Speaker 1: All right, everybody, tonight's episode of Wrestling Magic, we're just gonna
Speaker 1: have a little bit of a conversation. So tonight, my
Speaker 1: friend King Scully and I we're just going to talk
Speaker 1: about things that don't really need to be in wrestling
Speaker 1: anymore or just never needed to be there in general.
Speaker 1: But you guys know how it is. So without further ado,
Speaker 1: kink Scully, how you doing, man, how you've been. It's
Speaker 1: been a long time since I've heard your voice on
Speaker 1: the show.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm all good, Thank you, Thank you for coming
Speaker 2: to me with this. It sounds like he'll be a
Speaker 2: good little chot.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, definitely, man, And I couldn't think of anybody
Speaker 1: better to have it with. But anyways, so starting off,
Speaker 1: things that we don't really feel are needed in wrestling
Speaker 1: anymore or just in general. So there's things in wrestling
Speaker 1: that we might see it on a weekly basis at
Speaker 1: this point, or maybe it's just been there for so long.
Speaker 1: Nobody knows why it's there. Is there any examples that
Speaker 1: you can think of that, you know, it's just kind
Speaker 1: of not necessary.
Speaker 2: One of the things that annoys me is just like
Speaker 2: a nickname thing, but every time they come out and
Speaker 2: they say. Michael Cole would say, I think they've stopped
Speaker 2: it a bit now, but they put it in their
Speaker 2: names on the name plates and that, like sef freking Rudins.
Speaker 2: And remember when Dean Ambrose is the lunatic Fringe and
Speaker 2: they just keep going on about that every time it's
Speaker 2: the lunaficic Fringe and all that. It kind of got
Speaker 2: too repetitive and annoying, if you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I get that, because I mean, just say
Speaker 1: who they are, what they're I get it if it's
Speaker 1: like it's actually part of their name as the character
Speaker 1: or whatever. But to do it just constantly, for you know,
Speaker 1: Dean Ambrose, you don't have to say it every time,
Speaker 1: and especially Romans back before he was the tribal chief,
Speaker 1: which constant he's the big dog and it's his yard.
Speaker 1: Nobody cares. Man, just let us see the show.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and there was one when they called see it
Speaker 2: weren't so bad when they called Cane the big red machine.
Speaker 2: That weren't so bad because they didn't do it all
Speaker 2: the time. But there's a time was it Devil's favorite
Speaker 2: demon or something? They kept saying, yeah, like that, and
Speaker 2: it's just like.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I feel that that's one thing that we can
Speaker 1: definitely say it's just not really necessary or needed. And
Speaker 1: it makes sense when it's the character's name, like the Boogeyman,
Speaker 1: all right, that's his name for the character, Like that's
Speaker 1: all you see him as the Undertaker, that's just who
Speaker 1: he is. And I guess it's one thing when they
Speaker 1: say demon Balor or anything like that, because I mean,
Speaker 1: that's another part of the character and it's a specific
Speaker 1: character that he's playing. Within the character, it's like his
Speaker 1: alter ego or something, or Will of the Wisp as
Speaker 1: Jeff Hardy used to be at times. So it makes
Speaker 1: sense when it's the full character, but not when it's just, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's Jeff Hardy. I don't need to call on that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. It's just a bit like it's frustrating because
Speaker 2: it's just they say it too many times. You don't
Speaker 2: mind them seeing it now and again, but you don't
Speaker 2: need to hear it a million times in one match,
Speaker 2: if you go with me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with that. It's one thing when it's
Speaker 1: like at the very beginning of the match, while they're
Speaker 1: introducing them or whatever they come out, they say the
Speaker 1: name you know, hey, it's the Lunatic Fringe Dean Bros. Okay, cool,
Speaker 1: gave them the nickname whatever. But then after that you
Speaker 1: don't have to say it again for a while. Just
Speaker 1: wait till the end of the match if that, you know.
Speaker 1: But moving on to sorry, what was that?
Speaker 2: Well, there's one thing now you can choose one, all right.
Speaker 1: So something that I personally don't really see the point
Speaker 1: in and I never really have. I'm going to say,
Speaker 1: the WWE draft. And I get it that this was
Speaker 1: probably created at some point when Vince or whatever executive decided, Hey,
Speaker 1: you know, we want to seem like a real professional league.
Speaker 1: We want to have a draft just like the NBA does,
Speaker 1: just like the NFL does, just like MLB does you know,
Speaker 1: major League Baseball? And they probably just wanted to kind
Speaker 1: of ride the bandwagon and say, hey, yeah, we're professional
Speaker 1: sports league too. Look we have a draft just like
Speaker 1: they do. And it's not really necessary, Like I can
Speaker 1: understand if they were specifically to be like, Okay, we're
Speaker 1: only going to show the NXT guys that are coming
Speaker 1: up or the new up and comers, and we're going
Speaker 1: to show a draft for which show they're going to
Speaker 1: that to me would be okay, because then it's like, Okay,
Speaker 1: you're showing where the up and comers are going. Just
Speaker 1: like with how the draft is for the NFL, it's like, okay,
Speaker 1: what team is picking these college athletes and where are
Speaker 1: they going next? It makes sense for that, But for
Speaker 1: the WWE Draft, it's just it's the guys who are
Speaker 1: already on the main roster for the most part going
Speaker 1: to different shows. And does anybody even pay attention to
Speaker 1: who's on what roster? Does that even? Like, does anybody
Speaker 1: care about that? They switch it every week? For what?
Speaker 1: It seems like? What do you think? Man?
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly that Like one minute, Seth run into his
Speaker 2: raw den He's on Smacked Down, And I don't know
Speaker 2: the remains on war Denni's on SmackDown? Which one are
Speaker 2: they on? Do you know what I mean? What was
Speaker 2: what's the point of having it if then everyone on
Speaker 2: the same show anyway? And what is the point as
Speaker 2: well of having two Wow? This is probably I should
Speaker 2: probably wait for this bit, but it kind of comes
Speaker 2: into the draft because what is the point of having
Speaker 2: two heavyweight titles if both champions can go on any
Speaker 2: show anyway?
Speaker 1: I agree with that, And I was gonna say the
Speaker 1: one thing that I feel like does stay uh continuous
Speaker 1: no matter what is they do kind of keep the
Speaker 1: title separated. Like I believe that the US title stays
Speaker 1: on Raw if I remember correctly, and I believe the
Speaker 1: Intercontinental title stays all Smacked, and I might have those switch,
Speaker 1: but you know what I mean, like they stay to
Speaker 1: those shows. The champions can go wherever they want, but
Speaker 1: it seems like those titles will stick to those shows,
Speaker 1: and that's their mid card title, and I get it,
Speaker 1: but is it really that big of a deal and
Speaker 1: does anybody really pay that much attention to the Roster'd
Speaker 1: be like, oh wow, Kovie Kingston made the jump again,
Speaker 1: does anybody really care? And why would anybody care? It's
Speaker 1: one brand that has two different shows. The rosters aren't
Speaker 1: all that. It's not really something that needs to be separated.
Speaker 1: It's a TV show. It's not anything insane to me.
Speaker 1: What do you think?
Speaker 2: Man? Did you just drop something?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I did, unfortunately, Sorry about that.
Speaker 2: That's all right? So yeah, Like I guess that the
Speaker 2: reason that might do it as well is so they
Speaker 2: could get the exposure of certain superstars in matches on
Speaker 2: each show. So like if they're going to be on SmackDown,
Speaker 2: which at LA night, for example, he's currently on SmackDown,
Speaker 2: he's the US Champion, he's where he's fighting on SmackDown,
Speaker 2: you don't see him one more. So all these matches
Speaker 2: are going to be on SmackDown, which means he gets
Speaker 2: seen on the show, where if he was on both,
Speaker 2: you might not see him as much, if that makes sense. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I can see what you mean it might be because
Speaker 2: would you think, do you think the roster's quite big?
Speaker 1: Would you say, oh, yeah, definitely for WWE right now,
Speaker 1: it's definitely a larger roster than well concidering they also
Speaker 1: have three different shows, including NXT being their developmental Yeah,
Speaker 1: i'd say it's definitely a larger roster right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's quite big one in it. And then you've
Speaker 2: got all like the legends and now you come in
Speaker 2: now and again in the background. So I guess you
Speaker 2: can kind of see why they have it. But when
Speaker 2: they don't actually stick to their own rules, it's a
Speaker 2: bit pointless.
Speaker 1: Exactly what is the point of having these rules if
Speaker 1: it's just not going to stick. I mean, there's no
Speaker 1: point in it at all. But all right, I digress
Speaker 1: anything else on it, Bud.
Speaker 2: Not on the draft.
Speaker 1: Now, okay, what's next for you? Bud?
Speaker 2: The next thing? I guess this is more to do
Speaker 2: with the most recent and that is the theme songs. Okay,
Speaker 2: so what annoys me and I think what is the
Speaker 2: point is how many times does someone have to change
Speaker 2: the theme song? Like I think Damian Priest has had
Speaker 2: about twenty different versions of the same tune, so surely
Speaker 2: they should test it before they release it, and then
Speaker 2: you stick with that one for so long. But I'm
Speaker 2: sure since he left the Judgment day he's had like
Speaker 2: a few different versions of it, like they've tweaked it,
Speaker 2: and I think even the Rock they've tweaked tears a
Speaker 2: few times, and they've like recently, I mean not like
Speaker 2: over the years, which is fine, but recently he'd have
Speaker 2: one feet the Rock would have Summit on SummerSlam, and
Speaker 2: then the next time you see him it's a bit different,
Speaker 2: and it's like, how many times did they have to
Speaker 2: change the version of it? What is the point?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I guess I could see that, and I think
Speaker 1: the only way that I could justify it for the
Speaker 1: Rock is maybe because he has kind of gone through
Speaker 1: a heel turn since the first time he came back
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago and getting involved with the
Speaker 1: bloodline and everything. I feel like it changed sometime in there.
Speaker 1: I don't know. It is kind of interesting to see
Speaker 1: how often these guys have changed their songs recently.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's not so much like changing the song, but
Speaker 2: it's just the same song, but so and then the
Speaker 2: week late it'll be a bit different, Like bron Breaker
Speaker 2: he had, so the song, the theme song he's got
Speaker 2: now has actually got like words in it, like someone
Speaker 2: singing lyrics to the tune that he had before, which
Speaker 2: is fine, you don't mind that because they're but like
Speaker 2: some of the songs as well, the music is so
Speaker 2: genuine now now it's not like when Jim Johnston done it.
Speaker 2: Who he made loads of class theme songs, but now
Speaker 2: they're all a bit crap, do you know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, hearing a shout out to Jim Johnston. You know,
Speaker 1: he made some really great theme songs back in the day.
Speaker 1: They were just iconic. When I hear glass shatter. Nowadays
Speaker 1: I immediately think stone cold when I hear a bell
Speaker 1: toll Undertaker, and it's insane how well that he just
Speaker 1: put these things together. He really was an artist at
Speaker 1: his craft. And uh yeah, I've heard apparently recently that
Speaker 1: he has reached out and basically told aw hey, he'd
Speaker 1: be fine with coming in and making some stuff, and
Speaker 1: also has opened up the door for WWE like, hey,
Speaker 1: I can make some more stuff you guys want, which
Speaker 1: all for it if they're going to allow it. I
Speaker 1: would love to have Jim Johnston's old themes coming through
Speaker 1: and his old magic coming back, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely, like he actually took time to look at
Speaker 2: the character and write like a song that would suit
Speaker 2: them and that would stick with them, So it's okay,
Speaker 2: Like with sure Michaels saying so he probably had three
Speaker 2: or four versions of his Sexy Boy theme, I know,
Speaker 2: like Sensational Cherry sang get Out one point and all that,
Speaker 2: which is fine because it's the same song. It's just
Speaker 2: changed over Like when Sensational Cherry she left, like they
Speaker 2: split up, so she's not going to sing the theme
Speaker 2: song any more, if you get what meat.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's fair, And like you brought up with
Speaker 1: some of these stars and not keeping the same song
Speaker 1: or at least a similar one. Do you remember when
Speaker 1: Big show turned heel and then they made his a
Speaker 1: little bit more sinister and slower.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I do remember that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I saw something about that the other day
Speaker 1: and that did just come to mind, Like it's the
Speaker 1: same song. They kept it relatively the same, but they
Speaker 1: changed it for a reason. At that point, it was like, hey,
Speaker 1: they don't want it to be as upbeat. It's now
Speaker 1: he's a heel. It has to be a little bit
Speaker 1: more menacing. It needs to be yeah, menacing and aggressive.
