TheScarlettChad Posted March 5 Posted March 5 The Flair obsession in 2003 was pretty bad. The purple undies and boots and no facial hair. Urgh. Quote
Paid Members air_raid Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 Fuck placement, let’s talk about who’s there and who isn’t. 12 hours ago, BarryOVega said: Xpac and the Outlaws should be on there instead of the Dudleys or APA Came here to say “Ah yes, the tag division of the Attitude Era famously spearheaded by the legendary rivalry between the Duds and Always Pounding Ass.” Hardys and E&C erased from history. Huh. 7 hours ago, AshC said: Went to a house show in Brum the week after Mania 15 and the fella had one of the loudest reactions I've heard in my entire life. We’re a bit different in Birmingham though ay we. Quote
Paid Members garynysmon Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 (edited) 12 hours ago, LaGoosh said: I know 2000 is counted as an Attitude era year but to me 98-99 are the real Attitude years and X-Pac, the New Age Outlaws and Mick Foley were absolute key acts. Snap. I’ve always felt that the WWF got a little too up their own arses in 2000 and I detested the McMahon-Helmsley era stuff, while Austin was missing for pretty much the entire year. Very much the start of Ruthless Aggression for me, despite WM17 being seen as the last hurrah for Attitude. That disgrace of a Wrestlemania card without a single proper one-on-one match shows that complacency had crept in. I accept that the actual wrestling was better in 2000, but that’s very low down the list of priorities for me personally. The charm of the Attitude Era for me was throwing all kinds of stuff against the wall in late 97 and into 1998 and seeing what stuck. Angles being dropped and random appearances all over the place. It was all a little too polished for me after 1999. (For similar reasons I’ve always loved 1984-1985 WWF for its charm, a growing promotion full of teething problems and a couple of years before it became the ultra polished WWF of the late 80’s). Edited March 5 by garynysmon Quote
Chili Posted March 5 Posted March 5 (edited) 16 minutes ago, garynysmon said: Snap. I’ve always felt that the WWF got a little too up their own arses in 2000 and I detested the McMahon-Helmsley era stuff, while Austin was missing for pretty much the entire year. Very much the start of Ruthless Aggression for me, despite WM17 being seen as the last hurrah for Attitude. That disgrace of a Wrestlemania card without a single proper one-on-one match shows that complacency had crept in. I accept that the actual wrestling was better in 2000, but that’s very low down the list of priorities for me personally. The charm of the Attitude Era for me was throwing all kinds of stuff against the wall in late 97 and into 1998 and seeing what stuck. Angles being dropped and random appearances all over the place. It was all a little too polished for me after 1999. Completely disagree there, 2000 is my favourite year that isn't 1989 for characters and the matches were great, and the storylines actually had some minor effort to make some sense. Aesthetically everything is gorgeous, roster wise it's been tidied up. The tag division is the best and most packed since 1988 and no elements of Vince Russo really linger (ok Mae Young giving birth to a hand, fair. It's not Terri Runnels having a miscarriage is it). An Attitude Era with angles that made some effort of sense actually came too late in the game. It's absolutely not the Ruthless Aggression era. It's the Attitude Era with a better TV writer and a midcard that isn't a fucking embarrassment. Edited March 5 by Chili Quote
Paid Members air_raid Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 8 minutes ago, garynysmon said: Snap. I’ve always felt that the WWF got a little too up their own arses in 2000 and I detested the McMahon-Helmsley era stuff, while Austin was missing for pretty much the entire year. Very much the start of Ruthless Aggression for me, despite WM17 being seen as the last hurrah for Attitude. That disgrace of a Wrestlemania card without a single proper one-on-one match shows that complacency had crept in. I accept that the actual wrestling was better in 2000, but that’s very low down the list of priorities for me personally. The charm of the Attitude Era for me was throwing all kinds of stuff against the wall in late 97 and into 1998 and seeing what stuck. It was all a little too polished for me after 1999. This is interesting because I was about to jump in defending 2000 as a stunner of a year where all the new blood started having far better matches and the PPV cards especially were a lot tighter. But that wasn’t your point, it was how “Attitude” it was or wasn’t. And you’re bang on. I never think of Kurt as particularly “Attitude Era” for this very reason. The image I have of Attitude is always a bit of an amalgamation of aspects that never quite coincided - babyface DX and their “amusing” antics (pre Mania XV), distasteful nonsense like Beaver Cleavage or Steve Blackman fishing Val Venis’ vibrator out of his bag (mostly summer 1999), babyface Sable making you think THIS weeks Raw you might finally see her tits (1998), babyface Rock eviscerating some heel (fall 98 or post Mania XV) and Stone Cold defying the odds on top throughout. So you’re bob on, not really “2000” at all. Quote
