Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,115 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I keep hearing that Russo supposedly was the architect of the Attitude ERA. I have my doubts, but on the off chance that I am wrong, what exactly did he contribute that made AE what it was?

Reason why I am asking is that from what I hear, the AE was successful because the talent was allowed to be an exaggerated version of themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
He owned movie store's prior to working for the WWE thus watched tons of movies, inheriting a natural creative nack for producing creative STORIES and storylines....which ultimately was probably the largest part of the AE's success imo. Obviously the edgyness made it "cool", but the stories are what sucked people in. Characters were huge too, but I feel like every era has the tools to create good characters, but without compelling stories, youll never see a character shine, or mold into a character at all really.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
I keep hearing that Russo supposedly was the architect of the Attitude ERA. I have my doubts, but on the off chance that I am wrong, what exactly did he contribute that made AE what it was?
Even as a Russo hater, I'm curious about this as well. The sad thing is that we'll never know. I wouldn't trust a word of out Russo's mouth and the only other person that I think would have that info to tell would be McMahon and I don't think he'd tell the truth either.

edit: I agree with the guy above but I want to know exactly what. Like what stories, how much of whatever he said was rejected and I, maybe wrongly, assumed that's what OP meant as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
This doesn't answer the OP
Given the evidence I've provided, I'd say that it backs that he could have been more than capable to be the architect for the era's on screen success. It was pretty well known during the time that he played a huge part, and even though he gets heat for being a goof when he tried to revive the WCW that he was partially responsible for burying in the first place, he was still a major catalyst for the AE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
Given the evidence I've provided, I'd say that it backs that he could have been more than capable to be the architect for the era's on screen success. It was pretty well known during the time that he played a huge part, and even though he gets heat for being a goof when he tried to revive the WCW that he was partially responsible for burying in the first place, he was still a major catalyst for the AE.
I edited out my post (see above) because I think I misinterpreted the OP :eek: sorry, buddy. Was hoping you didn't see.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,096 Posts
He came up with the Val Venis character, which was obviously a very over gimmick at the time. Same with Goldust (which I've heard was his idea) - one of the most innovative characters ever, and certainly a catalyst for "edgier" programming. I also think he was the one that wanted to push Booker T in a title run. He also pushed the idea that everyone on the card should be involved in some sort of angle, so not to just disregard the undercard.

Not completely sure, but I think he had the idea of The Rock joining the corporation.

People always bring up the "McMahon filter", but I would submit that McMahon has consistently had far worse ideas in terms of angles and booking. Listening to his podcast, I find it very difficult to disagree with him 90% of the time. He's not always right, and certainly had some awful ideas, but I generally (not always) agree with his opinions on today's product and what the writing should be like to improve it.


Edit: didn't he come up with the Kane/Underaker angle, or am I imagining that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,508 Posts
Not completely sure, but I think he had the idea of The Rock joining the corporation.
Yeah, he did.

Survivor Series 1998 is the greatest PPV of all time in terms of storyline. I mean wow it was so geniusely written and filled with so many shocking twists and turns and that ended up with a new mega-star created at the end of the night.

Pure brilliance from Russo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
People always bring up the "McMahon filter", but I would submit that McMahon has consistently had far worse ideas in terms of angles and booking. Listening to his podcast, I find it very difficult to disagree with him 90% of the time. He's not always right, and certainly had some awful ideas, but I generally (not always) agree with his opinions on today's product and what the writing should be like to improve it.
McMahon has always focused on the main event programs. In some shoots I've watched, some names (Bam Bam among others) have mentioned that he doesn't worry about the undercard and just makes sure the main event is up to snuff. I find that incredibly believable especially with how different the undercard and main event players were during the AE.

wrt his podcast: of course he's saying things the intanet's going to agree with. If he didn't cater to that opinion, he'd make less money. Not exactly an in depth marketing strategy.

edit: I do appreciate your posts, Factor and Night.

I also think he was the one that wanted to push Booker T in a title run.
This is true. This is also because they were slapped with a racism lawsuit. Coincidentally, Booker was crowned shortly after. Russo goes as far in his book to say, "I draft Ichiro [and other baseball players I can't remember] in my fantasy baseball leagues. The fact that racism comes up makes me sick". Yeah, because drafting people to make you money makes you a lover of everyone. Insufferable pos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,096 Posts
wrt his podcast: of course he's saying things the intanet's going to agree with. If he didn't cater to that opinion, he'd make less money. Not exactly an in depth marketing strategy.


I mostly meant that with respect to his side comments and ideas for how to cater to new fans. Honestly, I'd assume his comments would ruffle the feathers of most of the hardcores/internet fans (though, this is the only forum that I frequent, so I'm not sure if it's a proper representation). He's always been big on the stories and light on the wrestling, as well as the importance of having "the look" and things like that that I feel like most people around here disagree with.


Edit: I didn't realize there was a lawsuit regarding racism. That's interesting. I always thought the story was the Hogan (or whoever it was) didn't want to do business and drop the title to Booker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
I will say that I've never listened to his podcast or any podcast featuring him. His accent and use of "bro" and no relenting on him doing nothing wrong in WCW with the exception of one thing just make me tune out.

Edit: I didn't realize there was a lawsuit regarding racism. That's interesting. I always thought the story was the Hogan (or whoever it was) didn't want to do business and drop the title to Booker
Yeah there were at least two lawsuits at play. Booker got the title at Bash at the Beach 2000 because of a lawsuit and Russo himself got slapped with a defamation lawsuit by Hogan for the slanderous things he said in the promo after Hogan pinned Jeff and left.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
I will say that I've never listened to his podcast or any podcast featuring him. His accent and use of "bro" and no relenting on him doing nothing wrong in WCW with the exception of one thing just make me tune out.

