 |
 |
Raven's Log
Stardate: 12.19.03
2:24 am in a Comfort Inn that isn't very comfortable in Worcester, Massachusetts and there is no place worse than Massachusetts.
I am absolutely appalled by who constitutes the critics in professional wrestling. If Pauline Kael (a famous movie critic) were alive and a wrestling fan, she'd denounce, skewer and lambaste what stands for criticism in the wrestling profession. She would be mortified by the fact that wrestling critics give more weight to a bunch of high spot-kateers doing acrobatics and gymnastics than to the actual skilled professionals who are telling a story filled with pathos and drama. If Roger Ebert were a wrestling fan, he'd either sit on or eat all of our sheet writing dirt reporters. Its not that I have anything against the sheets or the critics, I dont. I honestly don't. I also dont believe you have to be a wrestler to understand wrestling. Vince McMahon has made billions and he never wrestled a match until he was in his fifties. The problem with our critics is that they like a style of wrestling that has no substance, does not tell a story and, more often than not, doesn't get as big a reaction as the matches they rate poorly, whether its ROH, WWE, TNA or indie shows.
Example #1: Critics rave about these high spot-kateer matches with 80 million flips, flops, cartwheels, somersaults, gainers, half-twists, huracanranas and tumbleweeds that the fans may or may not be into, tell no story, and convey zero drama when no one acts any more injured after taking seventy of these as opposed to taking one. That is the equivalent of going to a movie with duels, gunfights, car chases and explosions where guys get stabbed and shot and immediately get up and show no signs of wear and tear over a plotless two hours. Then, they review a match that tells a story, has the people in the palm of its hand through psychology, the babyface gets sympathy because of his selling, the heel gets heat because the babyface sells and the match gets one star or my personal favorite, a DUD.
Example #2: Dean Malenko and Eddie Guerrero had a series of matches in ECW that were routinely given 4 or 5 stars. Not only did the people not cheer loudly, they actually booed and shit on them so vociferously that Dean Malenko had to grab a microphone and cut a promo on the people for being so rude. Now, I think Eddie is a phenomenal worker, undeniably one of the ten best in the business, and Dean is quite talented himself, but if the people didn't enjoy the match, how the hell can you give it 4 or 5 stars? The object of a match is to entertain the fans. If they are not entertained, it was not a good match. Simple as that.
Example #3: When Sabu and X-Pac first appeared, critics marvelled at their acrobatics and gave all their matches 4 to 5 stars. Then they actually learned how to work, tell a story, and became truly talented and they were lucky to get 2 stars. Absolutely freaking preposterous.
The idea of this business is to draw money. You draw money by making the fans love you or hate you, like or dislike wont get it. They have to care about you emotionally on a visceral level (promos are a big part of this, but thats for another day). It is truly hard to care for someone who no matter how long the match goes or how many things have happened to him, he's still running around like he snorted an eightball and acting like the match has just started. Can you imagine if in "Gladiator," Russell Crowe never sold like these high spot-kateers? It would totally kill the drama and that's what wrestling is: a drama. This bears repeating: wrestling is a drama or at least its supposed to be, not a bunch of bumper cars crashing willy nilly into one another with no rhyme or reason (yes, I said willy nilly).
What compounds this problem is the sheet writers talk about how great these so-called matches are, so workers coming up, instead of learning selling and psychology realize the best way to get noticed is have the sheets put them over, and the best way to do that is by having a crazy car-wreck high spot filled demolition derby where everybody is as fresh at the end of the match as they are at the beginning. Young workers figure, "Why learn how to work? The sheets are only gonna put me over if I become a high spot-kateer." If they spent half the time they do in the ring coming up with crazy spots by learning to sell instead, they might actually become stars. We have a running gag in the locker room after a high spot-kateer match. Someone will say, 'What did you think?' I say, 'Not enough selling and psychology.' They say, 'Did you watch the match?' I say, 'No, I didn't have to.' ... The critics, in trying to defend their positions, would say these people aren't pushed enough; so the only way to engender fan reaction is to become a high spot-kateer. Well, that defense is erroneous on two levels because
1) half the time the crowd still doesn't care even if they do a million high spots
2) if they truly sold and had psychology, eventually they would tug at the heartstrings of even the most jaded fans and overcome disinterest.
In movies, if there's no story (plot), movie critics shit on it. In wrestling, if there is no story, critics laud it with praise. Alas, not all is lost. In TNA, former high spot-kateers like CM Punk, Christopher Daniels and Micheal Shane are actually learning to sell and have psychology. Of course, now the critics won't like them, but hey, the consolation is maybe they'll draw some money. Wouldn't that be a shame?
Addendum: whatever the date is around 11:54 pm
It has been brought to my attention by my chief executive officer Vic Moreno that some people are misinterpreting my statement to believe that I don't like high spots. I like high spots. I think high spots are intrinsic to a good match. I just have a monstrous problem when all a match is is high spot, high spot, high spot, high spot with no selling for more than ten seconds at a time, no psychology and pacing that starts at one speed and ends at exactly the same speed it started; where momentum doesn't change, faces don't get sympathy, heels don't get heat and the story isn't told. To paraphrase Aristotle, "Moderation is the key." Use high spots to enhance your match, not to be your match. If you still can't understand my point, then either I've failed you as a teacher or you're just one really goddamned lousy student.
<< back to top | comment on entry | back to main >>
BACK TO MAIN BLOG PAGE | BACK TO THERAVENEFFECT.COM MAIN PAGE
|
|  |
|
|
