|
Post by autisticgeordie on Dec 31, 2019 12:32:17 GMT -5
For the record; I am not defending the decision to put the belt on a scrawny actor like David Arquette, but I have to give Arquette credit for being such a class act about it and donating a lot of the money he got to Droz and I also have to give him credit for getting back into the industry of wrestling and wrestling on the indy level.
Also, from what I understand, it wasn't David's call to put the belt on himself and even he, as a wrestling fan, thought that it was a f***ing ridiculous idea, and he was totally right on that one.
So, which I can understand people getting pissed at the reign, I don't think that people should point the finger at David, as if he had anything to do with it?
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Dec 31, 2019 12:43:34 GMT -5
For the record; I am not defending the decision to put the belt on a scrawny actor like David Arquette, but I have to give Arquette credit for being such a class act about it and donating a lot of the money he got to Droz and I also have to give him credit for getting back into the industry of wrestling and wrestling on the indy level. Also, from what I understand, it wasn't David's call to put the belt on himself and even he, as a wrestling fan, thought that it was a f***ing ridiculous idea, and he was totally right on that one. So, which I can understand people getting pissed at the reign, I don't think that people should point the finger at David, as if he had anything to do with it?He did have something to do with it though. He could have said no. He didn't. If he refuses to do it, it doesn't happen. Simple as. It's not like he was actually working for WCW and had to fear for his job if he didn't go along with the angle. Everyone involved with the decision deserves blame. Fair play to Arquette doing something great and donating any money he made from the angle to good causes. I don't think anyone doubts he's a good guy. That doesn't change the fact that he was complicit in one of the worst moments in wrestling history.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,060
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Dec 31, 2019 13:07:20 GMT -5
For the record; I am not defending the decision to put the belt on a scrawny actor like David Arquette, but I have to give Arquette credit for being such a class act about it and donating a lot of the money he got to Droz and I also have to give him credit for getting back into the industry of wrestling and wrestling on the indy level. Also, from what I understand, it wasn't David's call to put the belt on himself and even he, as a wrestling fan, thought that it was a f***ing ridiculous idea, and he was totally right on that one. So, which I can understand people getting pissed at the reign, I don't think that people should point the finger at David, as if he had anything to do with it?He did have something to do with it though. He could have said no. He didn't. If he refuses to do it, it doesn't happen. Simple as. It's not like he was actually working for WCW and had to fear for his job if he didn't go along with the angle. Everyone involved with the decision deserves blame. Fair play to Arquette doing something great and donating any money he made from the angle to good causes. I don't think anyone doubts he's a good guy. That doesn't change the fact that he was complicit in one of the worst moments in wrestling history. As I recall it, he did refuse, but Russo and a few other talked him around to it, which I can see, he was the outsider and took their word even if he didn't agree with it. As for why people got mad at him, well, all this stuff took a long time to come out. It was such a good story of a stupid angle with some weedy actor coming in. People weren't interested in him being a fan, donating money etc. They just saw an outsider coming in, making the talent look like idiots, presuming he knew as much as any other celebrity in wrestling, barring a couple and was treating the whole thing like a joke.
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Dec 31, 2019 13:57:42 GMT -5
He actually couldn't say no. He was contractually obligated to go along with it to help promote the movie.
|
|
|
Post by arrogantmodel on Dec 31, 2019 14:15:51 GMT -5
I was like 16 or 17 when it happened. I wasn't mad, it was just another, "Oh, WCW...you so crazy!" moment.
|
|
Rave
El Dandy
Perpetually Bored
Posts: 8,112
|
Post by Rave on Dec 31, 2019 14:16:00 GMT -5
IIRC, didn't the idea start as a joke and Russo jumped on it?
As was said, it's pretty much what happens these days when people get pissed at the performer for something that's actually out of their control. We know now that Arquette is good people and Russo's the idiot at fault, but we didn't know that back then.
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Dec 31, 2019 14:30:33 GMT -5
He actually couldn't say no. He was contractually obligated to go along with it to help promote the movie. How does that work then?
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 31, 2019 15:02:37 GMT -5
For the record; I am not defending the decision to put the belt on a scrawny actor like David Arquette, but I have to give Arquette credit for being such a class act about it and donating a lot of the money he got to Droz and I also have to give him credit for getting back into the industry of wrestling and wrestling on the indy level. Also, from what I understand, it wasn't David's call to put the belt on himself and even he, as a wrestling fan, thought that it was a f***ing ridiculous idea, and he was totally right on that one. So, which I can understand people getting pissed at the reign, I don't think that people should point the finger at David, as if he had anything to do with it?He did have something to do with it though. He could have said no. He didn't. If he refuses to do it, it doesn't happen. Simple as. It's not like he was actually working for WCW and had to fear for his job if he didn't go along with the angle. Everyone involved with the decision deserves blame. Fair play to Arquette doing something great and donating any money he made from the angle to good causes. I don't think anyone doubts he's a good guy. That doesn't change the fact that he was complicit in one of the worst moments in wrestling history. He did refuse to do it and they forced his hand so yeah that really doesn't fly Add on he donated his money as well so yeah I really don't put any blame on Arquette
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 31, 2019 15:03:47 GMT -5
He actually couldn't say no. He was contractually obligated to go along with it to help promote the movie. How does that work then? The movie is doing poorly, you are the "star" of the movie so you have to help us get this off the ground
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Dec 31, 2019 15:14:36 GMT -5
It was very much symbolic of WCW 2000. Arquette was the easiest target of that backlash even though he didn't deserve it.
|
|
|
Post by Chairman of the Board on Dec 31, 2019 16:18:52 GMT -5
David Arquette winning the WCW title WAS NOT one of the worst moments in wrestling history.
The booking was convoluted but the idea itself wasn’t half bad.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2019 16:24:37 GMT -5
That match vs. Nick Cage @ LA Confidential was freakin' great. I wish he would start his own version of Sweet n' Sour, Inc. - bringing the mega tv/movie stars such as himself in the mix (the more unknown, the funnier) and paid wraslers just "decent" money to join him.
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Dec 31, 2019 16:46:18 GMT -5
The movie is doing poorly, you are the "star" of the movie so you have to help us get this off the ground It was written into his movie contract that he had to do any angle a wrestling company booked for him on their programming, including being forced to participate in matches against his will? I find that hard to believe.
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Dec 31, 2019 16:56:56 GMT -5
He did have something to do with it though. He could have said no. He didn't. If he refuses to do it, it doesn't happen. Simple as. It's not like he was actually working for WCW and had to fear for his job if he didn't go along with the angle. Everyone involved with the decision deserves blame. Fair play to Arquette doing something great and donating any money he made from the angle to good causes. I don't think anyone doubts he's a good guy. That doesn't change the fact that he was complicit in one of the worst moments in wrestling history. He did refuse to do it and they forced his hand so yeah that really doesn't fly Add on he donated his money as well so yeah I really don't put any blame on Arquette In Arquette's own words, from a podcast last year: "I just sort of had an opportunity that I think a lot of people would have made the same decision if they were in that situation. And it's sort of a dream come true for me, so I was like, 'yeah. This is amazing.'" Key word there being 'decision'. Doesn't sound like he was forced at all. Talked into it, yeah. EDIT - Also this excerpt from an interview last year: "I thought it was a bit of a joke and he was like, 'No, I'm serious. I think [my] response was, 'That's a terrible idea. No, we can't do that,' but then they explained the storyline that I wasn't pinning a wrestler, I was pinning Eric Bischoff. "To be honest, the reason I wanted to do it was so I could be part of it. The fact of the matter was, yeah, I get to be the champion. Whoever gets that opportunity?" So yeah, doesn't sound like he was contractually obligated to do it at all.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Dec 31, 2019 17:02:18 GMT -5
David Arquette winning the WCW title WAS NOT one of the worst moments in wrestling history. The booking was convoluted but the idea itself wasn’t half bad. Isolated, it wasn't too bad. Not great, but there's been a lot worse and it could've worked if done during a time when the product was better. But in the context of WCW 2000, it was added insult to injury towards a fanbase leaving in droves. Especially when you contrast it to WWF 2000 which was arguably one of that company's strongest years ever in terms of overall product.
|
|
|
Post by The Thread Barbi on Dec 31, 2019 17:41:44 GMT -5
All I remember is Big Poppa Pump shooting on this angle that no-one would have minded the exact same if it was a tough guy actor like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The fact it was a skinny twerp pissed off Steiner lol.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 31, 2019 18:13:26 GMT -5
The movie is doing poorly, you are the "star" of the movie so you have to help us get this off the ground It was written into his movie contract that he had to do any angle a wrestling company booked for him on their programming, including being forced to participate in matches against his will? I find that hard to believe. You're being extra literal for really no reason He deserves 5% of the blame but that does not mean he should be lumped in with everyone else. He refused and they pulled the "we need you" card on him. It is going to be hard to turn that in Arquette was not involved in creative so to say he is complicit in anything is just wrong imo. You don't have to be literal to read between the lines and know what is going on
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2019 18:22:55 GMT -5
All I remember is Big Poppa Pump shooting on this angle that no-one would have minded the exact same if it was a tough guy actor like Arnold Schwarzenegger. The fact it was a skinny twerp pissed off Steiner lol. WrestleMania 36, after WWE throws away the remains of any health concers. John Cena vs. The Rock III Batista vs. Brock Lesnar Tyson Fury Mike Tyson & Sylvester Stallone vs. Arnold Schwarzenegger & Braun Strowman The Fiend vs. Bruce Campbell (w/ The Undertaker) Samoa Joe (w/ Sammo Hung) vs. Shinsuke Nakamura (w/ Jackie Chan) David Arquette, The Miz & Joey Ryan (w/ Lucy Lawless) vs. Becky Lynch, Charlotte Flair & Sasha Banks
|
|
|
Post by Gravedigger's Biscuits on Dec 31, 2019 18:30:05 GMT -5
It was written into his movie contract that he had to do any angle a wrestling company booked for him on their programming, including being forced to participate in matches against his will? I find that hard to believe. You're being extra literal for really no reason He deserves 5% of the blame but that does not mean he should be lumped in with everyone else. He refused and they pulled the "we need you" card on him. It is going to be hard to turn that in Arquette was not involved in creative so to say he is complicit in anything is just wrong imo. You don't have to be literal to read between the lines and know what is going on He was literally the definition of complicit. But okay, that's your opinion. And I'm allowed mine. What isn't opinion is people seemingly making stuff up about "oh, it was in his contract and he HAD to do it!" when Arquette hasn't said anything of the sort in recent interviews. Why bullshit for?
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Dec 31, 2019 18:46:54 GMT -5
He could have said no, he should have said no, but most of the blame lies with Russo and WCW management for even contemplating it in the first place, I think most people accept that at this point.
|
|