Speaker 1: That's the way that I would put it. But other
Speaker 1: than that, yeah, man, I kind of think back to
Speaker 1: Caine and Undertaker because like their themes. Besides, when Undertaker
Speaker 1: is the American badass, which totally fair, it's a different
Speaker 1: character at that point at least that's how it feels
Speaker 1: to me. But it feels like their's lasted for like
Speaker 1: twenty something years, you know, especially Caines, because he was
Speaker 1: always just the demon. It was always that organ sound
Speaker 1: and seeing fire everywhere. That's Cain's thing, and it worked
Speaker 1: for him, you know.
Speaker 2: To be fair, his f defersion, he's gott with the
Speaker 2: is it slow chemical? Yeah? That that's an amazing theme song.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I hear you. Man, I really enjoy it too.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, So like that, there's certain theme songs that
Speaker 2: like this. This is where I'm trying to get at
Speaker 2: with this is there's certain theme songs from years ago,
Speaker 2: like that one or Shameless is old one. There's loads
Speaker 2: of theme songs, even Drew McIntyre's old one. That's a
Speaker 2: brilliant one as well, like the old one.
Speaker 1: Oh, the one by Shaman's Harvest, I know what you're
Speaker 1: talking about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that one. And they're a really good band
Speaker 2: as well. But yeah, all those good ones that they
Speaker 2: stick in your head and you could just play them
Speaker 2: because you like them or like Randy Orton's voices or whatever,
Speaker 2: because they're decent tunes, or even all the Triple H
Speaker 2: songs have been good, even especially the ones by Motorhead
Speaker 2: or whatever. But like nowadays, I just think they're all
Speaker 2: a bit generic. I think Death Rebel do them now
Speaker 2: or whatever they're called. But it's just not nothing really
Speaker 2: sticks out. Really. They're all a bit like Cody Road
Speaker 2: song for example, it was nothing to do with them?
Speaker 2: Was it? He had that in AW? Didn't it?
Speaker 1: I believe he did. It's been a while stop watching
Speaker 1: the AW footage, but I think it was the same.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was because the band do
Speaker 2: sing that song are the ones that used to do
Speaker 2: like Dolph Zigler's song, and I think they did, like
Speaker 2: the Midses song and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: I could see that, and I mean, thinking back on it,
Speaker 1: there's so many iconic ones from the past and going
Speaker 1: into the future. I'm a little nervous to see because,
Speaker 1: like you're talking about, it is pretty generic now and
Speaker 1: it is a little embarrassing because you know, something that
Speaker 1: I've realized is I don't like when the merch for
Speaker 1: wrestling and the stuff for wrestling just screams this is
Speaker 1: specifically wrestling. Like if it's a song that sounds good
Speaker 1: outside of a wrestling situation, like voices like I can
Speaker 1: probably go to the gym and start lifting to that
Speaker 1: and I'm not going to have any problems. But if
Speaker 1: I'm listening to I don't know, like Dan Hausen's theme song,
Speaker 1: if you ever heard that one, I'm not going to
Speaker 1: be into that. Man, it sounds weird and he's not
Speaker 1: w w necessarily, And you know, I want to say
Speaker 1: this is more of just wrestling in general, but yeah,
Speaker 1: generic themes really not a good thing to have, So yeah,
Speaker 1: I totally agree with that, and I think I did
Speaker 1: okay at times, but yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you could even have like even instrumental music, like
Speaker 2: look how good Gang Grel's theme song is or gold
Speaker 2: Dusts was pretty good as well, Like even if it's
Speaker 2: just instrumentally, then I often necessarily have singing or words
Speaker 2: in it, but like now they just sound like someone's
Speaker 2: just can't be and just put it together.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with that, and somebody that I would
Speaker 1: also put in that category. Since Gay Nakamora his theme
Speaker 1: where it's kind of a I believe it's called The
Speaker 1: Rising Sun by CFO, very nice sounding, and I can
Speaker 1: listen to that outside of just watching wrestling, and it's
Speaker 1: not bad. Honestly, I really enjoyed the sound of it.
Speaker 1: It's calming at times, but then it gets intense and
Speaker 1: it's cool, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they've tweaked that one a few times, which is
Speaker 2: fine light even as his current character. It's fine lights.
Speaker 2: They're not necessarily unsuccessful with some of them, but majority
Speaker 2: aren't ones like you've got like Seth Wallin's theme song,
Speaker 2: which is just a sing along and it Yeah, then
Speaker 2: Jay Ushow's theme song which obviously the fans go up
Speaker 2: to that and it suits his character, but it is
Speaker 2: annoying because he takes twenty minutes to get get in
Speaker 2: the ring because of what he's yea.
Speaker 1: In the yeating thing. Man, it's funny how much the
Speaker 1: gardener hates that, but it does make me laugh a
Speaker 1: little bit. I think there's some things in wrestling that
Speaker 1: are just for the fans. It's not really for the
Speaker 1: wrestlers at times, because you know, like when Orange Cassidy
Speaker 1: used to do like keep his hands in the pockets
Speaker 1: and just like kick at the shins and the fans
Speaker 1: would go nuts over it. Some things are just for
Speaker 1: the fans to make them laugh and they love it.
Speaker 1: So just give it to him once in a while.
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely.
Speaker 1: But all right, So moving on something else that I
Speaker 1: think we even talked about this at one point, contract
Speaker 1: signings for title matches. Why it feels like it's such
Speaker 1: a filler moment, you know what I mean. It just
Speaker 1: doesn't feel authentic at all. It feels like, Okay, we
Speaker 1: have a time slot here, we know there's a title
Speaker 1: match coming up. What can we do to fill the
Speaker 1: time slot that we have nothing planned for? Oh? Why
Speaker 1: don't we throw in a you know, contract signing. Do
Speaker 1: you really think any of that has ever been like
Speaker 1: taken serious? Does anybody actually care about it? Because whenever
Speaker 1: I've seen elimination chamber or anything like that where it
Speaker 1: actually includes the title, I've never seen. All Right, everybody
Speaker 1: please sit down to this table. We're all going to
Speaker 1: sign over here. All right, everybody please initial by line six.
Speaker 1: Nobody's doing that. It's not serious. And I get it,
Speaker 1: it's wrestling, but to an extent, I want it to
Speaker 1: be somewhat realistic. If you're in this league already, shouldn't
Speaker 1: you just be already prepared to go in and fight
Speaker 1: for the title. Why do you have to sign a
Speaker 1: contract over? And why don't they always do it? It
Speaker 1: seems like it's very situational where it's like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: we just need a time slot field, let's throw in
Speaker 1: another one of these contract signings that isn't really necessary.
