Jump to content


Photo

Introducing The Microscope


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43369 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2013 - 04:23 PM

This new forum is a place for anyone to make the case for any wrestler as whatever they think they should be -- overrated, underrated, GOAT candidate, and so on. You can add YouTube links, match reviews and general thoughts into it over time. The threads can be used to debate the merits of the case being made, and can be bumped anytime. I think it'll make a good reference, and at some point, I'll scour the board and look for existing topics that we can plunk there.

#2 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43369 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2013 - 06:03 PM

I am not done moving threads here, in case anyone was curious. I realize there are more.

#3 El-P

El-P
  • Members
  • 8703 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2013 - 06:27 PM

You're doing a great job with the subforums. Really cool.

#4 WingedEagle

WingedEagle
  • Members
  • 5070 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2013 - 07:59 PM

Love the index. Can't wait to see it grow. Perhaps create another forum / subforum for some threads on various lists -- GOAT matches, users favorites, etc?

#5 goodhelmet

goodhelmet
  • Admins
  • 18946 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:10 PM

This is Awesome

#6 shoe

shoe
  • Moderators
  • 9058 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:35 PM

A pretty creative name to boot for the sub forum .

#7 jdw

jdw
  • Members
  • 8040 posts

Posted 12 January 2013 - 08:41 PM

Good idea for organizing stuff.

#8 Ricky Jackson

Ricky Jackson

    The Only 5 Time Champion

  • Members
  • 2723 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Vancouver Territory
  • Interests:Wrestling, music, comics, beer, movies, history, sports...good manly stuff.

Posted 13 January 2013 - 12:53 AM

Love the new and improved PWO.

#9 ButchReedMark

ButchReedMark

    #TogetherStronger

  • Members
  • 628 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Llangollen, Wales

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:52 AM

Great idea, but is there a way the Ted DiBiase stuff can be kept to the Ted DiBiase thread? I'm sick to death of reading about fucking Ted DiBiase in every thread (I'm looking at you, Jerry).

#10 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10153 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2013 - 12:02 PM

I honestly wouldn't mind reading more about Butch Reed.

#11 goodhelmet

goodhelmet
  • Admins
  • 18946 posts

Posted 01 February 2013 - 12:18 PM

BRM, I agree with youmnd your general point and have had to remind people to stay on topic but Dibiase is the hot shit right now because Jerry insists on comparing him to everyone who worked in the 90s. I'll just remind Jerry to take a comparison to the Dibiase thread when he gets that urge.

#12 concrete1992

concrete1992

    Sammy D

  • Members
  • 781 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2013 - 01:32 PM

Another great addition to PWO. I don't post a lot since I'm not as knowledgeable about a lot of things discussed but I tend to check here daily. Great resource here.

#13 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11314 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2013 - 03:20 PM

I want to defend myself a little bit here, the DiBiase comparisons haven't come from my urges, they've come from my reactions to people making wildly controversial claims like "Bossman is a better worker in WWF" and "Luger vs. Windham is better than any match DiBiase ever had in WWF". However, I think I've hit the point Loss did a week ago and got burnt out so I'm going to chill for a week or two and concentrate on AWA and Yearbooks.

#14 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10153 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2013 - 03:57 PM

The thing is that neither of those two claims seemed wildly controversial to anyone but you.

#15 shoe

shoe
  • Moderators
  • 9058 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:10 PM

The upside is at least he's not talking about IRS in every thread. That could get old. :)

#16 Exposer

Exposer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 2198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chattanooga, TN

Posted 01 February 2013 - 11:18 PM

No, now he's just mentioning Rotundo in every thread. :P

#17 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11314 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 February 2013 - 08:39 AM

I like that OJ is like the engine room of The Microscope.

#18 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10153 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 February 2013 - 08:52 AM

I think you're getting Periscope and Microscope confused. The microscope is not a mobile wrestling watching submarine.

#19 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11314 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 February 2013 - 08:54 AM

I was hoping no one would noticed the mixed metaphor ¬_¬

#20 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11314 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2013 - 02:49 PM

One of the little things I've been thinking about recently is how in the world of literary criticism and theory there are different critical schools and approaches. I think these exist also in the world of watching wrestling and rating it, although they don't all have names. I have identified a number of different schools as follows: Structuralism -- Matt D is a leading proponent of this; the approach of those for whom structure is everything. He's always looking for coherence as a guiding principle for the match. He doesn't like things for their own sake, they must have a purpose. Blood, guts and violence -- this is Will's default mode, brawling, sweet punches, gallons of blood, brutality, violence for its own sake. 00s-Keithism -- this is the now dated "workrate" approach that dominated the early internet. Workrate is in scare quotes because it tended to be shorthand for "guys who could do suplex variations and / or who could do flippy moves from the top rope". At its worst, this approach was blind to a lot of things. At its best, it encouraged more casual fans to discover matches from Japan and elsewhere. Role-relativism -- this is the "he played his role well" line, which can be a lens through which you see all wrestling. As in literary criticism, two different schools can often be "buddied up" in someone's approach. So you could be both a structuralist and a role-relativist. Role-relativism is one of the more forgiving schools of criticism. Individualism -- this is a focus more on what guys do than on the structure of the match. The thing in focus is more on the how rather than the why. Microism -- a subset or "advanced" version of the above. This is the study and appreciation of "the little things", often buddied up with other approaches. The wrestling equivalent of "close reading" -- more a tool than an approach itself. Contextualism-- considering a match within the overall context of the booking, what it is setting up or blowing off, and how effective that is. I find myself thinking about booking quite a lot, especially when considering finishes. This is the approach that most considers factors external to the match itself. Its mirror in the world of literary criticism is known as 'historicism'. There are probably other approaches too, although I can't think of them right now. I find myself flitting between all of these.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users