Yeah there were at least two lawsuits at play. Booker got the title at Bash at the Beach 2000 because of a lawsuit and Russo himself got slapped with a defamation lawsuit by Hogan for the slanderous things he said in the promo after Hogan pinned Jeff and left.
Russo is probably the best writer the E had. He actualy knows how to make wrestling attractive to new viewers. WCW SCREWED RUSSO.BY NOT GIVING HIM THE PLATFORM TO SHINE.
 

·
Ilya Smirnov ate my puppy.
Joined
·
4,925 Posts
Russo happened to be on board during one of WWE's most successful periods and takes a LOT more credit for it than he deserves. He contributed some to a few good story lines, but his bullshit ideas also had a lot more to do with WWE's decline from its highs than with its climb. If you ask me, his greatest contribution to the business is heading it in the direction that lead it to being in the sorry-ass state it is in today.
 

·
Team Narcisse
Joined
·
7,940 Posts
Russo was doing a thing on his podcast a while back(haven't listened in a while) where he'd review the weekly Raw along with one from the era when he he was involved. I always especially enjoy hearing his insight into the thoughts that went into the AE shows. He's not above calling some of his ideas stinkers. He will never admit that Arquette was a terrible idea, but he has on other stuff. He doesn't try to take credit for everything. If a great idea wasn't his he gives credit to the person who it belonged to.

I also enjoy him offering things that he would do differently on the current show. I do agree that there is a degree of pandering to the smark crowd here, but I do find myself agreeing with him on changes needed more often than not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,524 Posts
When a "filter" can't filter an angle that results in someone's death. I question that filter's abilities.

It's undeniable from Russo's statements online and videos that he says a lot of dumb shit and then he later backtracks and goes no, no, no I really meant this. So yeah Russo needs a filter and that was probably a lot of guys not just Vince McMahon probably mostly Ed Ferrara.

Russo is a master of structure and pacing though rather than having a lot of great ideas. Russo could make a wrestling show flow.

If Russo was booking Raw the show would flow better even if the content wasn't different.
 

·
Team Narcisse
Joined
·
7,940 Posts
Heres Russo talking about Rock at SS98 starting at a little after the 5 minute mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,115 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Russo happened to be on board during one of WWE's most successful periods and takes a LOT more credit for it than he deserves. He contributed some to a few good story lines, but his bullshit ideas also had a lot more to do with WWE's decline from its highs than with its climb. If you ask me, his greatest contribution to the business is heading it in the direction that lead it to being in the sorry-ass state it is in today.
I am starting to believe this post.

Think about it, everywhere that Russo went to besides WWE, he was an utter failure; WCW, TNA. He pretty much killed WCW and almost put TNA out of business.

I think his contributions to the WWE were; maybe a germ of an idea that McMahon or Prichard or Cornette or Patternson improved upon. I do believe that Russo gets a lot more credit than he deserves especially in this forum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,748 Posts
He came up with the Val Venis character, which was obviously a very over gimmick at the time. Same with Goldust (which I've heard was his idea) - one of the most innovative characters ever, and certainly a catalyst for "edgier" programming. I also think he was the one that wanted to push Booker T in a title run. He also pushed the idea that everyone on the card should be involved in some sort of angle, so not to just disregard the undercard.

Not completely sure, but I think he had the idea of The Rock joining the corporation.

People always bring up the "McMahon filter", but I would submit that McMahon has consistently had far worse ideas in terms of angles and booking. Listening to his podcast, I find it very difficult to disagree with him 90% of the time. He's not always right, and certainly had some awful ideas, but I generally (not always) agree with his opinions on today's product and what the writing should be like to improve it.


Edit: didn't he come up with the Kane/Underaker angle, or am I imagining that?
Nah, Russo had nothing to do with Goldust or Kane/Undertaker. Dustin Rhodes was given the Goldust gimmick in 1995. Russo didn't join creative until 1996. That latter was Jim Cornette. Russo wanted to blow Kane/Undertaker in a PPV. Russo probably takes credit for both. He's a liar that has done incredible damage to the wrestling business. See what happens when he actually gets creative control anywhere.

The Attitude era was a successful time for the WWF, but let's be honest -- that was because of Steve Austin and a few supporting players who had zero help from Vince Russo. The Val Venis character was rejected by DX, tainted Sean Morley's career for the rest of his run, and actually was a ratings loser for the company (look it up). The WWF would have started beating WCW sooner if the bullshit other than Austin was working better.

Can anyone actually name something of Vince Russo's that was successful? A lot of people will point to Deadly Game. Okay, I'll buy the heel turn that actually makes little sense. From a wrestling aspect, the show did suck. The Rock could do no wrong at this point in time. Case in point, they had him lose to Mark Henry like the month before. If that happened to a modern WWE star, it would be commonplace to blame the company for tainting their whole push. Rock succeeded despite Russo. There's a reason Brian Gewertz is employed by The Rock and Russo isn't. By the way, apparently it was Jim Ross who suggested The Rock started talking in the third person and really helped bring that cocky attitude out of him -- so JR probably deserves more credit than Russo.

If you can't tell, I really hate the hack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
We actually talked to Russo today, one of the things he talked about was DX and how it was McMahon's idea to plug Billy Gunn and Road Dogg into the group, and HHH and Shawn wouldn't go for it which is why they started as a tag team on their own, the New Age Outlaws, to see if they'd get over.

FYI - Russo also said he's spoken to McMahon over the last week.

I'll link the clip once it's posted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,768 Posts
He pretty much killed WCW and almost put TNA out of business.
^ A fictitious statement that's commonly assumed without any substantial verifiable evidence, or consideration of context.


The AOL/Time Warner merger "killed" WCW, and the Titanic was already sinking both creatively and managerially before Russo and Ferrara got on board.
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top