Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to “Interinactivity” - the column that the wonderfully talented Jonah Kue called “An idealistic and somewhat out of touch perspective on wrestling versus a realistic one”, and the column that our good friend and frequent contributor Flaming Wombat would call “a decorative pillar, most often composed of stone and typically having a cylindrical or polygonal shaft with a capital and usually a base.” He’s a very literal man – and, yes, I know – that’s the wrong type of column. But take it easy on him, he’s a busy man, having to point out all my “mistakes”.
Last week, I covered the utter absurdity of complaining about using
upper mid-card wrestlers to pull apart Brock Lesnar and John Cena. As usual, I made my point perfectly, yet still, for some reason, some confusion remains. We’ll get to the continuation of that topic in a minute. But first…
Last week, I debuted a term we’ll be using frequently here on Interinactivity. The word was “Twonk”. Reader “Steven” had this to say about the term…
Steven: Twonk is a great word. We used it as an insult in the 80s, it never got old, and I’m glad – GLAD I say – that some one’s using it again. For what it’s worth, we stole it from some UK sitcom. Just thought I’d throw in some positivity…
Thank you Steven. And I have an absolute gem this week. I already responded to this week’s Twonk in last week’s comments, but for anyone who didn’t see, this was too good to not make an article.
Flaming Wombat: If you can criticize wrestling without watching it, surely I can criticize your columns without reading them.
Blair: You don’t have to watch wrestling to keep up with it any more than you need to watch baseball to keep up with it.
(After some more back and forth – found here if you’re interested – I pointed out that I can see the stats for any game or any player online.)
Flaming Wombat: Maybe you can, but you surely can’t write informed columns about that player.
Blair: Of course I can. In fact, both qualitative and quantitative results on statistics would provide a MORE accurate basis for an argument that simply WATCHING that player would.
There was no response to that, although he did respond to other stuff after that was written. I guess he had nothing more to offer on the subject. I can’t complain, I got some quality stuff from him last week.
Thank you once again, Wombat. Hope to see you again this week. Twonk on.
Law: In reference to the previous week’s Raw, a replay of Brock kicking Cena’s hat was shown. Why? This serves only to make Brock Lesnar look like a prat (another great British word you’re free to utilise). There was no reason to show that replay- the replay of him destroying Cena, fine, it made him look an unstoppable monster. The replay of him kicking Cena’s hat is ludicrous.
Blair: This segment was one of the few that I bothered YouTubeing. Can’t say I remember that part, so maybe I missed it – so, I can’t really offer an objective opinion of it. But, and again, I say this without having seen it, it sounds to me like it falls into that same category of why anyone would CARE who came out to break them up. I don’t know why you say it’s ludicrous – most likely, it’s just WWE’s shitty attempt at symbolism. They do it all the time, like when Andre took the cross off Hogan or one of Undertaker’s opponents would randomly kick his urn around. The idea seems to be that Brock is sick of Cena and everything about him – like how The Rock tossed a bunch of Cena’s gear in the river. Both of those were a show of dominance. This sounds like kind of the same thing. It’s not difficult to believe that Brock could dominate Cena – Brock looks like he sleeps in a fucking steroid chamber.
From what I can grasp, the Cena / Brock thing is a continuation of Cena not being able to catch a break. He got caught with the Eve thing. He lost his buddy Zack Ryder. He got tortured and beat around by Kane. He’s now getting booed right off the planet. He got beat by The Rock. Then he came out to accept it like a man, and instead, now a returning Brock Lesnar is kicking his ass. You’re supposed to feel sorry for him, I guess? I don’t know.
Law: Brock Lesnar was then officially re-introduced by John Laurinaitis, and given time to speak in the ring. Establishing this link to an authority figure- and one who is ridiculed for his own attempts to cut promos- does no good for Brock Lesnar. Laurinaitis is not the person to speak for Lesnar, and Lesnar as muscle for the GM is a waste of both his ability and character development. Likewise, not letting him near a live microphone is a lesson the company should’ve learned long ago.
Blair: Laurinaitis being ridiculed for his own attempts to cut promos is part of his deal. It’s part of why you’re supposed to dislike him. People often forget that. The guy has crazy heat. Vickie Guererro heat. And unless I’ve missed something (very possible), you’re jumping to conclusions assuming that Lesnar is going to be Ace’s muscle. Regardless, I wouldn’t worry about Lesnar’s character development – he doesn’t need it any more than The Rock did when he came back. After quitting and hitting it big in UFC, Lesnar is a made man. He doesn’t need to worry about “making it”. He’s already made it. WWE knows that. And I’m sure Brock does as well. That’s why they’re paying him what I assume is a large amount of money for 40 appearances over the course of a year.
Law: Brock Lesnar was later shown speaking in his natural soft voice backstage, stumbling over words as he always has. Brock Lesnar is supposed to be a physically threatening menace. Giving him mic time undermines that hugely.
Blair: Yeah, I’m with you here. Brock is not good with words. Although, I don’t see how the fact that he can’t speak all that well takes AWAY from him being a physically threatening menace. A guy who can kick your ass is still going to kick your ass if you find out he has a suttter. Also, Brock has shown that he IS able to speak with passion in the right situation – I remember the odd decent promo from him in WWE, but I’m more speaking about UFC. Anyone else remember his Bud / Coors Light speech? Regardless, I agree – just let him be an asskicker. Have him say something – small – every once in a while. Like that video / interview package they used on Brock from last Monday. I thought that was well done – and something small like that is all he needs.
James Alsop: The scene from Raw, however, was even worse, because not only did a hundred guys run in only to prove themselves utterly powerless against the strength of Lesnar and Cena, but none of them were even named! They were simply, according to Cole, “the entire locker-room.” And they were all made to look weak against the might of Cena and Lesnar.
Blair: They’re supposed to look weak against Cena and Lesnar. Cena and Lesnar are the stars of the show. And why would any of the run-ins need to be named? Anyone watching knows who they are. Especially Shaemus. Dude sticks out like Doink The Clown.
James Alsop: Cynical Bastard (I think) made a great point: he said that it was cool to see Lesnar having to be restrained by The World’s Strongest Man. I agree, but unfortunately it’s a moot point because for the purposes of the angle, Henry was just a nameless face in the crowd, unacknowledged by commentary – and Lesnar shrugged him off twice!
Blair: Right. But did you really think that Henry had a chance of holding Lesnar back? At what point during planning do you think anyone suggested “So, these two guys, who are going to be the main focus of the show… let’s have one of them overpowered by Sexual Chocolate.”
Speaking of that bearded chinless useless fuckface, didn’t Henry lose to Cena in like 3 minutes sometime in the past couple months? You want the guy who Cena finished off in 3 minutes able to overpower the guy that Cena is now fighting?
James Alsop: Furthermore, the men feuding over SmackDown’s top title were stood right next to one another and weren’t batting an eyelid. Now THAT’S laughable. What did it achieve apart from completely shattering fans’ suspension of disbelief? More to the point, what did WWE achieve by showing Sheamus and Daniel Bryan brushed off like paper dolls that it couldn’t have otherwise achieved through having Cena and Lesnar shrug off random referees and security guards with no credibility to lose?
Blair: I believe it WAS done to suspend disbelief – just not towards Shaemus and Bryan. Who cares about suspending disbelief for them in the face of something as big as Cena / Brock is supposed to be? I think people were supposed to suspend that disbelief towards the guys that are in the main event. That’s what I got out of it. And obviously, using wrestlers was done because referees and security guards wouldn’t have been able to get the job done, and wrestlers are tougher. Sure, they could have used Shaemus and someone else or Bryan and someone else.
I just wouldn’t have thought it would have made a difference to anyone. That was my point. And either WWE thought the same way, or they just overlooked it, which, if the case, is kind of the same thing as making that decision anyway.
James Alsop: Now, this is just my opinion, mind, but I think that having Sheamus, Del Rio and Bryan run in as part of a stupid crowd scene alongside Yoshi Tatsu and Dustin Rhodes is a bad thing. You implied it yourself: it makes the the World Heavyweight Championship look like the WWECW Title.
Blair: That’s because is basically is the WWECW Title.
James Alsop: I hope you won’t say that, though, because it’s tantamount to a circular argument. “Of course WWE is going to treat the belt as unimportant, because it’s obviously unimportant, because it’s treated as being so unimportant.” I mean, you wouldn’t be wrong to say that Sheamus as champ is less important than Punk, but just because that’s how it IS, doesn’t mean that’s how it should be presented on television. It annoyed me that the World Heavyweight Champion (the holder of the second-biggest title in the company, the belt that has been at the centre of so many classic feuds in recent years, the belt around which the entire main event scene on SmackDown revolves!) was one of the nameless men in the fray, while someone like CM Punk wasn’t.
Blair: “Tantamount.” Great word. Stealing that. .
A circular argument implies that no one ever made the choice to have the World Heavyweight Championship as inferior. Obviously, at some point, that decision was made.
