 |
| The biggest reason behind most of these six pack entries Photo Credit: Online World of Wrestling |
Now, I'm not saying the Attitude Era sucked. I mean, portions of it did suck, but I'm not going to lie and say that the whole thing was a waste. There was a lot of buzz surrounding wrestling, some of the all-time greats did their thing during that time and it felt special to be a wrestling fan. Let's be real with ourselves though; there was a lot of garbage going on as well, and a lot of that garbage has been passed down the line. Here are six reasons why I feel like the Attitude Era may have done more long term harm than good for the wrestling industry:
1. It has conditioned fans to expect swerves.
The swerve is probably the most powerful tool you can use to shock a crowd and get them talking. Well, I should say it used to be the most powerful. Now, some fans aren't happy unless there's a surprise on a given card, and that's all Vince Russo's fault. Russo, who was head booker during the Attitude days, used swerves like a crutch, sometimes having two or three on a given show. It burnt me out on them to the point where at one point, if a segment proceeded with a guy making a save or a tenuous alliance reached at the end of a beatdown, I expected a turn to happen. Hell, I still can't shake that feeling whenever I see people team up for the first time, no matter how much I tell myself otherwise. You could say I'm still shellshocked by the swerve-every-segment style that was prevalent in the late '90s in the WWF.
Bookers and writers almost have to recondition the newer fans to expect good storytelling and happy endings without massive swerving in order to set things right with the universe. This is a long and arduous process in WWE, and with Russo still in charge in TNA, it's something that may be toned down from time to time, but it's still there. Would it be melodramatic to say that it's wrecked storytelling in wrestling for about a decade? Maybe, but it's also true.
2. It deemphasized what made wrestling so unique – the matches themselves.
I recently got into an argument at the A1 boards with a dude who kept insisting to me that wrestling wasn't sport, but television and strictly television. Therefore, it's only natural that it should be booked for TV rules. I was dumbfounded, because for one, I don't think it's pure sport anyway, and two, I've always found wrestling to be unique in that it had elements of sport and elements of theater but wasn't wholly in either category no matter how many things it had in common with either medium. A huge part of that mix has to do with the wrestling portion of it. If you deemphasize what happens in the ring, then how is pro wrestling different than a scripted drama or sitcom? It's not, and that puts wrestling behind the 8-ball when it comes to competing with those shows in several different categories, categories that I think would be better off fleshed out better in a different post.
Starting in the Attitude Era, the WWF and WCW both started booking for ratings, and increasingly, those ratings weren't tied to matches with decisive finishes as they were to teases for matches with fuck finishes or non-finishes, or "confrontations" or big reveals to surprises rather than Wrestler X vs. Grappler Y. That attitude has stayed over to today, when main events to shows are promos or "confrontations" rather than matches. You have a guy in Kevin Dunn in the WWE's front office who wants to ban the word "wrestling" from the pro wrestling, and another guy in TNA's front office in Eric Bischoff who identifies more with a TV producer rather than a booker and whose main program in TNA is a fucking court battle between Dixie Carter and Hulk Hogan. Wrestling has made a comeback, especially in WWE (even if it's not allowed to be called wrestling anymore), but the attitudes of the people in charge and sadly of some fans is that the matches don't matter as much as the TV stuff.
3. It made fuck finishes turned up to 11 the norm.
I'm sure I'm exaggerating here, but just going off memory, if there was a match on either RAW or Nitro on a given Monday, the odds of it having a clean finish were probably around 15%, tops. I mean, I don't remember very many matches off the top of my head, even when you extend to PPVs, that had one guy pinning or submitting another cleanly between 1996 and 1999. I'm sure the people in charge thought they were protecting everyone by making no one appear to lose heat by losing a match, but when you protect everyone, you're protecting no one. That mindset still persists, mostly in TNA, but the way that there were no clean finishes in the late '90s mainstream really took a toll on the fans' perception of how wrestling matches were supposed to end.
4. It forever changed the role of the authority figure for the worse.
Vince McMahon was as big a player as any in the rise of the WWF in the late '90s, and it wasn't just because of what he did behind the scenes. You could argue that he was the best foil Steve Austin ever had, not Bret Hart, not Undertaker, not The Rock, not Shawn Michaels, Triple H or anyone who was an active wrestler at the time. He played the role well, a little too well if you ask me. Because his character was so innovative and successful for the time, everyone, whether it was WCW, WWF/E or TNA, that followed has used some sort of variation on the template.
It was fine for Vince to do it because he was original, insanely charismatic and actually took to the ring to wrestle when the time came for it. He wasn't what I'd call good, but he was passable. But everyone who came after for the most part has felt like a warmed over rehash of the original Mr. McMahon evil boss. What was worse was that a scant few of them could bump and take a payoff in the ring that was satisfying to the feud at hand. Even if the authority figure isn't heel, that person is still almost expected to be overreaching to the point of micromanagement. I'm sorry, but when I watch a wrestling show, I want the focus to be on the guys and girls who can perform and deliver a payoff, not a stuffy NPC. However, the authority figure has become a lasting vestige that doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.
5. If it didn't completely and utterly destroy kayfabe, it at the very least struck a critical blow to it.
Again, this was something that seemed like a good idea at the time. The Montreal Screwjob blurred the lines between what was scripted and what was behind the scenes. Rather than take it as a happy accident to start off a major upturn, Russo took it as everything should have the lines blurred so much that no one has any pretense that it's staged anymore. There were so many worked shoots, especially when Russo was left to his own devices in WCW, that it was almost like they didn't even pretend that there was a line anymore.
Part of the allure of pro wrestling is that people want to believe that it's real, even if they know in their heart of hearts that it's staged. Blurring the edges and crossing the line only dilutes that, and throwing it in the audience's face doesn't endear the show to them. It only makes them aware of how fake the show is.
