Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2019 Attitude Era WWF is the most underrated Entertainment of all time. Granted it occurred at the perfect time for me to enjoy it, being in my teens the "attitude" part obviously appealed to me. But it was incredibly entertaining. I'm convinced if more people got over the "but it's fake" part, it would be huge in the UK (but obviously still not for everyone) 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 to be fair the rock was and still is one of the most watchable people in just about any medium, throw in stone cold, D generation X, mick foley and all the others, a much bigger chunk of it had nothing to do with the actual wrestling, the writing and acting was superb entertainment, the characters just worked, then towards the end they threw in an element of the backyard wrestling crazy stuff (some of the table ladders chairs tag matches were incredible to watch) not sure if they killed it with shit characters (cena the cash cow) bad writing and stories that felt forced (or if the promotion of said cash cows just became more apparent) or if they ran out of stuff we hadn't seen before so the extreme stuff lost it impact, they definitely pushed the PPV stuff too far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: to be fair the rock was and still is one of the most watchable people in just about any medium, throw in stone cold, D generation X, mick foley and all the others, a much bigger chunk of it had nothing to do with the actual wrestling, the writing and acting was superb entertainment, the characters just worked, then towards the end they threw in an element of the backyard wrestling crazy stuff (some of the table ladders chairs tag matches were incredible to watch) not sure if they killed it with shit characters (cena the cash cow) bad writing and stories that felt forced (or if the promotion of said cash cows just became more apparent) or if they ran out of stuff we hadn't seen before so the extreme stuff lost it impact, they definitely pushed the PPV stuff too far I think it's exactly like you said. The "Extreme" stuff lost the impact. They'd never be able to do it these days anyway, both in terms of a PC backlash and a safety backlash. Some of the things the wrestlers put themselves through back then wouldn't be allowed these days. For good reason, but at the time it was incredible. I think the internet has damaged it a lot. Everyone knows everything about everything to do with wrestling now. And everyone has an opinion on it and it's never the right thing. It was better back when you could watch it like you would watch any other fictional show. Disengage and watch the story spoiler free. I don't think you really get that anymore. We'll annoy people by talking about this in here 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Ultimate Warrior FTW 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 28, 2019 4 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Definitely one for this thread. I don't get it. Both activities sound **** horrendous to me. The second one, where the natural predator is absent from the food chain, I'm OK with. I wouldn't personally want to do it, but I get why it is (sometimes) necessary. Where there are, for example, no predators for deer, if they are left unattended, their numbers rocket, they destroy habitat, then they starve and die a much more painful death than an instant shot from a skilled marksman, who will pick off older &/or weaker specimens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 4 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said: Wrestling Sports Entertainment* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, blandy said: The second one, where the natural predator is absent from the food chain, I'm OK with. I wouldn't personally want to do it, but I get why it is (sometimes) necessary. Where there are, for example, no predators for deer, if they are left unattended, their numbers rocket, they destroy habitat, then they starve and die a much more painful death than an instant shot from a skilled marksman, who will pick off older &/or weaker specimens. exactly that, the deer stalker bloke i talked to at length about it and he made it sound like an art, he also told me the eye watering fines you can get for shooting the wrong thing if you told him you went to africa and sat in a box for 8 hours before shooting a lion with a cross bow from 4m away at a fake watering hole he'd probably punch you in the face 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, blandy said: The second one, where the natural predator is absent from the food chain, I'm OK with. I wouldn't personally want to do it, but I get why it is (sometimes) necessary. Where there are, for example, no predators for deer, if they are left unattended, their numbers rocket, they destroy habitat, then they starve and die a much more painful death than an instant shot from a skilled marksman, who will pick off older &/or weaker specimens. I can see why people do it when it's put like that. But I still think it takes a special kind of word removed to put a bullet into a living thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 28, 2019 8 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: I can see why people do it when it's put like that. But I still think it takes a special kind of word removed to put a bullet into a living thing. Obviously, it's your view and that's fine. Personally, speaking, an expert putting a bullet through the brain of a deer (say) they're not going to be able to catch and euthanise with a syringe - to me that's no different to "putting a dog to sleep" that vets do, for example. The actual act of killing for a greater good is regrettable, but I wouldn't personally label the actor as a special kind of word removed. Far from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 minute ago, blandy said: Obviously, it's your view and that's fine. Personally, speaking, an expert putting a bullet through the brain of a deer (say) they're not going to be able to catch and euthanise with a syringe - to me that's no different to "putting a dog to sleep" that vets do, for example. The actual act of killing for a greater good is regrettable, but I wouldn't personally label the actor as a special kind of word removed. Far from it. Yeah that's fair. Wrong words to use, I'll retract that. I just really, really hate hunting. I guess if someone is doing it solely for the reason you're saying they're doing it for then I can see the reasoning. But I'll stand by the above words for anyone that does it for fun or "sport". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 i think its the test of skill, the tracking ability, the time and precision it takes to sneak up on a deer, they're natural at hearing / spotting you, its not natural for humans to able to get that close and then the skill of the shot, or its the other way around, longer shot requiring more skill, you're talking guys getting 5m away from a deer before shooting it, or shooting a deer through the heart from 200m away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 Well, I think hunting is more or less in our genes.That's how we've survived for I don't know how many years. Hunting and farming which also includes killing animals. So hunting animals for food is pretty much natural for us. Hunting for fun on the other hand... I won't call it a sport. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 8 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Anyone who takes pleasure from shooting animals is a **** psychopath Is this your clinical opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 1 hour ago, villa4europe said: i think its the test of skill, the tracking ability, the time and precision it takes to sneak up on a deer, they're natural at hearing / spotting you, its not natural for humans to able to get that close and then the skill of the shot, or its the other way around, longer shot requiring more skill, you're talking guys getting 5m away from a deer before shooting it, or shooting a deer through the heart from 200m away I don't have a problem with humans killing animals for food (though it's not a universal acceptance - if the animals are vulnerable to extinction, for example) but I absolutely have an issue with killing animals for sport. So stalking (with whatever skills are necessary) in order to just display a skill is grim. If you're hunting to either acquire meat for you or your community or in order to protect other livestock then that's a different story. If it's a measure of the skill on tracking, precision, sneaking up on and so on then surely it's quite possible to do all of that without killing the prey? Is the measure of the skill and so on actually doing it and knowing that you did or having a trophy (with however many points - which don't demonstrate the skill but rather the luck) stuck on your wall as a talking point for a dinner party? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 It's pest control, it's usually employment from the land owner to kill deer rather than just a free for all, it's done to control numbers the sport element of it is just added to the fact that those animals are going to be killed, they could lure and trap them instead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted January 28, 2019 Share Posted January 28, 2019 17 minutes ago, villa4europe said: It's pest control, it's usually employment from the land owner to kill deer rather than just a free for all, it's done to control numbers the sport element of it is just added to the fact that those animals are going to be killed, they could lure and trap them instead I think that's a very, very charitable view. It strikes me that stalking is as good method of 'pest control' as hunting with hounds is. One may as well look to lamping as a means of culling badgers and dealing with bovine TB. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 1 hour ago, snowychap said: If it's a measure of the skill on tracking, precision, sneaking up on and so on then surely it's quite possible to do all of that without killing the prey? Is the measure of the skill and so on actually doing it and knowing that you did or having a trophy (with however many points - which don't demonstrate the skill but rather the luck) stuck on your wall as a talking point for a dinner party? Where my in laws live there are loads of wild deer and wild boar i quite often go out into the forest and see if I can sneak up close to some wild life , mainly just the thrill of getting close to a wild animal and the enjoyment of putting one over nature ... though one time I did manage to get within afew feet of a family of wild boar and needless to say being charged by mummy boar as it protects its babies ranks highly on the list of stupid things TonyH has done ... thankfully it was pre knee op days when I could still move a bit ! get eagles out there as well but haven’t found a successful way of sneaking up on one of them yet !! but to the villagers I’m just the crazy Englishman who turns up a couple of times a year ,for them a wild boar is food and a new rug for the kitchen , which is at least better than hunting for sport and some sense of glory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tonyh29 Posted January 29, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 29, 2019 9 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said: Wrestling When I was 10 used to go with my school friends to Woking centre halls and we’d see Big Daddy , Gaint Haystacks and co do their stage managed routine as we all lapped it up chanting “Easy , Easy” when Big Daddy finally despatched the bad guy ... then we’d all queue up outside to get his autograph and in some cases a quick snap on. 110 film camera that might never get developed and if it did tended to be blurred then we all turned 11 and realised wrestling was shit , which is the approach anyone that doesn’t want to still be living with their mum when they are 40 should take to wrestling 6 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, snowychap said: Is this your clinical opinion? Yes. Want to see my medical journals? Edited January 29, 2019 by Stevo985 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 29, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, Pelle said: Well, I think hunting is more or less in our genes.That's how we've survived for I don't know how many years. Hunting and farming which also includes killing animals. So hunting animals for food is pretty much natural for us. Hunting for fun on the other hand... I won't call it a sport. There's a lot of stuff that is "natural" that isn't acceptable in modern society. Excusing something just because it's "natural" is a shitty approach, imo. But this is probably a discussion for the vegetarianism thread Edited January 29, 2019 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts