Sex and violence always sells

CMpunked

I came across this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naQIpeWJwvk

And it made me think.

As bad as the wwe-pg era, would this kinda wwe actually do well these days?
Like there is really no one with enough charisma as some of the more 'raunchy' characters of yesteryear.
People like the Godfather, Val Venis, Eric in the video above.

So what could be possibly done if wwe went back to the pre-pg era?
(obviously i dont mean like in the video, thats just a reference)

For anyone unfortunate to be in work, the video is of raw in 2002 when eric got two models to strip down to their pants and when they went to kiss, 3 minute warning jumped the ring and completely tore them apart. theres enough in there to get you in trouble with your boss or co workers!

Charisteas

If WWE ever go back to Attitude, then I would find a way for them to be able to swear on television, something I don't think any wrestling company on TV has been able to do really. Swear words could really add something extra to a powerful promo, as long as there not over-used.

Imagine Sheamus " I'll kick your mutha f*cking head in, fella"

And I bet Ric Flair's promos on TNA would be even more incredible then they already are!

Dean820

I always cringe when I hear swear words on wrestling...it doesn't work.

Loughc

Dean820 wrote: »

I always cringe when I hear swear words on wrestling...it doesn't work.

I agree in a natural heated conversation its ok to have a swear here and there, but in a scripted environment like the WWE it feels forced and not right!

rossie1977

sex and violence always sells??

yeah tell that to tna, i was at the impact tapings this week, both shows were littered with swearing, even tazz said f**k, blading throughout, tables been broken and yet i bet neither show gets great ratings, tna ppvs are getting less than 10,000 buys atm

no sex and violence doesn't always sell, look at all the crappy movies littered with sex and violence that go straight to dvd and no-one ever watches em, good storylines and great characters always sell, this is a fact in movies and tv and its a fact in pro-wrestling, wcw nitro in 1996 was PG and it sold, wwf raw in 1997 was pg and it sold

Machismo Fan

I'm sick of people going on and on about 'WWE-PG' because in all honesty it's not all that different bar the lack of blood (which really makes no difference to the quality of the product besides HIAC matches). The standard of wrestling now is overall significantly better than the Attitude Era, and there's not as much trash and shortcuts.

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

I'm sick of people going on and on about 'WWE-PG' because in all honesty it's not all that different bar the lack of blood (which really makes no difference to the quality of the product besides HIAC matches). The standard of wrestling now is overall significantly better than the Attitude Era, and there's not as much trash and shortcuts.

The big difference between now and Attitude is that the Attitude era had really good characters that the audience could get emotionally invested in. Even the likes of Rikishi and 2 Cool used to get monster pops that the main eventers of today couldmonly dream of.

Mr.Nice Guy

I think it's about having the right balance. I can't see an ECW style mentality, 18+ type product being successful in the mainstream because ultimately the beauty of wrestling is that it's two guys putting on a show and trying NOT to seriously hurt one another. Therefore when you have guys doing insane stuff all the time it's a turn-off. Likewise with the women, I never liked some of the stuff in the Attitude Era involving them because it must have been uncomfortable for the parents watching, plus in the modern day stuff like that is available in plenty of places without it being on wrestling shows.

Despite that though I think WWE has tended to go too far the other way. Unfortunately Americans treat words as swearing that we wouldn't over here. To me 'ass' is not a swear word or worth censoring. Likewise the word 'bitch'. I also strongly dislike stopping matches for cuts that were accidental knocks. I think Austin said it best recently when he noted things didn't need to be so 'candy coated'.

I can't say Austin and Rock would have had the impact that they had in PG land. I think they still would have been successful but there wouldn't have been as many great moments. I recall Austin being interviewed on an Off The Record around '98, '99 where he was asked if he could have been as successful in WCW with his character as their TV was more strict. He made the same point that he would have been successful, but wouldn't have been able to take it as far as he had in WWF.

I think there have been cultural changes in society to warrant toning things down but not as much as the WWE have. I'd like to see the company go back to being PG-13, TV-14, whatever they were during the Attitude Era. It doesn't mean they have to be as risque as they were, but it means they at least have the flexibility to push the boundaries once in a while in a way that won't alienate parents and younger fans.

Machismo Fan

flahavaj wrote: »

The big difference between now and Attitude is that the Attitude era had really good characters that the audience could get emotionally invested in. Even the likes of Rikishi and 2 Cool used to get monster pops that the main eventers of today couldmonly dream of.

But that's much more down to the presentation and push of the characters rather than the rating of the show. It's not like Too Cool were really edgy.

Lord TSC

Dean820 wrote: »

I always cringe when I hear swear words on wrestling...it doesn't work.

I always cringe when I hear it on TV in general. Very few tv shows actualy manage to pull it off without making it sound like its just there for the sake of it...

flahavaj

Machismo Fan wrote: »

But that's much more down to the presentation and push of the characters rather than the rating of the show. It's not like Too Cool were really edgy.

I don't disagree.

What worked about the edginess of the Attitude era was that it was something new to the TV audience in the 90's, who were used to a more cartoonish product up until then. The live, anything could happen atmosphere of RAwWback in those days wouldn't have been quite as effective without the risque characters and storylines. It isn't really needed anymore as people have seen it all and shock TV only remains shocking for so long before you run out of stunts you can pull.

parker kent

This thread relates to something I read about this topic in Powerslam. They were talking about the current state of the WWE and the decreasing buy rates for PPVs. For the sake of those who don't buy it, I'll just write up a portion of what they said.

Looking at the big picture, WCW was rated PG during its late 1990s glory days. The New World Order, Sting, Goldberg and the cruiserweights all found a way to entertain the masses without swearing or running a razor blade across their foreheads each night.

The WWF used blood only on special occasions in its matches, pre-autumn 1997. The full-on Bret Hart vs. Shawn Michaels feud of that year was contested in a PG-rated environment. So were the matches in which Bret Hart clashed with Owen Hart and Michaels rumbled with Razor Ramon at Wrestlemania 1994. The WWF drew 550,000 buys from a comparatively minuscule pay-per-view universe for the Hulk Hogan vs. Ultimate Warrior match at Wrestlemania VI in 1990. Again, PG conditions applied.

Basically what they are saying is that wrestling does not need to be rated R or 14s. Blading constantly and swearing are not needed. The Dark Knight is an example of a compelling and edgy piece of entertainment that was rated as 12A. It can be achieved with a little imagination and creativity.

Now this is where I think the current WWE writers fail. They are juvenile and often use the most puerile, obvious and hackneyed booking. Some of the crap they type up for Cena to say beggars belief. He sounds and acts like a 10-year-old. Just because he is meant to appeal to kids should not mean that they alienate everybody else. But the writers are not talented enough to pull this off. Better writers would be able to succeed in the PG era.

That being said, I think they should relax the blading rules for events like Hell In A Cell. If it were used sparingly, it could be very effective. Imagine how different that one match would be if it happened once in the blue moon. The image would be shocking and different. Also in a sidenote, HIAC should also be used only for feud ending matches instead of being used in a gimmick led PPV. But again that is another example of lazy writing. Can't think of an idea....throw a gimmick PPV in there to get buy rates.

To finish on the PG topic. It is not an insurmountable object. Too often when blood or swearing is used, it is a cheap option used by poor wrestlers. Foley and Flair's recent match is an example of how to overuse blood. Powerslam said it was a substitute for skill, effort or athleticism". Whereas Shawn Michaels and the Undertaker have had 2 classics in the PG era.

Good wrestlers and good writing are what is needed, not a return to TV-14 ratings. For example, I loved the original ECW. The over 18s aspect played a role, but the in-ring action and booking of Paul Heyman from 1995-1999 are what made ECW entertaining. Same with the Attitude era. Steve Austin was a great wrestler, in the ring and on the mic. The Rock was a great promo performer. They were talented and would have got over in any era, PG or otherwise.

And on a last note (I swear! ), the treatment of women in wrestling in appalling. The Attitude era was a monument to Vince McMahon's misogyny. The way that women are still treated does not match a PG era. CM Punk and King laughing at Natalya or the Piggy James stuff are not needed. Women are treated like crap in wrestling. They are always manipulative, needy or else pieces of meat. Very rarely do you get a character that differs from the usual stereotypical views of women, unless their name is Stephanie McMahon.

Rant over

Lord TSC

Dammit Parker, I just read that last night in Powerslam before I went to bed and thought "I should post that in the topic on boards.ie"

HBK

parker kent wrote: »

This thread relates to something I read about this topic in Powerslam. They were talking about the current state of the WWE and the decreasing buy rates for PPVs. For the sake of those who don't buy it, I'll just write up a portion of what they said.



Basically what they are saying is that wrestling does not need to be rated R or 14s. Blading constantly and swearing are not needed. The Dark Knight is an example of a compelling and edgy piece of entertainment that was rated as 12A. It can be achieved with a little imagination and creativity.

Now this is where I think the current WWE writers fail. They are juvenile and often use the most puerile, obvious and hackneyed booking. Some of the crap they type up for Cena to say beggars belief. He sounds and acts like a 10-year-old. Just because he is meant to appeal to kids should not mean that they alienate everybody else. But the writers are not talented enough to pull this off. Better writers would be able to succeed in the PG era.

That being said, I think they should relax the blading rules for events like Hell In A Cell. If it were used sparingly, it could be very effective. Imagine how different that one match would be if it happened once in the blue moon. The image would be shocking and different. Also in a sidenote, HIAC should also be used only for feud ending matches instead of being used in a gimmick led PPV. But again that is another example of lazy writing. Can't think of an idea....throw a gimmick PPV in there to get buy rates.

To finish on the PG topic. It is not an insurmountable object. Too often when blood or swearing is used, it is a cheap option used by poor wrestlers. Foley and Flair's recent match is an example of how to overuse blood. Powerslam said it was a substitute for skill, effort or athleticism". Whereas Shawn Michaels and the Undertaker have had 2 classics in the PG era.

Good wrestlers and good writing are what is needed, not a return to TV-14 ratings. For example, I loved the original ECW. The over 18s aspect played a role, but the in-ring action and booking of Paul Heyman from 1995-1999 are what made ECW entertaining. Same with the Attitude era. Steve Austin was a great wrestler, in the ring and on the mic. The Rock was a great promo performer. They were talented and would have got over in any era, PG or otherwise.

Agreed!

parker kent wrote: »

And on a last note (I swear! ), the treatment of women in wrestling in appalling. The Attitude era was a monument to Vince McMahon's misogyny. The way that women are still treated does not match a PG era. CM Punk and King laughing at Natalya or the Piggy James stuff are not needed. Women are treated like crap in wrestling. They are always manipulative, needy or else pieces of meat. Very rarely do you get a character that differs from the usual stereotypical views of women, unless their name is Stephanie McMahon.

Rant over

Hold on now...
The whole womens rights movement is considered a woman moving from the sink to the cooker!
The majority of wrestling fans are predominently male, who want eye candy to look at. An everyday housewife is not going to cut it. So lets get the botox and fake tits in where possible!

Granted they were treated worse in Attitude days, nudity(The Kat getting her baps out on PPV) AND Trish Stratus on all fours on RAW barking like a dog for Mcmahon spring to mind! But still, a womans role in wrestling will never change, No one wants to actually see them wrestle
The diva search didnt help their cause btw!

parker kent

HBK wrote: »

Hold on now...
The whole womens rights movement is considered a woman moving from the sink to the cooker!
The majority of wrestling fans are predominently male, who want eye candy to look at. An everyday housewife is not going to cut it. So lets get the botox and fake tits in where possible!

Granted they were treated worse in Attitude days, nudity(The Kat getting her baps out on PPV) AND Trish Stratus on all fours on RAW barking like a dog for Mcmahon spring to mind! But still, a womans role in wrestling will never change, No one wants to actually see them wrestle
The diva search didnt help their cause btw!

I hope you are talking with your tongue in cheek for a lot of that (Obviously I know you are with the cooker line, but it is hardly cutting edge humour or in any way funny!)

