough to realize that thier company and Dwayne Johnson are 2 seperate entities. It seems like The Panda Folks simply dropped the ball and thought so little of thier consumerbase as to believe them dumb enough to confuse the two companies that they HAD to sue. If the suit had any REAL merit on the future, the old-school logo should be blurred as well. Seriously if it's just aboyut the 3 letter term, then Roth has a few Pissed-off Irishmen to deal with and the WWE needs to worry about a few folks that are "Straight Outta Compton" Great post! As I've said before, I wonder how long it'll take after the company is in the hands of Steph/HHH before they pay the Panda and re-issue ALL these sets "uncensored, unaltered, and unblurred for the first time in DECADES!" Talk about a selling point. They'd make their money back again twice over on the DVDs alone. I've said it before, but I'd be first in line to double dip, just to own those DVDs unaltered. I know I'm not alone. |
|
@TenaciousBe
Hank Scorpio
Guess who's back... back again
Posts: 5,659
|
Post by @TenaciousBe on Nov 25, 2009 16:06:51 GMT -5
The part that pisses me off is that this is OLD footage. It's historical video from days gone by. I can totally see if they have to stop using the WWF name and logo for current/future products, but what harm can possibly come from selling old footage unedited for the sake of "this is where the world was on this day"? It's just petty personal bullshit from the Wildlife Fund.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Nov 25, 2009 16:09:55 GMT -5
The part that pisses me off is that this is OLD footage. It's historical video from days gone by. I can totally see if they have to stop using the WWF name and logo for current/future products, but what harm can possibly come from selling old footage unedited for the sake of "this is where the world was on this day"? It's just petty personal bulls*** from the Wildlife Fund. But remember, Vince started the petty bullcrap first. Had he not violated his end of the agreement in a fit of hubris, this wouldn't be happening now. I agree that both sides need to grow up and move on...but Vince is the one to blame for this, as far as what I've read leads me to believe. |
|
|
|
Post by seamonsters on Nov 25, 2009 16:44:02 GMT -5
The part that pisses me off is that this is OLD footage. It's historical video from days gone by. I can totally see if they have to stop using the WWF name and logo for current/future products, but what harm can possibly come from selling old footage unedited for the sake of "this is where the world was on this day"? It's just petty personal bulls*** from the Wildlife Fund. But remember, Vince started the petty bullcrap first. Had he not violated his end of the agreement in a fit of hubris, this wouldn't be happening now. I agree that both sides need to grow up and move on...but Vince is the one to blame for this, as far as what I've read leads me to believe. Quite. The two companies had a legal agreement - Vince broke it, and got himself sued as a result. Had the World Wildlife Fund broken the agreement, you can bet your life Vince would have gone down the same route. |
|
Brother Coyote
Samurai Cop
Has Clarity of Vision Is an engine of will
Posts: 2,124
|
Post by Brother Coyote on Nov 25, 2009 16:52:28 GMT -5
Reissue of Wrestlemania 2000?
|
|
|
|
Post by a1TheEnigma1a on Nov 25, 2009 16:54:55 GMT -5
How the hell does it affect the panda pounders if the WWE uses the WWF scratch logo in old footage?
It's dumb.
|
|
Matt Dunn
Hank Scorpio
It was inevitable.
Posts: 5,596
|
Post by Matt Dunn on Nov 25, 2009 16:56:03 GMT -5
It's just something I learned to live with. Like the damn current WWE championship. A belt should say "champion" not "champ", damn it!
|
|