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 I was gonna make that same argument that 2000 was when the WWF grew up a bit from the Attitude Era but then I remembered that Mae Young got her tits out and gave birth to a hand in January 2000 alone and I changed my mind. Quote
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 (edited) For all the flak that the Attitude era rightly gets for its juvenile angles I think the Ruthless Aggression era was actually way worse for it. The Attitude stuff was mostly played for laughs, felt very tongue in cheek and was kept away from all the top stars and main storylines. But the Ruthless Aggression stuff felt like they had gone completely off the fucking deep end. Loads of stuff that was incredibly sleazy and had a real nasty, grimy and unpleasant undertone to it. Edited March 5 by LaGoosh Quote
Paid Members tiger_rick Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 Mad that Ruthless Agression was a shit, inorganic catchphrase that absolutely failed to get over and now defines an entire era. Guess if you say something enough, it'll become so. Quote
Paid Members Lion_of_the_Midlands Posted March 5 Author Paid Members Posted March 5 34 minutes ago, tiger_rick said: Mad that Ruthless Agression was a shit, inorganic catchphrase that absolutely failed to get over and now defines an entire era. Guess if you say something enough, it'll become so. That's what HHH is hoping when he keeps announcing all these new eras. We are in the New Era Era. Quote
SoloJones Posted March 5 Posted March 5 For Attitude Era week, they posted that Desire video from the end of 2001 which just feels wrong. Everyone probably has their own definition, but for me Mania 17 is basically the end of the Attitude Era, with most of 2001 being its own thing with the Invasion. The WCW/ECW stuff doesn't seem to fit in with either the Attitude Era, or Ruthless Aggression (which has a more obvious start point of when Vince started saying it on tv, and is backed up by the first time they did a brand split, etc). Quote
The Gaffer Posted March 5 Posted March 5 50 minutes ago, LaGoosh said: For all the flak that the Attitude era rightly gets for its juvenile angles I think the Ruthless Aggression era was actually way worse for it. The Attitude stuff was mostly played for laughs, felt very tongue in cheek and was kept away from all the top stars and main storylines. But the Ruthless Aggression stuff felt like they had gone completely off the fucking deep end. Loads of stuff that was incredibly sleazy and had a real nasty, grimy and unpleasant undertone to it. Katie Vick, Al Wilson, Gene Snitsky, Heidenreich and Cole. You're 100% correct. Most of the dross in the Attitude Era was expressly written in by Russo for the undercard in order to pop drunk college kids. I imagine Vince just glazed over a lot of it and never fully grasped it. By the time you get to 2002 though, he's using the shows as his own personal dark fantasy playground, with Gewirtz as his infinite monkey typewriter. It was way shitter than the Attitude Era, and delivered with a deathly serious, miserable intensity. Quote
Paid Members air_raid Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 6 minutes ago, LaGoosh said: For all the flak that the Attitude era rightly gets for its juvenile angles I think the Ruthless Aggression era was actually way worse for it. The Attitude stuff was mostly played for laughs, felt very tongue in cheek and was kept away from all the top stars and main storylines. But the Ruthless Aggression stuff felt like they had gone completely off the fucking deep end. Loads of stuff that was incredibly sleazy and had a real nasty, grimy and unpleasant undertone to it. Let’s see what I can remember… Chuck & Billy, HLA, Redneck Triathlon feat Mae, Big Show showered in poo, Katie Vick, camera angles perving on Steph, Vince being himself over and over, Al Wilson, casual racism… need I go on? Quote
TheScarlettChad Posted March 5 Posted March 5 Hassan commiting an execution on smackers the day of 7/7. Quote
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 14 minutes ago, air_raid said: Let’s see what I can remember… Chuck & Billy, HLA, Redneck Triathlon feat Mae, Big Show showered in poo, Katie Vick, camera angles perving on Steph, Vince being himself over and over, Al Wilson, casual racism… need I go on? Kane raping Lita, getting her pregnant and her having a miscarriage which was later played entirely for laughs is probably the worst of the lot. Quote
Paid Members air_raid Posted March 5 Paid Members Posted March 5 7 minutes ago, LaGoosh said: Kane raping Lita, getting her pregnant and her having a miscarriage which was later played entirely for laughs is probably the worst of the lot. Plus it cross references later with worked shooty bollocks. Double stinky. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.