Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,534
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jan 8, 2019 17:26:33 GMT -5
It's always bugged me how they try to make every arena look the same. Not everywhere can have a msg side entrance or Baltimore stairs but I'm sure they can do something to differentiate them a bit.I
PPV stages being boring is a huge let down too after some great ones like the backlash hooks.
Also the first week of the latest brand split they tried some different camera shots but that didn't last.
|
|
TGM
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,073
|
Post by TGM on Jan 8, 2019 17:33:47 GMT -5
1999 is weird. After Summerslam, it feels like I'm watching a different wrestling company entirely.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2019 19:31:17 GMT -5
Like with Lucha Underground, I suppose? There's clearly a different filming technique done there compared to the standard WWE show. Could the lack of change in the last decade be also down how the technology in broadcasting and production hasn't evolved as rapidly as it did back then? I watch a lot of old school IndyCar racing on YouTube, and the differences between a 1985 broadcast of a race and a 2000 broadcast of a race are staggering, but the differences between 2000 and 2015 are minimal at best. Definitely a good point on video quality; I own a lot of old baseball games on DVD, and the change in look from the 80s games to the 90s and then the early 00s are marked, but now that we're in HD it's tougher for things to look different. That said, I don't know if they need a Lucha Underground style, and maybe "cinematic" wasn't the right choice of word; they mostly just need to decide what they're trying to emphasize when they're doing their camera work, whether it's to create a more cinematic style or a more sports-like one, or even just a presentation style that emphasizes the importance of their stars, which is something I feel gets lost a lot these days. Though whatever they do, shaky zoom in/zoom out cam needs to die. They absoloutley cannot replicate the LU camera shots if for no other reason than set up In WWE they are always trying going for the hardcam shot and that is the wrestlers focus...Nia having to pin someone facing the hard cam etc In LU notice the background in the gif how the angle completely shifts u can see the stairs in one shot and then in the next u can't...and that is in part because they run an 11 camera set up and the neither Mundo or Puma has to change anything they are doing because the camera and production people are doing their job so the wrestlers just get to wrestle it is quite an unsung aspect of LU's production.
|
|
|
Post by prichardmark on Jan 9, 2019 21:34:33 GMT -5
The company needs a shot in the arm creatively and have needed it for 20 years. They're only way to even spike a rating is to bring back 50-60 year old guys. NXT some will praise but isn't that like a 25-30 million dollar EXPENSE for the company (From the financials Ive read from the company says anyways) that has basically created ZERO superstars. If it was as effective as people say you wouldn't see this clueless ass company still relying on the OVW class of 2002 or Hulk Hogan to pop a rating point. They could have kicked guys like Hogan, Cena, Orton, Lesnar to the curb YEARS ago if NXT was actually creating draws.
At this rate, they were far better off with OVW with Cornette/Danny Davis running it. The expense was a fraction of NXT, and they actually created superstars there that people still want to see.
Imagine the shape WWE would be in if they couldn't rely on guys like Lesnar/Cena to keep a few casual eyes on the product. I don't see one SHRED of return investment on anything this company is churning out for the future. Not one. Now of course, a lot of it is because of what they do to the guys once they hit the main roster.. But regardless. The numbers don't lie. Ridiculous expense from NXT and no superstars being produced. No draws.
If it was me running WWE the first thing I would do is go back to the fruits and nuts of legit farm training system with wrestling minds running it. Bring back Prichard, Cornette, Davis as my leaders for the farm system and make me some damn stars. The NXT aint churning out crapola. Just added expense to my company that is in a death spiral at this moment in time.
You don't LEARN this business in some f***ing training school. ROFLMAO. You dont learn how to draw. You don't learn how to work. You dont learn psychology. Not like you would in a place like OVW
|
|
|
Post by jivesoulbrah on Jan 9, 2019 21:42:06 GMT -5
I totally agree with what someone said earlier about 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005. They all felt vastly different from one another. 1995 to 2005 feels like decades apart. Everything has felt the same since about late 2010 through now.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Free Moon-Down with Burger on Jan 10, 2019 0:42:24 GMT -5
Definitely a good point on video quality; I own a lot of old baseball games on DVD, and the change in look from the 80s games to the 90s and then the early 00s are marked, but now that we're in HD it's tougher for things to look different. That said, I don't know if they need a Lucha Underground style, and maybe "cinematic" wasn't the right choice of word; they mostly just need to decide what they're trying to emphasize when they're doing their camera work, whether it's to create a more cinematic style or a more sports-like one, or even just a presentation style that emphasizes the importance of their stars, which is something I feel gets lost a lot these days. Though whatever they do, shaky zoom in/zoom out cam needs to die. They absoloutley cannot replicate the LU camera shots if for no other reason than set up In WWE they are always trying going for the hardcam shot and that is the wrestlers focus...Nia having to pin someone facing the hard cam etc In LU notice the background in the gif how the angle completely shifts u can see the stairs in one shot and then in the next u can't...and that is in part because they run an 11 camera set up and the neither Mundo or Puma has to change anything they are doing because the camera and production people are doing their job so the wrestlers just get to wrestle it is quite an unsung aspect of LU's production. I never cared for LU's look. It's edited to shit and they have a million cameras and still miss spots somehow. I admire them trying but man I thought the show looked like trash half the time.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 10, 2019 4:27:09 GMT -5
NXT is an expense mostly because the Performance Center as a whole is tied into it. Definitely a good point on video quality; I own a lot of old baseball games on DVD, and the change in look from the 80s games to the 90s and then the early 00s are marked, but now that we're in HD it's tougher for things to look different. That said, I don't know if they need a Lucha Underground style, and maybe "cinematic" wasn't the right choice of word; they mostly just need to decide what they're trying to emphasize when they're doing their camera work, whether it's to create a more cinematic style or a more sports-like one, or even just a presentation style that emphasizes the importance of their stars, which is something I feel gets lost a lot these days. Though whatever they do, shaky zoom in/zoom out cam needs to die. They absoloutley cannot replicate the LU camera shots if for no other reason than set up In WWE they are always trying going for the hardcam shot and that is the wrestlers focus...Nia having to pin someone facing the hard cam etc In LU notice the background in the gif how the angle completely shifts u can see the stairs in one shot and then in the next u can't...and that is in part because they run an 11 camera set up and the neither Mundo or Puma has to change anything they are doing because the camera and production people are doing their job so the wrestlers just get to wrestle it is quite an unsung aspect of LU's production. LU also arent live which is an enormous boon for their camera crew.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Jan 10, 2019 7:37:26 GMT -5
Yeah, going full LU isn't reasonable for WWE, but there are still, for example, plenty of puro promotions that know how to shoot live wrestling in a way that lets the action breathe and is very careful to angle and present things so that the wrestlers themselves look like the most important part of what's going on and are emphasized to look bigger, stronger, more threatening, more impressive, etc.
WWE's camera work just seems to feed into that whole perception that "the company is bigger than any wrestler", so it often doesn't feel like it's trying to make the wrestlers seem as important as they should be.
|
|
|
Post by willywonka666 on Jan 10, 2019 7:40:23 GMT -5
They're definitely resting on their laurels whether they want to admit it or not.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,850
|
Post by Dub H on Jan 10, 2019 7:54:52 GMT -5
NXT is an expense mostly because the Performance Center as a whole is tied into it. They absoloutley cannot replicate the LU camera shots if for no other reason than set up In WWE they are always trying going for the hardcam shot and that is the wrestlers focus...Nia having to pin someone facing the hard cam etc In LU notice the background in the gif how the angle completely shifts u can see the stairs in one shot and then in the next u can't...and that is in part because they run an 11 camera set up and the neither Mundo or Puma has to change anything they are doing because the camera and production people are doing their job so the wrestlers just get to wrestle it is quite an unsung aspect of LU's production. LU also arent live which is an enormous boon for their camera crew. Yeh love LU,but you got remember they have time to edit these 11 Camera Angles. Doing that Live is much harder.Maybe its doable if you try, and god knows WWE deosn't
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 9:16:31 GMT -5
NXT is an expense mostly because the Performance Center as a whole is tied into it. LU also arent live which is an enormous boon for their camera crew. Yeh love LU,but you got remember they have time to edit these 11 Camera Angles. Doing that Live is much harder.Maybe its doable if you try, and god knows WWE deosn't I think it is doable live they just have to get over the obsession of everything having to be for the hard cam and trust the ringside guys and guys operating things like the crane cam to do their job. but a beaver runs production so that aint happening anytime soon
|
|
Venti
Unicron
Posts: 2,995
Member is Online
|
Post by Venti on Jan 10, 2019 12:54:53 GMT -5
If they cut back on the LED and stopped the nausea-inducing camera moving, I'd be cool with things.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 10, 2019 14:06:06 GMT -5
