The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The glory days of the WWF are long gone in my opinion. Gone are the days of Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, The Nasty Boys and many more mythical monsters. Now are the days of testosterone-loaded lumps of muscle, walking down a ring and attempting to bludgeon each other to death, just for a simple cheap pop. Nowadays, the vast majority of WWF fans are teenagers or young adults and all they seem to care about is watching 2 wrestlers beat the hell out of each other, before a crowd of 15,000+. The ěcasualî fans, as I like to call them, know nothing about the art, the drama or the emotion of WWF and just seem to like it for itís violent content.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily clad females. Now, that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it becomes sick, repetitive and boring. Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
A lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî, which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with such grace and such skill.
There WAS a time before this all started.
In the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF. Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh, did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF fans among us.
Shaneo.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily clad females. Now, that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it becomes sick, repetitive and boring. Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
A lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî, which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with such grace and such skill.
There WAS a time before this all started.
In the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF. Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh, did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF fans among us.
Shaneo.
Page:
Thanks for all the replies people.
Mouldy Cheese wrote:
> The glory days of the WWF are long gone in my opinion.
Gone are the days of
> Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, The Nasty Boys and many more mythical monsters.
>
You mean the days when faces won everything? When Hogan held the
> championship for three years? When matches were even more predictable?
Now
> are the days of testosterone-loaded lumps of muscle, walking down a ring and
> attempting to bludgeon each other to death, just for a simple cheap pop.
>
er...I think you mean something other than testosterone. But I reckon todays
> wrestlers are much, much better than yesterdays. Pre 96, the WWF was dominated
> by big men - Andre, Hogan, Yokozuma etc. This was before ECWs
> influence.
Nowadays, the vast majority of WWF fans are teenagers or young
> adults and all they seem to care about is watching 2 wrestlers beat the hell out
> of each other, before a crowd of 15,000+. The ěcasualî fans, as I like to call
> them, know nothing about the art, the drama or the emotion of WWF and just seem
> to like it for itís violent content.
If that was true, ECW would have been
> much more populer.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily
> clad females.
Again, ECW. ECW had porn stars in it, for gods sake.
Now,
> that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch
> someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it
> becomes sick, repetitive and boring.
Agreed. It takes no talent to hit
> someone with a chair.
Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever
> lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
Again, agreed.
A
> lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî,
> which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless
> violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris
> Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with
> such grace and such skill.
Weapons are not always pointless violence.
> Weapons can be used creatively... look at RVD and Tommy Dreamer. If you consider
> the ladder a weapon, check out the Jericho/Benoit ladder match at this years
> rumble. There, the ladder was used in some very cool ways.
There WAS a time
> before this all started.
There was. It was before ECW was recognised.
In
> the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they
> claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical
> change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF.
> Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and
> Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the
> newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in
> 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where
> many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about
> wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh,
> did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
This
> new period is usually referered to as 'The attitude era'. And if you don't like
> it, blame ECW.
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF
> fans among us.
Shaneo.
In my opinion the WWF won the war of the federations because it chose to take the 'middle-ground' a path somewhere inbetween what WCW were doing witheir very 'traditiona;' wrestling orientated background and ECW's extreme in ever aspect approach. However what many people forget is, that without the influence the ECW brought to the WWF, it would probably have ceased to exist somewhere around 1995, when viewing and attendance figures as well as merchandise sales plumeted through the floor.
ECW saved the WWF's butt showing them a way forward.Which is why the WWF repaid the likes of Paul Heyman with senior roles within the company.
> The glory days of the WWF are long gone in my opinion.
Gone are the days of
> Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, The Nasty Boys and many more mythical monsters.
>
You mean the days when faces won everything? When Hogan held the
> championship for three years? When matches were even more predictable?
Now
> are the days of testosterone-loaded lumps of muscle, walking down a ring and
> attempting to bludgeon each other to death, just for a simple cheap pop.
>
er...I think you mean something other than testosterone. But I reckon todays
> wrestlers are much, much better than yesterdays. Pre 96, the WWF was dominated
> by big men - Andre, Hogan, Yokozuma etc. This was before ECWs
> influence.
