Tim Kail's Raw Review

There are times when the WWE strikes that perfect balance between heavy-handed schmaltz and sincere, logical storytelling.

That elusive sweet spot may just be the purest representation of the WWE's perspective on professional wrestling; an over-the-top family saga wrapped in spandex, fireworks, and an assortment of colorful heroes & villains that occasionally results in genuine expressions of pain, joy, surprise, and psychosis.

One such moment occurred on the November 13th, 2017 episode of Monday Night Raw when Kurt Angle and his tearful "son", Jason Jordan, were interrupted by a grim & determined Triple H.

THE RAW REVIEW

Imagine we’re by a campfire; you, me, and a few other campers. We’ve been hiking all day, and now we’re sitting down together to eat and drink and talk. The moonlight splinters against the forest canopy, falling to the dirt like strands of silk. Twigs and leaves snap and rustle in the dark beyond our campsite, reminding us that we’re not really alone. The campfire-light holds us in a warm, orange bubble, as we pull apart bits of jerky and laugh as gram crackers and marshmallows and chocolate dissolve in our mouths. A bottle of Jack passes from mouth to mouth, and that’s when the stories start.

THE RAW REVIEW

“Was RAW good?” my wife asked when she noticed RAW fade to black on my laptop. I could hear the hope in her voice, the earnest desire of any good spouse to know their partner is happy.
“I don’t know,” I sighed. She laughed in reply, accustomed to the sometimes indescribable angst any episode of Monday Night Raw inspires in me.

THE RAW REVIEW

For the first time in two years, I had fun watching Monday Night Raw. And although it was the “Raw after Mania”, which is often a good episode, the fun I had wasn’t related to what the audience was doing (quite the opposite, in fact). The audience is usually the main attraction of the post-Mania RAW, but this week the crowd only managed to get in the way of the show. RAW was better than the crowd this week and that’s the way it should always be because the crowd is the crowd…they’re not performers risking their lives to tell stories. For too long the WWE has permitted the crowd to be “more important” or “better than” the show itself, and that stems from a modern booking philosophy designed to make money from the internet fans rather than tell good stories for a general, television audience.

THE RAW REVIEW

This year’s WrestleMania card is fairly well-rounded, promising several potentially satisfying bouts designed to appeal to a wide range of wrestling fans. From The Divas Title match to Shane’s war for control over RAW (and several narratives in-between) the stakes are appropriately high and fans will likely be treated to some pop-worthy, memorable moments. Even the lackluster main event fight for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship between Roman Reigns and Triple H may overcome expectations (and biases) to deliver, at the very least, a good professional wrestling match. On paper, this is one of the more solid cards in years despite how inconsistent and, at times, unexciting the build has been.

THE RAW REVIEW

This week's episode of Monday Night Raw, as well as this build into WrestleMania 32, embodies the WWE's failure to craft coherent, entertaining television in 2016. Everything that I've critiqued about the product for the past several years has escalated in recent weeks, making it harder and harder to sustain an interest or passion for the product.

THE RAW REVIEW

Pro-wrestling is storytelling.

Everything that goes on in a pro-wrestling show is symbolic, a literal representation of something figurative (like theater, film, television etc). The simulated combat of a pro-wrestling match, while resulting in very literal pain, is a metaphor for a real-world sport, a personal conflict, a war, a familial struggle, an identity crisis, or (often in WWE’s case) corporate negotiations. Because pro-wrestling is storytelling, the medium’s symbolism and iconography can be incredibly powerful. Over time, audiences are conditioned to associate maneuvers, phrases, gestures, expressions, and even objects with particular performers or scenarios. The best professional wrestlers tend to be those who use their symbolic power to their advantage, manipulating the audience to incredibly intense Moments of Pop.

THE RAW REVIEW

First impressions are important.

That first encounter can even come to define your relationship with that person. Over time, your initial assessment of their character might prove to be incorrect, but it’s impossible to be wrong about how you feel. “I like this person” or “I don’t like this person” isn’t connected to anything objective about the person who inspires those feelings. You might hate someone who is a “good person” and you might love someone who is a “bad person”.

The same holds true for artists and their works of art.

THE RAW REVIEW

To tell a good story, it helps to have a basic respect for human beings.

It also helps if the storyteller appeals to the most intelligent members of their audience rather than assuming everyone is a wide-eyed, open-mouthed, passive buffoon who wants to see anything happen.

When human beings are told, convincingly, that “B comes after A” they settle into a place of comfort. They start to like the idea that B comes after A. They start to rely on the idea that B comes after A. Not before long, the idea that B comes after A transforms into an irrefutable fact in their minds.

THE RAW REVIEW

We’ve been here before…

A WWE pay-per-view that is met with resounding disdain is immediately followed by an episode of Monday Night Raw that elicits unanimous praise. As genuinely disheartened as I was by the Fastlane pay-per-view, as soon as I heard “Here comes the monaaaaaaaay!” and saw Shane O’Mac hit the RAW stage with his reliably fancy footwork, all wasn’t forgiven, but all was certainly forgotten.

THE RAW REVIEW

This week’s episode of Monday Night Raw perfectly demonstrates why a three-hour running time is (to put it lightly) too long a running time for Monday Night Raw. No matter how good an episode might be, by the end of the second hour, RAW has used up its energy and most of its goodwill, and the audience becomes noticeably exhausted and increasingly disinterested. It is an impossible length of time to contend with, especially for the “average viewer” the WWE relentlessly pursues. Around 10:00 pm, I felt my attention and my emotional investment wane. I was full, but the WWE insisted on serving me another entree, cramming four or five matches into a forty-minute span, building toward a main event that today’s WWE-viewer simply doesn’t want to watch. And that is a shame, because had the show been two hours it would have certainly been the best episode in months.

THE RAW REVIEW

I was twenty-five when I first started writing THE RAW REVIEW in 2012. I was a typical angsty young writer - single, pissed off at the world, envious of “better” generations, and certain that my work was the best in the world. I would tap away furiously at the keyboard, churning out long, irony-laced, condescending, thoughtful critiques of RAW. These early write-ups reflected my state of mind and my state of life.

The Writings