Speaker 1: We don't always do it. They don't. They don't keep
Speaker 1: it consistent, and that's what's annoying to me. What about you, man,
Speaker 1: what do you think?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I get I was wondering why you were saying that.
Speaker 2: I wonder if you know, like their little folder thing
Speaker 2: and it's got their clip peopboard with and they flip
Speaker 2: it over and it's got the vitt and finger and
Speaker 2: they sign it. What does it actually sound it someone
Speaker 2: took their time to write some up for nothing just
Speaker 2: because no one's going to read it. It's not like
Speaker 2: a proper document, is it.
Speaker 1: It's just what is the point exactly? I can only
Speaker 1: imagine that do they have an actual legal team going
Speaker 1: over this? Yes, this is a legal and binding contract
Speaker 1: that means absolutely nothing like that care And I wonder
Speaker 1: what's actually on there? Do you think it's maybe just
Speaker 1: a bunch of jokes or something.
Speaker 2: I know, that's what I mean. And they got a
Speaker 2: few pages as well. It's not just like one page,
Speaker 2: so what the how did they need to write on
Speaker 2: an ordeo of pages?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: I hear that, and like terms and conditions of what
Speaker 2: it's a vesting much it's scripted? Do you know what mean?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Exactly it. It just seems kind of useless to me,
Speaker 1: And I get it. Maybe you want intense segment from it,
Speaker 1: but it just seems like a type of segment that
Speaker 1: isn't necessary. And I really have never cared for it.
Speaker 1: What about you?
Speaker 2: Yeah. I think it's a bit stupid as well. And
Speaker 2: they always have someone, always a text of a person,
Speaker 2: and don't they And you can always see what's going
Speaker 2: to happen anyway, And the table that they sign it
Speaker 2: on't always seems someone goes through it.
Speaker 1: You know, You're right, it's kind of funny to think
Speaker 1: about that. They're not very good at this whole legal thing.
Speaker 1: You know, they can't ever just sit down and sign
Speaker 1: the contract like normal people.
Speaker 2: Know.
Speaker 1: They have to attack each other. It's every single time,
Speaker 1: you know. But it's a little redundant at this point,
Speaker 1: and I really see no point in constantly bringing this back.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's other things that they could bring back
Speaker 1: that would be so much worse. But realistically, that's one
Speaker 1: of those for me. Like can you imagine if they
Speaker 1: brought back TUXI doo't matches more often?
Speaker 2: Oh? Yeah?
Speaker 1: God?
Speaker 2: As well when you say, like with the contract signings,
Speaker 2: like so I'm I'm facing Van Deora next week, Yeah,
Speaker 2: and the winner faces Cody Roads for the title. Yeah,
Speaker 2: and I beat Vandel I've won. Why do I have
Speaker 2: to sign the contract facing Cody Boats avoided one exactly?
Speaker 1: It seems so strange and do you think they have
Speaker 1: to sign anything for the money in the bank contract?
Speaker 2: Well, what's actually in the contract exactly? What's in your
Speaker 2: lunch box? Some sandwiches?
Speaker 1: Okay, otis, But I see where you're going with that.
Speaker 1: But yeah, it's always weird to think about. Does the
Speaker 1: champion have to sign as well? Did he sign it
Speaker 1: before the ladder match ever happened? And if the championship
Speaker 1: changes hands in between, does he have to go and
Speaker 1: sign the money in the bank contract as well? For
Speaker 1: whoever is going to be able to challenge him at
Speaker 1: some point?
Speaker 2: Where does this go exactly? And why did they have
Speaker 2: to bring it out every time they have a match.
Speaker 2: I know it's to show that they're the money in
Speaker 2: the bank, but surely you'd want to keep it to
Speaker 2: yourself in the back so the champion forgets that you've
Speaker 2: got it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I hear that too. I mean I remember I
Speaker 1: want to say, mis had it for like a year
Speaker 1: and it was just constant Okay, he's cashing it. Oh no,
Speaker 1: he's not run back, and it's like, can we get
Speaker 1: past this? It was becoming so predictable every week, And yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, if the gardner was here, he'd be saying
Speaker 1: we can do without money in the bank matches and
Speaker 1: stuff like that. But you know, that's more his opinion
Speaker 1: than mine. I think it adds a little bit of chaos.
Speaker 2: What about you, man, Yeah, it definitely adds chaos. The
Speaker 2: match itself is pretty good there.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with that. I enjoy it personally, and
Speaker 1: you know, to each their own, and that's kind of
Speaker 1: what's nice about wrestling, magic and just wrestling in general
Speaker 1: is other people are gonna have different opinions and it's cool.
Speaker 1: There's no problem with that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I just think like the match is normally full
Speaker 2: of like really good spots, and normally you have someone
Speaker 2: going through ladders or tables and it's they're quite enjoyable
Speaker 2: to watch. But on the same thing, is the briefcase
Speaker 2: is a good thing. Why can't you just speak number
Speaker 2: one contend or whatever.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I could kind of see that, and it is
Speaker 1: a little bit annoying in some ways, like it is
Speaker 1: kind of cutting the line. But to me, it just
Speaker 1: kind of means that whoever gets it, they are able
Speaker 1: to at any point add that little bit of chaos,
Speaker 1: and there's always that question of are they cashing in tonight?
Speaker 1: You never know and that's what's good about it for TV,
Speaker 1: but also it can be annoying in the sense of
Speaker 1: the competition that we are trying to see it as
Speaker 1: you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I got to admit some of the cashis have
Speaker 2: being enjoyable there, like like Seth Wallin's one, oh yeah,
Speaker 2: quite a good one and Dolf Zigler's one the poppy
Speaker 2: got when he cushed in on Alba del Wo.
Speaker 1: But yeah, and then I want to say, wasn't it
Speaker 1: the first one where Edge came out on Sena with it?
Speaker 1: And then you just hear Vince McMahon, this person is
Speaker 1: cashing in their money in the bank contract right now,
Speaker 1: and then you see him walking in a scene as
Speaker 1: like bleeding out of his face and everything.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So they are enjoyable to see
Speaker 2: the costumes to be fair, So I guess we're kind
Speaker 2: of in the middle or not.