Nowadays, the vast majority of WWF fans are teenagers or young
> adults and all they seem to care about is watching 2 wrestlers beat the hell out
> of each other, before a crowd of 15,000+. The ěcasualî fans, as I like to call
> them, know nothing about the art, the drama or the emotion of WWF and just seem
> to like it for itís violent content.
If that was true, ECW would have been
> much more populer.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily
> clad females.
Again, ECW. ECW had porn stars in it, for gods sake.
Now,
> that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch
> someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it
> becomes sick, repetitive and boring.
Agreed. It takes no talent to hit
> someone with a chair.
Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever
> lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
Again, agreed.
A
> lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî,
> which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless
> violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris
> Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with
> such grace and such skill.
Weapons are not always pointless violence.
> Weapons can be used creatively... look at RVD and Tommy Dreamer. If you consider
> the ladder a weapon, check out the Jericho/Benoit ladder match at this years
> rumble. There, the ladder was used in some very cool ways.
There WAS a time
> before this all started.
There was. It was before ECW was recognised.
In
> the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they
> claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical
> change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF.
> Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and
> Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the
> newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in
> 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where
> many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about
> wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh,
> did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
This
> new period is usually referered to as 'The attitude era'. And if you don't like
> it, blame ECW.
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF
> fans among us.
Shaneo.
In my opinion the WWF won the war of the federations because it chose to take the 'middle-ground' a path somewhere inbetween what WCW were doing witheir very 'traditiona;' wrestling orientated background and ECW's extreme in ever aspect approach. However what many people forget is, that without the influence the ECW brought to the WWF, it would probably have ceased to exist somewhere around 1995, when viewing and attendance figures as well as merchandise sales plumeted through the floor.
ECW saved the WWF's butt showing them a way forward.Which is why the WWF repaid the likes of Paul Heyman with senior roles within the company.
he needs a better gimmick though it used to be dead man walking but now he is the dead man walking
The undertaker is a old skool wrestler, but he could be more charasmatic like The Rock
Ant wrote:
Of course there are some people (ie Undertaker,) who haven't
> progressed enough, and are still rather boring.
Heh...surely the Taker represents old wrestling anyway?
Of course there are some people (ie Undertaker,) who haven't
> progressed enough, and are still rather boring.
Heh...surely the Taker represents old wrestling anyway?
I would say that wrestling nowadays has it's advantages, and it's disadvantages. But that there are more advantages.
Wrestling in the old days were mainly dull. I mean, look at people like RVD and Chris Jericho and Jeff Hardy-so much more excited!
Of course there are some people (ie Undertaker,) who haven't progressed enough, and are still rather boring.
Weapons are good when used well and tastefully, like RVD, Jericho, Benoit and The Hardys, and even the TLC matches.
Scantily clad women however are pointless. Beatiful, athletic women like Molly Holly and even Lita re fine, but people like Stacy and Torrie are mostly a waste of time.
So it goes both ways really, but I believe the actual wrestling is much better than the old days. However, some other aspects are much worse.
Wrestling in the old days were mainly dull. I mean, look at people like RVD and Chris Jericho and Jeff Hardy-so much more excited!
Of course there are some people (ie Undertaker,) who haven't progressed enough, and are still rather boring.
Weapons are good when used well and tastefully, like RVD, Jericho, Benoit and The Hardys, and even the TLC matches.
Scantily clad women however are pointless. Beatiful, athletic women like Molly Holly and even Lita re fine, but people like Stacy and Torrie are mostly a waste of time.
So it goes both ways really, but I believe the actual wrestling is much better than the old days. However, some other aspects are much worse.
The glory days of the WWF are long gone in my opinion.
Gone are the days of Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, The Nasty Boys and many more mythical monsters.
You mean the days when faces won everything? When Hogan held the championship for three years? When matches were even more predictable?
Now are the days of testosterone-loaded lumps of muscle, walking down a ring and attempting to bludgeon each other to death, just for a simple cheap pop.
er...I think you mean something other than testosterone. But I reckon todays wrestlers are much, much better than yesterdays. Pre 96, the WWF was dominated by big men - Andre, Hogan, Yokozuma etc. This was before ECWs influence.
