Snitsky's back acne Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Its not necessarily Vince trying to distant himself from wrestling, more that he wants the term/logo of WWE to mean more than just wrestling. Â Which is fair enough, but Drew Carey, as ridiculous as it is, is being inducted into the 'celebrity wing' of a wrestling HOF, not an entertainment Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted March 20, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted March 20, 2011 That's almost the point i was getting at/making in my earlier post Killer. Â But, anyway...about your point on some people think WWE movies have to be about wrestling...i'm kind of surprised this isn't an avenue that hasn't been explored. Using their movies to create or enhance a character for WWE television. Considering the number of wrestlers who don't have or struggle to have any real discerning identity. Like, for example if the Kane vehicle, rather than being you're generic horror movie, was actually about the Kane character and used to tie up all the loose-ends in his back story. Or, for another example when Nathan Jones was about and going to debut, those vignettes he had could have been accompanied by and more trailers for a documentary style film to introduce and debut his character to television full-time. Â Anybody think this could work or be worthwhile trying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 There'd be a good few problems with it. Are the WWE films completely self-funded and self-distributed now? I could see it being a problem for any partners they've got, though at the same time, it might not. A wrestling film might limit the audience, but they're hardly smashing the box office as it is. Â The character introduction one would be a definite no-go. To do it properly, they'd have to shoot the film 12-18 months in advance of the wrestler's debut, and the writing would have to start a year or so prior to that. Wrestling is too fast-paced for that to happen, and if the rookie decides to quit before the big debut, that's a few million squandered on something that you can't do anything with. Plus, the WWE films with the big-name wrestlers don't do well. A WWE film with an unknown wrestler would tank completely, and wouldn't shift anywhere near as many DVDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jobberinho Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Do you mean something in the same vein as Bret's Wrestling with Shadows? Better yet, A Spinal Tap style spoof. That could be brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffbag Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 I'm surprised WWE havent started hiring actors, maybe that will be Vinces next stage of getting away from "wrestling" He is a nutter he really thinks WWE is a proper tv show or something. Â If been a billionaire makes you nutty then stick me in the same ward as Ric Flair. Â Remember his quote from Beyond the mat - "The real aim of WWF/E is to make movies" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted March 21, 2011 Moderators Share Posted March 21, 2011 Can we all please stop talking about how Vince has directly ordered the article to be pulled? Â What's happened is that a single publicist working in a large Marketing Department for a MASSIVE multinational corporation has responded to an article published in the market sector they are specifically responsible for, and has decided to take a general company policy of not using the term 'wrestling' and followed it to absurdity. Â It sounds a lot like she was put on the spot, and fearing for making the wrong decision and getting a bollocking over it just asked them to pull the article entirely. Â Yeah, it highlights how silly the idea of separating themselves from the term wrestling can be at times, but as others have pointed out in this thread there's a lot of positive aspects for the brand to that separation too. Â Mainly it's just another example of a stupid clunky move from a big corporation that would be more at home in a Dilbert cartoon than being used as an example of the state of the wrestling business. Â People are reading way too much into it, and seem to have no idea how the business world works at all. This is clearly the actual aim of the policy that allows silly things like this to happen: Â Its not necessarily Vince trying to distant himself from wrestling, more that he wants the term/logo of WWE to mean more than just wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loligan Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 The crazy thing is Vince's company name already sums it up perfectly. World Wrestling Entertainment. The are the world leader in presenting a wrestling based entertainment product. Â Aside from that I'd love to know what sort of entertainment he would class it as? Sports entertainment has always baffled me because there is nothing even remotely sporting associated with wrestling anymore. Is it athletic entertainment? Comedy entertainment? Conflict entertainment? Â Take wrestling away and they are world entertainment, which makes no sense at all. It's all very confusing. Â IT'S FUCKIN WRESTLING VINCE RIGHT!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pro ev promotions Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 If Vince is so desperate to pursue other aspects of the media, then why not create a parent company that wwe can fall under? You know kinda like how it did with Titan sports? Â That way he could have Titan sports that his wrestling shows will fall under and wwe can still be called wrestling. His parent company however would be the global media corporation he wants - he could have Titan Films, Titan music, Titan clothing, Titan gyms - the word Titan is not typecast like the words 'world WRESTLING entertainment' Â WWE films was never gonna work because it had WWE/wrestling plastered over it, itd be like the NFL having NFL films staring football players or Dana White starting UFC films staring mma fighters! Â Speaking of the UFC - notice how that is owned by a parent company (zuffa) zuffa could always have zuffa films, zuffa record label etc and not be assocaited with MMA and the UFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted March 21, 2011 Author Paid Members Share Posted March 21, 2011 They used to do that to be fair. No Holds Barred, ICOPRO, Coliseum Video, that Sugar Ray fight and the WBF and all the other stuff they were doing on the side in the 80s and early 90s were all under the Titan Sports banner. Then the whole company was traded under World Wrestling Federation Entertainment. And now its World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. Maybe they feel the WWE inc. name is more credible that some random name. Maybe if Mike Rotunda gets a promotion to head of talent, they could promote under Money Inc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RepoMan Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 Coliseum Video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhenom Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 They used to do that to be fair. No Holds Barred, ICOPRO, Coliseum Video, that Sugar Ray fight and the WBF and all the other stuff they were doing on the side in the 80s and early 90s were all under the Titan Sports banner. Then the whole company was traded under World Wrestling Federation Entertainment. And now its World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. Maybe they feel the WWE inc. name is more credible that some random name. Maybe if Mike Rotunda gets a promotion to head of talent, they could promote under Money Inc? Coliseum Video wasn't owned by Vince. The company was separate, and I read somewhere that they even released porno tapes at one point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted March 21, 2011 Author Paid Members Share Posted March 21, 2011 Sugar Ray Leonard wasnt owned by Vince either, but it was Titan Sports who was dealing with him and not the WWF brand itself. Coliseum video was the official distributor of Titan Sport in general, since they also sold WBF videos for a short period (or so wikipedia tells me). It wasnt until later that WWF started selling their stuff in house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted March 21, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted March 21, 2011 "Lord Alfred (as we sit here enjoying Skinner vs Virgil,) did you know this is an EXCLUSIVE match up for Coliseum Video?" Â They really used to push the boat out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Freebird Posted March 22, 2011 Share Posted March 22, 2011 I don't have anything against naming them superstars and divas, it really still makes them sound larger than life and bigger than 'wrestlers', I'm sure wwf superstars the term was used since 99 or so. The only people who call moves these days are Matt Stryker, JR and CMPunk and that tells you something  And at least 10 years before that too.  The WWF was calling itself sports-entertainment long before the newzletters told you to hate the term, kids.  I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.