6. It planted the seed in everyone's head that good wrestling TV had to be TV-14 or MA.
If you listened to a certain, vocal contingent of wrestling fans, the move to TV-PG was the worst thing the WWE ever did. This is where the biggest pang of nostalgia for Attitude comes in. Of course, they don't remember that the worst booked show in wrestling history, Impact, is TV-14. The WWF was good back in '99 when it was more risqué, so therefore, that's what is going to cure what ails the product today!
Not so fast. It's not the absence of the license to work blue that's holding WWE Creative back. It's the lack of talent, the lack of understanding on how to build a quality wrestling program. It wasn't the lewd and lascivious nature of the programming that brought out the quality. It was the fact that they had so many of the greatest wrestling personalities ever on one roster that led to that, even with the shortcomings in booking. Hell, if the ratings system was in place back in the Rock 'n Wrestling Days, the WWF would have been a straight TV-PG, and those would have been the salad days for folks watching during the last doldrums before the Attitude Era began. It's not the edginess of the content, it's the quality of it, and lewdness for the sake of lewdness is not going bring back the salad days.
Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!
Great read. The Attitude Era ran along side with my middle school days, so naturally that type of in your face TV was the talk of the classrooms the next days. I do enjoy old Attitude Era shows, but it's certainly flawed. It's like a group of people who come to a party and they are the life of the night, but after they leave there is a big mess to clean up.
ReplyDeleteExcellent column. The Attitude Era did more to damage the industry than help it, and it's about time those with rose-tinted glasses finally take them off and realize it.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the Attitude Era was that it was so successful, and like everything else, what made it successful is going to be used and abused to no end.
ReplyDeleteBut I think you're making a mistake in not giving credit where it's due. Look at acts that were around in 94 and 95 and compare those same guys to their role in the AE.
You had Jesse James who went from singing Karaoke as The Roadie to the incredibly over NAO. Billy Gunn went from being a Smoking Gunn feuding with The Godwins to NAO. The Ringmaster to SCSA. Hunter Hearst Helmsley to DX. Bret Hart's heel turn and hating America. Etc. All from bad characters, to top characters with compelling and edgier storylines - sometimes with talent, sometimes not.
I think the problem with Russo - well, one of them - is that its been 15 years since it began. Times change. Another problem is he needed McMahon. TNA lacks the top boss to make the tough decisions, filter out the shit, and to keep the big picture in perspective.
I bugged out on wrestling during the Attitude Era and couldn't explain why at the time except that this was not what I loved about wrestling. (I began watching in the mid 80s.) And I haven't been able to put into words why I thought it was dumb, except that there wasn't nearly enough actual wrestling to suit me. Thanks for sensible summation. :)
ReplyDelete@CO
ReplyDeleteI didn't deny credit to it, read the first couple of paragraphs. It was important, but I think people overrate its importance given the sharp drop off that happened afterwards as well as the bad habits started during that era that were kept. As good for business that it was in the short term, it was terrible in the long term.
It also sped everything up to such an extent, that there are no good long title reigns or feuds that last a year or more.
ReplyDelete@TH
ReplyDeleteI agree with all your points to a degree, and a big one you missed with how they treat titles as props (which is why those calling for them to hotshot it to Lawler are nuts). But my point is that is from repeatedly abusing a good thing, not from not being a good thing in the first place.
Even so, WWE is a lot better today then in 93-95, in the product they deliver, in the characters they have, in the wrestling they give and in the business they do - and a lot of that they owe from the AE.
You hit so many good points. The talent then comapred to now is just not the same. Monday night wars changes wrestling & not all of it for the good!
ReplyDeleteI think the WWE has made strides but now just lack talent. But I think WCW forced WWF to take chances back then bc of the pressure they felt ... there is no need to push the creative envelope if you are the only real game in town!
I am hoping with names like Y2J, UT, HHH, Batistia, HBK, all gone or close to it... maybe it will force them to give guys a chance! Ya never what incident/promo/moment it takes to make someone a star. Foley was a good worker but not till he threw himself off a cage... Austin... was a good worker but not till he made 3:16 speech blasting JakeSnake born again status after winning KOR... The Rock was ok with the Nation but not until he gave an interview during PPV & started refering himself in the 3rd person.
Nice read. To me the nWo had more to do with conditioning fans to expect swerves than the Attitude era.
ReplyDeleteThe swerve is the crack cocaine of booking. If used correctly, it provides a quick boost. But over time, it's addictive and destructive.
ReplyDeleteThe mass-market success of wrestling depends on strong characters with well-established identities. You can't build an identity if you're constantly swerving. (Samoa Joe could be a headliner, and Eric Young a decent midcarder, if they weren't being swerved every couple of months.)
The vast majority of wrestling fans simply don't pay very close attention; they're in it for a shot of entertainment. There are a lot of wrestling fans who, for instance, haven't yet gotten to know Alberto del Rio or Wade Barrett -- at least, not well enough to really care about them and pay money to see them.
Every time you do a swerve -- unless it's somehow within the scope of the character, a la Triple H or Randy Orton -- you risk sending a wrestler back to square one, in terms of building an identity. This is why TNA isn't growing an audience; the casual fan has no idea who's who. Russo's response, of course, is to do even more swerves. Might make for a Dr. Feelgood moment, but it does nothing to build a successful wrestling promotion.
You leave the Attitude Era alone! The Attitude Era brought us Mark Henry getting blown by a tranny, live on RAW! Let's see someone getting "blown" during the snoozefest that is "The PG Era"!
ReplyDelete@Thomas
ReplyDeleteWe do every night HHH steps into the ring. Sure, he's blowing himself, but still.