Speaker 1: Yeah, if they coordinate it well and they know what
Speaker 1: they're doing, it's great. But who is the guy who
Speaker 1: challenged for like the Intercontinental Championship or something with it?
Speaker 1: That just made me question, like why would you go
Speaker 1: for a mid card title with that you have a
Speaker 1: chance to go for gold and you're choosing silver.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a stupid thing. Why would you do that?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I still don't get that, but you know it's
Speaker 1: whatever that's in the past. They haven't done it since,
Speaker 1: so I'll give them that credit at least. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I think we beat this dead horse a little bit.
Speaker 1: So moving on. What else you got, man?
Speaker 2: A thing that annoys me for quite some time now
Speaker 2: is kicking out of finishers. They're meant to be a
Speaker 2: finishing move. You don't mind it in a big, massive
Speaker 2: main event like out WrestleMania between the Rocking Stone Cold
Speaker 2: the Rocke might have had two stunners before he actually lost,
Speaker 2: but and a load of other moves. But now it
Speaker 2: just seems like everyone just tries to go for their
Speaker 2: finish at a one hundred times in the match, like,
Speaker 2: ain't got any other moves?
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I hear that. Uh, that is a good
Speaker 1: one to bring up, because you know, I actually was
Speaker 1: talking with my supervisor at work the other day about this,
Speaker 1: and he used to be a wrestling fan, but he's
Speaker 1: talked about like, yeah, it's just kind of become a
Speaker 1: little boring and we're kind of reaching the point of
Speaker 1: and he kept saying the death of the finisher, and
Speaker 1: I started thinking, you know, he got a point. Everybody
Speaker 1: keeps kicking out of everything. It doesn't seem like it
Speaker 1: matters anymore when somebody hits their finisher on you. Now,
Speaker 1: I will admit when uh, I believe it was Edge
Speaker 1: versus Randy Orton, when Randy Orton at the very end
Speaker 1: of that match was a couple of years ago because
Speaker 1: it was during COVID. But when all of a sudden
Speaker 1: he brings back the punt, that made it seem like
Speaker 1: a good reason to be kicking out constantly because like, okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: the RKAO is just not doing it. He's bringing back
Speaker 1: that old move was such a nice callback, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, on that note, I agree with that, but
Speaker 2: it's just a bit like annoying, Like how many times
Speaker 2: just the kickout? Like I know, there's been some matches
Speaker 2: recently where someone's up to do like three finishes to
Speaker 2: win or four finishers, Like how many do you need
Speaker 2: to do? Yeah?
Speaker 1: And doesn't Cody Rhods usually hit three crossroads before he
Speaker 1: actually pins anybody.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think like sometimes he'll do one, they'll kick out,
Speaker 2: and then because a bit later he'll probably do like
Speaker 2: a double or a triple one or something. I think
Speaker 2: that's how it kind of went with like maybe room
Speaker 2: remains and all that.
Speaker 1: Maybe maybe, But yeah, it's a little annoying just because like,
Speaker 1: what is the point of the finisher at this point?
Speaker 1: And I think aw had a bit of an issue
Speaker 1: with that, especially God, it felt like everything was such
Speaker 1: a spotfest for a while. And sometimes it can be good,
Speaker 1: you know, Indie shows have the place for that, but man,
Speaker 1: when you're trying to compete with the grandest stages of
Speaker 1: them all and you want to put out that and
Speaker 1: you diminish your own finishing moves, especially things like Canadian
Speaker 1: destroyers as or Mexican destroyers, whatever you want to call it,
Speaker 1: it's the same move, as cool as it looks. They
Speaker 1: want to be kicking out of it, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, sorry, is it just Canadian? Because the best Lou
Speaker 2: did it, it's Canadian?
Speaker 1: I think originally it was the Canadian Destroyer, but then
Speaker 1: seeing Penta do it, and lately who's been calling it
Speaker 1: the Mexican Destroyer. I'm like, all right, it's just the
Speaker 1: destroyer at this point. Whatever. But yeah, it's like it's
Speaker 1: such a cool move, but we don't need ten of
Speaker 1: them in a match, and we don't need people no
Speaker 1: selling them and hitting each other with it. It's it's
Speaker 1: not necessary and it just kind of diminishes. What is
Speaker 1: the point of the move if you're going to use
Speaker 1: it that often? You know?
Speaker 2: Yeah, and another finisher, the sweet to music used to
Speaker 2: be a brilliant finisher. But now everyone does superkick as
Speaker 2: a normal move.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're like, you got light in WWE, You got
Speaker 2: the Use Shows doing two injured superkicks in aw got
Speaker 2: the Young Bucks doing two injured superkicks. It's just like
Speaker 2: a bit repetitive. It's like, come on, and you've got
Speaker 2: some house.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we could use some more originality when it comes
Speaker 1: to that sort of thing. And I liked the u
Speaker 1: when the Young Bucks and Kenny Omega were doing the
Speaker 1: BTE trigger or v trigger whatever they called it. I
Speaker 1: thought that was a cool move because it just seemed
Speaker 1: so vicious that three people line up in front of
Speaker 1: you they all hit the knee on you at the
Speaker 1: same time. That seems hard and that seems painful. But
Speaker 1: the superkicks thing, it did get overplayed a lot, and
Speaker 1: I totally agree superkick mania is now what we need.
Speaker 2: Man, No definitely not.
Speaker 1: But yeah, yeah, I'm really sad to see the death
Speaker 1: of the finisher of it does go this way. Ah.
Speaker 1: So something that actually was brought to my attention as well.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I asked this in a live chat with Perry Saturn.
Speaker 1: He was doing Ask Me Anything the other night, and
Speaker 1: it was really interesting to listen to him talk about
Speaker 1: some of his experiences and everything, and anybody who wants
Speaker 1: to support Perry and help him out. He's got a
Speaker 1: there's some sort of a game or something like that
Speaker 1: that's going on that's called WU. It's like World Wrestling
Speaker 1: Organization something like that. I don't exactly remember the name
Speaker 1: of it off the top of my head, but it
Speaker 1: does give proceeds to him and help him out as
Speaker 1: well as other wrestlers. But point being, during the chat
Speaker 1: he was answering just regular questions but also promoting that game,
Speaker 1: and during it I asked, Hey, what is something that
Speaker 1: you think can leave wrestling at this point that just
Speaker 1: doesn't have a place for you. He said, well, I
Speaker 1: would say gimmick matches without any build up. If you're
Speaker 1: just going to throw it in just to throw it in,
Speaker 1: there's no reason for it, and it's kind of pointless,
Speaker 1: and he recalled a couple of times where that's happened
Speaker 1: to him when he was in WCW as well as
Speaker 1: He also brought up pay per views always having gimmicks.
