Paid Members marc2j Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 In Ian Beale's defence hes now shacked up with that younger bird. Kudos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You asked what was different between what I said about Miz and Truth and what people say about CM Punk. Yes, and you've still not answered it. You're allowed to criticise the Miz and R-Truth characters losing and being ineffective, but nobody's allowed to criticise the CM Punk character being a slimy opportunist. Â If you saw the man who plays Ian Beale on the high street would you run up to him and slag him off for how he came across on Eastenders last night? I didn't watch Eastenders last night, so it'd be a bit of a gamble. Had I watched Eastenders last night and gone on to discuss it with someone, I might say "Ian Beale was a twat" if Ian Beale was a twat in it. Because I'm not severely autistic and I can both know a TV show/film/play/story is a TV show/film/play/story and still emotionally invest in and respond to it. I might say "Miz and R-Truth looked like weak opponents for Rock and Cena" when discussing Raw (I think I did in this thread). I wouldn't then start blarting because someone said "CM Punk looked a dickhead as well, shit babyface." Is it just that you can't handle people not liking CM Punk and thinking both the material and his performances might be crap, or what? Or is it just that people are responding as fans? Would you be happy if instead of saying "I'm not getting behind him, he's too smarmy for me and he was a coward there" people said "I rate the script one star, and the performance two stars"? Â If you can't see the difference between critiquing the product and the creative process that came up with it and the performer who is acting it out, then your stupider than you sound or as best testing indicates. If you can't see the difference between your and you're, you're in no position to be calling anyone else stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Paul's Bin Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I've just remembered there was no Mason Ryan this week. I was pretty disapointed there. I thought he was becoming a weekly thing. He tweeted yesterday that he's coming over to the UK for the tour so hopefully we will see him on RAW this week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrasslin Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 In Ian Beale's defence hes now shacked up with that younger bird. Kudos. Â Â She has no substance! It will never last and Ian will be alone again, with only his cafe and chip shop to keep him company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Sir Steve Redgrave Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 In Ian Beale's defence hes now shacked up with that younger bird. Kudos. Â 'CASHBACK!' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.PeterVenkman Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The Muppets were alright, Aksana looked fit as fuck, Kaitlyn's arse was good, Cole was funny with the "Robin needs Batman but he's got a Pirate and a Sailor instead" line, that's about all I can remember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra1000 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Sorry haven't reas the rest of the thread but why the hell should I care about Rock and John Cena teaming up, and why does Cena even need The Rock if he can take out Miz and Truth by himself? I wish Rock and Cena were facing Truth and Miz from before HIAC, just before they were neutered and no one cared. Â Some of the Muppet skits were really funny though, more than made up for the rest, which was mostly shit. Â Â moment of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fliff Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I really enjoyed the show. I'm a sucker for the Muppets so i really enjoyed their involvment in the show. Beaker's segment with Sheamus was definatly one of the highlights of the show. Â Rock segment was alright, not the greatest Rock promo ever but he still outshined half the roster on the stick. Looking forward to seeing him back in the ring, hope he still has it. Punk vs Del Rio should be alright. Mizark was ace as always aswell. Â Looking forward to next weeks show in the UK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 The thing that annoyed me most about it was the fact that we didn't get a proper Henry v Punk match as they're my two favourites right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 I was expecting the Muppets to be shit, based entirely on the WCW Robocop and Chucky stuff. I'm very happy to have been wrong. The only person I thought lost something from the Muppets involvement was Jack Swagger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 Kermit the Frog cut a better promo than The Rock. I don't know what that tells us about the state of the wrestling business. Â To be honest, I enjoyed the show, but that was largely because of The Muppets. I thought their segments were great fun. Â I really thought The Rock's promo was very boring and predictable by his standards. I still can't quite believe that he's booked for a match at Survivor Series, it all seems a bit bizarre. I'm not sure what to expect to be honest. The sad thing is, right now I'm barely even bothered. This is the long-awaited, never-thought-it-would-happen return of the biggest star of a generation. I should be wet with anticipation. Instead I'm left scratching my head wondering why they are wasting his return on an almost pointless tag team match, in which he is teaming with a guy he supposedly hates to battle two midcarders. Â What do people think he will actually do at SS? I am inclined to think that he'll end up doing fuck all apart from hitting his finishers, as if he does work a match it's going to take so much shine off his WrestleMania comeback. For me, the biggest selling point of WM is seeing how The Rock will look in his ring gear again and watching him wrestle for the first time in 8 years or whatever it is. If they give us that at SS, I won't be half as bothered about seeing it again 5 months later. Â The whole situation has been handled strangely. First, they announced that he would return at SS to team with Cena in a traditional Survivor Series match, did they not? It was strange because the announcement wasn't even given the 'major announcement' treatment on Raw, as you might expect. Instead, it was a relatively low-key wwe.com thing. There was also no explanation or reason given for why he would be teaming WITH Cena, his WrestleMania opponent. Nobody even questioned it. Then came Cena's bullshit announcement last week, which made a mockery of the previous announcement and made zero sense from a storyline perspective. I'm just a bit bemused by the whole situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 I was expecting the Muppets to be shit, based entirely on the WCW Robocop and Chucky stuff. I'm very happy to have been wrong. The only person I thought lost something from the Muppets involvement was Jack Swagger. Â I don't think so, he never had much to lose. Plus he seemed to have a good laugh and enjoy it all, and did well not to piss himself laughing a couple of times when he clearly wanted to. Â On a Swagger side note, when he does that lap around the ring, does anyone else always think he's about to do The Worm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loligan Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You asked what was different between what I said about Miz and Truth and what people say about CM Punk. Yes, and you've still not answered it. You're allowed to criticise the Miz and R-Truth characters losing and being ineffective, but nobody's allowed to criticise the CM Punk character being a slimy opportunist. Â If you saw the man who plays Ian Beale on the high street would you run up to him and slag him off for how he came across on Eastenders last night? I didn't watch Eastenders last night, so it'd be a bit of a gamble. Had I watched Eastenders last night and gone on to discuss it with someone, I might say "Ian Beale was a twat" if Ian Beale was a twat in it. Because I'm not severely autistic and I can both know a TV show/film/play/story is a TV show/film/play/story and still emotionally invest in and respond to it. I might say "Miz and R-Truth looked like weak opponents for Rock and Cena" when discussing Raw (I think I did in this thread). I wouldn't then start blarting because someone said "CM Punk looked a dickhead as well, shit babyface." Is it just that you can't handle people not liking CM Punk and thinking both the material and his performances might be crap, or what? Or is it just that people are responding as fans? Would you be happy if instead of saying "I'm not getting behind him, he's too smarmy for me and he was a coward there" people said "I rate the script one star, and the performance two stars"? Â If you can't see the difference between critiquing the product and the creative process that came up with it and the performer who is acting it out, then your stupider than you sound or as best testing indicates. If you can't see the difference between your and you're, you're in no position to be calling anyone else stupid. Â That's fine!!! That is just people who watch wrestling reacting to how a character if potrayed on tv. Exactly the same as me having a go at Miz and Truth. But it was you who absolved any bad booking of his character by saying, "False -- at least if we're ever going to praise Punk himself for his character and actions. "The writers are only to blame for the bad things" is the worst kind of attitude. If we're criticising the writers every time a wrestler does something we don't like, we should credit them when a wrestler does something we like." Â But anyway fuck it, it's just going round in circles. I'm sure you'll just say if Punk thought coming out and forcing a title match out of a downed opponent was a shit idea he could just of changed it to whatever he wanted to instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 But it was you who absolved any bad booking of his character by saying, "False -- at least if we're ever going to praise Punk himself for his character and actions. "The writers are only to blame for the bad things" is the worst kind of attitude. If we're criticising the writers every time a wrestler does something we don't like, we should credit them when a wrestler does something we like." I'm not absolving bad writing at all, I'm just pointing out that it's retarded to blame the writers every time you don't like something unless you're crediting them for stuff you do like.  But anyway fuck it, it's just going round in circles. I'm sure you'll just say if Punk thought coming out and forcing a title match out of a downed opponent was a shit idea he could just of changed it to whatever he wanted to instead. You genuinely seem to think CM Punk has no say over his character or storylines, why is that? You do realise he's not Trent Baretta, right?  Everything I've said isn't somebody else's words that they put on paper. They tend to hand me things like, "Here, say this," and I'm not saying any of it. The normal course of action is mouth shut, eyes and ears open, not stepping on toes. But that's how you get ahead. A squeaky wheel gets the grease. If something sucks, I've always been completely vocal about it, and I've been punished many, many times because of that. But I don't think I'd be in the spot I'm in right now if I wasn't me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted November 2, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted November 2, 2011 I was expecting the Muppets to be shit, based entirely on the WCW Robocop and Chucky stuff. I'm very happy to have been wrong. The only person I thought lost something from the Muppets involvement was Jack Swagger. Â I don't think so, he never had much to lose. Plus he seemed to have a good laugh and enjoy it all, and did well not to piss himself laughing a couple of times when he clearly wanted to. Â Â Maybe. Im a very casual watcher these days, but it felt to me, someone who only tuned in because of the Muppets, that Swagger had an aura when he first walked out that he lost the second he interacted with Kermit. Then Gonzo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.