Zone Was Wrong
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Currently living off the high that AEW brings every Wednesday and Friday
Posts: 16,128
Member is Online
|
Post by Zone Was Wrong on Apr 28, 2020 7:10:19 GMT -5
He did one inside reference to it.Nothing more There was way more than one reference. There was the sneezing. Meltzer acknowledged that him eating before others was based on a specific Vince incident. He didn’t put ketchup on his steak at least. There was of course the “old man” reference in his debut. The yawning which was again mentioned by Meltzer as being a direct reference. The Mister Brodie Lee. The similar style suits. I will give them credit for easing up on the references in recent weeks and hopefully they’ll be done with that aspect of the character. Like, if Meltzer never said any of this we'd have, what 1 "major" reference to Vince. Like, everything listed here is a reference to an overbearing, over controlling, diseased minded person. Pretty much a cult leader, like he should be. The fact that Vince just so happens to have those same exact traits should be an indicator of much larger issues than Brodie Lee possibly being a Vince parody.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Apr 28, 2020 7:26:43 GMT -5
There was way more than one reference. There was the sneezing. Meltzer acknowledged that him eating before others was based on a specific Vince incident. He didn’t put ketchup on his steak at least. There was of course the “old man” reference in his debut. The yawning which was again mentioned by Meltzer as being a direct reference. The Mister Brodie Lee. The similar style suits. I will give them credit for easing up on the references in recent weeks and hopefully they’ll be done with that aspect of the character. Like, if Meltzer never said any of this we'd have, what 1 "major" reference to Vince. Like, everything listed here is a reference to an overbearing, over controlling, diseased minded person. Pretty much a cult leader, like he should be. The fact that Vince just so happens to have those same exact traits should be an indicator of much larger issues than Brodie Lee possibly being a Vince parody. Sure, Vince is a cult leader , yada yada. That’s a totally different issue haha That doesn’t change the fact that Brodie’s been referencing him or using his traits.
|
|
|
Post by Yamashita Enforcement Division on Apr 28, 2020 8:19:51 GMT -5
I don't get what your problem with Brodie Lee using McMahon as a base for a cult leader then. If yon agree that McMahon displays the traits of a cult leader, and Brodie Lee just spent a long time within his cult, it seems easy to see why he's going to Vince as a source. Add that Vince McMahon is considered in the top tier of authoritative heels and it really makes sense.
So what is the problem?
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Apr 28, 2020 11:44:52 GMT -5
I don't get what your problem with Brodie Lee using McMahon as a base for a cult leader then. If yon agree that McMahon displays the traits of a cult leader, and Brodie Lee just spent a long time within his cult, it seems easy to see why he's going to Vince as a source. Add that Vince McMahon is considered in the top tier of authoritative heels and it really makes sense. So what is the problem? I don’t mind it per se at least as far as the more subtle references go, the whole angle just hasn’t clicked for me yet. Seems like it hasn’t been good for Brodie and hasnt been good for the Dark Order. I was more interested in Brodie when I thought he was going to be Jake’s Guy. I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,848
|
Post by Dub H on Apr 28, 2020 13:10:42 GMT -5
I don't get what your problem with Brodie Lee using McMahon as a base for a cult leader then. If yon agree that McMahon displays the traits of a cult leader, and Brodie Lee just spent a long time within his cult, it seems easy to see why he's going to Vince as a source. Add that Vince McMahon is considered in the top tier of authoritative heels and it really makes sense. So what is the problem? I don’t mind it per se at least as far as the more subtle references go, the whole angle just hasn’t clicked for me yet. Seems like it hasn’t been good for Brodie and hasnt been good for the Dark Order. I was more interested in Brodie when I thought he was going to be Jake’s Guy. I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org. He stopped using sister abigail (which I agree was really wonky) but he didnt mention Bray this week
|
|
|
Post by Bang Bang Bart on Apr 29, 2020 9:56:26 GMT -5
I don’t mind it per se at least as far as the more subtle references go, the whole angle just hasn’t clicked for me yet. Seems like it hasn’t been good for Brodie and hasnt been good for the Dark Order. I was more interested in Brodie when I thought he was going to be Jake’s Guy. I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org. He stopped using sister abigail (which I agree was really wonky) but he didnt mention Bray this week They might be referring to Preston Vance (the new Dark Order recruit) typing that he had the “whole world in his hands” when he was on the Dark Order site in the vignette.
|
|
thehottag
Don Corleone
We're here for one reason only: fame, fortune, & the World Wrestling Federation Tag Team Champions!
