Richie Freebird Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 You'll be surprised, the "Tommy's Mother's opinion" segment of the review will be less positive though. I'm just after the time to get some pics together. Fantastic! I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheffbag Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 only just found the thread but for me it would be Slaughter winning the belt just to set up the US vs Iraq themed WM main event. Completely wrong and the backlash was much deserved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.PeterVenkman Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 only just found the thread but for me it would be Slaughter winning the belt just to set up the US vs Iraq themed WM main event. Completely wrong and the backlash was much deserved. Â On the plus side, Slaughter winning the belt meant we got to see Randy Savage's awesome run in, don't think I've ever seen anyone so energetic during a run in, plus when I was a kid that sceptre shot to the head looked vicious as fuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshC Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 I just watched a bit of Survivor Series '95 in the week (that top-rope powerbomb was pretty daring) Even crazier, they (Jannetty and Skip) did the same spot on the King of the Ring 1996 PRE-SHOW match! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Kaz Hayashi Posted October 22, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 only just found the thread but for me it would be Slaughter winning the belt just to set up the US vs Iraq themed WM main event. Completely wrong and the backlash was much deserved. Â Â As long as the outcome is an American flag being smoothered over his dirty, blood dripping, turn coat face, i'm sure we can find a title run in there somewhere. Â (I believed I managed to integrate a Slaughter based comment and welcomed Richie in to the convo due to the mention of blood, decent effort.) Â Â Speaking of turncoats, whats the odds on Duggen being Canadian at the next gimmick battle royal? What was the crack with that whole cancer thing... was there any truth to it? Â edit: I see he did in fact have cancer, that doesn't excuse his diry Canadian heel run mind you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buba3d Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 not wwe per se, tna weekly ppv had a pipers pit type segment and they had vince russo on it, piper then pretty much told I hold you responsible for owens death, using that for cheap heat was wow  didn't Christian call sharmell a rag head or something along those on impact a few years back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Kaz Hayashi Posted October 22, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 Calling a black woman 'Saphire'?  Mexicools - cutting lawns / lazy etc etc  Virgil and his 'shoe buffer' role for Dibiase  Theres loads really, but again, do you get offended at Rocky 4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinc Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 All of DX's pre-taped skits in the last ten years have been insufferable, self-indulgent shite but Little People's Court is the only thing they ever did that made me think they must actually be bad people. Really, really tasteless and de-humanizing. Badly produced and badly performed, too. Just a stupid piece of television. Â Personally I think the fans would be reasonably receptive to it (though I fully admit I could be wrong). Considering this is a show that has had some of the crappiest storylines in its time, is it not worth a punt at a positive angle, EVEN if it's just for PR purposes? No. Like Butch said, having someone whose gimmick is "he's gay, but that's not part of his gimmick" is self-defeating, dull, irrelevant nonsense in wrestling. If you've got a gaybyface in wrestling, he's got to use his flamboyant gayness to wind up the heels, otherwise it's a pointless non-gimmick. The World's Strongest Man uses his strength. The World's Largest Athlete uses his size. The World's Gayest Grappler uses his gayness. And having a wrestler going around gaying up his opponents isn't progressive. Nor is it good PR. So it's a move that would backfire in terms of publicity, and at best would get good fan response as a novelty gimmick until the novelty wore off like it has with Brodus Clay. I agree and I don't. Butch (or Ian or whoever)'s point about gay people being normal, and normality being a shit gimmick, is spot on. But it would be nice if wrestling could get to the point where some of its characters were incidentally gay. Like how sexuality has nothing to do with (e.g.) Santino's gimmick, but he occasionally develops an incidentally heterosexual crush on Aksana or Jimmy Snuka's daughter or whoever. I know that you're the most self-aware wrestling fan in the world and realise that WWE is aimed at a rather low common denominator, but they got there in the end with the blacks; a superficial acknowledgement of the existence and equality of gay people isn't unachievable and needn't be detrimental or self-defeating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdh85 Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 But it would be nice if wrestling could get to the point where some of its characters were incidentally gay. Like how sexuality has nothing to do with (e.g.) Santino's gimmick, but he occasionally develops an incidentally heterosexual crush on Aksana or Jimmy Snuka's daughter or whoever. Â That doesn't even happen in Hollywood films yet, and WWE are about 20 years behind the mainstream of culture. Homosexuality is going to be treated as a big deal for a long time yet. Wrestling inherently deals in stereotypes because of its nature - most undercard wrestlers have about 10 minutes screentime per episode. New viewers need to understand their characters straight away, and the easiest way to achieve that is by drawing on stereotypes. Japs are going to be sneaky, Mexicans are going to be lazy, homosexuals are going to be flaming. People get it quickly and respond accordingly. There's scarcely even any point to incidental storyline developments which don't lead to an in-ring payoff where someone gets a come-uppance anyway. If a wrestler being gay doesn't either make the audience love them or hate them, or piss another wrestler off and lead to them having a fight, then there's no point mentioning it. Â I actually think there'd be a lot of space for a John Barrowman-esque flamboyantly gay manwhore babyface in wrestling. A lot of gay guys seem to be into WWE, and I'm sure they'd latch on to an unashamed happy-go-lucky gay character. But a large portion of the audience would shit on it, and WWE aren't going to have the balls to run with it knowing that. More to lose than to gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyincognito Posted October 22, 2012 Author Share Posted October 22, 2012 only just found the thread but for me it would be Slaughter winning the belt just to set up the US vs Iraq themed WM main event. Completely wrong and the backlash was much deserved. Â Weeeeeeell if that's not the perfect set up for me to plug my Arm Bar Critic Wrestlemania 7 review I don't know what is! Check it out gang, it's not just some opinionated smart mark talking into a camera (Don't worry there's plenty of that!) it includes, clips, skits, (amazing) impressions, comedy routines and all round wrestling themed tomfoolery. Â http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yud-X10pFB4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wendell Cooley Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Â David Schultz and Roddy Piper cut a racist promo. Mental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted October 22, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 22, 2012 Wasn't Rico basically a gay babyface without it being outright said? And Johnny B. Badd? You're immediate thought upon viewing them would be to think they were anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Yeah. And Goldust for a bit, I think. And Pat Patterson when he rebelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JLM Posted October 23, 2012 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2012 The Melanie Pillman interview has always bothered me. If anyone knows more of the story I would like to know how it came about she had even appear on TV the day after her husband died. I think 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.