Guest Stuart Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Nigel, I did give hbk his "due" a couple of posts back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigel Law Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Nigel, I did give hbk his "due" a couple of posts back. Okay, we know you're not an HBK fan so that's fair enough. Let's leave the thread open for others to comment on my review of 'From the Vault' and indeed for them to make their own thoughts on Michaels heard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stuart Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Thats cool nigel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AndyPandy Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Shawn was both apt at playing a babyface or a really great heel. He was one of the BEST peformers I have ever seen in the ring, and he really was what many people said he was: great.I have watched the tape (not DVD) and I can truly say that this does pay homage to the great man himself in great fashion.It's just a shame that many people just can't shake over that "Montreal" incident.Great review, mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naitch Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Yeah great review Nigel. I was never a fan of Michaels as a person due to his backstage antics however there was no disputing that he was an incredible worker and talker(Watch the Heartbreak Hotel interviews again and deny that this man could talk). Every pay per view that he was on and you could look forward to his match knowing it would be excellent, this includes when he was booked to face Sid! On another note I cannot believe that the Hell in A Cell match from Badd Blood was said not to be a classic. While on the other hand I thought the 1 hour match from Wrestlemania was not a classic and has been very overhypedd ue to the obsessive rest holds during the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigel Law Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Andy and Naitch, many thanks for the feedback it is much appreciated as always. If his recent inclusion into the Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame taught us anything, it was that HBK is indeed one of the most controversial characters in the business. However love him or hate him, I challenge anyone to provide me with an argument stating that HBK was a poor worker. Sure he may not have been a draw and his out-of-ring activities sometimes overshadowed what happened in it, but with a string of classic matches under his belt and a career spanning well over a decade, Shawn Michaels is without doubt a living legend. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BionicRedneck Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 On some occasions Shawn has sucked but most of the time he was a fun worker and sometimes great. He is, however, easily the most overrated wrestler ever. The fact that some people claim him to be one of the best wrestlers ever when there were seriously 20+ guys better than him says it all. He strengths were his bumping, his charisma and his ability to connect with the crowd but Shawn did some really stupid things in the ring (the crappy selling, the kip-up and subsequent superman comeback). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DebbieHardy Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 ......but Shawn did some really stupid things in the ring (the crappy selling, the kip-up and subsequent superman comeback). Those where some of the things that made it fun watching his matches. The fans always went crazy when he did the kip-up and still do to this day.Fantastic review of the DVD some of the ratings you gave may obviously be different from others like myself, but it was a great read Nigel.HBK was/is a great wrestler and entertainer and this DVD shows him at his very best. I would like to have seen more Rockers, Boy Toy era matches on it and perhaps a couple of Heartbreak Hotel segments, but I understand only so much would fit on the DVD.Hey maybe there will be an HBK:From The Vault 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wagon Man Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 A few points related to the entire thread...*Why is Vince McMahon blamed for the death of Owen Hart? When HBK did the same stunt at WMXII nobody had a go at him for risking his safety did they?*To whomever, you accuse Michaels of not selling enough, and so when he does sell a great deal (against The Undertaker in the first ever Cell match), he not only brought some life back to the Taker, but made the cell what it was. And how did he not sell at SS2002?! Last time I watched it he was stretchered out and gone for a few months.*HBK and Bret were well within their rights not to want to lose in the 60 minutes. To be honest, The Rock hardly looked much of a force when he was defeated by Triple H six times in an hour. That basically says Triple H can beat him in ten minutes, consistently.*Why won't you forget about Montreal? It's not like you can change it, so if you don't like it, surely remembering it so intently will only piss you off? Bret just got in the ring and did his stuff, no silly preening, posing and dancing from my man...and no entertainment. His character was about as boring as his matches. (reply with witty comment here) Same old routine, same old predictable Bret. Did he even have a personality? *If Michaels' matches against Ramon, Taker and HHH are all over-rated, why did they receive match of the year awards? *Why is it essential for each guy to sell exactly the same way? I know it's not real, but so long as my intelligence isn't insulted (ie. Hulking up), i'm all for entertaining comebacks, even if it's not realistic. If I wanted realism, I'd watch amateur wrestling, boxing, or a fight in the street.*Michaels/Nash is probably on par with Bret/Nash. To suggest anything else in the extreme is pure nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DebbieHardy Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Wagon Man you made a lot of good points there! *claps* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BionicRedneck Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) And how did he not sell at SS2002?! Last time I watched it he was stretchered out and gone for a few months.Oh, so he sold afterwards? Well, that's OK then. It doesn't matter that he got his back (You know, the back that's supposed to be broken!) worked over big style for the majority of the match (which was the main point of the match) and he no-sold it by "kipping-up", running around, jumping of ladders etc. pretty much rendering the whole thing pointless, but it's fine because he sold a sledghammer shot after the match. Bret just got in the ring and did his stuff, no silly preening, posing and dancing from my man...and no entertainment. Unless you like good wrestling.His character was about as boring as his matches. (reply with witty comment here) Same old routine, same old predictable Bret. Did he even have a personality?Obviously. Suggesting otherwise is retarded. Bret's matches were boring? What were Shawn's then? Bret's were predictable? Then what were Shawn's?If Michaels' matches against Ramon, Taker and HHH are all over-rated, why did they receive match of the year awards?Ha! From who? Marks? Also, remember what is popular isn't always good. (remember Hanson?) Various people give various awards to various crappy matches. Mutoh-Kawada was Japanese MOTY in 02 apparently even though that was a pile of bilge, too. Remember when Austin-HHH was given the 2001 MOTY by WWF fans? Oh and HBK vs. Ramon (94/95), Taker (97) and HHH (last year) are nowhere near the MOTY from those years. The ladder match in 94 isn't even close. HITC 1 isn't even the best WWF Match from that year (Austin-Hart, WrestleMania 13 clearly smoked it) let alone the rest of the world.*Why is it essential for each guy to sell exactly the same way?Nobody said that.I know it's not real, but so long as my intelligence isn't insulted (ie. Hulking up), i'm all for entertaining comebacks, even if it's not realistic.Shawn's kip-up was sometimes as intelligence insulting as Hogan's "Hulk Up". Edited September 15, 2003 by BionicRedneck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terje Rindal Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 Bret just got in the ring and did his stuff, no silly preening, posing and dancing from my man...and no entertainment. His character was about as boring as his matches. (reply with witty comment here) Same old routine, same old predictable Bret. Did he even have a personality? That is sooooo disrespectful to Bret. I wrote a piece on Bret back in January; I might as well post it again, as I don't want to write all my arguments again.----------------------------------------------The thread about Bret Hart from a few weeks back got me thinking. Quote Fadda: "You could really believe in what Bret was doing, and you believed that HE believed in what he was doing. There was something very genuine about him, and in the way that he wrestled. And he made victory seem so important, just a great, great wrestler..........Angle might be 'slick', he might have 'fun' TV matches, but as a wrestler, has he EVER affected me on any real level? No way. In that regard, he's a very 'shallow' wrestler, none of that 'intelligence' or master storytelling that Bret had. Angle's matches in that sense are so basic, look at the matches he has with BENOIT, which highlight the absense of real meaning to his work. Bret was a WORKER."Very well said. With Angle, when he gets out there, you know you will have a great match, lot's of good moves and counters, crowd heat, and overall fun. Has Angle ever made it seem so damn important to WIN the match, like Bret did though ? The answer is no. Bret was different. As Fadda said, the way he made victory seem like the most important thing in the world was second to none. That art of wrestling is lost today, possibly forever. It's all about the show now, even in Japan. It was about the show when Bret was around too, but he had the unique ability to make you forget that. This was that little something Bret had over Shawn Michaels too. Michales had awesome matches when he was in the mood, probably better than anyone in the world at the time. Still, while his selling ability is legendary; he could never make a match seem more important than Bret could. Shawn Michaels was an over-the-top superstar. Bret was human. As Fadda said, "that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted September 15, 2003 Paid Members Share Posted September 15, 2003 *Why is Vince McMahon blamed for the death of Owen Hart? When HBK did the same stunt at WMXII nobody had a go at him for risking his safety did they?That's because Michaels used a proper stuntman's harness and not one designed for the sail of a yacht. The point of the Owen stunt was that he would be able to 'accidentally' release himself completely a few feet off the ground with a comical crash landing. I don't think Vince had as much to do with it as claimed, but several companies refused to supply a harness that would allow a single release cord (with no backup) designed to come apart easily. Somebody knowingly let Owen Hart step off that platform with a very serious likelihood that the harness would fail.This was not a 'freak accident' by any means. Frankly several people should consider themselves lucky to have escaped a manslaughter charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheFranchiseera2003 Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 Liked The Review Been Waiting for some one to do a in depth review on the HBK DVD seen as the majority of people have loved it i will be going out this weekend and gettin it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wagon Man Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 (edited) Oh, so he sold afterwards? Well, that's OK then. It doesn't matter that he got his back (You know, the back that's supposed to be broken!) worked over big style for the majority of the match (which was the main point of the match) and he no-sold it by "kipping-up", running around, jumping of ladders etc. pretty much rendering the whole thing pointless, but it's fine because he sold a sledghammer shot after the match.It's called an entertaining comeback. You didn't see many of the fans in attendace being offended because of his "no-selling", and in fact, nobody at the time even mentioned it. Also, it showed that even with a broken back he can still go like he used to, and proved to the modern-day fans exactly why he is a WWE legend. If he were to come back and be destroyed, it would've just looked stupid. And it's hardly like he outclassed Triple H, because the end came with a relatively lucky pinfall.In regards to Bret Hart, i'm not denying that he wasn't a great wrestler. But for me, I didn't find him particularly entertaining outside of the ring, whereas Michaels was a great wrestler, and an entertaining character. I watch wrestling to be entertained, and Michaels' seems to be a better all-rounder for such a purpose.Ha! From who? Marks? Also, remember what is popular isn't always good. (remember Hanson?) Various people give various awards to various crappy matches. Mutoh-Kawada was Japanese MOTY in 02 apparently even though that was a pile of bilge, too. Remember when Austin-HHH was given the 2001 MOTY by WWF fans?I believe PS magazine readers decided that the matches I mentioned were matches of the year. Although you say "what is popular isn't always good", the more people it appeals to, the higher the success. The majority of wrestlers will go out to the ring and have a match in order to please and entertain as many people as possible, and so even if a few fans don't like it, as long as it appeals to the majority of fans then they've done their job. Incidentally, Austin/HHH was an excellent match, as i'm sure many people would agree. Whilst it may not be your match of the year, it shows that the majority of fans feel it is. And as for your comment about "marks" voting, they're opinions are as valid as yours. Just because you're potentially (and very questionably) a more intelligent fan, they still have the same capacity to be entertained as yourself.Shawn's kip-up was sometimes as intelligence insulting as Hogan's "Hulk Up".I think that's a ridiculous comment. Hogan would get-up straight after an opponent's finisher, on a consistent basis. Michaels, although able to recover (as many wrestlers are, what with the matches being staged), didn't make a mockery of the opponents. Edited September 15, 2003 by The Wagon Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts