PDA

View Full Version : 1st thread: Attitude vs today


dablackguy
08-21-2005, 03:15 AM
The story starts last week when me and 2 of my friends both long time fans, watched Wrestlemania X7 (Think: Rock/Austin w McMahon swerve, HHH/taker, hardcore 3 way) We sat there and even though we knew what was going to happen we couldnt help but watch the whole way through 4 hours of entertainment.

Fast forward to now, even as we compared to more recent Wrestlemanias, its obviously isnt the same, so we wondered why this is, some answers are obvious, some are more subtle, here's some of what we came up with:

A) IMO, the same effort isnt there, if you wanna call it passion, I'll believe that, but it doesnt seem like the same effort is going into the matches not on the writers parts, but on the wrestlers themselves. Some guys arent technical wreslting gods, understood. But you dont have to be a technical wrestling guru to put on an entertaining match. Hell, Rock/Austin was an entertaing match even though there was little technical wrestling to speak of, same goes for the hardcore 3 way. IMO Kurt Angle/Chris Benoit now is nothing compared to Angle/Benoit of old.

B) One of my friends cited the lack of gimmicks, what do you guys think of this? Before we had Kane, Biker underfaker so forth and so on.(even though everyone, me included bitched about him) Now, it seems, everyone is just "Chris Masters" or "Shelton Benjamin" or "Muhammad Hassan" there are no characters anymore, in a way, and some will kill me for saying it was fun because it was over the top. Everyone is just themselves "with the volume turned way up" simple, but not always entertaining. I still believe there should be gimmicks in a way but not under any circumstances at the cost of wrestling ability.

C)The writing today is garbage, enough said.

In a way, I think that the roster of today is more athletic (but not necessarily more talented) than the roster of old, yet the product is weaker. Make no mistake the attitude era had Austin/Rock/HHH/Foley/Taker but to say that guys like Benoit/Guerrero/Benjamin/Cena/Batista are not more agile and athetic in the ring may be a misnomer.

I believe that the difference in today vs then is the "it" factor. So to all of you, what is that "it" factor?? What is it that's missing and would you trade the product now for the product then? Maybe its apples and oranges comparing an upswing in wreslting popularity to now, but never hurts to have an opinion...

HankScorpio
08-21-2005, 03:22 AM
Biker underfaker
:rofl:

Hitman84
08-21-2005, 06:17 AM
attitude era > old school (but not by much, there would be a strong case for saying they're equal)

old school > today's wrestling (by waaaay much)

Therefore: attitude era > today's wrestling (by a huuuuuge much)

---

In my opinion, WWE has become complacent. Wrestling today is rubbish compared to both the Old School and Attitude eras as, WWF, as it was, had WCW to compete against and thus felt the need to produce a good job of work every week. Now there is little or no competition, WWF(E) - WCW = crap ...

Londoner
08-21-2005, 06:22 AM
Nice thread, except we've been talking about this stuff for ages.

Danny Electric
08-21-2005, 08:46 AM
So Hassan isn't a gimmick. An Italian playing an Arab-American.

Morgan
08-21-2005, 09:01 AM
They really should have used a Italian-American accent, would of made for some great promos:

"hey yo, yous guys, treat my arab brothers with respect or I'll shove a canolli up your ass!"

Favre4Ever
08-21-2005, 10:18 AM
I think technology itself has been hurting the WWE more and more as well........making it harder to keep things realistic. And have you noticed everytime they change RAW's look, the worse it gets?

Kane Knight
08-21-2005, 10:22 AM
So Hassan isn't a gimmick. An Italian playing an Arab-American.


Considering he's half "Arab" in real life too, can it really be said he's "Playing?"

Kane Knight
08-21-2005, 10:25 AM
In my opinion, WWE has become complacent. Wrestling today is rubbish compared to both the Old School and Attitude eras as, WWF, as it was, had WCW to compete against and thus felt the need to produce a good job of work every week. Now there is little or no competition, WWF(E) - WCW = crap ...

Even in the Attitude Era, or at least once it was "established," they would water down new stars, restrict finishers/moves, and let egos determine who would go over.

