cabbageboy

I doubt it will vanish....you know Vince is dying to get back on TV. I just have no idea what he would actually do, since there is no real feud for him to do. Maybe he'll just be normal for a change?

Why do they tempt me so with the World Class shows? Just show it now dammit!

Even going under WWE's odd line of thinking that people watch on Raw or only SD, it's still insane to bring guys over to Raw and immediately start jobbing them out. It's like they sit and think "Okay, we need new guys to be on Raw so we can feed them to Cena, HHH, etc." And in some ways, the new guys have cannibalized each other (such as Lashley dominating Booker and Kennedy only to be jobbed out himself).

I wonder if Vince will just go out and ignore the limo incident as though it never happened. Or if they will pick up with that angle with Vince coming out in heavy bandages a la the Invisible Man.

If it is a house show I wouldn't even bother taking a sign since it won't make TV or anything.

The tri brand experiment has been a bad idea. They have used it to basically push the same old guys on every PPV, whereas before they rotated between brands. It also has hurt the significance of the 4 major PPVs, or at least stuff like SummerSlam. SS is a PPV that doesn't have a real gimmick to it, whereas Survivor Series can at least have the usual team matches and the Rumble is the Rumble.

Mecca said almost exactly what I have felt for a while. I mentioned well before the draft that Raw is an entire show of guys that are buried. Silly me, but I thought the idea of the draft for Raw was to bring in new guys that are not buried and try to push them. But the thing is, Raw has already buried the vast majority of the guys they got in the draft! Major guys: Lashley: Seemingly the big pick, immediately jobbed to Cena clean, then jobbed to Kennedy clean. Now injured for a long while. Booker: Baffling draft pick really since he fit in well on SD and there's nothing for him on Raw. Before he get be buried by HHH he has to get past a 58 year old Jerry Lawler, and he's struggling to do that. Kennedy: Maybe was still hurt, but if so he shouldn't have been on TV. He starts out, Lashley kicks his ass easy, he jobs in 30 seconds to Super Crazy, etc. Then he comes out and constantly says he is the real #1 contender.....huh???? Frankly jobbing Lashley so hard to Kennedy this week only made Lashley look embarrassing, it didn't really help Kennedy. Minor trades to Raw: Regal: I thought he might be a decent IC contender or do SOMETHING on Raw. He's done jack shit. Snitsky: Hasn't really done much on Raw yet, jury is still out. Of all the guys NOT to bury, it'd be Gene Snitsky? Sandman: Pretty over on his Raw debut, was doing well initially, and then he just jobs to Carlito and then wasn't on the show this week. If he isn't totally buried yet, give it time. London/Kendrick: In a crap Raw tag scene these guys should be getting title shots or the belts, but due to some stupid shit London is in the doghouse. Quit being petty and push the guys. Jillian: I thought she could be a contender for the women's title, but she's jobbing to freakin Candice or doing little otherwise. New debuts or returns: Beth Phoenix: See Jillian. The jury is still out but they should have had her come in initially and just lay out Candice and lay claim to the women's title. Then feud with Micki James to pay off that angle from last year. How hard is that? Instead she's dicking around playing 2nd fiddle to a jobbed out Melina and no one cares. Cody Rhodes: Ugh. What could have been a rousing debut angle with him standing up for his dad against Orton turned into him just jobbing his ass off to Orton clean. If they are building up Orton for a title shot, why do it at the expense of a debuting guy? Speaking of which, why is it on Raw that they then try to push the various guys who have already long since been buried? Carlito has been uber buried. Why bring in the Sandman and job out to Carlito when Carlito has jack shit to offer at this point and Sandman is at least over? Why even push Orton when he's such a liability off camera and apparently is also the Ratings Killer too AND has been jobbed out to everyone for 2 years?

Also with Dawn of the Dead 2004 not only did it not have the bikers and rednecks, it lost that wonderful feeling of utopia that the original had. Half of the appeal of the original is the notion of being in a small group that kills zombies and takes control of a mall. Yet the remake has these asshole killjoy guards in the mall and it prevents the fun.

Let's be honest, Lebron being in the finals of that Who's Now tourney is a joke itself. He beat out Shaq easily despite Shaq having 4 title rings and was MVP of the Finals multiple times. Meanwhile, Lebron got squashed like a bug in the lone Finals he has been in. Oh, and the Finals he was in was the lowest rated Finals in the history of the NBA. Why exactly is this guy supposed to be so NOW?

Honestly, you know what is happening? We are getting the results of what WWE does in terms of developing talent when they can't just steal it from other places. Or actually with TNA they could steal it but they tend to sign the exact wrong guys from TNA. Honestly, how much WWE talent actually ever was good simply by being in WWE? Most of the guys in the 80s boom period were hardly their own roster (since their own roster, you know, SUCKED). They pillaged the AWA of its talented workers, got some NWA guys like Piper and Steamboat, and guys like Bret and the Bulldogs were acquired from Stampede. The UWF/Mid South gave them DiBiase and JYD, Savage came from Memphis. In the 1990s they really just got lucky, since WCW basically handed them The Undertaker, Steve Austin, Mick Foley, etc. But also during this time they did get fluke luck and developed The Rock, and later Angle as well. Since they actually did develop 2 quality guys, it made them think they produce the same results with everyone. Thus came WWE development leagues like OVW, DSW, FCW, etc. It's like trying to manufacture stars instead of letting it happen organic style.

Mooney was probably my favorite of the lame pretty boy announcers the WWF had in the late 80s/early 90s. He had a deadpan asshole humor at times that was a bit more subversive than these other dolts like Craig DeGeorge.

Walkin Dude, think about it. Cena vs. Orton right now is the Perfect Storm of Suck. In feuds like Cena vs. HBK, I think people at least maybe wanted Shawn to win and get one more run with the belt. Or with Cena/Khali, people at least wanted Cena to beat the giant. Cena/Lashley at least could be hyped as "Which unstoppable guy is better?" Cena vs. Orton? Ugh. It's a champion that is stale and needs to lose the title going against a challenger that nobody genuinely wants to win the title for a reason other than to see Cena job the belt. I don't think I've ever seen a situation like that in WWE, where there literally was no good option in a match.

I actually do think that the Vince death angle not being paid off might have something to do with it, but they can't really pay it off and the amusing thing is that there's no real logical way to bring him back onto TV. He was blown up...The End. Raw's problems are numerous. Here are just a few of them: 1. Raw has a champion that isn't consistently over, yet they keep the belt on him due to either stubborness or a lack of options. Let's face it, people aren't that stupid. Fans watched guys like Austin and The Rock struggle, lose the title, get ripped off. Since nobody buys Cena being better than those guys, it must just be his competition sucks. 2. There are no viable title contenders on Raw. They moved Booker to Raw mainly to bury him. They put Lashley on Raw and immediately jobbed him out to Cena and killed whatever future interest could lie in a program between them. Kennedy was moved to Raw and started jobbing immediately, though he had zero momentum anyway and hasn't since losing the MITB. HHH will get back but HHH/Cena is hardly a fresh matchup, neither is HBK/Cena. Orton/Cena is sorta fresh 1 on 1 I suppose, but hell having Orton as #1 contender may well be a factor in the scary 0.9 drop. 3. WWE keeps putting old men on TV for no reason. Is there any reason that I should be seeing Slaughter and Lawler wrestling on TV in the year 2007? Or Dusty Rhodes? Or Jimmy Snuka? Lawler is fine in his commentary role, but has never been taken seriously as a wrestler in WWE due to their own shoddy usage of him in the past. 4. Raw's current storylines aren't very compelling. There is literally no must see reason to watch Raw, or even a sorta interesting reason. At least with SD I can ponder if Batista will take out Khali, or if Matt Hardy can beat MVP for the US title. With ECW I can get behind CM Punk to see him beat John Morrison. There's no there there on Raw right now. It's a bunch of midcard JTTS guys masquerading as #1 contenders, guys doing the ultra stale feud over who is the KING, and a phony Italian jobber trying to nail a hot chick. In other words the WWE title scene is stale, the IC division is hardly there, and the tag division is jobber central. Note that when WWE was at its best they had strong world title divisions, tag scenes, and IC contenders. 5. Raw's wrestling is largely mediocre. Know how SD has remained somewhat decent? The wrestling is at least adequate or good on the show. I've been able to at least tolerate ECW since there's an occasionally decent match on it. Raw currently has mediocre in ring wrestling and also dull storylines. Has Raw ever had a combination like this before? Even in the dull mid 90s period they at least had guys like Bret, Shawn, Owen, Bulldog, and the like to deliver in the ring. 6. Raw practices a scorched earth mentality. I pose the question: Who in the past 2 years (aside from Cena, who was already WWE champ) has benefitted from a move to Raw? It seems like they rape SD's roster yearly, and then take the guys from SD and job them out on Raw. Meanwhile SD pushes some other people and essentially ends up being okay. 7. Raw has a lack of heroic guys that fans can get behind. I fear that WWE is stuck in this shades of gray Russo mentality and it doesn't really work anymore. I'm not saying that the faces need to be saints, but do any of these alleged good guys on Raw seem like guys you'd want to be friends with, or have your kids look up to? Or better yet, how about that rogue type character that you like and sometimes he's good, but sometimes goes bad and takes a wrong path only to eventually come to his senses (think of Randy Savage's character arc from roughly 1988-91). Anyway, those are just some of the problems with Raw at the moment. I would try and think of the solutions too, but I'm going to need a while to think about it, haha.

To be honest I don't much care for stables, at least not some ultra dominant Horsemen group or NWO. It's inevitable that these guys will all end up getting every belt and it gets tiresome. To me a wrestling stable is best used in either of these two ways: 1. High level guys to feud with the main face, maybe get some wins, but ultimately job out (Heenan Family). 2. Mid level stable that can gather some secondary belts for the lower tier faces to go after (Hart stable). Anyway, I don't know what the deal is with that Raw rating. I'm telling you guys, the only major development on last week's show that could have a bearing on this week was Orton being #1 contender. Well also Booker/Lawler, but I don't think that was such a big deal it would normally affect ratings to such a degree. It's kinda like this: WWE pushes HBK against Cena, people say "That's fine, at least it's not Orton." WWE pushes Khali against Cena, people can say "Khali sucks, but at least it's not Orton." WWE pushes Lashley against Cena, people say "Hmm...Lashley might have a shot, and at least it's not Orton." So WWE finally pushes Orton against Cena. People say "Fuck this, I'm not tuning in."

Is that number perhaps a misprint? I mean really, ratings just don't do that in jarring fashion without something major happening to justify it. There was no other really notable programming that might have deducted Raw viewers that I know of. Is it possible that this was the SD broadcast number from Friday that was accidentally reported as Raw? Cause there's no way shows usually go from 3.4 to 2.5 in a single week. If it is true there is one man to blame: Orton. Once he was announced as #1 contender apparently 0.9 viewers said "FUCK THAT!" and tuned out.

I thought the 2004 Dawn was okay, but the 1978 original is still miles better. I think whoever did that list is a huge Michael Caine fan, since Alfie and Get Carter were both on the list. I think the remake of Get Carter is more offensive if you're from the UK though, since that film is some major classic, whereas in the USA it's just a pretty solid Caine flick.

Yeah but if the Canadian govt. was pissed at the WWF over the depiction of the Mountie, then why not repackage the guy?

Eh, I'm not going to give TNA a trashing over the Karen Angle thing since nobody really is sure about Nancy Benoit taking Daniel and leaving, etc. It's a police theory, maybe a good one, but not concrete. Besides, as I noted Karen is likely to just reveal it's a ruse and turn on Joe.

I dunno, the most I could imagine from Teddy feasibly is a tag title run with Harry in the future, maybe a cruiser run if they cared about that division. With his reputed attitude problem (and lack of size) it's tough to imagine him being WWE champion or anything.

Really? I found the first half of Wicker Man really boring and even incoherent, not all that funny. Okay, Cage's bizarre dream scene when he wakes up and say "God dammit!" is pretty amusing, but other than that not so much. The 2nd half however? Hysterical. Maltese Falcon has to be #1 on the list of best remakes. Sure it was a book but it was a remake of the 1931 film (which is very good in its own right, in fact in some areas maybe even better than the Bogart movie). I don't think I would consider LOTR a remake exactly. Yeah there was the animated 1978 film but it only covered through Helms Deep, and there was also a horrid ROTK animated version. But I don't consider it a remake when something is animated and then done live action later.

Incidentally I watched that Survivor Series 93 show on 24/7 this past month and Pierre was hurt so Jacques was on the team solo. They billed him as "Quebecer Jacques" at the PPV. To me if he's alone with that same outfit he's just The Mountie again. Does anyone know why pray tell they wouldn't just call them The Mounties? As in Quebecers is harder to say and the gimmick was the same.

See, the whole Sting/NWO angle got really tedious to me since they constantly wondered "Whose side is he on?" The silly part is that if he was siding with the NWO, he would JOIN THE FUCKING NWO! You know, like half the roster did from 1996-98. Actually now that I think about it, Sting did join the NWO, albeit the Wolfpac "good guy" version. Really though, did anyone actually think Sting was joining the NWO at all? I just thought he was pissed off and sulking. The memories of that whole storyline are why it was impossible for WCW fans to boo this man when he attacked Hogan at that Fall Brawl in 1999. Fans never really bought Hogan going back to the red and yellow in WCW, so Sting delivering a long awaiting ass beating to Hogan was met with quite the positive response.

Didn't The Undertaker have a gimmick early in his career called "The Punisher" Dice Morgan? Why not give this gimmick to Matt Morgan now since the last name is at least appropriate? Hey, at least we get a repackaging of Test out of it. The guy has needed one desperately since about 2002.

Strangely enough I found this show a bit better than Raw, though they seriously need to get Morrison off the mic. Let him practice in front of a mirror or in the back, but he's lethal in front of a crowd. There were some fun things on this show though. Stevie getting 2 in a row over Thorn was amusing, nice to see him not be a total jobber. Also the main event was quite good, but let's see where they book it from here. Personally here is what I would do: Punk takes Morrison the full 15 mins. next week, thus earning the title shot at SS. Make it Extreme Rules for the hell of it. And there Punk wins the title. But they should not have Punk simply beat Morrison next week, since they have an avenue to get Punk the title shot without blowing their wad with Punk actually beating him. Dreamer is someone who seems to work better now than he did at his peak, if that makes sense. As in when he was younger he did these goofy brawls that didn't really show the man could work (recall the Cactus promos on this exact topic, where he bemoaned Tommy for doing hardcore brawling when he should be actually wrestling).

Wanna hear something funny? I remember in my local paper when that 1998 Psycho came out it got ***1/2 and the reviewer (I forgot who) said Vince Vaughn was much better than Anthony Perkins! As far as sequels to remakes, I'd say Ocean's 13 was good. 12 wasn't so much though. I would have also put that 1976 King Kong on this list. I'm not especially fond of the Jackson 2005 movie either, but it's at least a well made film. Neither can touch the 1933 original however. The only thing I wonder about with the 1933 Kong is why Bruce Cabot was the hero in it instead of resident RKO action hero Joel McCrea. What is doubly curious is that McCrea was in The Most Dangerous Game (1932) with Fay Wray and Robert Armstrong (the other 2 Kong leads) and that film was also produced for RKO by Cooper and Schoedsack. In fact, Most Dangerous Game uses the same basic jungle sets as Kong, right down to the famous huge log over the chasm!