There is still no need to treat them like shít. Trish barking like a dog was one of the things I had in mind when I wrote that as I had it in my original post before taking it out. Whilst nobody wants to see the type matches the Divas normally have, TNA proved a few years ago that women's wrestling can be entertaining. WWE have Gail Kim and don't utilise her at all. Plus women can play a good role in wrestling if they are used as more than vacuous arm candy. Steph is a good example. There are plenty of ways they could have women on TV without resorting to the same old misogynistic crap.

Also, fake tits are for 10 year old boys! Real men want real tits I love seeing great looking women in wrestling as my love of Stacy Kiebler in previous photo threads shows But a PG product should definitely not resort to depicting women the way Vince McMahon does.

Flash92

But a PG product should definitely not resort to depicting women the way Vince McMahon does.

It's not only women, McMahon plays to stereotypes and always has. Cryme Tyme, were criminals and gangsters. First Irish character they introduced, his son was of course a leprechaun. Umaga, Samoan so he was a monster. Muhammed Hassan, terrorist. Funaki and any other Asian wrestler they've had can't speak properly. Vince plays to popular old stereotypes for many of his gimmicks, so as part of that, he doesn't see women wrestlers as equal.

HBK

parker kent wrote: »

I hope you are talking with your tongue in cheek for a lot of that (Obviously I know you are with the cooker line, but it is hardly cutting edge humour or in any way funny!)

Somewhat!

parker kent wrote: »

There is still no need to treat them like shít. Trish barking like a dog was one of the things I had in mind when I wrote that as I had it in my original post before taking it out. Whilst nobody wants to see the type matches the Divas normally have, TNA proved a few years ago that women's wrestling can be entertaining. WWE have Gail Kim and don't utilise her at all. Plus women can play a good role in wrestling if they are used as more than vacuous arm candy. Steph is a good example. There are plenty of ways they could have women on TV without resorting to the same old misogynistic crap.

These women know what they are getting into. They are all of the same type, seeking fame and glory(with the exception of 1 or 2 who can wrestle), and will do anything to achieve that, so there not going to object...to being seen as objects!

parker kent wrote: »

Also, fake tits are for 10 year old boys! Real men want real tits

10yr old boys dont know what fake t*ts are! The baps are for the 10yr old kids fathers who bring them to the show

parker kent wrote: »

I love seeing great looking women in wrestling as my love of Stacy Kiebler in previous photo threads shows But a PG product should definitely not resort to depicting women the way Vince McMahon does.

I dont see how the current product portrays women anything like you are referring to?

parker kent

Flash92 wrote: »

It's not only women, McMahon plays to stereotypes and always has. Cryme Tyme, were criminals and gangsters. First Irish character they introduced, his son was of course a leprechaun. Umaga, Samoan so he was a monster. Muhammed Hassan, terrorist. Funaki and any other Asian wrestler they've had can't speak properly. Vince plays to popular old stereotypes for many of his gimmicks, so as part of that, he doesn't see women wrestlers as equal.

Well I'm hardly a fan of his stereotyping either, it is pretty shoddy writing. It has been a while since Vince has had a Japenese (or American who looks in some form Asian) "Pearl Harbour" somebody!

parker kent

HBK wrote: »

I dont see how the current product portrays women anything like you are referring to?

Two words: Piggy James

CMpunked

Flash92 wrote: »

Umaga, Samoan so he was a monster.

I agree with all of them bar this, mainly because he was jamal beforehand.
Umaga isnt as much a stereotype as the gangster gimmick was. and he came up with that himself.

Cactus Colm

Jesus ... that Hot Lesbian Action angle was absolutely horrible.

In general I have no problem with PG WWE, although they have gone too far in regards to blood. Certainly on PPV's blood should be allowed to flow, if it happens through the match. Blading should only be kept for the very special occassions.

The Divas division I gave up on a while ago. I do love Melina, and individually all the divas are fantastic looking women and some of them are quite talented. But too much it has become about how good looking they are, to the point where there's nearly a cookie cutter mentality. My two favourite female wrestlers from the wwe were Molly Holly and Jacqueline. The two of them are foxy as hell, but I don't think either fit into the modern wwe diva mold.

The only normal looking woman on the show is Vickie Guerrero (who plays her part fantastically well) ... and she is treated like she's quasimodo's ugly step sister. Which is a disgrace.