Yeh love LU,but you got remember they have time to edit these 11 Camera Angles. Doing that Live is much harder.Maybe its doable if you try, and god knows WWE deosn't I think it is doable live they just have to get over the obsession of everything having to be for the hard cam and trust the ringside guys and guys operating things like the crane cam to do their job. but a beaver runs production so that aint happening anytime soon I've taped for live tv, (local government stuff,) Hard cam or not, 11 camera angles is really not feasible for a live show. As a producer would have to keep track of all 11 of them at once too know who has the best shot. They could add more and rely less on the hard cam (which is based on laziness, having a hard cam is good so you have a base shot to always cut to... but it shouldn't be the main focus) by having 11 is overkill and honestly a waste of money unless you are doing an edited program and even then is a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 14:12:38 GMT -5
I think it is doable live they just have to get over the obsession of everything having to be for the hard cam and trust the ringside guys and guys operating things like the crane cam to do their job. but a beaver runs production so that aint happening anytime soon I've taped for live tv, (local government stuff,) Hard cam or not, 11 camera angles is really not feasible for a live show. As a producer would have to keep track of all 11 of them at once too know who has the best shot. They could add more and rely less on the hard cam (which is based on laziness, having a hard cam is good so you have a base shot to always cut to... but it shouldn't be the main focus) by having 11 is overkill and honestly a waste of money unless you are doing an edited program and even then is a lot. Oh I am not saying they have to have 11 camera angles especially not for a live show but relying much less on the hardcam and instead give more shots to the crane cam and the guys at ringside would give the show a different feel. Allow the matches to be shot in a bit more dynamic manner
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 10, 2019 14:15:16 GMT -5
I've taped for live tv, (local government stuff,) Hard cam or not, 11 camera angles is really not feasible for a live show. As a producer would have to keep track of all 11 of them at once too know who has the best shot. They could add more and rely less on the hard cam (which is based on laziness, having a hard cam is good so you have a base shot to always cut to... but it shouldn't be the main focus) by having 11 is overkill and honestly a waste of money unless you are doing an edited program and even then is a lot. Oh I am not saying they have to have 11 camera angles especially not for a live show but relying much less on the hardcam and instead give more shots to the crane cam and the guys at ringside would give the show a different feel. Allow the matches to be shot in a bit more dynamic manner Ok then we are agreed. The hard cam is a good thing to have as you always have an easy shot to cut to if everyone else is moving into position and such but it shouldn't be your main focus.
|
|
beefy
Trap-Jaw
OHHH YESSSSSSS
Posts: 444
|
Post by beefy on Jan 10, 2019 14:48:19 GMT -5
The company needs a shot in the arm creatively and have needed it for 20 years. They're only way to even spike a rating is to bring back 50-60 year old guys. NXT some will praise but isn't that like a 25-30 million dollar EXPENSE for the company (From the financials Ive read from the company says anyways) that has basically created ZERO superstars. If it was as effective as people say you wouldn't see this clueless ass company still relying on the OVW class of 2002 or Hulk Hogan to pop a rating point. They could have kicked guys like Hogan, Cena, Orton, Lesnar to the curb YEARS ago if NXT was actually creating draws. At this rate, they were far better off with OVW with Cornette/Danny Davis running it. The expense was a fraction of NXT, and they actually created superstars there that people still want to see. Imagine the shape WWE would be in if they couldn't rely on guys like Lesnar/Cena to keep a few casual eyes on the product. I don't see one SHRED of return investment on anything this company is churning out for the future. Not one. Now of course, a lot of it is because of what they do to the guys once they hit the main roster.. But regardless. The numbers don't lie. Ridiculous expense from NXT and no superstars being produced. No draws. If it was me running WWE the first thing I would do is go back to the fruits and nuts of legit farm training system with wrestling minds running it. Bring back Prichard, Cornette, Davis as my leaders for the farm system and make me some damn stars. The NXT aint churning out crapola. Just added expense to my company that is in a death spiral at this moment in time. You don't LEARN this business in some f***ing training school. ROFLMAO. You dont learn how to draw. You don't learn how to work. You dont learn psychology. Not like you would in a place like OVW I’m pretty sure nothing you mentioned has anything to do with this thread’s topic In terms of overhauling the look of the programs, I think WWE would be better off following NJPW’s presentation. (Specifically, they’re low angle of filming, lack of camera cuts during in-ring action, and extremely cinematic pre-match packages.) But then again, I also want them to cop LU’s style and become more cinematic overall, and really lean into the idea that it’s a show (rather than a live sorting event)
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on Jan 11, 2019 6:01:05 GMT -5
Hmm.
Any drastic change in presentation will likely annoy some and possibly let business fall. So they stick to what they feel is safe and already established/accepted, even if people find it stale, they know what to look for and how to look for it.
Like someone else said, anything less is automatically 'cheap and lazy'. Even though in the past, changes presentation wise were generally more accepted, whether a downgrade or not.
But that's business, sometimes you take risks, sonetimes you stay the course.
I honestly don't know what else they could do to spice things up presentation wise, that doesn't involve the actual in ring product or logo/videos. Maybe have more crew at the bottom of the ring to check wrestlers off in front of the fans? Possibly have two entrances at the top, one for each opponent/team comes out of? Some crazy change like the ring being embedded in the floor, so they're wrestling on the same level as the ringside seats?
Even TNA had it's six sided ring gimmick, but even though some liked it for being different, it seems less people as a whole liked that which in turn means lower profits? I dunno
|
|