I have one question ....
- Thread starter Ambiguous Turd
- Start date
Yeah, it is. "The Will of One", to be specific. It's on their first CD.
I love how the sig turned out.
I love how the sig turned out.
Fuck it, I've probably missed the tide by now, but I'm getting in on this shit.
Good wrestling draws. Bad wrestling doesn't. That's a fact. Wrestling is not, nor has it ever been, a subgenera of the arts. Wrestling is a division of the entertainment industry, and at any point that a program intended for entertainment fails to entertain the vast majority of it's audience then it is bad. That's very simple, and to be honest it's not relaly up for debate.
That being said, it's important not take this philosophy too far, lest you end up proclaiming that Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull was one of the greatest films of our generation. A hundred factors go together to determine the extent to which something draws, and many of them don't go close to a wrestling ring.
The WWE could build a program based around David Arquette wrestling members of the Insane Clown Possy, and it would still draw one-hundred fold what a trypical Ring of Honer program does.
Realistically a promotion can only be judged against its self, or other promotions of its size (Jerk-Fox over here is posting my opinions whilst I write them again). To try and compare the WWE to an indy federation outside the realms of subjective preference is laughable, because the WWE is so many echelons ahead of them that no comparison can be made.
You also have to take into account the fact that, although it may not seem to be the case, the WWE and a typical indy federation are competing for different markets. Indy feds, as minute businesses, and totally focused on one, very small cross section of fans (The ones Slyfox says think that they are too smart for the business, and I say need to stop calling women 'crack-****es every night'). The WWE has about as much in common with ROH product wise as it has with [generic, shitty US comedy].
Over the very long term we can establish that... for example, TNA are putting out a better product than Ring of Honer, since TNA is managing to expand its audience whilst ROH is starting to get bitch slapped by the competition (or so I hear, my opinion the US indys is roughly the same as my opinion of RAW). You can't do it on a night by night basis because it's impossible to categorise subjective options like that.
I think we can probably all agree on everything I've said... it's pretty non controversial. The problem comes from the hostile snobbery that comes from both sides. There are a large portion of indy fans who think that unless you fuck your body up for thirty minutes a night doing something that hardly anybody wants to watch that you're not a proper wrestler.
At the same level, you get people insisting that anybody who hasn't main evented at least one Wrestlemania has had a complete failure as a career.
All I can say to that is that most wrestling fans are complete half wits, and the sooner we grow to accept that the happier we will be.
Now I'm at the end I realise that this sounds rather like a peace making speech (or it did given the circumstances when I started posting... the threads probably moved on to being about tea my now), so I'll just close off by letting Slyfox know that X-Fear has been bringing his mothers sexual decency into question at one of our communist meetings.
Peace out.
EDIT: I was right... the *******s made peace before I could get my foot in the door. Sad Gelgarin.
Good wrestling draws. Bad wrestling doesn't. That's a fact. Wrestling is not, nor has it ever been, a subgenera of the arts. Wrestling is a division of the entertainment industry, and at any point that a program intended for entertainment fails to entertain the vast majority of it's audience then it is bad. That's very simple, and to be honest it's not relaly up for debate.
That being said, it's important not take this philosophy too far, lest you end up proclaiming that Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull was one of the greatest films of our generation. A hundred factors go together to determine the extent to which something draws, and many of them don't go close to a wrestling ring.
The WWE could build a program based around David Arquette wrestling members of the Insane Clown Possy, and it would still draw one-hundred fold what a trypical Ring of Honer program does.
Realistically a promotion can only be judged against its self, or other promotions of its size (Jerk-Fox over here is posting my opinions whilst I write them again). To try and compare the WWE to an indy federation outside the realms of subjective preference is laughable, because the WWE is so many echelons ahead of them that no comparison can be made.
You also have to take into account the fact that, although it may not seem to be the case, the WWE and a typical indy federation are competing for different markets. Indy feds, as minute businesses, and totally focused on one, very small cross section of fans (The ones Slyfox says think that they are too smart for the business, and I say need to stop calling women 'crack-****es every night'). The WWE has about as much in common with ROH product wise as it has with [generic, shitty US comedy].
Over the very long term we can establish that... for example, TNA are putting out a better product than Ring of Honer, since TNA is managing to expand its audience whilst ROH is starting to get bitch slapped by the competition (or so I hear, my opinion the US indys is roughly the same as my opinion of RAW). You can't do it on a night by night basis because it's impossible to categorise subjective options like that.
I think we can probably all agree on everything I've said... it's pretty non controversial. The problem comes from the hostile snobbery that comes from both sides. There are a large portion of indy fans who think that unless you fuck your body up for thirty minutes a night doing something that hardly anybody wants to watch that you're not a proper wrestler.
At the same level, you get people insisting that anybody who hasn't main evented at least one Wrestlemania has had a complete failure as a career.
All I can say to that is that most wrestling fans are complete half wits, and the sooner we grow to accept that the happier we will be.
Now I'm at the end I realise that this sounds rather like a peace making speech (or it did given the circumstances when I started posting... the threads probably moved on to being about tea my now), so I'll just close off by letting Slyfox know that X-Fear has been bringing his mothers sexual decency into question at one of our communist meetings.
Peace out.
EDIT: I was right... the *******s made peace before I could get my foot in the door. Sad Gelgarin.
Ambiguous Turd
Mid-Card Championship Winner
Aw, aren't you cute? A little 18 year old baby punk. And a mouthy one at that.
Jeez louise, Squidious. You're getting more humorless by the minute!
...More...humorless...
Less humorful?
Whatever.
...More...humorless...
Less humorful?
Whatever.
It's why I think Cuddly Cthulhu is a good representation of him. He's all angry a horror-filled, but at the same time adorable.
Shadow:
Sidious:
Sidious:
HBK-aholic
Shawn Michaels ❤
The problem with the WWE shareheolder thing is he believes no one else can enjoy what makes McMahon happy. I love everything about McMahons product. It also ignores the fact that on WZ, having debates about opinions can't always work, so when people are talking about how good things are for this business, that's different to saying they love it.