organizedkaos

I certainly haven't bought a ticket yet but might. Due to not being that interested in sports that aren't predetermined Wembley itself isn't that much of a draw itself.  I'm certainly in the boat of being fairly invested in the product (that's an average, it varies with the booking 😀) and lucky enough to be in a position I'd be willing to pay similar for this as to what i'd pay to go to a music festival or whatnot.  But yeah it actually doesn't feel that special at the moment.  Big stadium doesn't equate to that for me.

Forbidden door had quite a lot of matches that were very good but also felt a bit just there are not hugely exciting. Obviously the two main events were massive but I'm not familiar with NJPW so the matches involving people who hadn't been on AEW TV didn't seem that big.  It was certainly worth 20 quid though. I'm 50/50 on if it would've felt worth the cost / logistics of going to see it in London (if it had been there). And I've seen Okada/Omega triology + Omega/Osprey 1, they definitely did the lion share of making it seem exciting

It's fine, the show will do really really well. It'll probably have loads of great wrestling. Tony Khan doesn't need my money. I might still go. But yeah right now, weirdly, this show doesn't seem that exciting (even knowing that Osprey/Omega 3 is likely on the cards). One or two indications of things that might be there (ala announcing just Okada/Danielson for a while) would help

22 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

Nah come on now, that's not true.

There's...

...give me a minute. I'll think of one...

If you're counting ones that follow the "how the original story / character came to be" It's pretty much Better Call Saul as it managed to actually add context to the original work and stand on it's own. It used the fact you knew where it was going against you.  I guess you can argue Godfather 2 but that's probs blurring the assignment.

There's a bunch i guess that get included by definition (stuff like Prey that's set in an earlier time period, or stuff like Fire Walk With Me that's basically in the same time frame as the story but chronoligcally is earlier)

18 hours ago, Gay as FOOK said:

Thread worthy, for me. It looks like an extremely well produced charity skit that tries to pack all the nation's luvvies into one piece for Christmas. Sort of like they know how much everyone's heart rightly fell to Paddington, and are now trying to just copy it as formula. 

Fantastic Chocolate & Where To Find It. 

I think it's written and directed by the guy who made Paddington so this is a bit like saying Isle of Dogs is trying to rip off Fantastic Mr Fox

I mean it's still got a really decent chance of being shite but Paddington tried to pack all the nations luvvies into one piece for Christmas and it seemed to work out ok??

2 hours ago, theringmaster said:

I think that's kind of the point; a completely different feel and tone to Dynamite

Yeah I was reading chat about the show elsewhere and one of the comments was literally the inverse of this, something like "so nice to have a show with a more serious tone (apart from Juice Robinson)"

I think there's probably an argument to be made that there's two fairly distinct groups of wrestling fans for whom the WWE style does not appeal. If ratings aren't that big an issue then having two different shows which appeal to the different groups is quite good. One big modern "elite" style and one that's more traditional serious wrestling. Keep the stories fairly seperate so there's no need to watch the show that doesn't do it for you (which seems to be what they're going for)

Obviously wrestling fans are completists and will happily watch a show that's not putting on anything they like but you know...

32 minutes ago, Loki said:

In which case, perhaps he's back too soon?

To be fair we don't know if he's back full time right now.

He did a run in, which as others have pointed out definitely added to that brilliant end to the episode. So right now his comeback has been excellent. If he's in a match next week struggling to keep it together then we can argue he might have come back too soon. Right now this could well be a stone cold at backlash kind of moment.

Yeah that segment was the first thing Matt Hardy (and his brother) have done in AEW I've liked.  Ethan Page having to be nice but still acknowledging they're absolute weirdos (that anyone would find tiring) made me smile. I dunno if it can sustain because Page is mostly entertaining in matches when he's being an absolutely dickhead but those 2 minutes were better than any other Hardy rubbish so far.  Lean into them being odd uncool weirdos who mean well rather than trying to tell me these two middle aged men at all resemble the Hardy boys of my childhood

Ah oops, in my defence (yer honour) I did search the pages for the word Stevenson but probably could've actually looked more closely than that

1 hour ago, BomberPat said:

A couple of others that might have got overlooked with Tina Turner taking the headlines:

