Col. DeBeers [Figure-Four Daily Interview]
The Good
I typically subscribe to Figure-Four/Wrestling Observer Online now for several month stretches every year. Typically, I follow the shows faithfully, listen to back shows religiously and put any newsletters I want to read on my Kindle for consumption when I can find the time. When I have tedious work to do, I listen to hours upon hours of a single show. Last summer, I poured over hours of Figure-Four Dailies and found a handful of them to be so exceptional that I'll be going back and reviewing them for this blog. One that was a standout was Bryan's interview with Ed Wiskowski (aka Col. DeBeers), although this predated my listening to his RF Shoot, it convinced me that this guy was a shoot master. Wiskowski's vast experiences, great storytelling and sharp insight make him one of those individuals that I'll go out of my way to listen to talk wrestling. Bryan does the standard - how'd you get in?, tell us about your athletic background (football) and all that, but is able to pull in the follow-ups that Rob never can. Although it was brief, Wiskowski talking about his experiences in South Africa were captivating and that area is so rarely covered.
The Bad
Only an hour barely scratches the surface of such a full career. Wiskowski touches briefly on his numerous European tours, which is often left out in shoot interviews with pro-wrestlers. Since he and Bryan are familiar with one another personally and have lived in the Pacific Northwest, they had a great chemistry. The Colonel, who loathes Dave Meltzer, only briefly mentioned him in talking about how Dave did not not thinking his character drew money. Bryan had him back on after Buddy Rose died, but he could probably have him on as much as Paul Lazenby, Dr. Lucha and it'd never grow old or dull.
The Rating: ***1/2
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame - The Canadians
Author, Ghost Writer, Editor: Greg Oliver
Publisher: ECW Press
Released: 10/02
The Good
Greg Oliver is an excellent pro-wrestling journalist and this, the first in the "Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame" series is a nice sampling of the work he has been doing for years on his Slam! Wrestling website. This book is more of an encyclopedia of Canadian and adopted Canadian wrestlers than what future installments would be. Oliver top twenty listing could raise eyebrows, but nothing is grossly omitted, overlooked or downplayed. If you've never browsed his site, this is great original content with interview tidbits, anecdotes and well-researched history. A sound first attempt.
The Bad
"Hall of Fame" books are always full of subjectivity that irks everyone. While I have read some of the flaws of this book, it is generally good. I think its limitations are in its depth. However, Oliver had to choose between a wide variety of people to profile or great depth in those profiles and he chose the former. His top twenty had the depth I enjoyed, but was not on par with the mini-biographies in Dave Meltzer's Tributes books. Although this is okay, his future books make this look amateurish.
The Rating: ***3/4
Author, Ghost Writer, Editor: Greg Oliver
Publisher: ECW Press
Released: 10/02
The Good
Greg Oliver is an excellent pro-wrestling journalist and this, the first in the "Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame" series is a nice sampling of the work he has been doing for years on his Slam! Wrestling website. This book is more of an encyclopedia of Canadian and adopted Canadian wrestlers than what future installments would be. Oliver top twenty listing could raise eyebrows, but nothing is grossly omitted, overlooked or downplayed. If you've never browsed his site, this is great original content with interview tidbits, anecdotes and well-researched history. A sound first attempt.
The Bad
"Hall of Fame" books are always full of subjectivity that irks everyone. While I have read some of the flaws of this book, it is generally good. I think its limitations are in its depth. However, Oliver had to choose between a wide variety of people to profile or great depth in those profiles and he chose the former. His top twenty had the depth I enjoyed, but was not on par with the mini-biographies in Dave Meltzer's Tributes books. Although this is okay, his future books make this look amateurish.
The Rating: ***3/4
Monday, January 31, 2011
Slick [RF Video Shoot Interview]
The Good
Some people are just fun-loving types and when they do a shoot interview, they can relax and entertain you with stories from the road. While I'll never consider those the best interviews, they are enjoyable. This was one of those. Slick, who fancies himself as the kind of guy who could be friends with everybody, comes across that way. This is a man who is straightforward about his issues with others and does not come across bitter. It seems like the way he conducts himself here is very telling of why he found both success and adversity in the pro-wrestling business. He entertains. He voices his opinions. He probably both amused and irritated Vince McMahon, which is why he got a chance, but never got pushed as strongly as he might've been.
The Bad
This interview had so much potential, specifically because of the Slickster's strong personality, but it was hampered greatly by RF Video stupidity. Sometimes these shoot interviews are done late at night and usually it does not adversely affect the interviewee or at least not in a painfully obvious way. This was the opposite. Slick was dozing off toward the end and having a hard time staying focused. Secondly, the main issue that RF wanted to tackle was racism in the business. That was pretty obvious. Now I'm not saying that it was wrong to have that goal because here was a black man who worked in a few territories that have been or one would suspect are racist hotbeds. Slick is outspoken on the matter and he really got into here. The drawback was the poor questioning. When the idea of pimps "symbolizing the culture" was thrown out there (mistake or not), it revealed how poorly planned these interviews are. Aside from that this was a relatively short (not the standard two hours), focused on a relatively short career (a little over a decade) and did not include much psychology. Slick was entertaining and honest, but he did not get himself over a great talent in my view.
The Rating: ***1/2
The Good
Some people are just fun-loving types and when they do a shoot interview, they can relax and entertain you with stories from the road. While I'll never consider those the best interviews, they are enjoyable. This was one of those. Slick, who fancies himself as the kind of guy who could be friends with everybody, comes across that way. This is a man who is straightforward about his issues with others and does not come across bitter. It seems like the way he conducts himself here is very telling of why he found both success and adversity in the pro-wrestling business. He entertains. He voices his opinions. He probably both amused and irritated Vince McMahon, which is why he got a chance, but never got pushed as strongly as he might've been.
The Bad
This interview had so much potential, specifically because of the Slickster's strong personality, but it was hampered greatly by RF Video stupidity. Sometimes these shoot interviews are done late at night and usually it does not adversely affect the interviewee or at least not in a painfully obvious way. This was the opposite. Slick was dozing off toward the end and having a hard time staying focused. Secondly, the main issue that RF wanted to tackle was racism in the business. That was pretty obvious. Now I'm not saying that it was wrong to have that goal because here was a black man who worked in a few territories that have been or one would suspect are racist hotbeds. Slick is outspoken on the matter and he really got into here. The drawback was the poor questioning. When the idea of pimps "symbolizing the culture" was thrown out there (mistake or not), it revealed how poorly planned these interviews are. Aside from that this was a relatively short (not the standard two hours), focused on a relatively short career (a little over a decade) and did not include much psychology. Slick was entertaining and honest, but he did not get himself over a great talent in my view.
The Rating: ***1/2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)