Speaker 1: It's not really necessary. You can just have a pay
Speaker 1: per view, not if WrestleMania doesn't have to be the
Speaker 1: only time that you have regular matches. And just because
Speaker 1: you have a War Games match for the men, doesn't
Speaker 1: necessarily mean you need to have one for the women.
Speaker 1: Again his words, but still I do kind of agree
Speaker 1: to an extent, like let them have their own pay
Speaker 1: per view at that point is what he brought up,
Speaker 1: Like why not have a women's specific pay per view?
Speaker 1: What's wrong with that? What do you think?
Speaker 2: Man? Yeah, I see that, But like did they used
Speaker 2: to have pay per few called like Hell in a
Speaker 2: Cell or whatever and stuff like that, And it's just like,
Speaker 2: why would you have a name for pay per view
Speaker 2: when all the matches on it ain't going to be
Speaker 2: Hell in this out you and you can have one
Speaker 2: heading this out, So what's the point of naming a
Speaker 2: pay per view after it?
Speaker 1: I could see that. I mean elimination Chamber. I don't
Speaker 1: imagine that every match that night is going to be
Speaker 1: an elimination chamber match. But I could kind of see
Speaker 1: why it has its place, but not always, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. I think that's what he was getting at.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I kind of get that. Like you
Speaker 2: used to just have paper fews called like no Way out,
Speaker 2: the Edge, over the Edge, Yeah, judgment day armages. There's
Speaker 2: loads in your house ones, won't they?
Speaker 1: Yeah, there was for a while. It's interesting seeing the
Speaker 1: history on that and if anybody wants to read up
Speaker 1: on it, the Titan Sinking, Titan Shattered, Titan Screwed series,
Speaker 1: it can really help you learn a little bit of
Speaker 1: that history because it spells it out pretty clearly for anybody.
Speaker 1: But yeah, it's interesting just to see how many we
Speaker 1: used to have. I believe there was even like a
Speaker 1: rock Bottom pay per view at one point that was
Speaker 1: like nineteen ninety eight or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there was, there was one of these. It also depends,
Speaker 2: like I get what he's saying, Like with a gimmick
Speaker 2: match as well, there is sometimes it is a good
Speaker 2: thing to have one light. When you had Seth Wallin's
Speaker 2: first CM punk in the cage match, because of their
Speaker 2: build up and their hatred towards each other on TV,
Speaker 2: so everyone and they're hit beating each other up every week,
Speaker 2: and they got to find some way to end the rivalry.
Speaker 2: So they have a cage match, which is fine, but
Speaker 2: there's other ones. How many times do you see a
Speaker 2: street fight? You kind of see it quite often, do you? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Definitely.
Speaker 2: You don't need a street fight all the time, do you?
Speaker 1: No, you really don't. And I understand there's a certain
Speaker 1: level where they kind of do bring back the hardcore
Speaker 1: rules to I guess pay homage to ECW back in
Speaker 1: the day, but it's not always needed.
Speaker 2: I agree with that, yeah, exactly, And if they wanted
Speaker 2: to do that, they should just bring back the hardcore title.
Speaker 2: I know, because the twenty four to seven title weren't
Speaker 2: really the same thing, was it.
Speaker 1: It really wasn't, And a PG version of a hardcore
Speaker 1: thing is not a good idea. You basically would be
Speaker 1: taking Ah, you're just taking the fun out of it,
Speaker 1: you know. The whole point of it was, Yes, it
Speaker 1: could be defended twenty four to seven, but it's also
Speaker 1: a hardcore title. It's not meant to be just oh yeah,
Speaker 1: if you can pin that guy while he's sleeping, you
Speaker 1: can have that belt. To me, it's a low card belt.
Speaker 1: Who wants that? Nobody was going to care about it.
Speaker 1: What is the point of having it? You know, who's
Speaker 1: going to brag about? Oh yeah, the guy's a three
Speaker 1: hundred and eighty seven time twenty four to seven champion.
Speaker 1: It's a joke. Come on. Nobody cared about it. And
Speaker 1: that's something else we're I'm glad that we're rid of, you.
Speaker 2: Know, yeah, definitely, or do our truth was entertaining? But
Speaker 2: that's because he's the national treasure when it comes to it.
Speaker 1: Oh absolutely, our truth is great. And you know, even
Speaker 1: though I'm kind of making fun of that title, he
Speaker 1: made it entertaining. And just the fact that wasn't there
Speaker 1: one night where he's like hiding under the ring, like
Speaker 1: up on a table and then you see somebody like
Speaker 1: pulling out the table and then they see him just
Speaker 1: laying on it and smiles at him awkwardly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, yeah, he did make it good.
Speaker 1: To be fair, Yeah, I will give him that.
Speaker 2: He uh yeah, really do I agree that that's titleways pointless? Really?
Speaker 1: Definitely? But uh yeah, man, you got anything else? You
Speaker 1: did bring up something else in our conversation that originally
Speaker 1: sparked this, so I want to let you have that one.
Speaker 1: I don't want to take it from you.
Speaker 2: What was it called? Remember?
Speaker 1: Oh was the poll parts?
Speaker 2: Oh? Yeah? Yeah, they keep happing in regularly, didn't.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I get it. When there's something that works,
Speaker 1: you want to use it over and over. But the
Speaker 1: formula is getting old and it's becoming too repetitive, to
Speaker 1: the point where it's like I don't care about seeing
Speaker 1: these cat fights every single time that I get on
Speaker 1: and watch RAW for once, Like I don't want to
Speaker 1: see the same thing over and over again. If I
Speaker 1: wanted to see that, i'd keep watching the same movie.
Speaker 1: Let's see something different next time.
Speaker 2: You know, Well that the problem anyway, They didn't even
Speaker 2: do their job, so maybe they'll hold them back, but
Speaker 2: they still like manage to get away and fuck carry
Speaker 2: on fighting. So it's the same thing over and over again.
Speaker 2: Like you can see what's happening. It's like a pair
Speaker 2: of kids fighting at school and you've got the teachers
Speaker 2: trying to hold them back.
