HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 WWE Wrestlemania thread

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Sun Mar 24, 2013 4:41 am

So, Wrestlemania around the corner....

What do you think?

Has the WWE got the card right? If not what should they have booked?

Who do you think wins, and what feuds do you think they are looking towards in the Summer?

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:34 pm

Personally, I think the card is just about right.

I dont' think Taker will lose the streak, but it won't hurt Punk too much to job to him after the monster year he had last year.

HHH needs to lose to Brock. Now that Lesnar has signed for another year, they should have him beat HHH and then feud with Cena for the title. I could actually even see Rock winning at Mania, Brock taking the belt at Extreme Rules, and then Cena chasing Brock to Summerslam before he's finally champion again.

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:35 pm

Then again, I can equally see Cena getting his WM win back.

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:16 pm

The whole card looks very solid.

I'd like to see Brock beat HHH. As much as I like HHH, him retiring would wouldn't hurt the company. Brock winning would be great, as he could then do as you said and challenge Rock or Cena for the WWE championship.

Ryback and Mark Henry is going to be a great match between two powerhouses. I like Ryback's intensity, and Mark Henry is just a beast. Hopefully it doesn't turn out like Goldberg vs Brock Lesnar did at Wrestlemania 20. That was a match between two powerhouses which looked promising, but ended up be a massive disappointment.

Orton, Sheamus, and a yet to be announced partner against The Shield. It'll be a good match, and it seems very likely that Big Show will be the third member of the team.

I like Team Hell No, and hope they successfully defend against Ziggler and Big E. I don't really like the look of Big E, so I want him to have very little ring time. Ziggler is a class act, and the more in-ring time he gets the better as far as I'm concerned.

I'm really liking Del Rio right now, and want his title reign to continue past Wrestlemania. As much as I like Jack Swagger, I'm getting a bit bored with Zeb Colter. I guess that's the point though, to bore people and irritate them.

I can't see Taker losing the streak against CM Punk, but it's still going to be a really good match.

The main event, The Rock against John Cena. We saw it last year, but this year I have a feeling the outcome will be different. I reckon Cena is going to win, to the dismay of the majority of WWE fans.

Not sure if I've missed any matches out.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:45 am

Ryback and Henry will hopefully have a slugfest where they just knock the crap out of each other. I'm a fan of Mark Henry when he's in mauler mode, and I really want to see him beat Ryback into a grease spot at Mania.

Lesnar/Goldberg at Mania. Now that was a fun match... well, the match wasn't fun, but being in the audience shouting at them was.

Shield .v. Orton/Sheamus/Show should be good. Shield have been very impressive in their PPV matches thus far, and this feud seems to have finally woken Orton up and made him want to be there. So should be a good match.

I think Hell No are superb together, but its maybe run its course now, I don't know. I actually think Ziggles is on for bigger things coming out of Mania.

Linked to the above, I see Ziggles cashing in and becoming WHC following the Del Rio/Swagger match. I prefer this booking of Swags as a mean guy who hurts people, and Dutch Mantel is a good voice for him, as Swagger doesn't have the skills to cut promos and make people care. Del Rio is excellent at the moment - that guy has worked hard to improve.

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:33 pm

So, we've now got Wade Barrett against The Miz, and Chris Jericho against Fandango.

Barrett vs The Miz should be pretty good, and I'd like to see Miz win. I like Barrett, but he's held the title long enough and it's about time we had a new champ.

Jericho vs Fandango, I don't know... Will be interesting to see what Fandango can do in the ring. I don't want to see Fandango win, but I think he might. Hope they don't make Jericho look too weak, just to get Fandango over.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Wed Apr 03, 2013 11:48 am

I think Barrett and Miz will have a good match, but Miz does nothing for me as a face. He simply isn't likeable. That said, I'll be surprised if he doesn't take the title.

Barrett ought to be kept as a hard bastard and not weakened doung stupid "I'm in a movie with Colin Farrell" cobblers. Would still love to see him leading an aggressive UK stable with Regal as manager/adviser.

Fandango I'm utterly unconvinced by, as as most of the audience it seems. He's done nothing to deserve a Mania berth. I'm sure he will beat Jericho, but it's a waste ova match IMO

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
NightStarX
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1979
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Thu Apr 04, 2013 12:40 am

Honestly, from all accounts, Johnny Curtis a.k.a Fandango is being talked up a lot as being actually quite a good wrestler, who WOULD have a very promising future in the WWE if it weren't for... things.


The problem, of course, is soley... THE GIMMICK.

I really believe this theory out there that new talent in WWE are purposefully given the absolutely worst gimmicks possible and told to make it work as their initiation to WWE. And with Fandango, this really brings this point up to me in the most relevant way possible, so I'll share what I've thought for the longest time now.

I think I see what WWE's logic is for constantly doing this, but I feel it's misguided for several reasons:

Their reasoning to giving new talent the worst fucking gimmicks they can think of, I think, is two major things. WWE seems to believe after all the years of doing things the way they do them, that some of their most popular top talent has always come from a Rags to Riches story.

WWE loves to revel in that zero to hero story, whether it being them being quite proud of the fact that Steve Austin was atrocious as The Ringmaster, The Rock floundered and died a million deaths as Rocky Miavia, Kane had to go through Dr. Issac Yankum, and The Christmas Creature, ect, ect.

And not just gimmicks, they also love to boast endlessly about how the top stars they made, all came from personal backgrounds where they always "beat the odds" and did all that they could for the business and suffered on through hard times. Wrestlers in the old days, had to sleep in cars, and make a living off of $20 a month. It's no longer like this, anymore.

I believe that WWE really has come to feel that the best idea today, to MAKE their talent, or FORCE their newcomers to suffer for their art, is to instantly toss them a clown nose, big floppy shoes, a pair of pants 8 sizes too big, and a "KICK ME" sign, and throw them out onto a stage of leering, judgmental spectators, and sit back and watch with focused eyes, what they do, and how they handle stupid gimmicks and the inevitable negative response.

WWE creates some of the stupidest names, the dumbest personas, and the unfunniest of jokes, and then fill these people up with stories of how they're gonna do great and make it big one day, and "don't screw this up, kid, get out there."

I get the idea. I do. In theory, it's what WWE thinks really builds character or makes a future hall of famer pay for their art. And they've seen it happen so many times through NATURAL means, how a great performer turns a stupid gimmick or hard luck into a huge success, they think they have to create these means and this hard luck ARTIFICIALLY, this way, with everyone.

That only by heaping this adversity and doomed-to-fail ideas on a lot of these guys, it's the ONLY path to success, and the ONLY way that is ever going to prove that they have what it takes to succeed.

That's the first problem, I think this creates. WWE has come to rely on this method so many times, that they're convinced it's the only way to break in the guys that they want to test, and fail to see that a lot of up-and coming wrestler's potential can come from a plethora of ways, not just the "kick me sign" method.

The boot camp method and the "your indie success doesn't mean shit here, son, You're nothing and a nobody and you suck. Now get out there and humiliate yourself with a stupid gimmick until you prove you deserve to be here!" mentality is actually not going to work for everyone, but whenever it doesn't work (And a lot of the time, it doesn't work the way WWE feels it should of often enough) they always just shove 100% of the blame on the wrestler for "failing to turn crap into gold." And just sends them on their way with a future endeavored notice.

And the second, (and quickly becoming more important) problem is that while WWE may think that this method is going to work 100% of the time or else "he just didn't have it in him", it obviously means that of course, from the perspective of the casual, everyday WWE fan being used as the guinea pig for these "character building exercises", it's going to come off as incredibly annoying, stupid, and un-entertaining to us. Probably because gimmicks like fandango are incredibly annoying, stupid and un-entertaining.

I think WWE got so wrapped up in putting Johnny Curtis to the test, they forgot to actually make him a decent character FOR THE FANS TO WATCH.

He's everything that annoys and tries the patience of a crowd that, of course, is going to be absolutely dead and awkward to him.

Some really out-of-place music from out of nowhere that is of a style that most wrestling fans do not find interesting, plays. An exchange between Fandango and a Ring Announcer plays out, in an incredibly drawn out fashion with a character who speaks with the speed of a sloth says that same thing about 3 times. It's long, drawn out, awkward, and worst of all, entirely unfunny.

But the kicker is when Fandango leaves and disappoints everyone by not wrestling, and making everyone feel as if they just wasted their goddamn time for nothing.

That's pushing it too far. It's breaking the limit of what people are going to put up with, and it's not a heat-grabbing stunt or anything that would just make a fan boo, it's something that seems specifically set-up to draw dead, awkward silence.

And then when the revelation is revealed that the entire thing amounted to absolutely nothing, it's nothing that is going to cause a fan to get irate... it's just going to make them look around at the fan next to them and think "What the fuck was that about?"

So, of course, this begins the cycle of Fandango. Do this multiple times. The exact same thing every time. And build Fandango up as effectively as someone who isn't worth your time, is here to waste your time, isn't funny, is slower than molasses, and awkward as a fart in a church.

And I can understand that boot camp show-biz method of dressing someone up like a stupid clown, and telling them to juggle water balloons to a crowd that came to hear an opera, as a test of how dedicated they are, that WWE seems stuck on doing.

But this is like forcing an audience to stare at a bowl of wax fruit that does nothing for 8 hours.

And the thing of it is, it's a knock-off of Damien Sandow, not too much longer. With Sandow, he instantly had a character. Not an archetype. A character. Sandow's persona was a full-of-himself, stuck up, pseudo-intellectual snob, and was played as supposedly really being who this guy is, so we could BOO at him. Because we knew to do that.

Fandango is..... well, he's not a character. He's an archetype. A stereotype. A holdover from the days in which a wrestler's persona was nothing more than a job or an outfit. Ballroom dancer. That's really it. I don't think we've ever gotten anything more explained about him than "Ballroom dancer". Because, he has the music, and the clothes. Oh, he's a ballroom dancer. Damien Sandow wasn't a COSTUME. He was the personification of a lot of annoying people we know and we can relate to someone like him, whether we are a Sandow or we KNOW a Sandow.

But Fandango's attitude is explained to us entirely in two words. "Ballroom Dancer". Kinda random. And so, meh.

It's more than just a test, it's a disaster on all fronts. It does nothing to show Curtis's talents as a wrestler, or even hint at it. Since his character refuses to wrestle. But he's slow, he's purposefully annoying, he's awkward, and it all amounts to telling the audience "Fandango does nothing!! Get it?? Because we wasted 10 minutes of your time!! GET IT??? THAT'S SO FUNNY!!"

You know... You can be the best wrestler in the world. And you can possibly wrestle in clown makeup, being told to make an ass out of yourself, and learn the ropes while doing so.

But when you're brought out to do nothing but force an audience, a MUCH larger and more mainstream audience to appease than the days in which wrestling was more of a niche interest, to endure a repeated joke that isn't funny in which the punchline is "we wasted your time!" about 4 times....

...that guy is not going to be looked at worthy of a WM match, he's not going to make himself look good to the audience, he's not going to make himself look good to WWE, he's not going to look good in his own eyes as "doing the best he can with what he had to work with", and it's just going to bomb.

If you want to make him prove himself, fine. But this is essentially luring a new talent out onto the stage with a kick me sign... and then pull the plunger on a block of TNT under the stage, killing him before he even gets to do his dance.

Am I to think that WWE REALLY must have high hopes for him, if they're willing to bury him this far underground with the worst, most awkward, unfunny, time sucking gimmick ever made? Or is this just an assassination?

And the worst part of it is.... Johnny Curtis can wrestle. And from the sound of it, he can perform when he's given something good. Have we seen him do what he's capable of? No. Has he pissed us off with his massive amounts of heel heat? No, he just comes across as lost and awkward.

This Fandango thing just isn't any good for anyone, and it's a perfect time for WWE to re-think the way they mean to be instilling a love and dedication for a business that sabotages it's new talent like this before they can ever show something worth showing, into them to do so. But now shoving him onto Wrestlemania?

Too much, way too fast. No one is buying that he's going to deserve to be there, and certainly no one is buying that this is where he's suddenly going to break out and finally show us what he can do, because it's Wrestlemania. It's going to be too little, too EARLY and YET also too late, no matter what because this event is going to overshadow him even if he does something as shocking as shoot the pope, live.

Too little because, as I said, a WM wrestling debut is never going to do anyone any favors due to everything else on the card overshadowing him, too EARLY becuase we've not seen a damn thing that makes us care to see what he can do at WM, and too LATE, because his gimmick has already been torched and burned to a crisp before they ever allowed it to get out of the gate.

Find some new methods of pushing talent or lighting a fire in them, WWE. Because this forced way of trying to present the condensed version of the hardships a Superstar has to go through to make it, isn't genuine anymore, it isn't working with most new talent anymore, and it isn't even trying to play to their strength, or present this guy to an audience in a way that makes us want to see more.

Maybe instead of shitting on every indie guy for being an indie guy, maybe it's time to start looking at indie guys, what they did there, and what they could do in WWE, and ask them to do a bigger and better version of it.


Nawwwww... that's stupid talk. Hey. Let's just bring in El Generico, take his mask off, and call him Sammy Sane.

Brilliant. Can you hear it? The sound of one hand clapping? Yeah.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://cxauniverse.4umer.com
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Thu Apr 04, 2013 4:08 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hvx0OFtkU5s Not the best sound quality, but you can just about hear what's being said.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:07 am

Unfortunately, I'm in the office and don't have my headphone with me, so I can't watch the video.

But to pick up on Mike's post, its an interesting concept - the idea that the WWE deliberately feeds new wrestlers ridiculous gimmicks and names as a way of testing them and seeing what they do with it. There is definitely something in that, and I think people have too readily put past mistakes down to purely stupid writing and idiocy on the part of the creative team.

To some small extent, I can see a grain of logic in the WWE's thinking - lets see how committed this guy is; how ready he is to work with what we give him; and whether he really has the ability to turn a bad gimmick good. After all, as we have said before, the most successful gimmick wrestler of all time - the Undertaker - is (when you stop and think about it) based off a pretty laughable and awful gimmick (undead zombie mortuary assistant). Yet because Callaway is a great performer and because he's had the foresight to work with the gimmick and modify it over time, its seen as brilliant. I can see how they might think the process will weed out a certain number of people who simply don't have that natural ability.

But on the other hand, I completely agree with Mike that its short-sighted and detrimental in terms of delivering the weekly TV product to its audience, and ultimately, for every Undertaker there are a dozen failed gimmicks and ludicrous angles that the audience never buys into for a second, and parading them on weekly TV in an effort to shove them down our throats doesn't do them any favours.

I get - and am the first to trumpet the idea - that you cant have a wrestling company just filled with big angry shouty blokes in basic wrestling kit. You need to develop characters and you need to have personalities. But the best wrestling "characters" (taker aside) are the ones that developed organically as a result of some aspect of the person's natural talents or personalities. CM Punk works best as the arrogant asshole heel because the real life guy is an arrogant asshole heel; Dwayne didn't work as Rocky Miavia but worked as the wiseass Rock because Dwayne is a wiseass in real life; Austin worked as the pissed off redneck bruiser because he's a redneck pissed off bruiser, and so it goes on. Regal is a natural comedian who can also fight, John Cena's entire push came out of his being allowed to do in front of the camera something he use to do behind it for fun, etc etc.

The problem the WWE really has now is the lack of the territories system. I've said this before but in the old days guys would have drifted around the territories, worked with different promotions and promoters, and would have had time to find and develop either their own gimmicks, or else the ability to work with and develop one they were given. WWE are trying to expect that of guys that are too green, and are being so unsubtle in the way they do it, that they aren't giving them a really fair chance.

This is of course compounded, as Mike says, by their attitude to the indies. El Generico is a great example (though maybe his gimmick would have been a stretch for WWE) but better ones are Punk and Danielson. Both guys were big names on the indies, and both had good followings. A sensible WWE would have had them working dark matches for a couple of months to adjust to WWE style, and then brought them in with fanfare as real contenders - still selling WWE as a steop up the big leagues, but respecting their past accomplishments. Instead...well, we know what happened.

We can only hope that as time goes on, and perhaps as HHH takes over fully, we see a return to more old school ways of doing things.

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:33 am

So, Wrestlemania's all over for another year, and I enjoyed it. Here's what I thought of each match. Obviously, this will contain spoilers.

First up was the pre-show match between Wade Barrett and The Miz. It was a solid match to get things rolling. I think Barrett and Miz work well off one another, and it showed. The ending was a bit rushed, but other than that it was good. Definitely got the crowd pumped for the night ahead. Now Miz is IC champ, I'd like to see a heel turn. Like Dave said earlier in the thread, he's best as a cocky heel.

The opening match of the main show was Orton/Sheamus/Show against The Shield. It was a great match to open the show. I really like the way The Shield work together, with their hectic style. They held their own against an all star team, albeit a team with its problems. Toward the end of the match, the fact Big Show was the outsider of the team was played up well, but once again I think the ending was a bit rushed. I'm happy with the winners, but the ending of the match was very predictable.

Second match of the main show was Ryback against Mark Henry. I was looking forward to this match, as these two wrestlers are immensely powerful. I didn't expect it to be so one sided for the most part, but it was still an alright match. For the third time though, I think the ending seemed a bit rushed. The after-match beat down Henry got was great to watch though, and Ryback Shellshocking him was awesome.

Team Hell No vs Ziggler and Big E was the next match. It was another good solid match, and Big E came across well in his in-ring debut. I was expecting Ziggler and Big E to win it, but they didn't. Shame really, as Ziggler deserves a championship reign. Maybe WWE doesn't think Big E is ready for it yet.

Now we come to a match I really wasn't sure about, Fandango against Jericho. It was in fact a very good match, and Fandango showed some real skill. Do I think he should have beaten someone of Jericho's caliber in his debut match? No. Do I think his debut match should have been at Wrestlemania, higher up the card than a Tag Team championship match and an IC championship match? No again. Regardless of all this, Fandango's in-ring debut went well in my opinion. It just should have been against a lesser opponent, on Smackdown or RAW. That's not to say Jericho was made to look weak. On the contrary. He looked as strong as ever, even though he lost. The Code Breaker at the very start of the match was pretty good, and he had his chances to win it. It'll be interesting to see if the crowd react any better to Fandango, now he's shown he can wrestle a lot better than he can dance.

We come to the bigger matches now, and the first of those was the World Heavyweight championship match between champion Del Rio and Jack Swagger. It was a really good back and forth match, probably the best match of the night so far. Lots of countering of potential submissions and big moves, some good outside involvement, and finally there was an ending which didn't seem rushed. I'm happy with the result of this match, as Del Rio has done a brilliant job since becoming the champion.

I'll continue this later, as I have to go out for a bit. Still got three matches to talk about, including THAT main event.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
NightStarX
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1979
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:54 am

Really?? Chris Jericho and Fandango was a good match??

