BigCrippyZ
02-12-2010, 03:14 AM
This is my first post on these forums and I'd really like some feedback on it. I know this may be a long post but I'd really appreciate if you guys would actually give it a good thorough read through.
Having read all the posts over the past few months about what's going wrong in the industry, WWE/TNA, etc, I've been listening and taking into account everyone's opinions. This past weekend I put in some of the WWF Attitude era DVD's I grew up with from 1998-2001 when they were at their peak and getting huge ratings. I noticed some major differences between what's going on in the WWE today and what happened back in the Attitude era. A lack of structure and a lack of character development are resulting in a lack of realism that I feel are ultimately the result of the brand split and are really hurting the product today.
First of all, regarding a lack of realism, I understand that pro wrestling is scripted. I also understood that it was scripted back when I was young watching it every week during the Attitude Era. The realism I am referring to is this. Despite the fact that it is scripted, during the Attitude era everyone involved in the program(s) treated it as though it was serious and a real athletic competition. From the wrestlers, to the characters, to the announcers, to the storylines, to the matches/results, everything was almost always believable and could be taken as real if you didn't know any better. Sure every once in a while they would go over the top with it and you could poke some holes in a couple of things. But I'd say 95% of the time, everything was believable. Let's delve into some of the structure flaws which hurt the realism.
First of all, there was always ONE World Champion. You always knew who the TOP guy in the company was. He was either the World Champion or feuding/competing for the World title. Sure the top guy might change every so often, but you always knew who he was and/or what he was doing storyline and structure wise. Can anyone tell me who THE TOP GUY in the WWE is right now? Is it Taker? Is it Sheamus? Orton? Cena? HHH? HBK? Batista? Mysterio? Edge? Punk? Jericho? Just who the hell is it? There are too many "MAIN EVENTERS" (or "former main eventers") who jump from storyline to storyline, feud to feud so often that you don't know who the top guy or even top guys are.
Okay, on to something else. There used to be a "rankings system" that the announcers and wrestlers would occasionally bring up in reference to determining who was going to get a shot at which title and/or be given main even status, etc. Sure it wasn't a HUGE thing, but it was just that little something extra that would add in that little extra sense of realism to the product. It was generally understood that to get to the World title you had to win the European and then Intercontinental titles first to be considered a ready and viable candidate for the World title. Take The Rock, HHH and Austin for example. They all feuded and fought over the IC title throughout 1997-98 before moving up for the World title in 1999-2000.
Another structural flaw is the fact that there's no organization to the shows. In the Attitude era, it was INCREDIBLY rare to have a main event/title match or former main eventers or upper card guys have a match in the opening half hour or midpoint of the show. It's one thing to have a interview/backstage angle/segment around these spots, but it takes away from their upper/main event prestige if they're having matches at these points in the show. Treat it with a little more realism than that. Ya know, kinda like an actual wrestling event.
Let's move onto character relationships and stables. This kinda falls into a lack of both character development and structure I think. What ever happened to the huge stables and relationships that used to exist in the Attitude Era? There were characters and stables and they all had relationships that evolved over time and affected how they would act and react towards things.
You had stables like DX, the Nation of Domination, The Corporation, the Ministry of Darkness, and later the Corporate Ministry, McMahon-Helmsley Faction, etc. All of these stables feuded with each other in different ways and evolved over time organically and it appeared natural and BELIEVABLE. What stables are there now? Legacy? Straight Edge Society? DX? Really? Three member stables. These are hardly stables in my book. I understand that people will slowly be added and slowly leave each group, but come on.
A stable to me should have enough members to have or be involved in 2-3 matches each show each week and not get stale. Take Legacy for example. There's only so many DiBiade/Rhodes tag matches and Randy Orton vs random main eventer/upper midcarder I can take week after week before the STABLE gets STALE! If they had a couple other lower/midcard members you could be changing things up every week and have things evolve and it wouldn't be a re-hash. Another thing I think a truly powerful stable should have is an authority figure or someone with some type of power/influence.
Another flaw to me is character relationships. In the Attitude era the characters were all interconnected because EVERYONE's ultimate, unwritten/unspoken goal, from the jobbers to the main eventer's was to work their way through the ranks and become the ONE World Champion. This was just understood, even if it was obvious a particular wrestler would never be World Champ. Characters, storylines and feuds would spill over into one another and evolve over time slowly and naturally. Even characters that weren't in stables/groups would use (and bring up in promos) past feuds, storylines, results, etc and use them to take sides, act/react a certain way, etc.