Speaker 1: You know, I might be the only one who does this,
Speaker 1: but do you ever look at some of these people
Speaker 1: that are holding them back and everything and try to
Speaker 1: figure out. Are any of these going to be the
Speaker 1: next world champion at some point?
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. And I always say look at them and think,
Speaker 2: what the hell is that guy going to do? He
Speaker 2: didn't exactly have any muscle on him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, some of these guys are tiny, and it's like, Okay,
Speaker 1: maybe he's going to be a high flyer or something.
Speaker 1: You know. I don't really have a whole bio on
Speaker 1: some of these guys that we just see, but little
Speaker 1: do we know. At one point Joe Henry was one
Speaker 1: of those bodyguard types that we've seen on TV. We
Speaker 1: just didn't know it at the time. There's a there's
Speaker 1: a couple of wrestlers that used to be the rose Buds.
Speaker 1: I believe, I want to say it was Alias and
Speaker 1: someone else. I can't remember who the other person was,
Speaker 1: but yeah. It's funny when you start looking at these
Speaker 1: extras that you think are on there quote unquote extras,
Speaker 1: and then later on you see them on TV and
Speaker 1: you're like, hey, do I recognize this guy?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I think Braun Struman was one of the Booze
Speaker 2: puts as well.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I believe it was Braun. So, yeah, it was
Speaker 1: Braun and Elias. I know were in the rose buds and.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that guy I did that, but that was a
Speaker 2: type a book gimmick.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree, And that's another thing. We don't need
Speaker 1: some gimmicks. Just need to go ahead and go off
Speaker 1: into sunset, like one gimmick that I've always thought about
Speaker 1: that we don't need anymore. We don't need the foreign
Speaker 1: heel gimmick. We don't need Russia versus America or anybody
Speaker 1: for that matter, And we don't need like how Russev
Speaker 1: was portrayed against Sena. For a while, it felt like
Speaker 1: I was watching a Cold War era wrestling tape or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I get what you mean. And the funny thing
Speaker 2: is he an even Russian anyway exactly?
Speaker 1: They called them the Bulgarian brute as well, which made
Speaker 1: me like, so why, Okay, I get they're somewhat close,
Speaker 1: but what this doesn't make sense?
Speaker 2: And then Lana is not Russian, She's American.
Speaker 1: So I'll make a little bit of a pass on
Speaker 1: certain things, like they're gonna play a character, it's cool,
Speaker 1: but like, if you're going to portray them as another
Speaker 1: country entirely but still give them like Russian ties, that
Speaker 1: doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I get that
Speaker 1: they're close, but nah, man, this just doesn't work for me.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I think we can do away with some
Speaker 1: of those heels and some of those type of characters.
Speaker 1: It just doesn't work anymore. We don't need the Iron
Speaker 1: Chic and what's his name anymore. I mean call off yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that type team, the French Ones what they
Speaker 2: called Love Assistance Mmmm okay, yeah, I think that they
Speaker 2: were a novel one new didn't like Americans.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we just don't need that as a gimmick anymore.
Speaker 1: It it served its purpose maybe back in the eighties,
Speaker 1: maybe even a little bit in the nineties, but nowadays
Speaker 1: it's just kind of coming gone. I especially understand it
Speaker 1: from before then, because you know, you had a the
Speaker 1: whole memory of Nazis and stuff was still fresh, and
Speaker 1: you saw guys like Fritz von Era coming out and
Speaker 1: acting that way. And at the time that makes sense.
Speaker 1: But nowadays that's kind of coming one look down on
Speaker 1: and nobody really wants to see it anymore. I get it.
Speaker 1: We don't need it anymore.
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely. There is something or kind of myths as
Speaker 2: well with wrestling, what something and that is the old
Speaker 2: style count like El HEBNA slow count or whatever. They
Speaker 2: don't seem to do it very much anymore. It's very
Speaker 2: when the rest free count, it's for me one two
Speaker 2: free one two, like who counts like that?
Speaker 1: That's fair. I can understand that. But I do appreciate
Speaker 1: that at least they are consistent a little bit more
Speaker 1: with the referees nowadays. Excuse me, but something that I
Speaker 1: remember growing up and watching was I remember seeing like
Speaker 1: you would see a heel holding the face in the
Speaker 1: corner or something, and then you'd see them going beyond
Speaker 1: whatever the count was that the referee was giving, and
Speaker 1: then eventually, depending on who the referee was, they'd either
Speaker 1: pull them apart or they just call for the disqualification.
Speaker 1: I remember thinking, like, man, depending on who your referee is,
Speaker 1: you're getting screwed in these matches. You can be winning
Speaker 1: by this disqualification, or you can be just getting pulled
Speaker 1: apart and then getting cheated against later. That's kind of
Speaker 1: messed up. So I do appreciate that they worked a
Speaker 1: little bit on the consistency of being a referee.
Speaker 2: You know, yeah, yeah, yeah, I can see that. I
Speaker 2: just missed that. I guess the dram of a the
Speaker 2: old style count that's true.
Speaker 1: I mean some refs are better than others with that.
Speaker 1: Like what's her name from aw Audrey? I think is
Speaker 1: her name Audrey or Aubrey wanted it too. I don't
Speaker 1: really remember her full name off the top of my
Speaker 1: head right now, but she has done a pretty good
Speaker 1: job of trying to be a character as well in
Speaker 1: the ring. And talking with Mike Keyota, he had explained,
Speaker 1: like being the third man in the ring, it really
Speaker 1: does give a different perspective on certain things because being
Speaker 1: that guy, if you mess up, everybody's gonna notice, and
Speaker 1: your performance is just as important. It's just not the
Speaker 1: same way. But if you mess up, boy do they know,
Speaker 1: and boy does everybody call you out? He actually explained,
Speaker 1: like Sean Michaels apparently used to be notorious for if
Speaker 1: a referee messed up their matches, especially at house shows,
Speaker 1: after the show was over, he'd be one to like
Speaker 1: tell the whole audience be like, yeah, this referee is
Speaker 1: a pos he don't know what he's doing type of thing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I can see. Is it must be like quite difficult,
Speaker 2: isn't it?
Speaker 1: Maybe a little bit at the time, but yeah, it's
Speaker 1: something that God, I would love to have a conversation
Speaker 1: with him about it. I think that'd be really cool.
Speaker 1: But I digress either way. But yeah, man, So anything
Speaker 1: else that you can think of about things that we
Speaker 1: just don't needt a wrestling because I'm kind of tapped
Speaker 1: out at this point.