Because I actually started seeing comments, a youtube upload of a podcast (I heard some of it by accident while looking for other things) and various people on Facebook firing off how it was easily the worst match of the night, the worst Wrestlemania match ever since Brock Lesnar and Goldberg, and about how it'll go down as a goldmine for the next Botchamania and one commenter called it "A train wreck for the ages."

Actually, from what i've been seeing just on curious glances around the internet, i've been hearing this ripped apart by nearly everyone, called one of the worst Wrestlemania's of all time, generally, with only one good match to it's credit, that being the Taker and Punk match.

Again, I only have the general internet response to go by, since I wasn't actually very interested in Wrestlemania this year to begin with, and from what I read about the results and the largely negative reception of it, I kinda felt satisfied I didn't see it. The only thing I can say for myself was that I just noticed that someone on my friends list was tearing the show a new asshole, and I kinda chucked by his observations as I went about working on Photoshop.

But from what it seems that I saw about 6-7 different sites say afterwards about the whole affair, was that the main event was plodding and abysmal, Fandango and Jericho absolutely stunk up the place, and the rest was uninteresting generic filler that felt like sub-par Raw matches, and too much time was pushed aside for a hideous musical performance and awkward segments.

To be quite honest, your review is literally the first positive thing i've read or heard anyone say about the PPV, yet. ehe.

I just kinda assumed the show was a terrible flop, seeing as how heavily criticized the thing was and how many jokes were being made during the whole thing. One radio show I listened to the start of their show, actually went on to actually deem it the worst Wrestlemania they remember seeing in 10 years. Even I thought to myself "Ouch." when I heard that.

I basically have no opinion myself, but I kinda chuckled hearing it savaged by so many people within the span of 2 hours.



Back to top Go down
View user profile http://cxauniverse.4umer.com
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:04 am

You know what people on the Internet are like. They're quick to criticise everything, even the good things. There's no pleasing the majority of the people who critique things like wrestling shows. You yourself have posted rants about these people who are never pleased.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
NightStarX
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1979
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:04 am

Anyways, sorry if it seems like I don't really seem to have any personal opinion, myself. *shrug*

Can't critique what I didn't watch. Basically, was just amused seeing it so throughly shat on, coming from several directions while I was basically just throwing together image editing. All I really have to offer is what I noticed other people say.

But maybe they're all wrong or just hating on it to hear themselves talk. It wouldn't be the first time the IWC shit something into the ground more than it needed to be.

And yeah, even I thought the reaction was harsh. I mean, there's been scores of Wrestlemania's. The worst one ever?? I gotta believe that's going a bit too far, just by the law of averages.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://cxauniverse.4umer.com
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:11 am

It wasn't the best Wrestlemania ever, not by a long shot. It was a solid enough show, but it definitely could have been better. As I said in my review of some of the matches, at times it seemed rushed. It was like they were getting the lower and mid-card matches over with quickly, so they could focus on the higher-card matches. They then gave a whole load of time to the main event, which was wasted on taunting and the same few moves repeated over and over again. The main event was a shambles, so I agree with anyone who criticises it. Jericho against Fandango though, wasn't half as bad as people are making it out to be. It wasn't a show stealer, but it was still a good match to watch.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
NightStarX
Admin
avatar

Posts : 1979
Join date : 2010-10-08
Age : 37

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:12 am

hell it wouldn't even be the first time i've done so, either
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://cxauniverse.4umer.com
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 9:42 am

Ok, some opinions on the show.

The first thing to say is that two things became obvious as the show progressed: 1) it was booked in the wrong order and 2) the show had been heavily chopped in some places following the Saturday rehearsal, and some of the guys hadn't been able to convincingly rebook the pace of their matches.

I think the latter is the reason Wheato felt some of the endings were rushed. I think they were because the show was running long. Also wonder if the order was rebooked as well to squeeze the early matches and ensure they got to the man events with time to spare- a decision which backfired in that it burnt the crowd out.