Posts: 1,668
|
Post by thehottag on Apr 29, 2020 14:50:54 GMT -5
What I find interesting is that Brodie Lee could literally do anything now & people would probably assume it's a Vince reference. If he lit Evil Uno's balls on fire, people would say 'I wonder which writer he did that to?'
|
|
Hypnosis
T
Posts: 97,804
Member is Online
|
Post by Hypnosis on Apr 29, 2020 15:53:02 GMT -5
What I find interesting is that Brodie Lee could literally do anything now & people would probably assume it's a Vince reference. If he lit Evil Uno's balls on fire, people would say 'I wonder which writer he did that to?' If Brodie does anything with fire, he probably got that idea from Kane.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Apr 29, 2020 17:10:07 GMT -5
Like, if Meltzer never said any of this we'd have, what 1 "major" reference to Vince. Like, everything listed here is a reference to an overbearing, over controlling, diseased minded person. Pretty much a cult leader, like he should be. The fact that Vince just so happens to have those same exact traits should be an indicator of much larger issues than Brodie Lee possibly being a Vince parody. Sure, Vince is a cult leader , yada yada. That’s a totally different issue haha That doesn’t change the fact that Brodie’s been referencing him or using his traits. But what does it matter if Brodie is plucking traits of a manipulative boss from his former manipulative boss? Especially as we get further and further away from recognizable Vince-isms, nobody can actually point out how it's bad for Brodie to be pulling inspiration from there when you can see a clear line of people doing stff like this not just in wrestling but in all of media.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,848
|
Post by Dub H on Apr 29, 2020 17:23:11 GMT -5
Sure, Vince is a cult leader , yada yada. That’s a totally different issue haha That doesn’t change the fact that Brodie’s been referencing him or using his traits. But what does it matter if Brodie is plucking traits of a manipulative boss from his former manipulative boss? Especially as we get further and further away from recognizable Vince-isms, nobody can actually point out how it's bad for Brodie to be pulling inspiration from there when you can see a clear line of people doing stff like this not just in wrestling but in all of media. The issue isnt that he is grabbing Vince traits that are cult leader He is getting Cult Leader Traits that people associate with Vince.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Apr 29, 2020 18:13:01 GMT -5
Sure, Vince is a cult leader , yada yada. That’s a totally different issue haha That doesn’t change the fact that Brodie’s been referencing him or using his traits. But what does it matter if Brodie is plucking traits of a manipulative boss from his former manipulative boss? Especially as we get further and further away from recognizable Vince-isms, nobody can actually point out how it's bad for Brodie to be pulling inspiration from there when you can see a clear line of people doing stff like this not just in wrestling but in all of media. As I described earlier: I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org. So I agree that the more subtle references shouldn’t be an issue the longer we are removed from those initial, more obvious references.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Apr 29, 2020 19:29:22 GMT -5
But what does it matter if Brodie is plucking traits of a manipulative boss from his former manipulative boss? Especially as we get further and further away from recognizable Vince-isms, nobody can actually point out how it's bad for Brodie to be pulling inspiration from there when you can see a clear line of people doing stff like this not just in wrestling but in all of media. As I described earlier: I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org. So I agree that the more subtle references shouldn’t be an issue the longer we are removed from those initial, more obvious references. But you said the thing in response to someone pointing out how many of these Vince-isms are subtle and would go unnoticed, saying "That doesn't change that Brodie is referencing him" in response to that says that subtler references are still a problem somehow, too.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Apr 29, 2020 21:54:40 GMT -5
As I described earlier: I definitely think the more on-the-nose references to Vince or Bray do detract from the character though (old man comment, Sister Abigail set up, the sneezing, and I think someone said he mentioned Bray again this week). IMO, you don’t want people constantly thinking of your past employer and your past gimmicks when you’re trying to do your own thing in a new org. So I agree that the more subtle references shouldn’t be an issue the longer we are removed from those initial, more obvious references. But you said the thing in response to someone pointing out how many of these Vince-isms are subtle and would go unnoticed, saying "That doesn't change that Brodie is referencing him" in response to that says that subtler references are still a problem somehow, too. Right I’m saying they’re an issue now because he started off so strong with the references that everyone is going to keep drawing the parallels. I did say that the subtle references I don’t really have a problem with. As he keeps getting further removed from those initial references, the subtle references should be less of a problem. Best case would be no references of course.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Apr 29, 2020 23:44:44 GMT -5
But you said the thing in response to someone pointing out how many of these Vince-isms are subtle and would go unnoticed, saying "That doesn't change that Brodie is referencing him" in response to that says that subtler references are still a problem somehow, too. Right I’m saying they’re an issue now because he started off so strong with the references that everyone is going to keep drawing the parallels. I did say that the subtle references I don’t really have a problem with. As he keeps getting further removed from those initial references, the subtle references should be less of a problem. Best case would be no references of course. But this is the part I'm getting at that keeps getting danced around. Why are subtle references the audience can't get without a journalist saying "Actually this is what that refers to" on his radio show a problem at all? Why is the 'best case' that he take no inspiration from Vince when actors base their performances off of people they knew and writers adapt figures from their past? I'm far less concerned with why people think him getting on people for sneezing isn't to their taste. I get that. But why is the best case no references instead of ones that are nigh invisible to the viewer? At that point what does the difference matter?
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Apr 30, 2020 6:04:10 GMT -5
Right I’m saying they’re an issue now because he started off so strong with the references that everyone is going to keep drawing the parallels. I did say that the subtle references I don’t really have a problem with. As he keeps getting further removed from those initial references, the subtle references should be less of a problem. Best case would be no references of course. But this is the part I'm getting at that keeps getting danced around. Why are subtle references the audience can't get without a journalist saying "Actually this is what that refers to" on his radio show a problem at all? Why is the 'best case' that he take no inspiration from Vince when actors base their performances off of people they knew and writers adapt figures from their past? I'm far less concerned with why people think him getting on people for sneezing isn't to their taste. I get that. But why is the best case no references instead of ones that are nigh invisible to the viewer? At that point what does the difference matter? The difference is that people are going to read into the more subtle references right now to try and connect them to Vince due to the earlier heavy-handed references. I mean, I don’t know if you read other forums or other places that discuss wrestling, but they knock Lee’s character to a way higher degree than here. I’d also argue that invisible to the viewer is a stretch since the target audience/core audience of AEW are fans that will make the connection, IMO. We’re the most “inside baseball” fans there are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2020 7:51:18 GMT -5
I think more than anything what's tiring to me in this is the constant, "People are desperate to turn everything back to Vince, no one's giving it a chance," talking point because that's just a completely meaningless strawman. Someone could easily turn it around and say by the same token, "He could set up a Kiss My Ass Club and you people will insist it has no basis to Vince," and it'd be just as much of a good faith argument as that is.
I think the bigger question is really just whether someone's individually reading things as a Vince reference or not and whether or not they mind that. And personally... Ehhhh. I do definitely think a lot of it is on purpose, and I do think it's hokey, but really I have a lot bigger issues with the gimmick thus far, mostly how he's almost entirely upended how the group was being portrayed to this point and how his squashes really aren't nearly impressive enough to warrant doing them on basically every single show because he really just doesn't hit that hard or have that flashy of moves. These squashes are a lot less Umaga and a lot more Rodney Mack and that's probably the biggest problem I have with him right now, he feels like he's wasting my time.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Apr 30, 2020 15:44:44 GMT -5
But this is the part I'm getting at that keeps getting danced around. Why are subtle references the audience can't get without a journalist saying "Actually this is what that refers to" on his radio show a problem at all? Why is the 'best case' that he take no inspiration from Vince when actors base their performances off of people they knew and writers adapt figures from their past? I'm far less concerned with why people think him getting on people for sneezing isn't to their taste. I get that. But why is the best case no references instead of ones that are nigh invisible to the viewer? At that point what does the difference matter? The difference is that people are going to read into the more subtle references right now to try and connect them to Vince due to the earlier heavy-handed references. I mean, I don’t know if you read other forums or other places that discuss wrestling, but they knock Lee’s character to a way higher degree than here. I’d also argue that invisible to the viewer is a stretch since the target audience/core audience of AEW are fans that will make the connection, IMO. We’re the most “inside baseball” fans there are. There are people dead certain dress code references are somehow a WWE jab. If people want to try and sit there going "Well I don't know that this is something Vince does but I bet it is", that's a them problem. The audience reacting to this information by scrambling about to find find all the ways in which something is totally about Vince doesn't have any impact on the performance, it's the audience making their minsd up abu something and then going through tons of justification to try and figure out how to make it about the thing it is. And the 'eat before everyone else' thing is not a widely known Vince-ism, it had to come from Meltzer. Yawning, same thing. The idea that "Mister Brodie Lee" is somehow a Vince stab when "Mister Vince Mcmahon" is never what Vince has been referred to and you have to splice together different thins he's called to make that happen. These aren't inside baseball fans picking up on stories they know, this is rhetorical pretzling to say something is that way and then seeking confirmation from somewhere else. I think more than anything what's tiring to me in this is the constant, "People are desperate to turn everything back to Vince, no one's giving it a chance," talking point because that's just a completely meaningless strawman. Someone could easily turn it around and say by the same token, "He could set up a Kiss My Ass Club and you people will insist it has no basis to Vince," and it'd be just as much of a good faith argument as that is. You literally insisted that because everything before had been a reference to Vince that a dress code thing had to be a WWE jab because WWE used to have a dress code, and not because corporations often have dress codes. We don't have people doing the Kiss My Ass Club thing but we do have you yourself begging the point back around to Vince, so just by one being hypothetical and the other happening, these aren't the same.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,848