Speaker 2: Oh okay, you submitting you?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't think I have anything else in my
Speaker 1: head anyways that we don't need anymore. But I do
Speaker 1: like that we kind of went to like things that
Speaker 1: we could use more of as well. If you have
Speaker 1: any of that, go.
Speaker 2: For it, dude, Yeah, what can we use more of? Well?
Speaker 2: Going back to the finish I thing just to finish
Speaker 2: and whin the goddamn match on a normal show rule
Speaker 2: or something, and you didn't have to kick out on that,
Speaker 2: do you know me?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't really need to play up too much
Speaker 1: drama on your just regular shows, you know. I will
Speaker 1: say that, Uh, what was I going to bring up?
Speaker 1: So when it comes to these promos recently, did you
Speaker 1: hear about what happened with the Charlotte and what's her name?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it apparently went off script and all that, But
Speaker 2: I do kind of wonder if it was a work
Speaker 2: just to get some heat on it if you go,
Speaker 2: I mean.
Speaker 1: Maybe, but yeah, Charlotte and Tiffy, I mean hearing and
Speaker 1: seeing what they were saying. Apparently it's also been removed
Speaker 1: from like Netflix and stuff. I'd have to go back
Speaker 1: and see if it's actually there or not, but from
Speaker 1: what I've heard, yeah, they're like taking it pretty serious.
Speaker 1: I don't know everything that happened. I've read the script
Speaker 1: of it, but man, if that's really going on, I'm
Speaker 1: kind of impressed if it is a work, but if not,
Speaker 1: then it's a little too real there.
Speaker 2: I kind of feel like because obviously they're going against
Speaker 2: each other, so I know, not every wrestler likes each other,
Speaker 2: but they have to work together or whatever. But in
Speaker 2: this case, it's probably they were struggling with their promos,
Speaker 2: I think, and the back and forth wasn't exactly brilliant,
Speaker 2: and because they were getting very good feedback what I
Speaker 2: could hear. But like on this Narviia, it was a
Speaker 2: case of I think Tiffany said something about have ha
Speaker 2: been what free marriages or something.
Speaker 1: I think it was three or four divorces at this point. Yeh, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a.
Speaker 2: Bit and then she walked out the ring and then
Speaker 2: Charlotte said something like Ludwig's in my DMS, which is
Speaker 2: obviously not true, but.
Speaker 1: I mean it's entertaining. I'll give it that. So I
Speaker 1: do kind of hope it isn't work and I hope
Speaker 1: they're not going too far against each other there. But
Speaker 1: you know what, maybe they're doing some method acting. I
Speaker 1: don't know, maybe they agreed to it beforehand, and maybe
Speaker 1: they're just having fun. But that's the case, Yeah, heck,
Speaker 1: have fun with it. But all right, I'm kind of
Speaker 1: coming to the end here. I don't think that we
Speaker 1: have too much in the mind right now. So I
Speaker 1: guess I could ask Scott, do you have any recommendations
Speaker 1: for the audience this week?
Speaker 2: It's a British drama. I don't know if you've watched it,
Speaker 2: MAV called Adolescence. Have you seen it?
Speaker 1: Oh, I've seen the trailers on Netflix. I haven't watched
Speaker 1: it yet, but I do want to.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So, basically, the main character the lad he plays
Speaker 2: to like called Jamie, and he's accused of killing murdering
Speaker 2: a fellow schoolgirl. Basically, but the main purpose of it,
Speaker 2: it's only four episodes, one series, four episode. The main
Speaker 2: purpose is it of the program is it goes deep
Speaker 2: into the characters themselves. So rather than just be like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 2: why did you kill him? And oh I killed him
Speaker 2: because of this or whatever like that, it's more of
Speaker 2: a you see more of the character, like them getting
Speaker 2: angry and like what it means to like the parents
Speaker 2: of the kid, what their life is like afterwards, if
Speaker 2: you get me.
Speaker 1: Interesting. Interesting.
Speaker 2: So it's very like The camera work I found was
Speaker 2: quite entertaining as well because it was different, like it
Speaker 2: follows the actors around rather than just like laid back.
Speaker 2: It kind of follows their footsteps, if that makes sense.
Speaker 2: So when they go into a room, you'll go into
Speaker 2: the room with stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Okay, I see, so they're like legitimately following them instead
Speaker 1: of just being like a camera set up in the
Speaker 1: next room for them or anything like that.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, And it's kind of cool, loud they did it,
Speaker 2: and it's got like Stephen Graham, who's like one of
Speaker 2: the most underrated actors. He's brilliant. He's from Liverpool and
Speaker 2: he's been in loads of things like This is England.
Speaker 2: I don't know if you ever seen that film.
Speaker 1: I have not yet, but I'll put it on the list.
Speaker 2: Now, yeah, and he's also there was also one of
Speaker 2: my favorite series that came from This Is England film,
Speaker 2: which was This Is England series. There was eighty six,
Speaker 2: eighty eight, and ninety and basically they continued from that film,
Speaker 2: so he was in all them as well, along with
Speaker 2: the original actors from the first film. And he's just
Speaker 2: a brilliant actor. He's really past, like really good at
Speaker 2: what he does basically. So that would be my recommendation
Speaker 2: for someone to watch.
Speaker 1: Okay, sounds good man, So my recommendation for this week, guys,
Speaker 1: there's an old movie and I guess they're making continuation
Speaker 1: of it soon and I'm really excited for it. It's
Speaker 1: gonna be starring Liam Neeson. So let's go back and
Speaker 1: watch the original. Let's watch the old Naked Gun movie
Speaker 1: because as dumb as it is, that comedy Leslie Nielsen
Speaker 1: put out, I love it. I eat it up. That's
Speaker 1: one of my favorite things ever between Airplane the Naked Gun.
Speaker 1: Some of the Scary Movie franchise loved it. But yeah,
Speaker 1: so I guess that's it for this week. Guys. As usual,
Speaker 1: do some nice for somebody you never know who needs it.
Speaker 1: You guys know where to reach us at this point.
Speaker 1: With that the words of Memphis Mark, we're out.
Speaker 3: Thanks for listening to the WWE podcast. Don't forget to
Speaker 3: subscribe on your favorite podcast app so you don't miss
Speaker 3: a show, or head to WWE podcast dot com and
Speaker 3: for all of these shows add free head over to
Speaker 3: Patreon dot com slash WWE podcast. Until then, we'll see
Speaker 3: you next time.