Movies is different.
When I watch movies with different mindsets.
When I just want disposable fun, I will watch an 80s action movie or whatever, because I am not in the mood for something heavy or groundbreaking.
When I watch something a bit more 'deep', I watch something thats got some meat on its bones, with actors who I know are going to bring something to the role.
That said, there are actors I cannot stand because they are the Cenas of the acting world. Guys like Jim Carrey. A guy that was shoved down our throats while he was flavour of the month, and I hated pretty much everything he did.
And then theres Adam Sandler, a guy who will do a good film, and then he will do a mediocre film.
When I watch a wrestling, I want to watch a wrestling show.
There is only one mindset.
When I watch a film, I am watching a single entity, and can choose to avoid watching anything wih Jim Carrey in, but if I want to watch a good wrestling match, I have to watch all the dross that goes on around it as well, as its all intertwined.
TNA I watch sparingly these days because the product is so bad, and is just rehashing all the old shit that was bad in the old days.
It wouldnt be so bad if it was the good stuff, but its not.
I have watched it a sum total of 3 times this year to at least give it a chance to see if there is improvement, and there hasnt been so far, so I dont watch it.
WWE though has enough going for it to keep me tuned in.
Like most things though, the bad stuff is really bad, which is why it gets talked about so much, while the good stuff is rarely higher than what is expected, which is a damn shame.
And this is why I get so riled up, as you put it, about wrestling.
Cause I want it to be what it can be.
I dont want it perfect, but I could live with the Cenas, Batistas and Hogans of this world, if there was a similar level of investment in the rest of the show as they put into guys like them.
Take WM for instance.
My complaint was that the Rey/Punk match was too short, not that it was bad, yet you totally failed to read what I said, and defended it as a good match.
That may be the case, but why was it so short?
Why not give equal time to a match like that?
Why make it a throwaway match that nobody is going to be talking about, when it had so much more potential than the Cena/Batista match?
Its very similar to what Jericho has said about RVDs debut on TNA.
Here you have a guy the fans have been clammoring to see, and they go and put him in a match that lasts five seconds, the proceeds to have him beat down.
It didnt make sense.
If you know what the fans want, why give them so little of it?
And just to give you some persective that its not just typical wrestling fans who were not impressed with WM as a whole, I have since spoken to people who dont read news sites, dont know the ins and outs of whats going on, and they thought the show was pretty shit other than the Taker/HBK match.
I have also spoken to some wrestlers that I know, and they are of the same opinion.
Funnily though, I disagree with them.
I dont think it was shite, I think it was less than it should have been, but had enough redeeming moments to raise it from being called shite.
