|
In response to
"One sec. I'll cut and paste if I can find it in my history. -- nm"
by
David
|
Here:
Posted by
David (aka David)
Jan 5 '10, 18:32
|
TNA have won the first battle of the new wrestling war, according to America's critics.
Their flagship programme Impact went head to head with WWE Raw last night in the United States, pitting Hulk Hogan's debut against the return of Bret Hart.
And those reviewing the shows mostly agreed that while both had good and bad points, TNA seemed fresher with more surprises.
Impact saw Jeff Hardy, Ric Flair, Sean Waltman, Scott Hall, Eric Bischoff, Val Venis, The Nasty Boys, Orlando Jordan and Shannon Moore join TNA � and an outstanding Kurt Angle v AJ Styles main event.
Raw featured the long-awaited confrontations between Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels and The Hitman and Vince McMahon, as well as Michaels and Triple H retaining their tag titles against Chris Jericho and Big Show.
Mike Shannon of PWMania wrote: "Well, in the first shot of TNA v WWE, the winner was DEFINITELY Total Nonstop Action wrestling.
"Not only was their show more entertaining but the wrestling blew the WWE's right out of the water.
"WWE's handling of Hart's return was extremely disappointing, while TNA made sure to give themselves a much-needed facelift and showcase their stars.
"I really think this will get the company some new viewers and might show Vince that wrestling geared towards adults actually works."
Writing for the Wrestling Observer website, Todd Martin said: "TNA is a promotion with some serious and obvious flaws, but watching Impact and Raw tonight, it felt like TNA is the hot promotion and WWE is the stale one.
"WWE is so fixed to its narrow formula vision of sports entertainment that it feels like you know everything that's coming.
"The music openings for all WWE shows are the same. The fireworks are the same. The backstage segments are the same. The matches are the same. The comedy is the same.
"There isn't the feel of unpredictability. Everything feels sanitised and aimed at a young and unsophisticated audience.
"If TNA tonight showed WWE that it needs to be more unpredictable and varied, watching WWE and TNA also sends the message that TNA needs to be much clearer with its storylines.
"WWE is always very careful to explain what's going on � and that's a good thing. You get video packages explaining the angles and they try to tie everything together.
"Impact, by contrast, was full of inside references and rapid-fire references to all sorts of things happening all at the same time.
See pictures from TNA Impact by clicking on the
"TNA needs to make sure their product is available to more than just the most hardcore wrestling fans.
"I'm not sure that tonight's show was, even if I found it more enjoyable than Raw."
However, the reviewers at Hit The Ropes Radio did rate Raw as better, saying: "WWE proved tonight that they didn't need shock value and returns to get momentum over TNA."
Their writer Shane Howard added: "As the supposed alternative, I thought TNA would be a bit different from the WWE with the three hours.
"Unfortunately, there was still a whole lot of talking and backstage segments.
"Granted, there were some bright spots. I enjoyed the Knockouts tag team championship match, the Pope/Wolfe encounter and the main event.
"My question is: Can you live on only counting on Styles, Angle, Wolfe, Kong and Hamada to give great matches?
"For fans who haven't kept up with TNA, this might have been a great night. For those who actually watch the product, I was expecting more."
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/wrestling/2794955/Wrestling-reviewers-gave-the-thumbs-up-to-TNA-as-it-went-head-to-head-with-WWE.html#ixzz0bnO1L1L8
|