Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lotus
Maybe it was just me, but if I didn't read the SmackDown! spoilers last week posted here, I wouldn't have really thought about it as those guys being terrorists. I didn't think it came off that way at all. Yeah, ski masks and shit, but how could you tell those dudes were "terrorists"? I guess maybe the sacrifice talking and shit was a clue, but that's about it.
|
If not for the warning I probably wouldn't have thought terrorist.
Hell, people talk about sacrifices in other sports. Or in the WWE. Remember that annoying Creed song?
On the other hand, the carrying off of Divari after the fact is reminiscent of scenes of martyred suicide bombers. Doesn't mean I would've made the connection had they not been warning, and had me in the mindset of "What the fuck could be related to the bombings? Oh, right...ALLAAAAAAAAAAAAY..."
Of course, I generally don't look for offense in wrestling. If I did, I'd spazz out almost weekly. The Mexicools, while funny, are horribly offensive, for example. Wrestlers are charicatures...Exaggerations of stereotypes.
But back to my point. Remember the whole backmasking thing? While backmasking is a big waste of time, it does indicate that people predisposed to hear something will hear it. More people will find offense when actively looking for it.
This is pushing it, but it's still in keeping with the WWE's standards of quality. Where we fuck corpses, capitolise on terrorist attacks in the US, have the French (Sorta) attack our troops, feed people dogs, play U-Haul with the corpse of a wretler's dad...
...Please, tell me if I'm missing any major ones. This one wasn't even INTENTIONALLY cashing in (Like the Muhammed character). Not directly anyway.
I'm not a fan of what they did, but I'm not surprised. And barring severe learning diabilities or having watched wrestling for less than six months, none of you should be either.