The W
June 8, 2012 - crzsucksdicks.jpg
Views: 169950571
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
26.3.23 0651
The W - Pro Wrestling - Shades of Grey?
This thread has 5 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(14092 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Post (7 total)

Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 54 days
Last activity: 54 days
#1 Posted on
A lot of you may remember one Vincent K. McMahon spewing the buzz pharse at the time.

Something along the lines that the WWF is no longer GOOD guy/BAD guy which was *passe*, but it's more like real life where characters are a shade of grey. Let the fans decide who they are going to cheer for.

Now that's not an exact quote, I'm sure it's out there, maybe in the CRZ archive, I'm just not sure where. It does bring up an interesting point though. Where has that shade of grey gone?

It was surely an ECW style of attitude. Throw two guys out there and let the fans decide who to root for. Gone were the prayers and the vitamins. Gone were the evil forieners. There were still guys that resembled good and guys that resembled bad, but there were a hell of a lot more guys toeing the line. It made for good t.v..

The WWE seems to have fallen back into Good Guy vs Bad Guy. We don't get to pick between Taker and HHH. We are suppossed to cheer the Game and boo Taker. That's the way it is. Why has the WWE gone to something that only 2-3 years ago was *passe*? Wouldn't you like to pick who you cheer for? Wouldn't mixed crowd reactions add needed HEAT to matches? I don't know. I think that they would.

(edited by BigDaddyLoco on 29.6.02 0310)

Promote this thread!

Since: 8.1.02
From: Modesto, CA

Since last post: 6551 days
Last activity: 6545 days
#2 Posted on
Good post. I often think of this myself, just yesterday in fact. And I may be full of it, but I still think some of the recent return to good guy vs. bad guy (i.e. the return of Hogan and the nostalgia for him, babyface HHH, etc.) may be attributed to a post-9/11 deal. Americans are fighting a war, times are tense, and we want (and/or need) clear images of good vs. clear, objective evil. It's not the 90s anymore, where the Cold War was over, Bill Clinton was screwing interns, and "America Gone Wild" was all over TV. As Generation X gets older and at the same time is trying to fight a war against "evil terrorists," you see a harkening back to an age where things were not as grey and a desire for everything else that goes with the happy-go-lucky 80s. (Where else are Transformers being sought after again?)

However, this possible Undertaker face push *may* be a sign that the WWE wants to return to the Attitude days. It's only one thing so far and only time will tell, but maybe now that we're no longer worrying about terrorist attacks as much (sure, we were all freaked for awhile waiting for the next one, but now we all seem to think it is inevitable and people may not be caring as much anymore, we just hope we're not there when it hits) we will start to see more of the cheer for whoever you want "gladiator" kind of deal that we saw in the 90s? Or maybe another attack will hit, Americans will pull together strongly once again, and Hogan will be pushed to another title reign. I don't know, I'm probably making too much of this whole connection thing but I think theres something there.


"You! You're sumthin' you!" -Robert DeNiro, Analyze This

Since: 2.1.02
From: MD, USA

Since last post: 3203 days
Last activity: 3170 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.18

There are rumors from the usual sources that some in the Titan office want to put the belt on Angle and have him feud with both faces and heels, sort of a throwback to the touring NWA champion.

Tra-la-la, la-la-la-la-la
Tra-la-la, la-la-la-la-la

Since: 9.6.02
From: Southwick, MA

Since last post: 7213 days
Last activity: 6946 days
#4 Posted on

    Originally posted by odessasteps

    There are rumors from the usual sources that some in the Titan office want to put the belt on Angle and have him feud with both faces and heels, sort of a throwback to the touring NWA champion.

one can only dream the wwe will chose this path...for whatever reason i think angle with the title just seems right..he is your olympic hero...i hope they make him the first guy to hold it for a year since deisel

Net Hack Slasher

Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 6665 days
Last activity: 5085 days
#5 Posted on
Was there ever that much grey area back then, or was that just a catch phrase. I remember Vince doing the speech right after Bret left, well right after Bret left Austin started gettting his push, and I thought it was pretty much a given that Austin is the face and anyone who challenged him usually a corperation memeber was the heel. They had new DX led by H who was the face and the Nation was the heel. The only real grey section was the DOA vs. Los Stereotypes but that was more because I couldn't give a rats ass for either.

Maybe I'm just forgetting something, but was there a major angle back then that truly had the crowd split and you really couldn't figure out who was the good guy and who was the bad. There were heel that were cheered (ala Austin) but he quickly jumped over and started attacking more and more heels then faces in a short period of time.

I don't get it, everyone loves rats, but they don't want to drink the rats milk?

Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 3381 days
Last activity: 3068 days
#6 Posted on
FACE: A goody two-shoes, All-American wrestler.
See: Hogan, Hulk

HEEL. An evil, maniacal, foreign wrestler.
See: Iron Shiek, The

IRONIC FACE: A good two-shoes, foreign wrestler who is revered even though he fits into the HEEL category.
See: Rikishi

IRONIC HEEL: An evil, maniacal, All-American wrestler who is hated even though he fits into the FACE category.
See: Angle, Kurt

TWEENER: A heel [ironic or otherwise] who is cheered, even though he *should* be hated.
See: Austin, Steve

CRAPPY FACE: A face [ironic or otherwise] who is hated, even though he *should* be cheered.
See: Miavia, Rocky

NATIONALIST: A wrestler whose gimmick involves supporting a specific nationalist group.
See: Storm, Lance or Hart, Bret

Bart: Hey, immigrants! Beat it! Country's full!
Sailor: OK people, you heard the lady. Back into the hold. We'll try Canada.
[the immigrants moan]
-- "The City of New York Vs. Homer Simpson"

"That's what the Internet is for, slandering others anonymously" Banky Edwards (Jason Lee) in Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back

The Great Thomas

Since: 17.6.02
From: Miami, Florida

Since last post: 6452 days
Last activity: 6452 days
#7 Posted on

    Originally posted by Freeway420
    TWEENER: A heel [ironic or otherwise] who is cheered, even though he *should* be hated.
    See: Austin, Steve

During the whole "Invasion" angle I always thought that RVD would fit perfectly in this category, since he's always getting cheered, yet the Alliance is supposed to be evil, right?

Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.
Next thread: Can the gimmick be bigger than the man?
Previous thread: New toys more "1st timers"
(14092 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I suggest you try to work the XFL into as many of your responses (WWE related or not) as you can. :)
- fuelinjected, NBC Survey on WWE (2004)
The W - Pro Wrestling - Shades of Grey?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

©2001-2023 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.32 seconds.