If they’re going to have two World Titles, then one of them is always going to be looked at as “less” than the other. And naturally, the belt that they put on their less-important Friday night show is going to be that lesser belt. That big gold belt has been less important for YEARS now – but that’s really neither here nor there. Your opinion of how it SHOULD be has no bearing on the Brock / Cena segment – what matters is how it IS. The segment itself is just the illustration of that.
James Alsop: Yes, Punk is a bigger name with the #1 belt, but does that mean that the #2 champ should be made to look insignificant?
Blair: He’s not. Not because of this segment, anyway. It’s in your head. WWE have been busting their asses for years trying to get people to take Shaemus seriously. This particular segment wasn’t a step in one direction or the other in that effort.
Frequent commenter Finn McInnes said it fairly simply in his contribution…
Finn McInnes: I’ve seen these sort of things for years in WWF/WWE and it is not without historical precedence for upper mid-carders (like Del Rio, Henry, Shaemus and Bryan) to get involved and for the principals of said pull apart brawl to make the upper mid-carders like useless tools in the process. It’s traditionally how that formula works. Andre attacked Hogan and took out both British Bulldogs, Jake the Snake, Junkyard Dog and Tito Santanna without even taking one hand off Hulk’s throat. Hacksaw Duggan had to come hit him with the 2X4 to break the hold.
James Alsop: It’s bad business, and a slap in the face to any fans who DO buy into Sheamus. It irritates me that the WWE Champion and his challenger were absent from the whole fiasco, because it means that someone in the back said to themselves, “we won’t send Punk and Jericho out – this will detract from their feud / aura / importance.” That same person then said “Sheamus, Bryan and Del Rio, the three guys currently feuding over the WHC? Yeah, they can go out, that’s fine.” So the holder of the company’s #2 belt and his two challengers went out, weren’t even named, and were thrown in all directions by Cena and Brock. And that shouldn’t have happened.
Blair: Yeah, they probably DID say that, because it WAS fine. Because the Punk / Jericho thing IS more important than Shaemus / Del Rio / Bryan.
Everyone knows it. You know it.
And I get that you don’t THINK it should be that way.
And that’s fine. I get it. You’re entitled to that opinion. And you’re probably not alone.
But that’s how it is.
So really, your complaint is ACTUALLY about how they treat the World Heavyweight / WWECW Title as inferior to the WWE Title. This run-in segment that you keep talking about isn’t the cause of that. This run-in segment is the effect of that. My point was how using Shaemus and Bryan as a run-in isn’t a big deal, given how they do things. Your point rests entirely on how you THINK they SHOULD be doing things, and not the way they actually do things.
That “the World Titles should be equal” subject, however, is a whole other can of worms. Happy to discuss it, but I think we’ve gone long enough this week. As always, you guys can let me know if there’s something you’d like me to tackle. But we’re almost out of time for now, and we’ve still got to cover…
“Bobby Roode Is So Boring…” Facts Edition
So, to lighten the mood up around here, I was going to do “New Rules” again this week, as those are fun and have gotten lots of positive feedback. I was trying to come up with a “Bobby Roode Is Boring” rule, and then I came up with MULTIPLE “Bobby Roode Is Boring” rules. And then a couple of my ilk came up with some REALLY good ones. So rather than do “Rules”, this week I will just be posting some “Bobby Roode Is Boring” facts.
Most of these haven’t been posted anywhere before, but a couple of them you might have seen in the comments section last week. Enjoy.
And lastly… my personal favorite.
I feel bad about some of these jokes. Mostly because I haven’t even seen very much of Bobby Roode’s title reign.
… then again, who has? BOOM!
Anyway, these turned out better than I ever imagined. Got your own “Bobby Roode Is Boring” fact? Feel free to post it in the comments.
Well, that’s it for another thrilling edition of “Interinactivity”. Thanks to everyone who participated. Remember to comment or e-mail me at email@example.com with your circular arguments, Twonk material, Bobby Roode Is So Boring jokes, or unintentional great moves. Speaking of that, I’ve actually gotten some great e-mails over the last few weeks, and plan on doing an article with that material sometime in the next little while.
I might take next week off though – you guys have kept me busy lately. Until then, thanks for reading, and have a great weekend.
I’ll be in my trailer. Later twonks.
Tags: Blair A. Douglas, Bobby Roode, Bobby Roode Facts, Bobby Roode Is Boring, Brock Lesnar, CB, Daniel Bryan, DaveDubya, FD Swayze, Interinactivity, Jack Newbury, James Alsop, john cena, Law, Martin Shaw, New Rules, Shaemus, Twonk, Twonk Of the Week, WWE, WWE Extreme Rules, WWE RAW