Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 5, 2013 6:35:23 GMT -5
Go on YouTube and watch a WWF television show from 1991. Notice the lay out, the angles, the camera work etc.
Then watch one from 2001. Notice the different right? It's like it's a completely different product. Different use of layout, camera work is different, it's edited a different way, formatted in a different way.
So that's 10 years and the product underwent an almost unrecognisable transformation in look, presentation, design, production and everything else.
Fast-forward from 2001, 12 years into the future...
"Um.....I think.....I think the Titantron looks different."
Is about the size of it. The show looks awfully dated now both in terms of how it look and the way it's produced because it's almost not changed at all in the last 12 years or so. I think it notices. It looks tired. If you watched a match with the sound off and the wrestlers in the ring blacked out, I don't think it'd be terribly easy to place the year within 5. But you could tell in a hearbeat that a match from 1990 wasn't 1988 - just two years before.
It just shows how innovative and forward thinking they were back then whereas now the need seems to be to do everything almost exactly the same as before.
|
|
|
Post by audiencewatching on Nov 5, 2013 7:12:53 GMT -5
Actually couldn't disagree more.
+ Its HD + They use slow-mo cameras + They have the NXT style float over ring camera quite often + Sets are LED based, it used to be alot of metal + They removed photographers from ringside + The crowd and higher rafters are always given a colour hue
Its a far more polished product all around and extremely different. I actually preferred it gritty, but I think its way off base to say its even similar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 10:04:15 GMT -5
I think the production value has evolved pretty well, especially when you consider they were producing 2 hours of TV then and 7-10 now (+monthly PPVs).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 10:59:42 GMT -5
One thing I like about WWE is the camerawork which is stellar.
Remember when everyone hated the bad camera angle when Bryan hits the running knee on HHH at the PPV? That was a pretty big deal. Know what made it extra noticeable? That happens like once a year if even. 99.9% of the time if something happens you see it and see at the right angle to know exactly what went down.
|
|
|
Post by Friday Night SmackOwn on Nov 5, 2013 11:09:03 GMT -5
If anything, the production values on vignettes/hype videos/etc. has also evolved to a point where they elevate even the most awful of feuds into ones worth watching.
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 5, 2013 11:19:22 GMT -5
I'd say I'm pretty happy with WWE's overall look/production. The only things I can think of that I'd change would be to lessen the lighting on the crowds and also not cut to them so often during "low key" promos (cutting to various signs during a heated in-ring segment/interview is fine, but backstage character development not so much).
Other than that, everything seems to have a more big time feel, which I'd imagine the LED setup helps with if you're new to wrestling and you want to have a good first impression made on you. The downside to a "gritty" setup is that it might just look bush and low budget to a lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Nov 5, 2013 11:22:59 GMT -5
One thing I like about WWE is the camerawork which is stellar. Remember when everyone hated the bad camera angle when Bryan hits the running knee on HHH at the PPV? That was a pretty big deal. Know what made it extra noticeable? That happens like once a year if even. 99.9% of the time if something happens you see it and see at the right angle to know exactly what went down. I couldn't disagree more for three reasons; Shield beatdown chaos! cam, zoom in/zoom out Cesaro swing cam and hard camera pins. Words can't express how much I hate them.
|
|
|
Post by Old Jack Burton on Nov 5, 2013 11:32:12 GMT -5
My complaint would be that WWE looks too slick and polished. One could even say it has a glam look. And it has been pretty much the same since they went to the universal LED stages.
All the flashy lights, super clean looking stages and graphics just betray the notion that RAW is a set, not a sporting event.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on Nov 5, 2013 11:38:22 GMT -5
I absolutely hate the beatdown zoom in/out crap, as well as the crowd shots during onscreen promos. Also, the angle shot they do after an in ring Beatdown where the guy is standing over his fallen victim, emotionless.... They do it the same way every time!
|
|
|
Post by Loser troll. Please ban me on Nov 5, 2013 11:40:30 GMT -5
Actually couldn't disagree more. + Its HD + They use slow-mo cameras + They have the NXT style float over ring camera quite often + Sets are LED based, it used to be alot of metal + They removed photographers from ringside + The crowd and higher rafters are always given a colour hue Its a far more polished product all around and extremely different. I actually preferred it gritty, but I think its way off base to say its even similar. I know it gives the front row a better view but I miss this, It made big matches seem really really important
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Nov 5, 2013 11:44:56 GMT -5
Actually couldn't disagree more. + Its HD + They use slow-mo cameras + They have the NXT style float over ring camera quite often + Sets are LED based, it used to be alot of metal + They removed photographers from ringside + The crowd and higher rafters are always given a colour hue Its a far more polished product all around and extremely different. I actually preferred it gritty, but I think its way off base to say its even similar. I know it gives the front row a better view but I miss this, It made bug matches seem really really important And they used to be a great storytelling device. How many fake cameramen have they used in the past? It was cool
|
|
|
Post by Nerdkiller the threadkiller on Nov 5, 2013 13:44:33 GMT -5
My complaint would be that WWE looks too slick and polished. One could even say it has a glam look. And it has been pretty much the same since they went to the universal LED stages. All the flashy lights, super clean looking stages and graphics just betray the notion that RAW is a set, not a sporting event. I know. I also miss the unique sets that they would have for certain PPV's. Like the scrap cars from Over the Edge '98, for example. Not to mention the brilliant SmackDown set with the fist. I know it gives the front row a better view but I miss this, It made bug matches seem really really important And they used to be a great storytelling device. How many fake cameramen have they used in the past? It was cool Not since the Taker/Edge rivalry, I believe.
|
|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Nov 5, 2013 15:45:11 GMT -5
I like that one show is the red show and one show is the blue show, because otherwise I would have no way of telling the difference between Raw and Smackdown.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave is Correct on Nov 5, 2013 15:49:10 GMT -5
All i really dislike is the fact that they use the same stage for pretty much every event.
I get that the HD set was stupidly expensive but for PPVS you could throw in something to differentiate them from the weekly tv tapings.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Nov 5, 2013 16:03:36 GMT -5
There's good and bad.
One thing I absolutely hate is them switching shots during a big move, simply in the off chance that someone botches a move, of course they only seem to do it during a big move. More times than not, they miss it.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Nov 5, 2013 16:23:55 GMT -5
I don't think it has changed as drastically as it did from 1991 to 2001, however, it does have a completely new hi-tech feel as opposed to the gritty, grungy feel of the late 90's to early and mid 2000's.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Nov 5, 2013 16:56:52 GMT -5
I don't think it has changed as drastically as it did from 1991 to 2001, however, it does have a completely new hi-tech feel as opposed to the gritty, grungy feel of the late 90's to early and mid 2000's. It's slicker, probably. But in terms of the basics, lay out etc, it's still obvious it's produced by the same person. Given how fast production changed almost on a yearly basis 25 years ago onwards, with each step providing dramatic, innovative changes, these last 12 or so have brought little more than baby steps. If you covered the Titantron and transported someone back to a fully set up WWE show before the crowd came in, aside from the colours of the ropes I don't think many people would successfully get the year right within 5.
|
|
|
Post by sagsag on Nov 5, 2013 17:38:53 GMT -5
I stopped watching in 2001 and only started watching again in late 2012, and I thought the overall production and presentation looked way different. Not just the HD set either, the camera angles, the zoom in/out during bumps, and "staring off into space" at the end of backstage promos, the "watch your own replays on the titantron after a match, before more posturing" stuff. Everything seems way more rigid and produced now. The late 90s/early 2000s production is probably the only time the show felt "raw." I think they're just as sterile these days as they were in the early 90s, just differently so.
One big thing I noticed these days is that the other cameramen are NEVER in frame. Watch for it sometime, if a camera pans over and gets to a guy holding a camera, they quickly change shots. Back in the day, you used to always see the other camera guys, carrying those big long spools of cable and such. For as many cameramen as they have now, I think it's actually pretty impressive how rarely they're shown.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,506
|
Post by Malcolm on Nov 5, 2013 19:13:27 GMT -5
Actually couldn't disagree more. + Its HD + They use slow-mo cameras + They have the NXT style float over ring camera quite often + Sets are LED based, it used to be alot of metal + They removed photographers from ringside + The crowd and higher rafters are always given a colour hue Its a far more polished product all around and extremely different. I actually preferred it gritty, but I think its way off base to say its even similar. Wait, this is a plus? This is actually one of my biggest pet peeves of the current production values next to cutting away to the titan tron during backstage promos.
|
|
Toates Madhackrviper
King Koopa
Is owed an Admin life-debt.
This avatar is so far out of date I might as well stick with it forever now.
Posts: 10,737
|
Post by Toates Madhackrviper on Nov 5, 2013 19:39:14 GMT -5
There's something about the production of the WWE shows that I don't like. Its true. I really can't put my finger on it. Something makes it feel like it lacks weight and importance...
I checked out some NJPW stuff before, and there was something about the production, especially the entrances, that gave me that importance and weight thing I was looking for (though only if they were in a big arena like the right kind of arena was important the smaller ones felt shitty). I can't totally put my finger on what they had that WWE lacks for me, but I want it in WWE. If only I could nail down what it was.
|
|