SLAM! Wrestling Editorial: WCW shoots are clear misses
By CHRIS GRAMLICH -- For SLAM! Wrestling
In a matter of weeks, WCW has gone from being an exciting program that was
beginning to surpass the WWF in terms of wrestling, interesting plots and
use of their talent, and have instead regressed into a befuddling mess of
misdirection, lost tangents and missed opportunities. (Anyone else think they
missed the boat by not having Muta and Vampiro feud right away?).
Many will
point to the return of Vince Russo as the agitator in the whole equation;
after all, it seems that when WCW was really making strides and gaining
ground it was with Russo on the sidelines. Granted, Russo and Eric Bischoff did a number of excellent things when they first joined forces and unveiled the
"new" WCW. The "New blood" versus "Millionaire's Club" was fresh and interesting and Russo putting the title on Booker T when he returned stands out as one of the smartest moves he's made in his career. But it seems to have been all downhill from there.
Gone are coherent plots and feuds, storylines have
returned to being dropped, picked-up and dropped again, and although Russo
is certainly a genius, he can only hide behind the Standards and Practices
"hamstringing" him excuse for so long. Eventually he has to take some
responsibility for the mess that WCW is in.
All the tools are there for him
to turn WCW around. There are a number of marquee and creative
talents at his disposal, many of whom were used quite effectively
during the various Russo absences and the mysterious disappearance of Eric
Bischoff, rumoured to have brokered some sort of non-wrestling TV deal with
Fox.
Still, WCW's biggest mistake so far, besides allowing Mark Madden to
get near a microphone, has been the "shoot" angle
that has been playing out between Scott Steiner, Kevin Nash, Goldberg and now Russo (well, if Russo he can keep himself from being censored), all in an attempt to renew interest in their product.
It's no small secret that Russo is a big
fan of the "shoot" angle, an angle that takes real life tension, drama and
emotions, and juxtaposes them into the surreal world of wrestling. Sometimes
this works, in the case of Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart, two wrestlers that
legitimately disliked each other but put on stunning matches that were
heightened by the fact that everyone knew they hated each other.
Sometimes
it doesn't, the Hulk Hogan/Russo feud seemed confusing to all but the most
obsessive of internet fans, and this one won't come across any better.
The
mistake isn't in the utilizing of the genuine hostility between Goldberg,
Nash and the missing-in-action Scott Hall -- an angle that is in fact
interesting for a number of reasons, the future of Hall, predominantly -- it
is the fact that in trying to be edgy, in trying to push the envelope, they
have broken one of the fundamental rules of wrestling.
Call it kayfabe. Call it the suspension of disbelief. Call it the "Easter Bunny" or "Santa Claus" rule (and yes, neither are real, but we still believe, don't we?). Call it what you will, but WCW has admitted, on camera no less, during their own programs, repeatedly, that wrestling is fake, that matches are predetermined and that politics decides who wins or loses.
Now, this isn't exactly an
earth-shattering revelation. After all, the average wrestling fan was forced
to draw these conclusions long before puberty, hopefully, but to admit it on
camera, in the middle of a wrestling program, is paramount to wrestling
blasphemy.
Wrestling works and is popular because fans suspend their
disbelief, it is the same reason why people can watch movies -- whether they
suck or not isn't as important as how "real" they were and if they made you
believe. What WCW has done would be the equivalent of an actor, say Russell
Crowe, cutting an interview in the middle of Gladiator, discussing how the
movie is "fake," how he hates his co-stars, feuds with the director and how
he wins his fights because it was written that way in the script. Forget
about flow and continuity, both go right out the window. Doing exactly this
this during a wrestling show, belief is shattered and fans can't help
but feel insulted.
After spending years being ridiculed for liking a "fake"
sport, we now have the sport proclaiming the stigma it spent years fighting
against. If Wrestling isn't a sport due to its booked finishes, it is an
athletic event. It is full-contact, people get hurt and the athletic calibre
of its overall talent is beyond reproach; the stories, the entertainment,
that's what fake, and since the two co-exists as one, it'll always be
perceived as equally fake and equally real.
What WCW did in no way
serves to promote the sport of wrestling, it doesn't hype the Pay-Per-View
(didn't you know, wrestling isn't real, save the Goldberg, Steiner, Nash
match), and it doesn't do the wrestlers any justice. Fans of wrestling know
that it is as much entertainment as it is sport, but we don't need our noses
rubbed in it, and that's exactly what WCW has done, and continues to do.
Reader Feedback
July 27:Undertaker's a mid-carder now
Just wanted to say that while I sadly agreed with a lot of what you said
about the Undertaker and the way his character has been mishandled by
the WWF (especially since late 1998), I really don't think my favourite
wrestler has been pushed to mid-card status. I think (and would
certainly hope) that the WWF realizes that despite the years, the
absence, the injuries, etc., the fans would not accept that. Now if he
would've lost to Angle at "Fully Loaded", however, I would've blown a
gasket. Angle's too new to get that kind of honour. In fact, I wrote
to Bob Ryder to disagree with him, who was decrying the WWF not doing
what he in essence called a "disservice" to Benoit, Jericho, and Angle
for letting them all lose their main-event matches at "Fully Loaded".
While all three of those guys are hot talent, particularly Benoit and
Jericho, I felt none of them would've deserved to win their matches --
ESPECIALLY Angle.
My take is that the WWF allowed the drastic gimmick change to the
"Underbiker", as you so aptly called it, to appeal to the
attention-span-of-a-gnat-gotta-be-hip group of fans who think a
10-second resthold is cause for a "BO-RING!!" chant. According to
'Taker himself on his "Byte This" appearance, he was so glad to hear
what a great reaction he got when he returned at the "Judgement Day" PPV
(I was there) here in Louisville. He seemed to not be "bashing" his old
character, but seemed to sincerely want the change. He seems to want to
keep some semblance of the old UT, but oh, I wished he'd have come back
as the Invincible Phenom. I just wonder how many fans are still out
there who've watched and loved UT from almost the beginning, when he
began that mystique that continued and kept him at the top for so many,
many years? This was the character that Vince McMahon was quoted two
years ago as saying "I'm the most proud". I'd hope that the WWF will go
back and "dance with what brung 'em". I'll be an Undertaker fan no
matter what -- but I want the best for The Phenom -- not the American
Bad Ass. There was only ONE Phenom; we already had plenty of
"bad-asses" (yeah - the "D.O.A."?)
Miss Pamela
pincurl@earthlink.net
In defence of the Undertaker-
1) The Undertaker has been out for months rehabbing multiple injuries.
It is probably better for him to ease back into the action.
2) If you are out of sight, you are out of
mind. The Undertaker admittedly came back before he was 100%.
3) The Undertaker may not have the physique he once had, but no one should
expect him to. He tore
his pectoral muscle while rehabbing, among other things, an abdominal
injury.
4) Wrestlers such as The Rock, HHH and Edge are getting pushed
because in addition to
talent, they have youth. Barring injury, they could have ten or more
years ahead of them. As much as his fans hate to admit it, the same
cannot be said for The
Undertaker.
5) The fans may still want the "old" Undertaker, but does
Mark Calloway still want to be him after ten years?
Donna H.
dmhasegawa@earthlink.net
I want to thank you for your piece on the Undertaker. I've always been
a mark for the Dead Man, and it perplexes me to see how so many Internet
smarts and fans are still waiting for him to break out again as if we'd
gone back to 1995. UT has deteriorated physically beyond the point of
return to his prime, and the days of five star matches are behind him.
That is why he needs the Dead Man gimmick back. The persona gives him
enough mystique, intrigue and entertainment value to compensate for his
depleted in-ring abilities.
However, unlike you, I have no problem with Undertaker dipping into the
mid-card occasionally. As long as he is still primarily a main eventer,
he can help the company, as he has in the past. You said that years
ago, Undertaker would never be putting over mid-carders looking for a
push. That's not true. Goldust, Kama Mustafa, Kamala, and other mid
carders have all gotten the better of the Undertaker at one time or
another, and it
didn't hurt his stock a bit.
The main thing for the WWF is not to keep him elevated, but to keep him
interesting, and that's what's missing with his directionless biker
gimmick.
Josh, Ottawa
WallzofJericho@aol.com
I am very pleased that there is someone out there who feels the way that
I do, and has some power in this business. Great article on The
Undertaker. I have been waiting for that article to come out for awhile
now. But really, what can we do. I find myself watching the WWF's
product and what they are doing with the Undertaker and, frankly, it
makes me sick. Not so much the gimmick, although is has taken a turn
for the worse, but the angles that they have the Undertaker in. I truly
believe that if Vince McMahon was such a genius than he would understand
the problem, but he doesn't.
Just wanted to say that while I sadly agreed with a lot of what you said
about the Undertaker and the way his character has been mishandled by
the WWF (especially since late 1998), I really don't think my favourite
wrestler has been pushed to mid-card status. I think (and would
certainly hope) that the WWF realises that despite the years, the
absence, the injuries, etc., the fans would not accept that. Now if he
would've lost to Angle at "Fully Loaded", however, I would've blown a
gasket. Angle's too new to get that kind of honour. In fact, I wrote
to Bob Ryder to disagree with him, who was decrying the WWF not doing
what he in essence called a "disservice" to Benoit, Jericho, and Angle
for letting them all lose their main-event matches at "Fully Loaded".
While all 3 of those guys are hot talent, particularly Benoit and
Jericho, I felt none of them would've deserved to win their matches -
ESPECIALLY Angle.
My take is that the WWF allowed the drastic gimmick change to the
"Underbiker", as you so aptly called it, to appeal to the
attention-span-of-a-gnat-gotta-be-hip group of fans who think a
10-second resthold is cause for a "BO-RING!!" chant. According to
'Taker himself on his "Byte This" appearance, he was so glad to hear
what a great reaction he got when he returned at the "Judgement Day" PPV
(I was there) here in Louisville. He seemed to not be "bashing" his old
character, but seemed to sincerely want the change. He seems to want to
keep some semblance of the old UT, but oh, I wished he'd have come back
as the Invincible Phenom. I just wonder how many fans are still out
there who've watched and loved UT from almost the beginning, when he
began that mystique that continued and kept him at the top for so many,
many years? This was the character that Vince McMahon was quoted two
years ago as saying "I'm the most proud". I'd hope that the WWF will go
back and "dance with what brung 'em". I'll be an Undertaker fan no
matter what - but I want the best for - The Phenom - not the American
Bad Ass. There was only ONE Phenom; we already had plenty of
"bad-asses" (yeah - the "D.O.A."?)
Miss Pamela
pincurl@earthlink.net
In defence of the Undertaker-
1) The Undertaker has been out for months rehabbing multiple injuries.
It is probably better for him to ease back into the action.
2) If you are out of sight, you are out of
mind. The Undertaker admittedly came back before he was 100%.
3) The Undertaker may not have the physique he once had, but no one should
expect him to. He tore
his pectoral muscle while rehabbing, among other things, an abdominal
injury.
4) Wrestlers such as The Rock, HHH and Edge are getting pushed
because in addition to
talent, they have youth. Barring injury, they could have ten or more
years ahead of them. As much as his fans hate to admit it, the same
cannot be said for The
Undertaker.
5) The fans may still want the "old" Undertaker, but does
Mark Calloway still want to be him after ten years?
Donna H.
dmhasegawa@earthlink.net
I want to thank you for your piece on the Undertaker. I've always been
a mark for the Dead Man, and it perplexes me to see how so many Internet
smarts and fans are still waiting for him to break out again as if we'd
gone back to 1995. UT has deteriorated physically beyond the point of
return to his prime, and the days of five star matches are behind him.
That is why he needs the Dead Man gimmick back. The persona gives him
enough mystique, intrigue and entertainment value to compensate for his
depleted in-ring abilities.
However, unlike you, I have no problem with Undertaker dipping into the
mid-card occasionally. As long as he is still primarily a main eventer,
he can help the company, as he has in the past. You said that years
ago, Undertaker would never be putting over mid-carders looking for a
push. That's not true. Goldust, Kama Mustafa, Kamala, and other mid
carders have all gotten the better of the Undertaker at one time or
another, and it
didn't hurt his stock a bit.
The main thing for the WWF is not to keep him elevated, but to keep him
interesting, and that's what's missing with his directionless biker
gimmick.
Josh, Ottawa
WallzofJericho@aol.com
I am very pleased that there is someone out there who feels the way that
I do, and has some power in this business. Great article on The
Undertaker. I have been waiting for that article to come out for awhile
now. But really, what can we do. I find myself watching the WWF's
product and what they are doing with the Undertaker and, frankly, it
makes me sick. Not so much the gimmick, although is has taken a turn
for the worse, but the angles that they have the Undertaker in. I truly
believe that if Vince McMahon was such a genius than he would understand
the problem, but he doesn't.
I have been a huge fan of wrestling for
about 15 years. The Undertaker is my favourite of all time. Now, the
Undertaker is a forgotten man and I know, I just know, that in the back
of everyone's mind, they are saying, man wouldn't it be great to see UT
return and just kick ass the way he did in the beginning. The only
problem is that most of the fans are too willing jump to newest product
as soon as it is produced. They push aside the fact that there are well
established stars that still have more to give and want to jump on the
new "talent" right away. What will eventually happen is that the new
"talent" will be pushed aside even quicker than the previous, such as
the Undertaker because there are always newer and newer talent coming
along that are just as good as the others. But the key is Vince
McMahon. He doesn't think that just because of his new attitude that
the old Undertaker would get over very well. Are you kidding me!! If
he came out with the black hat and the cloak, are you telling me you
wouldn't have goosebumps. Are you telling me that you wouldn't put
aside the Rock, Benoit, And Jericho for the time being.
The Undertaker
is back. Deep down, we all love the Undertaker of old. Vince even
admits that it his best gimmick that he ever created. Why change it.
If there was only a way to get this message, in general, to him, it
would change the wrestling world for ever. The Undertaker would be over
more than ever before and I think that he would no longer be the
forgotten man. He would be a legend. If I were to change one thing
about today's wrestling scene, it would be just that, and I'm sure many
others just need that thought put in their head to bring a smile to
their face.
Dean Whalen
Airway05@aol.com