|
Glad you're doing the show this week. I've been missing the weekly podcasts. You guys can't help being busy and all that, but as a selfish consumer it's good to have at least two coming up in a row. At least the monthly casts will mean we'll be spoiled if they become more frequently. Hot shot that motherfucker.
This is such a tricky question that I've given some thought to all week. It's easy to just throw out a December to Dismember and call it a day, but what does that change? ECW was still a reanimated corpse (and featured reanimated corpses -- Zombie, Bob Holly, Sandman) and Heyman was still on his final straw, and 2006 still sucked so bad you guys had to re-book it (Go, Shelton!).
Whenever you do TV episode episodes, I get a bit lost, because a lot of the TV just washes over me, and I've gone back and watched a lot of the more historically important stuff in retrospect, so my thinking on it is purely hypothetical. That's why I'm going with an episode that seemed big to me at the time, but actually marked the beginning of the end:
The March 26, 2001 Raw/Nitro simulcast. It was great seeing Vince the happiest he's ever looked outside a tanning salon, but in past podcasts where you've analyzed the Invasion angle, I think it was Kieran who suggested the angle was kind of dead as soon as you had Shane McMahon be the one who bought the company. It became just another McMahon angle. I'm inclined to agree, because even though I was not privy to the things fans are to now, I knew what I was watching in regards to the Invasion just wasn't good, and it all had this WWF McMahon storyline taint.
Maybe if you scrap that script and take a different angle from the start, the butterfly effect will see things click more into place, and everything turns out a little bit differently? I mean, you'd still have Taker up there acting like a right cunt, but if the "Shane buys WCW" angle is dropped at the start, maybe it's because they're avoiding doing a McMahon angle, which at least starts things off on the right foot.
|