|
Post by Dub H on Apr 30, 2020 17:30:59 GMT -5
I think more than anything what's tiring to me in this is the constant, "People are desperate to turn everything back to Vince, no one's giving it a chance," talking point because that's just a completely meaningless strawman. Someone could easily turn it around and say by the same token, "He could set up a Kiss My Ass Club and you people will insist it has no basis to Vince," and it'd be just as much of a good faith argument as that is. I think the bigger question is really just whether someone's individually reading things as a Vince reference or not and whether or not they mind that. And personally... Ehhhh. I do definitely think a lot of it is on purpose, and I do think it's hokey, but really I have a lot bigger issues with the gimmick thus far, mostly how he's almost entirely upended how the group was being portrayed to this point and how his squashes really aren't nearly impressive enough to warrant doing them on basically every single show because he really just doesn't hit that hard or have that flashy of moves. These squashes are a lot less Umaga and a lot more Rodney Mack and that's probably the biggest problem I have with him right now, he feels like he's wasting my time. Difference is: We have examples and even some proof a lot of it is not of it is Vince inspired.Like him following books of cult and Scientology for his promos. We have things that happened that are not WWE in any way except people say Vince is also a Businessman. The fact you CAN'T pull off a "Yeh but he did this clear vince spoof (like kiss my ass,good shit, strut,etc) that people refuse to admit it is" is proof that it isnt a Vince spoof
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on May 1, 2020 7:05:19 GMT -5
The difference is that people are going to read into the more subtle references right now to try and connect them to Vince due to the earlier heavy-handed references. I mean, I don’t know if you read other forums or other places that discuss wrestling, but they knock Lee’s character to a way higher degree than here. I’d also argue that invisible to the viewer is a stretch since the target audience/core audience of AEW are fans that will make the connection, IMO. We’re the most “inside baseball” fans there are. There are people dead certain dress code references are somehow a WWE jab. If people want to try and sit there going "Well I don't know that this is something Vince does but I bet it is", that's a them problem. The audience reacting to this information by scrambling about to find find all the ways in which something is totally about Vince doesn't have any impact on the performance, it's the audience making their minsd up abu something and then going through tons of justification to try and figure out how to make it about the thing it is. And the 'eat before everyone else' thing is not a widely known Vince-ism, it had to come from Meltzer. Yawning, same thing. The idea that "Mister Brodie Lee" is somehow a Vince stab when "Mister Vince Mcmahon" is never what Vince has been referred to and you have to splice together different thins he's called to make that happen. These aren't inside baseball fans picking up on stories they know, this is rhetorical pretzling to say something is that way and then seeking confirmation from somewhere else. I think more than anything what's tiring to me in this is the constant, "People are desperate to turn everything back to Vince, no one's giving it a chance," talking point because that's just a completely meaningless strawman. Someone could easily turn it around and say by the same token, "He could set up a Kiss My Ass Club and you people will insist it has no basis to Vince," and it'd be just as much of a good faith argument as that is. You literally insisted that because everything before had been a reference to Vince that a dress code thing had to be a WWE jab because WWE used to have a dress code, and not because corporations often have dress codes. We don't have people doing the Kiss My Ass Club thing but we do have you yourself begging the point back around to Vince, so just by one being hypothetical and the other happening, these aren't the same. We’ll have to agree to disagree as we’re talking in circles. I think the bottom line is that the gimmick to a large portion of the fan base is now seen as a Vince spoof, whether intentional or not, whether justified or not, it’s been painted as that by many.
|
|
Bad Moon
Unicron
for reasons known only to the goblins that live in my brain
Posts: 3,091
|
Post by Bad Moon on May 1, 2020 7:42:27 GMT -5
You know what I really appreciate? It's that it's not a spoof of Vince the TV character, he's not doing the Kiss My Ass club or the gorilla walk or talking about his dick, but 100% Vince the real life person as related by the people who worked with him. Because Vince is enough of a f***ing cartoon characater that you don't need to invent anything to turn him into a wrestling character.
|
|