Since Wrestlemania there’s been nothing but stories about John Cena winning an amazing 17th title, blah blah blah… It’s a “History making moment”, yadda yadda yadda…
Like…of course he did. It’s the storyline. It’s quite literally “in the script”.
This isn’t an achievement. Why is this in my sports news next to last night’s hockey scores instead of next to an article about who was the bitchiest on the lastest episode of Real Housewives?
I get it. I loved Wrestling growing up. Back when we all WERE pretending it was real; Macho Man, Hulk Hogan, The Undertaker, etc… But I thought at some point they steered into the whole “entertainment” aspect when most of us grew the hell up and clued into the absurdity of it all.
It’s a soap opera with fighting. Of course fans are talking about the characters and the story. Nobody talking about anything that happens in a soap Opera will add that it’s just fiction, they’re talking about the events.
People are excited about the writting in the show they watch. 90 banillion articles came out about Severence too.
People that are fans then play into the kayfabe, as thats a large part of the point of the show.
Let people enjoy things, they arent harming you by talking about wrestling.
This isn’t an achievement. Why is this in my sports news next to last night’s hockey scores instead of next to an article about who was the bitchiest on the lastest episode of Real Housewives?
Because wrestling is a huge business and it has a lot of overlap with combat sports fans.
Like…of course he did. It’s the storyline. It’s quite literally “in the script”.
Yesn’t.
An actor breaking the record for most best performer oscars won in a career would also be newsworthy, yet you can absolutely pay your way to an oscar.
John Cena is remarkable in that he’s such a draw that a multi-billion dollar organization decided to set his career as the new ceiling to break for the next big star, by breaking a record untouched for decades, might I add. That’s newsworthy.
That isn’t scripted, that is a performer being skilled at what he does, as much as I personally don’t enjoy his work.
But I thought at some point they steered into the whole “entertainment” aspect when most of us grew the hell up and clued into the absurdity of it all.
This is like, the most “I learned something so the rest of the world learned it with me” I’ve ever seen.
Wrestling has been known to be fake for over a century; newspapers stopped reporting on it as a factual sport in the early 1900s.
Hell, it was known to be fakery before it was ever televised.
Kids don’t know until they do.
It’s live action martial arts anime theater. No more, no less.
tl;dr: Should John Cena’s record-breaking 17th title win be in the papers? absolutely. Sports section? Maybe, depends. It is a “sport” in the same way that figure skating or synchronised swimming is.
Who cares? Let people enjoy it if it makes them happy.
Living in the western world - I hear nothing about Wrestling…
Yeah, I think this says more about OP’s information bubble.
Same. US defaultism strikes again. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone talk about wrestling in my life
Wrestling has a significant presence in Central America, Japan, and Europe. Presumably other regions as well but I really don’t follow the sport so my experience is all second-hand.
Where in Europe?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_wrestling_in_the_United_Kingdom
Quick little history of the last century in the UK.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_wrestling_promotions_in_Europe
Active circuits are pretty much everywhere.
That’s not significant at all. The viership is practically non existent. I’ve lived in 3 inches different countries in Europe plus the US. Not once have I’ve seen wrestling make the news anywhere in Europe. It’s extremely fringe.
Most sports never make the news. Even in the US it’s pretty fringe except for the wrestlers who transition to Hollywood, like John Cena or Dave Bautista. Though it had a heyday from the Hulk Hogan era through Stone Cold and The Rock when people were much more aware, generally. I don’t know anyone who watches but I know a bunch of people who used to watch.
We’ve regressed into believing a lot of imaginary things are real.
Wrestling is the least of our worries.
WWE is less wrestling and more a glorification vehicle for the MacMahon syndicate. All the real pro wrestling is on AEW or the circuits now.
It’s a soap opera for men. Sure the storyline is made up, but people still like being entertained.
Note, I am assuming the match was good. I haven’t watch wrestling in a while, but some of those old matches are still fun to watch.
I’ve heard the soap opera comparison before. But I think “circus” is technically more accurate. You’ve got these very obvious professional athletes performing a well-rehearsed routine that is physically demanding and dramatically delivered.
