Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Jan 25, 2007 19:04:34 GMT -5
I'm not sure, did the Four Horsemen ever exist? I don't know but, the upcoming DVD on them should clear that up. And since WWE likes to rewrite history so much, I'm hoping they skip right over Paul Roma, Jeff Jarrett, and Steve McMichael.
|
|
|
Post by romafan87 on Jan 25, 2007 19:55:08 GMT -5
My biggest peeve with "revisionism" is when the WWE BLANTANTLY lies to the fans by dubbing in cheers for those who get NONE and boos for those that get cheers. You know who I'm talking about here. How hard is it to be honest, anyway? I mean, it only makes the WWE look petty and stupid when they dub in an Austin-like pop for John Cena, and you can see on the video that NO ONE is cheering....in fact, there are a great many people flipping Cena the bird, and giving him the thumbs down. Add to that the ENDLESS live reports from the folks that were there in person that don't jibe with the show/DVD...... And again, I'm left to ask, "Why lie?". Now because of this, I no longer trust anything the WWE puts out. How long before they go back and start editing past matches to enhance a crowd reaction? What exactly is real and what is memorex? With all due respect, they have been doing this since atleast 1985, especially during Superstar tapings. There are times when Haku would enter, everyone on camera was clearly silent, but from the sound, you'd think Hitler walked into the room. The hugh amping up of sound is REALLY evident on SNMEs as well as Coliseum videos. -Ian
|
|
|
Post by Loki on Jan 25, 2007 20:16:15 GMT -5
A couple of "explainations": portraying Cena as the most dominant guy on the roster, and possibly of the history of the company makes perfect sense in terms of both marketing and kayfabe. Are they supposed to admit their current Champion and Top Guy actually is pretty average and in another time he'd been midcarder at best? About Flair and Triple H. HHH's main grudge with Ric was him "reveling in his newfound mediocrity" while being IC Champion. Maybe Flair did pick up a bit of his old ways and now Trips is ok with that... The only revisionism that bothers me is not acknowledging certain wrestlers' legacies/contribution (Sammartino, Steamboat, Savage, Demolition, Warrior, Hart to an extent) and gimmicks (Turncoat Sgt. Slaughter, Rocky Maivia, Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Ringmaster etc...) I can live with the lack of continuity in the face-heel interactions because with all the turns and the overexposure of the product on TV, it'd be too hard (and tiresome) to give and get reasonable explainantions for all the alliances being made and broken...
|
|
|
Post by 2 time pro bowler Fred Dryer on Jan 25, 2007 20:45:42 GMT -5
This thread got me thinking about an old RAW episode I watched the other day, from sometime in '98. It was after Teri Runnels ditched Goldust for Val Venis, and they were hyping Goldust's return to face Val on PPV. They showed kinda a career retrospective of Goldust, mainly his IC title win over Razor Ramon at RR 96, and his match with Piper at WM 12, with snippets of audio putting over how dominant he was. Now, I know why they did it, putting Goldust over at the expense of 2 top WCW guys, but it was definetly revisonist history. Goldust lost his match with Piper, and while he did beat Razor to win the title, it was the 123 kid's interference that was the deciding factor. I didn't hate it, but I remember thinking, "Hmmm, that's kinda a questionable way to go."
|
|
BHB
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,778
|
Post by BHB on Jan 25, 2007 21:07:43 GMT -5
The way that they try to present Hunter as the greatest worker in wrestling history is disgusting. I remember Jim Ross basically calling Jack Brisco, Harley Race, and Ric Flair rolled into one performer. Trips has had maybe one or two matces in the past 5 or so years that could earn that praise for him. Exactly. Trips was fantastic in 2000-2001. Since then he's had a handful of great matches and everything else he's done has been the same thing every time. He's been phoning it in for over a year now. And i hated his match with Cena.
|
|
|
Post by brutuscheesecake on Jan 25, 2007 22:16:31 GMT -5
Yea, they definitely over hyped Goldust as some kind of revolutionary, controversial character. Reactions to him were lukewarm at best, people actually seemed more bored than shocked and appalled.
|
|
|
Post by Just "Dan" is Fine, Thank You on Jan 25, 2007 22:18:55 GMT -5
How about revising history moments after it has occurred. When WWE.com reported RVD's win at ONS, the article read:
"Paul Heyman rushed (lie) to the ring, grinning ear-to-ear (lie), and quickly (lie) made the 3-count."
|
|
|
Post by odanobunaga on Jan 25, 2007 22:57:02 GMT -5
Yup I remember that.
|
|
|
Post by Kerry Von Erich is my hero on Jan 26, 2007 0:29:14 GMT -5
I hate how they say that every wrestler from every era always thought of the WWF as the top promotion. Even in the 60s when they were a small regional promotion, the early 80s when they had fallen so low that the WWF title had actually lost World title status in pro wrestling illustrated, and the mid 90s when WCW was the place to be. you're definately right about this. WWF from... I'd say around 1980 until when Hogan showed up was a bushleague promotion and was considered to be second rate to other organizations such as WCCW and NWA. In fact, from 1982-85 WCCW was THE place to be, not the WWF. Look at the talent between the two companies. The Von Erichs were on fire, as were the Freebirds, and of course the other NWA mainstays who ventured down there such as Flair and Race. Compare that to B-level performers such as Bob Backlund and Pedro Morales. Those guys just weren't getting it done, and soon enough, Backlund was flushed like a stinky turd once Hulk Hogan got there. So yeah, i hate it when Vince always tries to make himself look like his company was always the elite within the industry
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Jan 26, 2007 1:15:17 GMT -5
My biggest peeve with "revisionism" is when the WWE BLANTANTLY lies to the fans by dubbing in cheers for those who get NONE and boos for those that get cheers. You know who I'm talking about here. How hard is it to be honest, anyway? I mean, it only makes the WWE look petty and stupid when they dub in an Austin-like pop for John Cena, and you can see on the video that NO ONE is cheering....in fact, there are a great many people flipping Cena the bird, and giving him the thumbs down. Add to that the ENDLESS live reports from the folks that were there in person that don't jibe with the show/DVD...... And again, I'm left to ask, "Why lie?". Now because of this, I no longer trust anything the WWE puts out. How long before they go back and start editing past matches to enhance a crowd reaction? What exactly is real and what is memorex? With all due respect, they have been doing this since atleast 1985, especially during Superstar tapings. There are times when Haku would enter, everyone on camera was clearly silent, but from the sound, you'd think Hitler walked into the room. The hugh amping up of sound is REALLY evident on SNMEs as well as Coliseum videos. -Ian Maybe so, but that doesn't excuse it, nor make it any less maddening. I mean, it's one thing to clean up audio, and improve the listening experience by removing feedback or white noise. But adding in cheers and boos that aren't there......it's just cheating. It's decietful, and every time I catch this crap, it makes me mad.
|
|