Ray Stephenson as well - one of those people who's been in way more things you've watched than you always realise. Load of memorable side roles (and a few major ones, I forget he was the punisher in the bonkers punisher film)

Elsewhere someone suggested that shows like Dark and Elevation do well in some places where AEW isn't on TV because they're free to watch. It always seemed like there use to be a whole bunch of WWE programming where the idea didn't seem like everyone watched everything; Heat, Jakked etc weren't for people watching Raw and so on. Of course most of the smaller programming seemed to be catchups for the other programming (or family friendly versions) rather than AEW where all the content is different

1 hour ago, LEGIT said:

I mentioned this in another thread. My 7 year old loved the movie, and I thought it was good too. There's too much snobbishness with animated kids movies where critics judge them from an adult perspective and expect the drama, emotion and twists and turns of a Netflix thriller. 

Conversly why does is anyone looking for a full grown adult to advise on these things? Particularly a one star review in the Guardian. There's a bunch of other places recommending it as a good time for kids. A review considering it from a different angle shouldn't even be of concern if you only want to find something that'll entertain the spawn for a while

Critics is one person giving their subjective opinion, I think there's some interesting points in that review regarding familiarity and fun etc. I also wouldn't  take a one star guardian review into account when deciding whether a child might like a film.

I like reading people's individual opinions on films, they can be helpful to get recommendations or simply to understand the wonderful wide range of reasons people get joy from films. Good reviews (both from snobby or fanboy critics) can be great signposts, bad reviews can be interesting things to think about. Someone having a negative opinion about something doesn't make it bad, or lessen the value you got from the thing. It just meant they didn't like it.

Same day as Notting Hill Carnival which I think tends to put a bit of pressure on London's transport?  It's a large city though so I guess maybe it's all far enough apart

Quote

Punk himself refutes it in the statement he made, he said he wouldn’t work hurt, and he worked the matches, which therefore mean he was cleared and fine. That or he’s lying about what he said he wouldn’t do. Let’s face it, he’s a hair triggered grumpy man who got raging at a forum comment and ranted and regretted it. That he’s not here talking shitting patterns and takeaways is his loss 

Oh I think we interpretted that differently. I took "They kept saying it could just be a squash, so I didn’t need to be cleared. I scoffed at that. My health is more important." to mean he didn't work until he was healthy. As in they wanted him to do the squash earlier than it happened, legal letter, squash happens much later than intended.

But interpretting semantics of a angry instagram post probably isn't really that fruitfull


Also this is whats why I spelt it bad

I'd kinda assumed that the original "Rocky 3" idea would play out over a longer period of time rather than having one promo of Punk going from sadface to fired up ready for the title. Punk loses, gets depressed, starts training again, gets pep talked, maybe even have an uncertain return match etc then fights for the title.  Everything between the loss and wrestling again could be done with him injured and keep him on TV. Gives you a nice build to the rematch, people hopefully invested in whether he can go again.

It's not a bad storyline, however it requires him to work a match mid rehab which is a terrible idea and means they should have thrown the story in the bin. They try and push Punk to work the squash, he gets legal involved. Tony Kahn being Tony Kahn decides that they'll do the storyline anyway as soon as he's cleared to wrestle, this is why we get the weird effect of Punk challenging again for the belt 10 days after getting squashed

I dunno if there's been anything said that refutes that interpretation , i've not followed this hugely closely. But yeah it's the only one I see that sort of explains all the weirdness (and it doesn't seem implausible someone like John Moxley would think working a short match injured is fine, why Punk would freak out at that idea and we're all aware that Tony Kahn can write storylines that clearly work in his head but don't actually work in practise)

1 hour ago, Supremo said:

He’s a genuinely fascinating man. The week he’s supposedly sniffing around to come back, looking to build bridges, and he can’t help himself but flip out again, likely ruining whatever chance he had. It’s me. Hi. I’m the problem. It’s me.

To be fair it does appear that he was sniffing around to come back, someone leaked the fact he'd sent a legal letter to Tony Kahn to avoid jobbing and Punk set the record straight in his tone deaf grumpy way and immediately nuked any goodwill he'd built up in fans (and AEW staff I'd guess?)

