WWE going back to the future?
 

WWE the last several months seems as if they are returning to the formula that made them successful during the 1980s. They bring back the legends every now and then, they are returning to the interview segments (i.e. Highlight Reel, The Cabana), recreating certain 1980s moments with different wrestlers (Big Show getting his hair shaved by Angle last year - shades of Big John Studd and Ken Patera raping Andre the Giant of his dignity in 1985), the Masterlock Challenge (Hercules Hernandez did something similar with the full nelson), Mighty Molly losing to Victoria at WM XX (shades of Adrian Adonis going humpty dumpty look after losing to Roddy Piper at WM III), Hassan (heat like the Iron Sheik), Hogan getting Pearl Harbored by HBK (shades of Hogan getting Pearl Harbored by Paul Orndorff in 1986 then receiving several piledrivers to boot). The matches are less extreme/hardcore and offer more athleticism/technical wrestling than it was before. One more obvious change in direction: the champions are reigning for longer periods. I don't recall a WWE titlist holding their belts for very long in the Attitude era. In fact, it's unheard of for a JBL to hold that belt as long as he did til he dropped it to Cena, Shelton Benjamin's IC reign was pretty long (I believe it was the longest reign since the Ultimate Warrior or Mr. Perfect held the belt in the late 80s/early 90s). One more thing: Carlito walking out and taking the count-out (shades of Greg "The Hammer" Valentine saving his back vs. Tito Santana for a full year (1984-85). Opinions?

For The Godfather, they should bring back "The Doctor of Style Slick" and put him in his corner... that would be a dream combo! LOL

Future = forward in time

jackass

Actually, people here have compared Carlito's self-countout to Honky Tonk Man keeping his title by worming his way out of defeat. :p

And eeeeaaasy there, Senor Banana. It's easy for a newbie to get the past and future mixed up. Anyway, have a great day and I'll see you earlier!

from reading all that, the only thing you saw was "back to the future" and decided to bitch about it, anyway it's an expression "back to how they were"

back = past, Future = future, bring the PAST to the FUTURE. get it :p

Big John Studd and Ken Patera raping Andre the Giant of his dignity in 1985?

Can someone explain this please :)

"raping" and Andre The Giant should never be used together in a sentence

Back in the right direction. Towards the future.

Regardless of the terminology, this is stupid.

Are you seriously saying that, for example, when you see Hassan, it reminds you off the Sheik, but not of Sgt Slaughter during the Persian Gulf or Tiger Ali Singh a few years later, or of the literally hundreds of other "evil foreigner" gimmicks?

Or the attack on Hogan? This reminds you of Orndorf /Hogan...but what about Michaels/Janetty, Savage/Hogan, Tatanka/Luger, Luger/Sting, Triple H/Austin, Hogan/Savafe NWO_style or the thousands and thousands of other times that a wrestler double-crossed their partner?

And the cowardly heel champion goes back literally to the days of Gorgeous George...

Every single example you gave are examples of angles that have been occuring on a regular basis since the late 50s. There is nothing truly "original" in wrestling, just various twists on the same basic angles. The WWE is repeating the same storylines they've been repeating for years and years. This isn't a "retro" movement. This is just business as usual.

this is like watching a football game, saying "Hey these guys are scoring touchdowns. They used to score touchdowns in the 50's!!! The NFL IS GOIN' BACK TO THE GOLDEN DAYS OF FOOTBALL !!! YEE-HAW!!!"

This is also entertaining.

What I wonder is less if they've gone back to their roots in that sense, but once again woken up and realised that if you put on a good show, people will watch. While the characters may change, the roles are very much the same. However, we've seen plenty of quality entertainment, and it's getting people excited. The angles have been done, most of the characters have been done (Though honestly, I wish Hassan was less the evil foreigner and more the misunderstood foreigner), but it's entertaining. Time and time again...

If they've remembered that "Sports Entertainment" is "Sports Entertainment" and not "Sports Politics and Egomasturbation" or "Sports Tenure (Hogan notwithstanding currently, but he's here primarily because of VH-1 I'm guessing/hoping)," or "Sports 'fuck you smarks,' " They're going back to something that will make them big again...ENTER-FUCKING-TAINMENT.

Tiger Ali was the man, I remember when he gave money to that woman to take off her top (or something) then said that American women will do anything for money, He did a few funny things.

Well then stop it!

Yeah like manage Lo-Down! :rofl:

Actually, if you take the title of this thread in context with how it was originally used (the movie), then Bahena is technically correct.

Marty went back in time, and was trying to get BACK to the FUTURE, or BACK to the present, from the past.

The WWE has not gone back in time and are not facing a struggle to return to the present. Although that would be a very interesting storyline, with all the superstars dressing up like wrestlers from the 80's, and Paul Heyman playing "the Doc."

"Marty went back in time, and was trying to get BACK to the FUTURE...."

Alright, it can go either way, but which do you think bulltp55 was using? ;)

He's right when he says the matches have become less hardcore.
I think every PPV should have at least one 'holy shit' chant. I haven't heard that chant in a long time in WWE.

sweet, maybe the Giants will start winning again

I find that the character development is really good at the moment. There are not many wrestlers on either promotion who don't have some direction or purpose.

Yep. They fired all those guys. :lol: :-\ :(

Back to the Future was mereely a tagline which was needlessly confusing, but catchy for the purpose of naming a movie. IT was a Spielberg Zemeckis project, and hardly bleeding edge Sci Fi...A lot of that shit made NO sense, so arguing that, from the standpoint of the movie, this title makes sense and is valid is kind of pointless.

Remember a time when threads stayed on topic?













Me either.

LOL... exactly what I was thinking.

Either that or they're on Heat/Velocity.

Also, I'd just like to point out that I don't think a return to basics is a bad thing. And like KK, I think its entertaining. It's just that the intitial post was ridiculous to me because looking at the product now, and then saying that the WWE must be looking all the way back to the early 80s for inspiration ignore the fact that the same storyline have been repeated over and over since the business was started. Those 80s angles were stolen from angles that had been done to death all over the country.

In a way, its a throwback. But in general, good booking is timeless.

Also, I'd just like to point out that I don't think a return to basics is a bad thing. And like KK, I think its entertaining. It's just that the intitial post was ridiculous to me because looking at the product now, and then saying that the WWE must be looking all the way back to the early 80s for inspiration ignore the fact that the same storyline have been repeated over and over since the business was started. Those 80s angles were stolen from angles that had been done to death all over the country in places like Mid-South and Georgia Championship.

In a way, its a throwback. But in general, good booking is timeless.

That's because they never did. Ever.

There was that one back in '86

No.


...

No there wasn't. Go back to sleep, crazy lady.

Anyway, back on topic, the originator of this thread could have meant the third BTTF where they went all the way back to the Old West, 1885, and...er...

Huh?

Finally we get back on topic.

What an embaressing first post, the poster was trying too hard i think.

Ok, I'm sorry but after reading that I just couldn't resist posting this pic:

http://myfinalheaven.freeartfoundati...nrapeandre.JPG

:shifty: