Jeremy
Hank Scorpio
Horse of a Different Color
Posts: 6,240
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 18, 2012 12:29:45 GMT -5
They turned in August 2008 So, in September 2008
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on Nov 18, 2012 12:37:53 GMT -5
Attitude Fan: Get the Wrestling out! That's a bit of a generalization. I love the Attitude era but I'm also the kind of person that prefers great wrestling. Hell, the Attitude era at one point had tons of awesome technical wrestlers, they just happened to have good characters. It's not like WWE features a lot of great matches today.
|
|
|
Post by angelofapocalypse on Nov 18, 2012 12:39:43 GMT -5
But it was just high spots after high spots.
|
|
Chip
Hank Scorpio
Slam Jam Death.
Posts: 5,185
|
Post by Chip on Nov 18, 2012 13:23:58 GMT -5
I just wish they didn't take away protected chair shots to the head. Its get annoying to see the same set up for every chair shot. Totally agree. As much as I understand the huge risks behind taking a chair in that manner it was awesome to see, the noise it generated was perfect and it always looked brutal. I really wish they could find a way to make gimmicked chairs or something.
|
|
Jeremy
Hank Scorpio
Horse of a Different Color
Posts: 6,240
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 18, 2012 13:26:51 GMT -5
I especially enjoy the argument "OMG, Ranyd Ortan is NOT pg. He is so kool!!!1!!!"
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Nov 18, 2012 13:30:43 GMT -5
Who's "Ranyd Ortan"? Is he Randy Orton's non-unionized Mexican equivalent?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2012 14:00:37 GMT -5
it's right for WWE to go PG but it has yet to fully commit to it IMO. The Attitude era produced too many fans that aren't wrestling fans. "A headlock? Booo this crap. This is wrestling. Get a chair or a sledgehammer!!" I'm not saying anything new here when I say that's why it was successful. I'm all about moving forward and I don't think the Attitude era needs a revival for me to enjoy WWE again, but I really think people on the other side of the "bring Attitude back" argument could be just as hard to take. People talk about it like the Attitude era was on the borderline of professional wrestling and faces of death. A lot of the examples I read of people pining for the Attitude era sound like they carry the sophistication of a Youtube poster, who is easy to ignore and are hard to take seriously even if I'm giving it my full attention. Maybe it's because this is my only online hangout to get my wrestling fix, but it really does sound like some of you are going out of your way to be annoyed by these people. I totally get why someone would want the Attitude era back, not necessarily for the blood and guts but there's an undeniable energy about it that's lacking today. You can knock on the non-fan all you want, but there needs to be a balance because you watch WWE today and the problem isn't that it's PG, it's that it's such a low risk, inconsequential show where wins and losses don't matter and shows just write themselves that there's no impulse for me as a viewer to watch week by week other than the fact that I'm a self hating pro wrestling fan who can't help it.
|
|
|
Post by KobashiChop on Nov 18, 2012 14:14:33 GMT -5
Anti-PG? Yes.
Complaints about how linear and unimaginative the booking can be? Never.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Nov 18, 2012 16:09:12 GMT -5
I too think it's a just a term people are using to describe the current era. What else do we call it? We had Rock and Wrestling, New Generation, Attitude, Ruthless Aggression and now? It's not the fact that it's pg at all although. Maybe we should be calling it the corporate era?
My favorite era of wrestling is the mid-late 80's and that was more pg than it is now. I hate the current era because it's so rigidly scripted, the comedy is awful, they keep building up the midcard and then releasing them. It's Cena/Orton/Show for the past ten years (longer than Hulkamania) and they've added Del Rio/Punk and Sheamus (who've been on top already longer than Austin). It's just stale, boring, status quo crap where nothing exciting ever happens. But like SNL and Simpsons I keep watching out of habit.
BTW, if it's not the product, than current PG fans are young and stupid. They pay for a ticket to a live event and sit on the their hands and don't make a peep.
Also I realize that the Attitude was full of fairweather fans that weren't really into the wrestling. They wanted to see Sable's boobs or someone take a crazy bump, so I'm not defending them but those people have been gone for a long time. The Mega Cena push of 05 drove the last stragglers away forever.
|
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Nov 18, 2012 16:13:01 GMT -5
Eh, a lot of the time I just see it as people using the term "PG" as shorthand for the current product (and the recent past). It's not the rating and its imposition on the product that people are upset about, it's that the product and talent are not as compelling to many as they were 12 years ago. No amount of blading and hardcore matches would fix the current product. This sums up my feelings on this matter.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on Nov 18, 2012 16:13:24 GMT -5
I too think it's a just a term people are using to describe the current era. What else do we call it? We had Rock and Wrestling, New Generation, Attitude, Ruthless Aggression and now? It's not the fact that it's pg at all although. Maybe we should be calling it the corporate era? I call it the Universe Era in reference to the "WWE Universe", since it is another hot buzz word like "Attitude" or "Ruthless Aggression".
|
|
|
Post by admane on Nov 18, 2012 16:35:52 GMT -5
Some people just can't accept change.
I guess it makes them feel better when they're ripping on the current product.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,859
|
Post by agent817 on Nov 18, 2012 16:44:36 GMT -5
You want to hear something funny? I remember coming across a YouTube video of an old Raw from 1994. NINETEEN NINETY FOUR, PEOPLE! One person was all talking about how that was better than PG stuff. Hello? It was considered PG during that time even though the rating system wasn't around then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2012 16:46:50 GMT -5
You want to hear something funny? I remember coming across a YouTube video of an old Raw from 1994. NINETEEN NINETY FOUR, PEOPLE! One person was all talking about how that was better than PG stuff. Hello? It was considered PG during that time even though the rating system wasn't around then. RIP ATTITUDE ERA 1994- 2008
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Nov 18, 2012 17:00:58 GMT -5
Some people just can't accept change. I guess it makes them feel better when they're ripping on the current product. I just made a post about how the current era is stale. How it's status quo and how the same guys have been on top for ten years. Yes, we can't handle all these changes.
|
|
hitch
Don Corleone
Hitch knot
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by hitch on Nov 18, 2012 17:11:43 GMT -5
Some people just can't accept change. I guess it makes them feel better when they're ripping on the current product. I just made a post about how the current era is stale. How it's status quo and how the same guys have been on top for ten years. Yes, we can't handle all these changes. This is a good point. As I raised earlier, if you look at the style, application, look, feel etc of the flagship shows - it's not much different than 2001 eleven years ago. If you look at the same criteria and take WWE in 1989 and see how much it changed between then and 2000 - the difference in the difference is stark. I think that is an issue. It might not be 'Attitude' anymore but it's still the same Attitude framework, presentation, style etc. Once they decided to close the page on that era they should have set about making major cosmetic changes to their product. So far, they've made very very little.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Nov 18, 2012 17:16:06 GMT -5
I just made a post about how the current era is stale. How it's status quo and how the same guys have been on top for ten years. Yes, we can't handle all these changes. This is a good point. As I raised earlier, if you look at the style, application, look, feel etc of the flagship shows - it's not much different than 2001 eleven years ago. If you look at the same criteria and take WWE in 1989 and see how much it changed between then and 2000 - the difference in the difference is stark. I think that is an issue. It might not be 'Attitude' anymore but it's still the same Attitude framework, presentation, style etc. Once they decided to close the page on that era they should have set about making major cosmetic changes to their product. So far, they've made very very little. Yep. The only new thing they do is airing and cancelling different C-shows.
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Nov 18, 2012 17:31:22 GMT -5
I've seen a lot of generalization about Attitude fans, one guy in particular.
I've watching wrestling since 1988. I watched anything wrestling back then and actually prefer stuff earlier than when I started watching. But I realize wrestling will never go back to small studio shows and accept that. I've always found things I liked in each "version" of wrestling that comes along every ten years or so. There are things I like today and stuff I liked in the Attitude era.
The only real thing I miss about the Attitude era was the actual competition between WWE and WCW, and not knowing who was jumping to where.
|
|
|
Post by Kash Flagg on Nov 18, 2012 17:32:55 GMT -5
I just made a post about how the current era is stale. How it's status quo and how the same guys have been on top for ten years. Yes, we can't handle all these changes. This is a good point. As I raised earlier, if you look at the style, application, look, feel etc of the flagship shows - it's not much different than 2001 eleven years ago. If you look at the same criteria and take WWE in 1989 and see how much it changed between then and 2000 - the difference in the difference is stark. I think that is an issue. It might not be 'Attitude' anymore but it's still the same Attitude framework, presentation, style etc. Once they decided to close the page on that era they should have set about making major cosmetic changes to their product. So far, they've made very very little. I definitely think that a new way of presenting the product is the way to go, but the WWE is too set in it's ways right now to do much of it, barring the social media thing. That's been smart of them.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Nov 18, 2012 17:36:24 GMT -5
I've seen a lot of generalization about Attitude fans, one guy in particular. I've watching wrestling since 1988. I watched anything wrestling back then and actually prefer stuff earlier than when I started watching. But I realize wrestling will never go back to small studio shows and accept that. I've always found things I liked in each "version" of wrestling that comes along every ten years or so. There are things I like today and stuff I liked in the Attitude era. The only real thing I miss about the Attitude era was the actual competition between WWE and WCW, and not knowing who was jumping to where. Take notes people. This is the correct answer. In fact, the only difference between this and my response is I started in 1989.
|
|