Speaking of characters, what the hell happened to having BELIEVABLE authority figures? Authority figures would go out of their way to fire/suspend/arrest, lock people out of the buildings, and just make it difficult on the characters they didn't believe were profitable, champions, stars, etc. If you're going to have someone in charge of a show/company, make it believable. In the Attitude era (and even in WCW at that time) the authority figures were always either a rich and powerful company executives or a wrestling legend/former champion and were constantly getting involved in the main event/world title storyline(s) and concerned with marketability, profit and ratings. You didn't have lame former announcers/commentators like Adamle or a random former referee (Teddy Long) in charge of a whole show/company. What type of company/organization would give an announcer or referee executive control over a whole company/show? It's just not believable or realistic.
Another issue with character development/realism is the characters/storylines were always believable in the Attitude era. You never had a guy like The Rock or Austin come out and single-handedly take out an entire group of guys AND a monster/giant a`la John Cena. Not without having help from someone else or AT LEAST taking some kind of punishment/resistance and then getting the upper hand. Now a giant or monster like Kane/Big Show/Taker might come out and dominate and take out a whole group/stable but Cena is FAR from a giant/monster. Again, not BELIEVABLE.
Now some of these things may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But it's the little things that add up to a more realistic show and I think, a great overall experience. Now some of you might be saying, "But I know it's not real, so it doesn't matter how realistic you make it seem. Plus, I watch it to escape reality!" That's a great point, I watch it to escape reality too. To me though, the more realistic something seems, the easier it is to believe and it's more likely I am going to focus on the show, be entertained by the show and be able to escape reality.
Not only that, but if it seems more realistic, I'm going to actually care more. If I know it's not real AND it's NOT BELIEVABLE, what's the point of caring who wins and looses and what happens with the characters?
It's not that I'm expecting it to be totally believable and/or totally realistic. That would be impossible, not to mention unrealistic. The problem with the product today is it's not realistic or believable ENOUGH.
I know this was long and I appreciate you reading this. Any thoughts?
Having read all the posts over the past few months about what's going wrong in the industry, WWE/TNA, etc, I've been listening and taking into account everyone's opinions. This past weekend I put in some of the WWF Attitude era DVD's I grew up with from 1998-2001 when they were at their peak and getting huge ratings. I noticed some major differences between what's going on in the WWE today and what happened back in the Attitude era. A lack of structure and a lack of character development are resulting in a lack of realism that I feel are ultimately the result of the brand split and are really hurting the product today.
First of all, regarding a lack of realism, I understand that pro wrestling is scripted. I also understood that it was scripted back when I was young watching it every week during the Attitude Era. The realism I am referring to is this. Despite the fact that it is scripted, during the Attitude era everyone involved in the program(s) treated it as though it was serious and a real athletic competition. From the wrestlers, to the characters, to the announcers, to the storylines, to the matches/results, everything was almost always believable and could be taken as real if you didn't know any better. Sure every once in a while they would go over the top with it and you could poke some holes in a couple of things. But I'd say 95% of the time, everything was believable. Let's delve into some of the structure flaws which hurt the realism.
First of all, there was always ONE World Champion. You always knew who the TOP guy in the company was. He was either the World Champion or feuding/competing for the World title. Sure the top guy might change every so often, but you always knew who he was and/or what he was doing storyline and structure wise. Can anyone tell me who THE TOP GUY in the WWE is right now? Is it Taker? Is it Sheamus? Orton? Cena? HHH? HBK? Batista? Mysterio? Edge? Punk? Jericho? Just who the hell is it? There are too many "MAIN EVENTERS" (or "former main eventers") who jump from storyline to storyline, feud to feud so often that you don't know who the top guy or even top guys are.
Okay, on to something else. There used to be a "rankings system" that the announcers and wrestlers would occasionally bring up in reference to determining who was going to get a shot at which title and/or be given main even status, etc. Sure it wasn't a HUGE thing, but it was just that little something extra that would add in that little extra sense of realism to the product. It was generally understood that to get to the World title you had to win the European and then Intercontinental titles first to be considered a ready and viable candidate for the World title. Take The Rock, HHH and Austin for example. They all feuded and fought over the IC title throughout 1997-98 before moving up for the World title in 1999-2000.
Another structural flaw is the fact that there's no organization to the shows. In the Attitude era, it was INCREDIBLY rare to have a main event/title match or former main eventers or upper card guys have a match in the opening half hour or midpoint of the show. It's one thing to have a interview/backstage angle/segment around these spots, but it takes away from their upper/main event prestige if they're having matches at these points in the show. Treat it with a little more realism than that. Ya know, kinda like an actual wrestling event.
Let's move onto character relationships and stables. This kinda falls into a lack of both character development and structure I think. What ever happened to the huge stables and relationships that used to exist in the Attitude Era? There were characters and stables and they all had relationships that evolved over time and affected how they would act and react towards things.
You had stables like DX, the Nation of Domination, The Corporation, the Ministry of Darkness, and later the Corporate Ministry, McMahon-Helmsley Faction, etc. All of these stables feuded with each other in different ways and evolved over time organically and it appeared natural and BELIEVABLE. What stables are there now? Legacy? Straight Edge Society? DX? Really? Three member stables. These are hardly stables in my book. I understand that people will slowly be added and slowly leave each group, but come on.
A stable to me should have enough members to have or be involved in 2-3 matches each show each week and not get stale. Take Legacy for example. There's only so many DiBiade/Rhodes tag matches and Randy Orton vs random main eventer/upper midcarder I can take week after week before the STABLE gets STALE! If they had a couple other lower/midcard members you could be changing things up every week and have things evolve and it wouldn't be a re-hash. Another thing I think a truly powerful stable should have is an authority figure or someone with some type of power/influence.
Another flaw to me is character relationships. In the Attitude era the characters were all interconnected because EVERYONE's ultimate, unwritten/unspoken goal, from the jobbers to the main eventer's was to work their way through the ranks and become the ONE World Champion. This was just understood, even if it was obvious a particular wrestler would never be World Champ. Characters, storylines and feuds would spill over into one another and evolve over time slowly and naturally. Even characters that weren't in stables/groups would use (and bring up in promos) past feuds, storylines, results, etc and use them to take sides, act/react a certain way, etc.
Speaking of characters, what the hell happened to having BELIEVABLE authority figures? Authority figures would go out of their way to fire/suspend/arrest, lock people out of the buildings, and just make it difficult on the characters they didn't believe were profitable, champions, stars, etc. If you're going to have someone in charge of a show/company, make it believable. In the Attitude era (and even in WCW at that time) the authority figures were always either a rich and powerful company executives or a wrestling legend/former champion and were constantly getting involved in the main event/world title storyline(s) and concerned with marketability, profit and ratings. You didn't have lame former announcers/commentators like Adamle or a random former referee (Teddy Long) in charge of a whole show/company. What type of company/organization would give an announcer or referee executive control over a whole company/show? It's just not believable or realistic.
Another issue with character development/realism is the characters/storylines were always believable in the Attitude era. You never had a guy like The Rock or Austin come out and single-handedly take out an entire group of guys AND a monster/giant a`la John Cena. Not without having help from someone else or AT LEAST taking some kind of punishment/resistance and then getting the upper hand. Now a giant or monster like Kane/Big Show/Taker might come out and dominate and take out a whole group/stable but Cena is FAR from a giant/monster. Again, not BELIEVABLE.
Now some of these things may not seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But it's the little things that add up to a more realistic show and I think, a great overall experience. Now some of you might be saying, "But I know it's not real, so it doesn't matter how realistic you make it seem. Plus, I watch it to escape reality!" That's a great point, I watch it to escape reality too. To me though, the more realistic something seems, the easier it is to believe and it's more likely I am going to focus on the show, be entertained by the show and be able to escape reality.
Not only that, but if it seems more realistic, I'm going to actually care more. If I know it's not real AND it's NOT BELIEVABLE, what's the point of caring who wins and looses and what happens with the characters?
It's not that I'm expecting it to be totally believable and/or totally realistic. That would be impossible, not to mention unrealistic. The problem with the product today is it's not realistic or believable ENOUGH.
I know this was long and I appreciate you reading this. Any thoughts?