If Angle can't have Bret give him....

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Then what is the purpose of selling? Why be consistent? Why get hurt? If "adrenaline" is something that comes along without rhyme or reason, why don't two guys just fight until one of them dies? Extreme, yes, but that's essentially what you're saying.

 

HBK's *bad back* - the reason he retired from wrestling in the first place, sure as hell was a factor in the match. I'd equate the amount of moves Jericho did on Michaels in that match to a sledgehammer shot. Besides, if 4 years couldn't totally heal HBK's back, then why should 6 months? Why is Michaels back the focus of his matches anyways??

[chaosrage 0]

Then what is the purpose of selling?  Why be consistent?  Why get hurt? If "adrenaline" is something that comes along without rhyme or reason, why don't two guys just fight until one of them dies?  Extreme, yes, but that's essentially what you're saying.

........he kips up once. He doesn't keep doing it throughout the match.

 

HBK's *bad back* - the reason he retired from wrestling in the first place, sure as hell was a factor in the match. I'd equate the amount of moves Jericho did on Michaels in that match to a sledgehammer shot. Besides, if 4 years couldn't totally heal HBK's back, then why should 6 months? Why is Michaels back the focus of his matches anyways??

 

It's not, Flair went after his leg and Orton went after his shoulder.

 

A backbreaker and a boston crab is the equivalent of a sledgehammer? Are you serious?

[Guest Rob Edwards]

Try reading my fucking post. The point is that it isn't meant to be good in the super-technical Smark sense, it's meant to be good in the markish sense, which is what really matters because they're out to make money and a card full of nothing but matches smarks would want would be boring as all-fuck and make very little profit. I didn't see a lot of technical marvels in the WWF main event during the Hulkamania era, did you? Look at all those ***** money matches going on during the 98-99 period. Technically sound matches have their place, but it isn't meant to be the only mode of operation, and only in sparse doses as the main attraction.

 

Not meaning to be an ass Kotz but....Shawn didn't draw

[Guest wildpegasus]

Top Ten Grossing Films of all Time, courtesy of imdb.com:

 

1) Titanic

2) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

3) Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

4) Jurassic Park

5) Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

6) Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

7) Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

8) Independence Day

9) Spider-Man

10) Star Wars

 

Boy, you told me.

Side note: Are those receipts adjusted for inflation?

 

Note that all except one are from the last decade, with 6 coming within the last 5 years

Of course not. Those rankings are the Worldwide listings, that's all. The US rankings for all time are quite different...

 

1 Titanic Par. $600,788,188 1997

2 Star Wars Fox $460,998,007 1977

3 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial Uni. $435,110,554 1982

4 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace Fox $431,088,297 1999

5 Spider-Man Sony $403,706,375 2002

6 Jurassic Park Uni. $357,067,947 1993

7 Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers NL $339,789,881 2002

8 Finding Nemo Dis. $339,666,356 2003

9 Forrest Gump Par. $329,694,499 1994

 

...and the following is the US rankings, only adjusted for ticket price inflation, listed is the amount for inflation and the other one also....

 

1

Gone With the Wind

MGM

$1,268,839,894

$198,655,278

1939

 

2

Star Wars

Fox

$1,118,591,056

$460,998,007

1977

 

3

The Sound of Music

Fox

$894,368,562

$158,671,368

1965

 

4

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial

Uni.

$890,845,225

$434,974,579

1982

 

5

The Ten Commandments

Par.

$822,680,000

$65,500,000

1956

 

6

Titanic

Par.

$811,387,059

$600,788,188

1997

 

7

Jaws

Uni.

$804,334,978

$260,000,000

1975

 

8

Doctor Zhivago

MGM

$779,570,661

$111,721,910

1965

 

9

The Exorcist

WB

$694,371,245

$232,671,011

1973

 

10

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

Dis.

$684,520,000

$184,925,486

1937

 

...by the way, why the hell is this in this thread?

But in fairness for the overall movie ratings we must point out that some movies get released over and over in the theatre.

[Art Sandusky 0]

I never said that success = good, I said success = profit-making. I really wish you'd all stop twisting that.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

"Exciting matches are GOOD. Exciting matches get the crowd into them. The crowd then is more willing to spend more time and money on the product after they leave the arena, as will those watching on television. This is why nonsensical action films make so much money."

[Art Sandusky 0]

Very well then: success = profit-making, and profit = good. Is that sufficient for you? For a bunch of smarks (the operative part of "smark" being "smart"), you sure can't make logic connections.

[Guest Rob Edwards]

Yeah but Shawn didn't make profit and Hogan did

 

when confronted by the idea of Hogan being better most Shawn marks would tend to laugh it out of the thread