Shinsuke Nakamura talks about crying after wrestling Brock Lesnar
 

An excerpt from Shinsuke Nakamura’s book:

Brock only interested in money. True story, bro. Or should I say bRAW.

Nakamura sounds like a bitch.

Agree with Stickman, probably was a shitty situation but to cry over it seems a bit much.

Real men cry, they just dont talk about it.

What a shocking revelation.

I always laugh when people say that like that it matters

Weird brainwashing that its not enough to be good you also have to love it as much as whatever nerd is the metric for passion

There's no crying in rasslin unless you're Ric Flair

I feel the same way when someone talks about a wrestler deserving something because they work hard. Like... if Lesnar doesn't give a shit about wrestling and some less talented guy eats, sleeps and breathes it, Lesnar "deserves" his spot, his money and his fame more. The business doesn't exist to make sure guys who get into wrestling get what they deserve. It exists to entertain people watching and literally nothing more.

"Taker deserved to be able to keep his streak"

Come onnnn

Also, Nakamura is totally working here. He's pushing the storyline narrative.

"SHIN" as Michael Cole calls him

Sounds like kayfabe.

OR

what Dale said

No, you should not.

Why not? Okay, may I say BRoman because guys clearly have a bromance going on. No wonder Big Dog calls Brock his bitch if you catch my drift. And this infatuation of Roman is actually harrowing.

Then maybe all of the different wrestling companies should purge their rosters of those who are only there for the money.

'Passion for the product > Passion for the pocket' should be the motto of the whole industry, with money considerations thrown in the garbage and ignored, with those believing in the latter banned from the industry for a term of life.

=P

It takes a big man to cry. But it takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man.

Unpopular take: Taker should have lost his streak to Giant Gonzalez at WrestleMania IX so we didn't have to hear anything more about it.

Yeah, this point sounds more and more alien every time I hear. What does passion have to do with someone's effectiveness and ability?

I thought they didn't start talking about it until he went to 5-0 at WrestleMania XI?

It didn't really become a big part of The Undertaker's shtick until 2002.

From a creative, non-wrestling standpoint, working with somebody who is talented but phoning it in and under performing really sucks.

You don't love music, you don't deserve that iPod.

Except that doesn't apply to Brock at all. When I've worked with creative people that can improvise their stuff and get amazing results, the reason people get bitter is because they're jealous. There's no substitute for hard work, but Brock does the work he needs to -- work that no one else can really do. He's more akin to an actor that gives brilliant performances but hates the fame and doesn't want to mingle with the other actors or talk shop with them outside what he does for a living.

That's fine. I know musicians that hate the music scene, comedians that hate the comedy scene, actors that hate group readings because they rehearse better alone. Why does someone creative need to apply themselves in a fake bullshit way to every aspect of the job like it's all some big candy-land dream? If you're giving good performances, who the fuck cares whether or not you "love" the whole process?

It's more like "You don't love the music scene, your music shouldn't be listened to no matter how brilliant it is and how much it outsells other bands."

True. I have to agree.

Except Nakamura is saying this in the context of "My match with Brock was so fucking awful it made me cry" which indicates he didn't give a good performance.

Where does it say that?

His entire answer to "Why did you cry?", he puts it more politely / respectfully but he hated the match. There were reports of him going to the performance centre for the first time to find the other talent were watching that match and he made them turn it off because he's so embarrassed by it.

Wait, Brock wrestled Nakamura?

The fuck was the point?

There was nothing to gain here.

It was pre-WWE. In New Japan.

See: most Randy Orton and Alberto Del Rio matches

Except both of those guys are really good (even if Del Rio became very boring as a character really fast).

I wonder if he does that with most of his WWE run thus far. Passion has got nothing to do with it, and that's not contained within the answer. What's contained within the answer is "I don't like the match because I feel like Brock doesn't have passion." Diddums.

I love Nakamura, but there are plenty of guys that weren't total geeks for the industry that have made a killing and produced some of the most magic stuff we've ever seen. There is no direct relationship between passion and effective work.

Brock's had absolute classics. Again, I love Nakamura, but Brock vs. AJ was better than just about anything Nakamura and all his passion has achieved since coming to the WWE -- and I'm a fan of his work with AJ. Nakamura vs. Zayn was really good, but Brock vs. AJ was more recent.

They are really good. But there have been prolonged stints where I haven't had any interest in watching them because they were phoning it in on a regular basis.

Like, they were so gifted that they could just half-ass it and still have it be totally passable. So I get why they did it. But as a fan I just didn't find it particularly interesting after a while.

Del Rio felt checked out for much of his WWE run and his boring character didn't help. Orton seems to mostly just coast when he's a face, he's very outspoken of his preference of being heel and it does seem like he's extra motivated when they've allowed him to have a heel run.

The Circle of Noid.

The response to both is fair. If you say A and the response is B, then the response to saying A is going to be B again.

Ah, a well-thought out response. This is something I can engage with. Thanks. :y:

I get what you're saying, but a lot of what made Del Rio boring wasn't that he was "phoning it in." I'd say the part that you could make a case for Del Rio doing that would be League of Nations, and who can blame him for that? They all did, sans Rusev, because you need to pick your battles. I think the issues that plagued Del Rio were other. I think it's too assume too much to assume that if he had tried it would have worked. The guy got a really good push and people just didn't care beyond WrestleMania, and I may be generous because I was into the act for a minute.

With Orton, I feel all the points have already been said a thousand times. Sometimes he looks unmotivated. The dude is still on the road full-time, largely, 16 years into a WWE career. He still produces good work and is one of the most over guys on the roster. Is he phoning it in, or are you just used to seeing him? I've grown to appreciate him more and more, not less and less, because I can see how much better he is than a lot of the guys who do bust their ass but don't "get it" as much as he seems to.

As a fan, I'd rather watch someone special like Brock than someone routine and mundane that busts their ass to flop around like a fish for no reason. I don't consider that "phoning it in." That's the point. I consider it better work. Jared Leto isn't a better actor than Bryan Cranston because he goes full insane and immerses himself in the character and does too much. If someone can do more with a wink than a monologue, more power to them.

I'm sure Ultra Mantis has had creative experiences and is speaking true to his own opinions. Cool. So have I, and I appreciate both process and product. Different people have different processes. If the product is what is desired (and I'd argue with Brock that it is), then that process might be important to that. Don't fuck with it. Especially not out of some insecurity-filled "they don't love it enough" bullshit. If you are the best at something and everyone in your field is an asshole, you might choose not to associate or love the culture, but it doesn't mean your work isn't valid.