Nowadays, the vast majority of WWF fans are teenagers or young adults and all they seem to care about is watching 2 wrestlers beat the hell out of each other, before a crowd of 15,000+. The ěcasualî fans, as I like to call them, know nothing about the art, the drama or the emotion of WWF and just seem to like it for itís violent content.
If that was true, ECW would have been much more populer.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily clad females.
Again, ECW. ECW had porn stars in it, for gods sake.
Now, that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it becomes sick, repetitive and boring.
Agreed. It takes no talent to hit someone with a chair.
Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
Again, agreed.
A lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî, which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with such grace and such skill.
Weapons are not always pointless violence. Weapons can be used creatively... look at RVD and Tommy Dreamer. If you consider the ladder a weapon, check out the Jericho/Benoit ladder match at this years rumble. There, the ladder was used in some very cool ways.
There WAS a time before this all started.
There was. It was before ECW was recognised.
In the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF. Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh, did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
This new period is usually referered to as 'The attitude era'. And if you don't like it, blame ECW.
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF fans among us.
Shaneo.
Gone are the days of Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, The Nasty Boys and many more mythical monsters.
You mean the days when faces won everything? When Hogan held the championship for three years? When matches were even more predictable?
Now are the days of testosterone-loaded lumps of muscle, walking down a ring and attempting to bludgeon each other to death, just for a simple cheap pop.
er...I think you mean something other than testosterone. But I reckon todays wrestlers are much, much better than yesterdays. Pre 96, the WWF was dominated by big men - Andre, Hogan, Yokozuma etc. This was before ECWs influence.
Nowadays, the vast majority of WWF fans are teenagers or young adults and all they seem to care about is watching 2 wrestlers beat the hell out of each other, before a crowd of 15,000+. The ěcasualî fans, as I like to call them, know nothing about the art, the drama or the emotion of WWF and just seem to like it for itís violent content.
If that was true, ECW would have been much more populer.
Nowadays, people tune in for pure violence and scantily clad females.
Again, ECW. ECW had porn stars in it, for gods sake.
Now, that is all well and good and it is rather entertaining, but I can only watch someone being battered with a weapon for a certain amount of time before it becomes sick, repetitive and boring.
Agreed. It takes no talent to hit someone with a chair.
Now, I am probably the biggest wresting fan that ever lived, but I still do not condole pointless violence.
Again, agreed.
A lot of the people on the FOG forums give WWF the moniker ěPointless Violenceî, which is not true. No, I am not contradicting myself. The weapons ARE pointless violence but the art of wrestling everything but that. For instance, take Chris Benoit, he makes wrestling look like ballet. He pulls off his manoeuvres with such grace and such skill.
Weapons are not always pointless violence. Weapons can be used creatively... look at RVD and Tommy Dreamer. If you consider the ladder a weapon, check out the Jericho/Benoit ladder match at this years rumble. There, the ladder was used in some very cool ways.
There WAS a time before this all started.
There was. It was before ECW was recognised.
In the time from 1985 to 1996, the WWF was ěfamily entertainmentî. In 1996, they claimed that the WWF was now ěThe New Generationî and it went under a radical change. However, this was just stage 1 of the metamorphic process of the WWF. Such comic book characters as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan were gone and Shawn Micheals, Bret Hart, Diesel and more were in, as though they were the newest fad among adolescent 13 year olds. Then, is has the final facelift in 1998, as weapons were added to the WWF mix. 1999 was the year for the WWF, where many fans flocked in. For instance, in 1996, I used to talk to people about wrestling and they used to say ěWhatís WWF?î. Now, those same people say ěOh, did you see Raw the other week?î. Well, thatís a casual fan for you!
This new period is usually referered to as 'The attitude era'. And if you don't like it, blame ECW.
So, thereís the history of WWF for all of those ěcasualî WWF fans among us.
Shaneo.
I wonder when the Rock will stay until.
yeh austin retires at the end of wrestlemania 2002 any way because of his neck
Like Undertaker. He should go soon. He has been in the WWF since 1989 (I think) and is now fat and sloppy in the ring. Give it up Taker. The same goes to Austin.
Page: