|
/wrestling /guests /Proffitt |
|
|
/wrestling /guests /Proffitt |
| Guest Columns | Kevin Proffitt |
MainBLAH |
A FAN'S NOTES If there is anything that should be learned from wrestling on television and the Internet it is this: Less Is More. Whatever else wrestling is right now, most of all it's just too much. Too much exposure, too much talk, too much sex, too much vulgarity, too much soap opera, too much violence against women, too much attitude, too much whatever. It's just too much. On television there are too many wrestlers with too many microphones trying to act cool, saying things that aren't interesting or funny. There are too many segments that run on far too long (see anything with Chris Jericho as an example); too many storylines and gimmicks that are repeated ad nauseam ("We're out of time!!!" is a classic); and way too many of the same guys doing and saying the same things, every week, every show. And, sorry CRZ, there's too much hair. If I were Vince McMahon the first thing I'd do is make all my wrestlers get haircuts. That Ozzy Ozbourne, heavy-metal-biker-look may work for our friend Chris, but if I see one more balding wrestler flip and flap his long flowing mane I'm going for the scissors. One reason Nitro sucks is that it is damn hard to produce three hours of live television every week. With that much air time to fill it's inevitable there will be weak spots in every show. And now, with both of the major federations having two prime time shows per week, plus their weekend shows, plus monthly PPV's, plus who knows what else, it's a wonder they do as well as they do. Conceding that wrestling, even at its best, is not Masterpiece Theatre, I defy anyone to produce that much wrestling programming and not have some, or most, of it be bad. Granted, the people who watch wrestling are, typically, not overly discerning and prefer quantity over quality. So the bar is not set very high in terms of what we're asking for here. But it seems that all the federations are pursuing the riches of the moment while risking dilution of their talent and creativity pool, while, possibly, overexposing their product. For example, the wear and tear on wrestlers who must appear every week (plus house shows) and perform increasingly risky maneuvers for an increasingly aggressive audience threatens both their livelihoods and the quality of the product. This is probably one reason why there is less wrestling and more talk on Raw and Nitro these days and why, with few exceptions, wrestling careers are measured in dog years. Both the worker and the producer want to make hay while the sun shines. Meanwhile, overexposure threatens the quality and credibility (again, a relative term) of the product and the performer. Certain wrestlers, for example, are lauded for having terrific "mic skills".Yet two of the best - Austin and the Rock - are in danger of becoming parodies of themselves. Austin's shtick is more stale than last week's donuts and Rock is close behind. It's obvious McMahon is trying to get all the mileage he can out of these two but he's doing so at the risk of making his biggest stars boring and passe. There are only so many times Austin can tell someone to kiss his ass or that the Rock can describe how he is going to take this-and-that, turn it sideways, and shove it up so-and-so's roody poo ass without it becoming old hat. Maybe some twelve year olds can listen to the same stuff over and over a million times, but I doubt the majority of us can. And I'm sure the people in charge are even more aware of these problems than me. But what can they do? Continually bringing in new talent is one answer. Coming up with new storylines (i.e., soap operas) is another. But these options are not risk-free and there is lots of air time to fill and, well, everyone's trying to make a buck. So, they put the guys out there who they know are popular and have them do what they do best - the old "give 'em what they want". As for wrestling on the Internet, it's the same thing only more so. Considering that 95% of what I read on the Internet about wrestling is not so good (to put it mildly) I think wrestlers and promoters should be given equal time to complain that the quality of what is on the Internet is no better and often worse than the quality of what they produce on television. Most of the Internet commentary I see -- even from the smarts -- is very linear and predictable. The typical reasoning seems to be: B follows A, therefore C follows B. But anyone who follows wrestling should know that the best wrestling happens outside of the box: i.e., expect the unexpected (Vince McMahon as champion?). Yet Internet guys constantly make reckless and feeble predictions that are continually proven wrong. But, they're right back the next day following the same pattern and making the same mistakes. I don't know why it is necessary to predict what will happen in wrestling. Maybe this shows my markish-ness, but the fun of wrestling is being surprised. For me, the key to enjoying wrestling is to anticipate nothing. There also seems to be a gang mentality on the Internet. The guys who run the sites say whatever they want (no matter how stupid) and if someone disagrees they pull the plug or ridicule the poor dissenter into oblivion. It also seems that might makes right. There is a prevalent "I can kick your ass so I'm smarter than you", or, "More people agree with me than agree with you so that proves I'm right and you're wrong" attitude on the Internet that is both childish and annoying. Whatever. Anyway, the overabundance of Internet smarts who feel obligated to constantly express their opinions has created an industry that reminds me of what a local radio station used to call Brute Force Cybernetics. Their motto was: We create a demand and then fill it. A self-perpetuating machine has developed on the Internet that is now ubiquitous. For every post there is a rejoinder. For every columnist there is someone who knows better. Every website has a rival and commentators such as CRZ and Hyatte have their own loyal and competing fan bases. What to do? It's impossible to put the Jeanie back in the bottle, but, from this perspective at least, it is hoped this surge will ride its course and everything will fade to a more reasonable level. Less is more. If there is anything to be learned from Sean Waltman's potential legal problems it's that all celebrities -- particularly wrestlers with their macho personas - are targets whenever they go out into public. Maybe Waltman is guilty of assault, but it's likely there is more to this story than we know now. My guess is that wrestlers are very savvy and aware of people who would like nothing more than to make a reputation - or a lot of money - at their expense. So that's why it seems best to reserve judgment in this instance until all the evidence is in. And making me even more skeptical is the typical scenario of the accuser filing civil rather than criminal charges. If this guy was as badly hurt as he says why didn't he call the police immediately and have Waltman locked up? Maybe he's looking to make a few dollars? Plus, in civil court the burden of proof is far less than in criminal court so the chance of gaining a favorable verdict, or a fat settlement, is far higher. So, boys, caveat wrestler: Let the wrestler beware. There's always someone out there looking to score on your reputation. Finally, on the subject of violence against women, let me say this: What is happening now in both federations is not just stupid, it's wrong. Portraying violent acts by men against women is wrong. Imitating or alluding to violence against animals is wrong. There's nothing more to say. It's wrong and it should stop. Kevin Proffitt Special Guest Commentary for [slash] wrestling Mail the Author |
BLAH |
Main |
||