I can't say I'm that fussed if he comes back or not and this feels a little tin foily but yeah... there's one perspective on this where's he's getting a bit played

In fact they just went up and so won't for a little while because these things are regulated to some extent. Also a percentage of rail ticket prices (certain fares and routes) are raised against metrics of inflation rather than whether or not the workers require a fair wage.

Quote

The article mentions that there is resentment that they escaped with false credentials; but that language strikes me as deliberately careful - as in, I imagine the journalist couldn't establish whether or not this actually prevented other footballers from taking the plane. 

The comments by the players over the weekend does suggest this. They thought all national players were out plus some other women and seemed pretty happy about that.  Less happy about the potential implications from BBC article.

Not necessarily saying the BBC were definitely wrong to publish the article but yeah interesting to read comments by people involved.

I've been doing DDP Yoga for about 3.5 years. Noticed masses of increase in flexibility (i couldn't touch my toes at start, I can now put fists knuckle down on the floor with knees locked straight), definitely got more core strength and leg strength.  I've lost fat and am noticeably more well built (I have been doing my own modified routines in the last 2 years to include more things like slow press ups, core crunches and squats which probably helps).  I used to get back pain from bad posture even with work providing Herman Melville chairs, I mostly work from home these days on a 20 quid ikea chair and have no back pains whatsoever. 

Because it's the only exercise I do most of the benefits I can see are related to doing the yoga itself. Increase length of time in certain poses, being able to do more reps of stuff or being able to do poses I could never do when I started (like the crow)

I didn't do very much excercise before DDP Yoga - I was fairly active (i'd say i was easily doing about 7-10 hours of walking a week) and ate healthy but yeah no real proper exerciese. So it's probable that the benefits i've seen are as much from doing exercise as it being specifically DDP Yoga. If you're more serious about your exercise it might not offer as much or might not give the benefits you want.

From what I understand it basically improves useful day to day stuff but it's not exactly giving you the "super fit" thing. As far as I can see I'm doing about 45 min a day where my heartrate is about 70% of max, doing flexibilty exercises/stretches and body weight exercises. That's more than enough for being healthy. It's easy to work around your own routine because you can do it at home (or anywhere really give or take certain things being a bit painful to do without a yoga mat). Having to go to a gym or even get ready and leave the house makes it easier for me to skip exercise, being able to do it from home means there's no excuse (although I know some feel gym membership or the like works as motivation so YMMV)

18 hours ago, RedRooster said:

It’s another weak looking card. Are The Gunns still part of The Firm? Who The Acclaimed are facing has reminded me that they were once a part of that tedious stable. 

Excalibur said they'd "called in a favour" during his high speed upcoming matches roundup on Rampage, so I guess they're acknowledging the Gunns were part of the Firm but also they're not any more.

As for the Elite, what is there to do? They might as well just announce the match, there's not enough time to build a feud so it might as well be "2 teams of good wrestlers wrestle". For better or worse i'm pretty sure that's what they're going for with the 6 man division (Top Flight having a rematch, best of 7). Kenny Omega on Swerves podcast was a good listen for at least explaining the thought process behind what he's doing now. Whether or not you agree with the choices and if they work it did show they're consciously trying something different with division (along with consciously keeping Omega away from big grueling singles matches) and that seems to be a more sporty perspective than feuds.

Of course the House of Black are so very sports entertainment it seems weird so... i dunno, might not be the best choice but they made it 😛 They'll not change tack right now

I realise the caller wasn't exactly up for a quiet considered debate but immediately using an aggressive tone responding to her means no that point will be heard.  Discussing calmly monetary influence across politics might encourage consideration or reflection (maybe? i'm possibly being a bit optimistic). Being angry or attacking others for their views basically ony serves to you feel good, it pretty much discourages change or progress

Although I'm pretty sure the Jeremy Vine show wants people to feel a mixture of self satisfaction and anger so that sort of "discourse" is perfect.

-- Double Curses. Why does "Reply" not visibly post your reply --

-- Curses --

16 hours ago, Merzbow said:

The only reason I started the show was seeing there was a new season like The Return, shame to hear it's maybe not so great.

Season 2 sounds like a trip though and I'm going to enjoy it.

