|
|
Post by wildojinx on Nov 15, 2007 9:43:15 GMT -5
Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the wwe should go back to being "family entertainment", especially considering the current backlash towards wrestling? I mean, it wouldnt affect the wrestling itself, and to be honest, if it means the end of all that diva crap i think fans everywhere would be all for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by 8-BitAssassin on Nov 15, 2007 9:50:17 GMT -5
No. </Tomko>
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,372
|
Post by Push R Truth on Nov 15, 2007 9:52:03 GMT -5
I always thought John Cena's God Push was about as close to Family Entertainment as they are going to get. Most of his stuff was about as edgey as a spoon.
So I have to agree with the Tomko.
|
|
Big L
Grimlock
Posts: 13,883
|
Post by Big L on Nov 15, 2007 9:53:28 GMT -5
LASHLEY:NO! YOU BATHTURD!
|
|
|
|
Post by seano on Nov 15, 2007 9:53:32 GMT -5
Considering the American family in 2007 is a lot different (and worse?) than the American family of 1985-1995, I agree with the Tomko.
|
|
Chainsaw
T
A very BAD man.
It is what it is
Posts: 90,480
|
Post by Chainsaw on Nov 15, 2007 9:55:30 GMT -5
Family Entertainment=Hornswaggle blowing up Coach Looney Tunes style.
To quote The D, I'm not saying "f*** the Kids", I'm saying SMURF the kids!
|
|
|
|
Post by skiller on Nov 15, 2007 9:57:19 GMT -5
Isn't that what they have now?
|
|
|
|
Post by wildojinx on Nov 15, 2007 10:08:00 GMT -5
I'm not saying go back to the 92-97 dreck of "Wrestler by day, ____ by night", and slapsticky stuff with clowns and midgets and kings, but a return to the 84-91 style of storytelling (which could be family oriented without being too schlocky) wouldnt be that bad. It is true though that cena (and to a lesser extent CM Punk, and even though we dont like him here, batista) IS a good champion who doesnt rely on being "Edgy".
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Nov 15, 2007 10:10:27 GMT -5
NO!
|
|
|
|
Post by bjboston on Nov 15, 2007 10:54:17 GMT -5
How about three separate and actually different brands?
RAW: More "adult" storylines pushing the envelope with sex and violence
ECW: A pure wrestling fan's show with simple storylines and focus on in-ring work
Smackdown: Geared more toward kids with cartoony 80's style stories
Huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by nerdinitupagain on Nov 15, 2007 11:08:53 GMT -5
How about three separate and actually different brands? RAW: More "adult" storylines pushing the envelope with sex and violence ECW: A pure wrestling fan's show with simple storylines and focus on in-ring work Smackdown: Geared more toward kids with cartoony 80's style stories Huh? ... Nahhh.. that just makes too much sense. What needs to be done is to over expose the one market we have with the same product in and out. It would make no sense to try and branch out, build three seperate markets and grow them indvidually which would then inherently have leak through to the other brands from new fans. Business.. it's easy. |
|
Kae
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,610
|
Post by Kae on Nov 15, 2007 11:10:34 GMT -5
"It seems today that all you see is violence in movies and sex on TV.
But, where are those good ol’ fashioned values
on which we used to rely?"
That's all I have to say to this topic, other than I don't think the promotion would survive with that kind of booking anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by GaTechGrad on Nov 15, 2007 11:34:36 GMT -5
They aren't already family entertainment?
|
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 15, 2007 11:45:58 GMT -5
The business model's always had an eye towards tweens, even during Attitude. But now it's to the point where the "scratch W" looks pretty out of place now.
While I really don't want to see the WWE go super-edgy/adult, I'd like them to mature up and go a tad more old-school in their image, more like the NWA or WWWF.
Put simply, I can approve of gimmicks like Umaga, MVP, Santino Marella, Cade/Murdoch and even Jimmy Wang Yang. I can't get behind face Hornswaggle or Deuce and Domino, to be honest.
|
|
|
|
Post by leemir on Nov 15, 2007 11:48:53 GMT -5
It's really weird cause some of it for kids but then a lot of it isn't. Like there are a lot of things on there you just wouldn't want your kids watching even though a lot is to childish for yourself. You'd think it would be one or the other.
|
|
|
|
Post by pathogen on Nov 15, 2007 12:05:11 GMT -5
TONKO! In the UK, the late shows are uncensored, and they have it on at 5 PM ish for children or the pathetically easily offended people who shouldn't be watching it anyway, And again, TOMKO!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 15, 2007 12:14:17 GMT -5
Sounds good in theory, until you realize that to the WWE family entertainment means repeated huge face pushes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lenny: Smooth like Keith Stone on Nov 15, 2007 12:19:47 GMT -5
To answer the question of whether is it currently family entertainment, it is not. Not when the top guy has finishing moves called FU and STFU. That may not be "adult content" either, but it's nothing that is family oriented.
|
|
|
|
Post by BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps on Nov 15, 2007 12:20:48 GMT -5
Sounds good in theory, until you realize that to the WWE family entertainment means repeated huge face pushes. Those CAN work provided that the face has some appeal to all segments of the crowd- youngsters, smarks, 18-34 male demographic, maybe women but that's not the first priority. I think if the superface is under 6'4, he should be a chaser. He shouldn't run through all challengers in long title runs otherwise. |
|
Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Nov 15, 2007 13:08:01 GMT -5
Smackdown is as family friendly as WWE gets television wise.
At house shows there is no real dirty promos, and that's when most of the children watch. I say it's good clean fun at the show.
I mean yeah there might be a diva swim suit competition...but besides that the raunchy type promos aren't really done anymore.
|
|