Like, would you call a tightrope walker or a trapeze artist “fake”? If a dozen clowns pile out of a car and start performing back flips and somersaults and climbing into human pyramids and spraying one another with seltzer bottles, would you dismiss it as an obviously scripted display?
Would you go to a Harlem Globetrotters game and complain when they pull out a springboard and start doing stunt slam dunks?
It’s a show! It doesn’t need to be competitive in order to be fun.
Would you go to a Harlem Globetrotters game and complain when they pull out a springboard and start doing stunt slam dunks?
I did, so Ethan “Bubblegum” Tate made fun of me, I became verbally abusive, and then they asked me to leave.
Yeah from a physical aspect yes you are correct but wrestling has the storylines that the circus doesn’t. The Jerry springer like drama and feuds that people really get invested in with the same level of chair throwing.
The outcome of the match is predetermined while the participants pretend that it isn’t. That is why there are constant arguments about whether or not it’s “fake”.
The outcome of the match is predetermined while the participants pretend that it isn’t.
The adventure is in the journey, not the destination. I don’t care whether you win or you lose when I came to see two roided out giants do backflip kicks into one another’s torsos while their friends spray silly string to distract the combatants from the sidelines.
That is why there are constant arguments about whether or not it’s “fake”.
There is absolutely no question that the outcome of the matches is predetermined, in the same way that there is absolutely no doubt that the Rat King is going to get killed by the Nutcracker at the ballet. But both wrestling and ballet are athletic endeavors.
I agree that most of them are athletic, but they simply aren’t competing in an athletic competition.
I think your comparison to the Globetrotters is on point. In the ballet and other examples, the difference to me is that they’re not pretending to be in a ballet competition while dancing the ballet.
There’s no doubt that what most wrestlers do requires skill, talent, and athleticism but it’s “fake” in that what you’re watching isn’t an authentic athletic competition despite the people involved pretending that it is.
In the ballet and other examples, the difference to me is that they’re not pretending to be in a ballet competition while dancing the ballet.
In the Nutcracker, at least, they’re pretending to fence, in a choreographed dance. A first-time naive viewer who came out of the show offended when they discover skill at fencing has nothing to do with whether the dancers playing the Nutcracker or the Rat King wins would sound silly.
I do think that the kayfabe is what sets wrestling apart from more traditional performance art. The carnival-barker lying-to-your-face aspect of the performance is what makes it feel extra circus-y. But when you accept that the kayfabe is just part of the performance, you stop feeling offended by it and start recognizing degrees of commitment to the bit as part of the artform.
In the Nutcracker, at least, they’re pretending to fence, in a choreographed dance.
And no one writes stories about who won the fencing match.
Wrestling takes things to a ridiculous level compared to all other performances.
And no one writes stories about who won the fencing match.
Because it’s the same story that’s been running for the last century. Pro-Wrestling shows are just stories you haven’t seen before. And reviews of new performances are written about regularly.
Wrestling takes things to a ridiculous level
Sure. The exaggeration and the very deliberate kayfabe is a big part of the appeal. But then you see that in Cosplay and at the Renaissance Faire all the time. Running onto the tournament grounds and shouting “These aren’t real knights! They aren’t really jousting!!” is still considered gauche. And it breezes past the skills you need to ride a horse, maintain a kit, and put on the display without hurting yourself or your partner.
Meh, it was okay I suppose.
Cena doesn’t play a heel very well, and it’s kind of shitty that they used crotch shots in both of the WM main events.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a load of bots because Netflix spent the GDP of a small country on it.
No, we know the outcome’s predetermined. Last year’s Wrestlemania was basically written six-months ahead of time.
It’s still fun to watch though, and the athletes do some amazing shit.
I wouldn’t call them athletes if their skill isn’t what determines the outcome. Performers certainly like cirque du Soleil.
Why not? What definition of ‘athlete’ are you even using? Did you just decide this?
athlete Athletes compete or strive against others to attain a goal, TV wrestlers perform, or enact a feat before an audience.
You could say there goal is to perform for that audience, as a team….of athletes.
No idea why my previous comment shows as quoted, but whatever
My argument is that if they were actually competing that would mess with the performative nature of the storytelling.
LOL
Go try to do moonsault off a steel cage without breaking your neck and then you can judge.
Wrestling is a form of theatre.
Its just the high octane, sensationalized, ridiculous, coked up, american pop culture version of Theatre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnvSs3HEz2o excellent video where someone talks about why Wrestling got popular
Wrestling Isn’t Sports. But it also isn’t fake. Not entirely. the outcomes are usually scripted, and theres a card they are usually following (Sometimes, they aren’t. Whether its a botch, a shoot, etc) (botch means a mistake, a shoot means someone’s not acting, and they’re throwing real punches)
but the acrobatics and "stunts’ people are doing, are very real. an incredible amount of effort and skill is needed to have the physical ability and timing to make the stuff look real for the kids and cameras
thats why its called sports entertainment,
Just to further your point. It’s like Cirque du Soleil, scripted, but they are really doing those moves.
Makes me wonder how ‘real’ roman gladiators were.
Far as I know, not very.
Real combat with weapons is not all that entertaining.
You nick a guy in the right place and he’ll die a slow agonising death in the locker room, far from the eyes of the crowd, then you’re down an athlete and even the enslaved ones aren’t cheap, and they need training, and housing, and feeding, etc.
Moreover this may happen at any point of the fight and that’s not very satisfying to watch, think Mike Tyson one-hit KO vs a 20 minute banger with back nad forth.
So obviously you’d make it look good and take your time, send the crowd home happy. Even were it a real competition, which it was at times.
Gladiators that were intantionally killed in the arena were “bought” by the editor (the person paying for the games overall), and it was at a premium. Afterall the lanista got a major cut of their stable’s wins, so you’d have to cover the sum of all the potential winnings of the rest of their careers, and then some, to make it worth it.
So it wasn’t quite pro wrestling, but it was definitely close, the economics of it make more sense that way, and the (relative) longevity of certain documented gladiators also.
Interesting thanks. Not all that surprising though.
Counterpoint- all sports are silly. That’s why they are called games.
I don’t dunk on wrestling fans anymore because people are free to enjoy whatever they want. But it’s always been like this. It didn’t change - you did. Personal growth!
I agree to some extent, but there’s an important difference between sport and performance. WWE is categorically separate from say, BJJ. Sure, they both have guys rolling around on the floor, and they’re both kinda silly, but one is a real competition with rules and skill while the other is a predetermined show.
Not all sports are games, if you cant quickly grab some friends and head out to play it, its not a game.
All sports are games. Not all athletic competitions are sports.
What athletic competition would not be a game if all sports are games? I mean, honestly, what is the difference you see between “sport” and “athletic competition”?
You can extend or contract “game” as much as you want, but I can’t think of a definition of game that would encompass all sports but not all athletic competitions (if there really is a difference).
Track and field events are not games.
Gymnastics or any kind of event involving a choreographed routine. Diving. Really any kind of race.
I don’t consider all athletic competitions to be sports.
Why track and field events not games? They have rules, can be won or lost, and can be played casually if you think that is a requirment.
Take shot put, hammer throw, and javelin, for example. The game is who can throw the object in a certain way the furtherest. I could play a shot put game with some friends at a river bank by drawing a line in the sand and seeing who can huck the heaviest rock on the shore the furthest.
There’s a reason they call them Olympic Games.
Really any activity with some structure is a game if it is play and not “real”, even better if it can help practice a skill useful in life. There is a difference between a running race (a game) and running for your life from a bear (not a game). Between MMA and a street fight. Between war games and a shooting war.
Nah. Those aren’t games. The rules are often quite loose. You’re often not even directly competing with anyone else. Like, one person acts, and later another person acts and the results are compared. Your opponent’s actions don’t affect your results. Those field events don’t even necessarily have a set order to act on… people just wander in and out making their attempts, it’s mostly them competing with themselves.
You could run a race asynchronously as well, but time constraints prevent that.
Games have action, AND reaction. They have strategy. Throw things harder isn’t a strategy. Run faster longer isn’t a strategy.
The rules are quite loose? Why else would they have eagle eyed officials watching closely to disqualify athletes for infractions.
Games can absolutely be played asynchronously. Games can have scoring systems instead of head-to-head.
Would you say pinball is not a game?
I didn’t think I needed to get out the dictionary definition of game, but I hope this clears it up… Definitions from Oxford Languages: “noun, a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.”