Ah the first two hold up great and most of us had always treated 2 as an ending given no-one expected a return...

And not to say S3 is bad or anything, it doesn't quite have the weird spark of the original thing.  It may be that that's part of it's reason to be - in the same way that The Return is tied to the aging of the cast and creators I think Exodus is too - except with Exodus it's more about Lars Von Trier not quite being the young provocateur any more.

It also working against the fact that most of the memorable character's actors are dead... We'll see, I feel like it's the sort of thing that's hard to gauge until the end. And yeah, the first two parts are still excellent regardless of how part three pans out

33 minutes ago, Merzbow said:

So that ending to the first season of The Kingdom, what the fuck mate? It's the most pure Lars Von Trier part of the show so far, which have been really enjoyable and I've loved how the main protagonist is an elderly woman, she's ace.

I think the idea was always that the story would get progressively more bonkers as it went along.

Episode 1 of the first season is a lot them discussing the relative cost/reward of CT scanning an old lady.  Then

The subsequent episodes of the first season then form

I mostly like how season 2 kind of builds from there in terms scope, almost in a kind of Alien to Aliens way? A small story gets expanded out into much larger lore.  However the wackiness does keep increasing. The whole show kinda feels like it introduces a level of weirdness, waits for you to get comfortable then goes up another gear.

Season 2 is still pretty tightly written, I think original Kingdom kind of hits a lot of what some people wanted Twin Peaks to be in that it's got a fairly complex mythos but it's all been planned out pretty specifically and the lore is mostly (eventually explained). There's a couple of reveals in the second season that really neatly tie some of the loose threads of season 1 together.  But yeah it definitely starts adding in more and more "weird stuff" for better or worse (similarly to TP). That thing that happens at the end of season 1 is good weird though. I think.

I'm holding off my opinion on season 3, only seen 3 episodes so far (initially I was making it last, then I kinda lost interest).  As someone who adored the first two parts and has watched them many times since I first saw it 18 (ffs) years ago it's not quite working for me

16 hours ago, Vamp said:

But any question of the authorship of any of the works for Shakespeare seems to cause controversy. I remember a very disappointing QI episode where they quickly dismissed it as being the domain of snobs who didn't believe that someone in Shakespeare's class could have written some great plays and sonnets and some very shit ones. There are some who posit that view but it's a very shallow and ignorant view of the field. That's ignoring the irony of that coming from a panel consisting of largely Oxbridge graduates who probably should be aware that it's not necessarily a question of intelligence or knowledge but opportunity.

I know that's not a very exciting way of looking at it but that argument does hold some weight. Less so regarding that it's "snobs" who don't believe someone in Shakespeare's class could write such works but that it stems from the classism that basically forms the backbone of England. The simplest form being people in the upper class are inherantly better than us, they are in higher positions of power because they are the best people to do that. You know, the current government and all that.

Suggesting that Shakespeare didn't write his plays but Francis Bacon did works with that. Francis Bacon is the son of a lord, of course he'd be better at stuff than Shakespeare

(Yes I am fully aware that someone has already pointed out that Christopher Marlowe doesn't fit this explanation whatsoever)

There's also a conspiracy theory that Beatles didn't write their songs.

So in short, the conspiracy theory I like is that the Shakespeare conspiracy theory was spread by conservatives to encourage us to know our role and stay in our place

It's that effect of when things being good everything is perceived well and vice versa.

Last weeks Rampage, whilst still having issues with using the same boring wrestlers, was pretty cohesively written - the matches had reasons to be, segments flowed into matches, things setup future things, multiple characters and storylines in the main event. I think some here did point this out but the general consensus was still "rampage terrible, matches that don't mean anything, EWR booking"

Same with this Hangman thing. AEW writes bad stories and throws matches together therefore everything is perceived the same way.

Now don't get me wrong, AEW has massive booking/writing issues at the moment. Also people did this the other round when it was hot, everything was the best and there are no flaws, Tony Kahn is a great booker.

People online (or maybe just people in general) really don't have time for things being good and bad. Something is either the best and "I'm here for it all" or it's the worst trash that's ever been seen and arguments/conversations mostly seem to have to work within that paradigm