CM Punk chat

[RedTwoster]

42 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

It was nonsense, but it was basically a version of Sting vs. Triple H that made sense. Just a succession of easy pops instead of a simple, coherent story. But it worked, and that's all that matters.

It’s interesting that @LaGoosh compared WWE to the MCU - on the whole I don’t feel that way about the company, but if any match was MCU inspired - or, more specifically, End Game inspired, it was this one. Fortunately, WWE has actually managed to follow this up well, without Kang-ing it up. The end sequence in that match is probably my favourite ever moment in wrestling - I really felt like I was watching something that just couldn’t be repeated.

Edited December 22, 2024 by RedTwoster

[Hannibal Scorch]

1 hour ago, DavidB6937 said:

"It felt safe" is such an odd way of looking at it. What the hell did you want them to do? Go out and have a mat classic where they go all amateur and shock everyone? Or was it a lack of chainsaws?

I felt it was far too similar to nearly every other Roman Reigns match since the Bloodline saga kicked off. And yes of course that’s a me problem hoping for more there, it’s exactly what they should have delivered.

14 minutes ago, RedTwoster said:

The end sequence in that match is probably my favourite ever moment in wrestling

I’m not trying to sound like I’m taking the piss, but really? Of all the things any wrestling company has ever done, that? It was just childhood nostalgia pops, reminding (at least me) of when things were better. It wouldn’t even be in my top 50 things of WWE history.

[Mr_Danger]

That match was great and encapsulates everything the WWE do well. Of course Romans last title defence was similar to all his other title defences. It was his time to try the same old shit but get caught out. All the cameos bar Undercracker were great. It was the perfect celebration of WWE and the ending of a long running saga.

[Hannibal Scorch]

55 minutes ago, Mr_Danger said:

That match was great and encapsulates everything the WWE do well. Of course Romans last title defence was similar to all his other title defences. It was his time to try the same old shit but get caught out.

And that’s a great explanation tbh. I don’t think it was everything they do well, but I think it’s probably everything they do well in this era. I still think Mania III to X8 are my favourite period. Everything post that I’ve felt mixed things and so it probably is just down to taste. I mean there will be a generation now who will look back at The Uso’s, Cena, Roman and LA Knight as I did the British Bulldog, Bret, Savage, Mr Perfect, Foley and Hogan. 

[Vamp]

See, I think the Undertaker cameo makes it work better than if it was Austin. I know nobody agrees with me on that.

I get why people wanted it to be Austin, he's The Rock's main rival, etc. But to me Undertaker makes more sense because it's the Undertaker's WrestleMania match with Roman where any last hope of the Undertaker being able to have 1 last WrestleMania epic (both in storyline and out of it) dies. It wasn't remotely their intention, and they fuck it up a bit with Undertaker destroying Cena a year lately, but Undertaker feels more relevant to Roman and more relevant to WrestleMania than Austin does. And I think if its Austin it does feel like they're just reliving better moments but because it's Undertaker it feels like there's an actual connection with one of the competitors, Roman, where as Austin would feel like he's just connected with Rock. 

I'm basically just trying to justify why I actually prefer the fact it's Undertaker over Austin. And hey, at the end of the day, they can both fuck off.

[RedTwoster]

3 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

I’m not trying to sound like I’m taking the piss, but really? Of all the things any wrestling company has ever done, that? It was just childhood nostalgia pops, reminding (at least me) of when things were better. It wouldn’t even be in my top 50 things of WWE history.

It absolutely is, but given that you don’t enjoy modern WWE, I wouldn’t expect you to agree. I liked it so much because I felt like I was experiencing something that couldn’t be replicated, and each second of it was joyful. You had an historic title reign, and the right challenger. Based on what happened the year prior, it didn’t feel like a guarantee that Cody would win, adding to the drama. Then you had the added ‘big bad’ in the background of The Rock - and then there was the cameos, with wrestler after wrestler coming out at the end; some expected, some unexpected - that final stretch is something they won’t be able to replicate any time soon, if ever. 

You mention it being ‘nostalgia pops’ harking back to ‘when things were better’ - I think you need to view things in WWE through a different lens. Even if it’s not for you, for a lot of WWE viewers, things haven’t been better. For me personally, there’s very little to complain about and a lot to feel excited about. 

[DavidB6937]

If it had been relying on nostalgia pops because they had nothing else going on then I can see a fair level of criticism there.

But it was a bunch of interference and appearances building as a crescendo. It nearly all made sense. Usos. Solo. Cena. Rock. Seth. Everything was intertwined and had links back to the storyline. It was really only Taker that was purely a nostalgia pop.

[Callum1993]

Making the save at MSG last night doing a Val Venis cosplay 

 

 

[Merzbow]

"Who the FUCK cares about CM Punk? Where's RHEA?"

[LaGoosh]

Oof. I guess Triple H is rubbing off on him, seems Punk doesn't read about sexual assault accusations either.

[DavidB6937]

3 minutes ago, LaGoosh said:

Oof. I guess Triple H is rubbing off on him, seems Punk doesn't read about sexual assault accusations either.

To be fair I haven't seen much mentioned in months about him so it wouldn't surprise me if some people aren't aware.

[Hannibal Scorch]

59 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

To be fair I haven't seen much mentioned in months about him so it wouldn't surprise me if some people aren't aware.

I haven’t seen Harvey Weinstein mentioned much recently, but I didn’t forget his actions.

[Devon Malcolm]

 

13 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

I haven’t seen Harvey Weinstein mentioned much recently, but I didn’t forget his actions.

Weinstein was the most powerful producer in Hollywood. Neil Gaiman writes comic books.

[SuperBacon]

1 hour ago, LaGoosh said:

Oof. I guess Triple H is rubbing off on him, seems Punk doesn't read about sexual assault accusations either.

This seems a bit of an unfair thing to say in my opinion. 

[Hannibal Scorch]

3 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

 

Weinstein was the most powerful producer in Hollywood. Neil Gaiman writes comic books.

Coraline isn’t a Comic Book. Neither were his Dr Who episodes. And I’d give you that as a compelling reason if CM Punk wasn’t a massive Comic Book fan. And CM Punk watches films as often as Michael Owen so probably has no idea who Weinstein is.

Anyway my point is, that’s a lazy excuse to give him a pass. It’s very possible he didn’t know, maybe it alluded him, but optical it’s not great which I think was the point being made.