Did "This Is TNA" win you over?

[WHATAMANOOOVER]

TNA doesn't seem to realize that you don't get new viewers by going with tons of gimmick matches and pointless backstage segments, horrible commentating and what not. People will watch TNA to check out some wrestling featuring guys who likely will never be in WWE (Daniels, Styles, Homicide, etc.). As long as TNA gives 2-3 minute matches on TV, they will remain looking bushleague and a minor league compared to WWE.

As Lance Storm said, WSX seems to be more of the alternative to WWE than TNA claims they are.

[KB Klash is nWo 4 Life]

So wait: I'm getting the impression that they didnt show one of the Joe/Styles/Daniels matches. How could you have a "Best of TNA" without one of the best matches in recent history?

[#Classic Hi-Definition X]

As a consolation, they named that match the #4 greatest moment in TNA history.

As for the special, no it didn't really win me over. Even though they showed some good matches, on Thursday we'll right back to the same ol' same ol', which is lots of talking, very little wrestling, and everybody and their mama making an appearance.

[THE Dinobot]

Not that I'm the type that needs to be won over'ed by TNA, but will say the most enjoyable segment on the special was the little profile dealie of Alex Shelley.

[Deleted]

Complaining about "TNA films" is proof people of this board are just digging for things to whine about. You don't like the storylines, Russo, gimmick matches then fine. But you're honestly going to complain about an alternative camera angle?

[Hiroshi Hase]

I didn't see the special, didn't want to, but I heard that the new commentary was awful and something about different camera views which kinda slowed down the matches and did warrant some complaints, from what I hear.

[hollywood]

I'd already seen all but one of the matches, anyway. And the one I hadn't seen, the King of the Mountain match, had people crying bloody murder that it sucked so bad. (That's what I heard, I haven't seen it) So, I didn't even bother watching.

Does that mean they didn't win me over?

[ACG2x]

brentreznor said:

Complaining about "TNA films" is proof people of this board are just digging for things to whine about. You don't like the storylines, Russo, gimmick matches then fine. But you're honestly going to complain about an alternative camera angle?

Um, we are complaining about the TNA Flims camera angles because they sucked? They gave me a headache flying the camera around like that. I don't mind numerous pans and/or cutaways, but that was overkill.

You don't seem to understand that production value is part of a wrestling show, hell any TV show. Doing that TNA Films angle constantly took away from the matches. I can completely see casual wrestling fans going "WTF is going on here?" which takes you away from the match which takes you away from being interested in the product.

But as far as the show goes, my final take of the most good and bad-

Good
- The X Division action they did show
- The Styles/Daniels vs. LAX tag match
- Christian on the mic...anytime, anywhere
- It was something different than Raw on Monday nights

Bad
- Tenay & West constantly yelling over each other. It works so much better when you have one excitable announcer and one straight man. They make your head hurt after about two matches.
- WAY too many gimmick matches. For a company that's been trying to differeniate itself from WWE, this was not the way to go
- Showing too much of what used to happen. Why not get new fans onboard by starting a fresh, big new angle right there. Make them have to tune in.
- TNA Films angle. It was horrible. Which is why I'm complaining about it. I complain about horrible things.

[erisi236]

brentreznor said:

Complaining about "TNA films" is proof people of this board are just digging for things to whine about. You don't like the storylines, Russo, gimmick matches then fine. But you're honestly going to complain about an alternative camera angle?

yes, why would we actually want to see the matches, how dumb of us.

[Michael Coello]

I don't get the hate for the TNA film thing. It was just a close up on a certain part pf the action. Not like it bothered me watching it.

[hollywood]

So nearly twice as many people weren't won over. Is it okay to LOL@This Is TNA now?

[Rick Mad]

I voted no because I was already won over.

[Gillberg: 0-175]

You're obviously asking the wrong people. Mostly everyone who posted here said that they've already previously watched TNA, and that it will return to the same old on Thursday. The show was to introduce new viewers to the show.

I think it did an ok job, could have been better (I was waiting for the Joe/daniels/AJ match, and hoping for the KoTM where Raven won), but it was more than enough of a wrestling fix for the average fan. They introduced their characters, and the show had to have a lot of promo time in it. You're trying to introduce an entire company in 2 hours, while showcasing some of the best matches they have. Of course you're gonna get promos.

I've been noticing that people in the IWC will bitch for the sake of bitching. TNA Films did piss me off, a lot, but I thought the show was a good way to devert RAW fans and have them tune in next time to increase their audience.

I also thought the stuff with Eric Young and the dogs was clever. Yeah, it was a pot shot, but it was also funny and served it's purpose to devert RAW fans even more by saying that the WWE channel cares more about dog shows than the wrestling fans.

[Hiroshi Hase]

^I'm sure some will tune in to Impact, and when they don't see the level of action they saw on that Monday night Special, they'll probably tune right back out of TNA as quickly as they tuned in.

[royboy8]

I enjoyed it. But as a person who watches the E and rarely catches TNA the one thing(negative) that stuck out in watching the show. They have soooooooooooooooooo many stupid gimmick matches and it seems like every match they have is a gimmick match. And most of them dont make any sense. Most of them also prolly don't last for more then one match also.

[hollywood]

Can I LOL@This is TNA yet?

[Jeff]

No

[erisi236]

hollywood said:

Can I LOL@This is TNA yet?

wait till the ratings are in at least.

[hollywood]

erisi236 said:

hollywood said:

Can I LOL@This is TNA yet?

wait till the ratings are in at least.

Dammit! [shoves hand in pockets and sulks]

[Hellsing920]

royboy8 said:

I enjoyed it. But as a person who watches the E and rarely catches TNA the one thing(negative) that stuck out in watching the show. They have soooooooooooooooooo many stupid gimmick matches and it seems like every match they have is a gimmick match. And most of them dont make any sense. Most of them also prolly don't last for more then one match also.

I'm a big TNA fan, and even I will tell you that they have too many gimmick matches. But, a lot of them are one's you won't see from WWE. Will WWE ever book a scaffold match? How about something similar to Ultimate X? or War Games (TNA calls it Lethal Lockdown, but it's the same match)? Sadly, WWE seems to be stuck with TLC, Ladder, HIAC, MITB, Inferno (which is just a lame gimmick match), Buried Alive, and Casket.

And, WWE has done a bunch of one time only gimmick matches. I only remember one Dumpster Match happening. What about the Dark Side match between 'Taker and Giant Gonzales? Kennel From Hell? Punjabi Prison? Iron Circle (Shamrock vs. I think Blackman in a parking lot surrounded by cars)? I'm not complaining. I'm just showing that WWE has had a few horrid gimmick matches too.

But, that doesn't let TNA off the hook, either. They really should cut back a little.