I'd say they were already complacent. The only thing that changed was that they were allowed to be once all the competition folded. WCW occasionally made them sit up and take notice, and is probably the only reason certain stars were run with (A black, albeit half-black champion? :eek: )

Anybody Thrilla
08-21-2005, 03:24 PM
I think that the lack of "gimmicks" started with Tough Enough. Not saying that the show itself had that powerful of an effect on everything, but the fact that they were showing wrestling from the INSIDE of the business and depicting the wrestlers as "people" as opposed to "wrestlers".

Wrestling has always been plagued with the label "FAKE" by casual viewers or people who don't view at all, and thusly, they lose a lot of 'credibility'. By presenting the characters on the show as more realistic and humanistic, as opposed to characters like Doink, Bastion Booger, Damien Demento and such, I think they're trying to counteract that.

Furthermore, I think that the demographic that the WWE was pushing to primarily back when it was at its apex is maturing, and you can't get Undertaker-like characters over as easily. The fact that the Undertaker is over in his gimmick today, I would imagine is driven largely by nostalgia. If Mark Calloway had never been debuted on WWE TV until recently, I don't think it would have worked (SEE: Moredecai).

Danny Electric
08-22-2005, 12:40 PM
Considering he's half "Arab" in real life too, can it really be said he's "Playing?"

I didn't know he was half Arabic.

Yashamaga
08-22-2005, 01:36 PM
The Attitude Era was the greatest wrestling time in the history of the business in terms of entertainment and mainstream popularity. God damn I miss those days :(

Attitude died at the end of Wrestlemania X-7 in my opinion. But damn that was a great show to go out to.

Kris P Lettus
08-22-2005, 02:07 PM
The reason the WWE was better in the late 90's than now is back then there was compitition (I.E. WCW and ECW).. They had to put on great shows because if they didn't wrestling fans would just switch the channel.. Now if a fan wants to watch wrestling, they have to watch WWE.. I know there's others (TNA, ROH, OVW) but none are actually on par nationally with WWE like WCW was..

Destor
08-22-2005, 02:09 PM
The reason the WWE was better in the late 90's than now is back then there was compitition (I.E. WCW and ECW).. They had to put on great shows because if they didn't wrestling fans would just switch the channel.. Now if a fan wants to watch wrestling, they have to watch WWE.. I know there's others (TNA, ROH, OVW) but none are actually on par nationally with WWE like WCW was..
I think that just about sums it up.

Kane Knight
08-22-2005, 04:36 PM
I think that the lack of "gimmicks" started with Tough Enough. Not saying that the show itself had that powerful of an effect on everything, but the fact that they were showing wrestling from the INSIDE of the business and depicting the wrestlers as "people" as opposed to "wrestlers".

Wrestling has always been plagued with the label "FAKE" by casual viewers or people who don't view at all, and thusly, they lose a lot of 'credibility'. By presenting the characters on the show as more realistic and humanistic, as opposed to characters like Doink, Bastion Booger, Damien Demento and such, I think they're trying to counteract that.

Furthermore, I think that the demographic that the WWE was pushing to primarily back when it was at its apex is maturing, and you can't get Undertaker-like characters over as easily. The fact that the Undertaker is over in his gimmick today, I would imagine is driven largely by nostalgia. If Mark Calloway had never been debuted on WWE TV until recently, I don't think it would have worked (SEE: Moredecai).

I disagree. At one point, Vince tried to bring us behind the scenes, and Kayfabe was broken. Tough Enough started well after they showed people what was really going on in wrestling. There haven't been a huge number of gimmicks over the last 5 or so years, and they were decreasing in number over the years before that.

It was, however, in a reaction to the "fake" stigmata.

And honestly, Mordecai didn't get over because he was boring. The gimmick was better than he was. Taker's driven by nostalgia and the name. The fact that there's someone that most everyone recognises makes him a success as well, but it doesn't preclude that someone in a good gimmick with some reason for us to give a shit might get over. Wrestling's about being larger than life, and some can do it and be very REAL. Shelton vs HBK, for example. Brilliant. But people dig charisma and entertainment, and a good gimmick can give an opportunity for both.