Didn't see Miz v Barrett but not surprised at the result

Opening six man was pretty good. It told a story of the egos not getting on and them not trusting big show, but I think if the match had been longer it could have done that much better. As it was it was a solid opener and I enjoyed it.

Ryback v Henry was fine for what it was. Again it should have gone longer and the finish was a bit out of nowhere but they got the Ryback power moment in so it did its job.

Hell No .v. Zig&Big was pretty decent as well. Loved the start and Dolph teasing Bryan with the kiss, and while it lasted it was perfectly fine. I wasnt expecting Dolph to win as I was backing him for the cash in later, so only expected filler to get him on the card. It was fine in tthat regard. Not spectacular but did the job.

Fandango .v. Jericho was by no means at all the car crash people are saying. I think Fandango should have been booked to have a bit more of the match tbh, as he didn't get to show much. The ending botch was all down to Jericho's screw up, not fandango's fault. It wasn't a great match, but it wasn't Goldberg/Lesnar either.

I liked the World title match. I think those guys work well together and there were good sequences here. Don't mind Alberto retaining but expected Zig to cash in. Solid Mach here well worth the time.

Punk .v. Taker was tremendous. Superb stuff. Punks entrance in old school taker colours, Taker's entrance rising from the ground with the souls grabbing for him, the pacing, the taunts, the kick outs, punk using "old school". I just loved it. It was everything the main event wasn't in the RIGHT way to reverse and kick out of finishers. Brilliant stuff.

HHH and Brock should NEVER have followed it. The crowd were burnt out. It was a good match. Could hav been more bloody and more violent (though can see why it wasn't when Extreme Rules is next month) but it worked and told a good story. Wrong winner though. More to offer with a Brock win.

Rock .v. Cena wasn't bad. I think the reversals ad kick outs here seemed false and overbooked, and in the absence of swerves and shocks the rest of the night it just felt a let down for this to go exactly the way we all predicted. Clearly the burnt out crowd didn't help. But at the same time it was a perfectly passable match. I certainly wouldn't crap on it.



_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
lonewolfshanehunt

avatar

Posts : 1225
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:25 am

The Undertaker against CM Punk was even better than Del Rio against Swagger. It was easily the match of the night. Taker and Punk worked really well against one another, and the whole match was really good. I'm happy that Taker kept the streak alive, and that Punk really pushed him.

Triple H and Lesnar beat the fuck out of one another. I would have liked to see a bit more violence, and maybe even some blood being shed. It didn't happen, although Lesnar did get bruised up a bit. A good match, where Lesnar looked like a beast. I wanted Lesnar to win, but I guess Triple H wasn't ready to retire just yet. They shouldn't have put that stipulation in the match, and let Lesnar win it. Then Lesnar could have challenged the winner of Cena vs The Rock, for the WWE championship at Extreme Rules.

I'm not going to say too much about Cena vs The Rock. I really didn't enjoy the match. It was far too slow paced, and every movement seemed very forced. I didn't want to see Cena win either, as much as I expected it. For a main event match at Wrestlemania, it was a massive anti-climax.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Mjolnir

avatar

Posts : 2467
Join date : 2010-10-09
Location : London, England

PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:00 am

That's three Wrestlemanias in a row where Undertaker has had the only real "main event worthy" match on the card. And probably five in a row where he's been in the best match of the night.

Its no wonder Vince lets him have the rest of the year off, and pays him seven figures for one month's work a year.

_________________
I'm not climbing to the top of the mountain. I am the damn mountain!
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://facebook.com/david.shand
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: WWE Wrestlemania thread   

Back to top Go down
 
WWE Wrestlemania thread
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» RP Dice Roll Thread
» NightMares (Official Thread)
» Gun/Military Thread
» Super Action Bio Thread Go!
» Shattered Realms Registration Thread

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
CXA Universe :: Topics, Discussion, and Talk :: General Conversation-
Jump to: