Why does Matt Hardy insist on looking like that?

**Mr. Nerfect** · 10-11-2017, 05:56 PM

It's good to see people calling the Broken gimmick out for the steaming pile of shit that it was. Bad for the sake of bad is not good. It had 15-year-old boy syndrome in a big way, and that's largely because it came from a guy who never matured outside the wrestling industry.

It's weird that people say it was "hot" too. No one watched TNA. Even your average WWE video has more views than their Broken stuff. I don't get how people think it was successful. It was championed within certain pockets, but this idea that it made money or got TNA attention is just...false. People were literally saying that there was more money in Broken Matt than in Classic Hardys -- you know, one of the most over tag teams and biggest merch movers WWE has ever had. Insanity.

But let's say the gimmick was good. I'm not willing to concede that, but let's put it on a subjective spectrum: How much of that do you think was environmental? How much of the hand-held camera, aerial drone shot, poorly acted stuff gained "charm" or whatever from being a) pieced together by a company that was trying really hard to be good and falling short; and b) being in a small-time promotion. Don't you think there would need to be innate philosophical differences between a TNA produced one and a WWE produced one?

TNA and Matt Hardy were being overly ambitious with the gimmick. They had nothing better to fill time with. They had no eyeballs so it was logical to experiment. You're going in one direction. Plus, Matt Hardy and Jeremy Borash, or whoever the fuck, only have a certain level of production skill, so when they try really hard to put things together, it could theoretically attain that "camp" effect, in that they were trying really sincerely to do this thing, and if there were any charm there, it has to surely come from that.

For WWE, it wouldn't be technically ambitious -- it would be sacrificing many of the tools at their disposal. There is plenty of stuff they could put on instead of it. There are eyeballs watching their product (lol, not many though), so there is more risk involved. They've this world-class production team. It wouldn't make sense for them to air shitty camera footage on their show like that.

Aesthetically and philosophically, I would think that fans of the TNA gimmick would want WWE to leave it the fuck alone.

10-11-2017, 05:56 PM	#11
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,565	It's good to see people calling the Broken gimmick out for the steaming pile of shit that it was. Bad for the sake of bad is not good. It had 15-year-old boy syndrome in a big way, and that's largely because it came from a guy who never matured outside the wrestling industry. It's weird that people say it was "hot" too. No one watched TNA. Even your average WWE video has more views than their Broken stuff. I don't get how people think it was successful. It was championed within certain pockets, but this idea that it made money or got TNA attention is just...false. People were literally saying that there was more money in Broken Matt than in Classic Hardys -- you know, one of the most over tag teams and biggest merch movers WWE has ever had. Insanity. But let's say the gimmick was good. I'm not willing to concede that, but let's put it on a subjective spectrum: How much of that do you think was environmental? How much of the hand-held camera, aerial drone shot, poorly acted stuff gained "charm" or whatever from being a) pieced together by a company that was trying really hard to be good and falling short; and b) being in a small-time promotion. Don't you think there would need to be innate philosophical differences between a TNA produced one and a WWE produced one? TNA and Matt Hardy were being overly ambitious with the gimmick. They had nothing better to fill time with. They had no eyeballs so it was logical to experiment. You're going in one direction. Plus, Matt Hardy and Jeremy Borash, or whoever the fuck, only have a certain level of production skill, so when they try really hard to put things together, it could theoretically attain that "camp" effect, in that they were trying really sincerely to do this thing, and if there were any charm there, it has to surely come from that. For WWE, it wouldn't be technically ambitious -- it would be sacrificing many of the tools at their disposal. There is plenty of stuff they could put on instead of it. There are eyeballs watching their product (lol, not many though), so there is more risk involved. They've this world-class production team. It wouldn't make sense for them to air shitty camera footage on their show like that. Aesthetically and philosophically, I would think that fans of the TNA gimmick would want WWE to leave it the fuck alone.