Dr. Darin Davis

I rarely talk about movies here (in fact the only other time I can think of was when I recommended Lipstick & Dynamite), but I watched a film last weekend that I thought would be of interest of the readers of this site.

The movie is a documentary called Bigger Stronger Faster* (2008). It deals with the use, abuse, and propaganda of steroids, while examining the root problem of why someone would want to take them. You can read the review from Roger Ebert (3.5 out of 4 stars) or IMDB (7.7 / 10) for a synopsis– I’ll just touch on a few more points below.

The film’s main characters are three brothers: Chris, Mark, and Mike Bell. Chris is the director, interviewer, and narrator. All three brothers had tried anabolic steroids, and two  (Mark & Mike) were still on them at the time of the documentary. One of the motivations for them to give steroids a try were there heroes, including Hulk Hogan, Schwarzenegger, and Sylvester Stalone. All of whom would either admit to using steroids (Hogan and Schwarzenegger), or be caught with them in later life (Stallone with growth hormone).

All of the bodybuilders and professional athletes shown in interviews (like Jose Canseco, Barry Bonds,  Olympian Ben Johnson) said they took performance enhancing substances because they had to– everyone else was doing them. That was one of the central themes of the movie. They didn’t do it to get ahead… they did it to keep up. To keep up with the idea that America has to be the biggest, strongest, and fastest country in the world.

On one hand we spend an extraordinary about of political and media attention on: steroids in the WWE, steroids in baseball, “roid rage” in the media (Chris Benoit), but at the same time we reward and admire those that are faster or larger than life and we look the other way. The U.S. Olympic Committee spends most of its time looking for loopholes for U.S. athletes to exploit (or they work with the officials to change the rules), according to one of the interviewees.

While everyone is focused on steroids, the supplement industry is pulling in over $27 billion dollars a year (PDF), and is virtually unregulated thanks to tons of legislation from Utah senator Orrin Hatch. Not coincidentally, about 10% of the supplement business resides in Utah.Which leads to shenanigans like the photographer who admitted that many of the “before and after” shots he has done for supplement companies were taken the same day, thanks to the use of lighting, makeup, and a bit of Photoshop. No rules against it, and everyone else is doing it so why can’t I?

The picture below was a set of shots the photographer took the same day to show how it is done. The six pack was airbrushed on. Not airbrushed on the image, but on the guy (Chris Bell).

For those of you that recognize the name Mike Bell, you may remember his work as a jobber for WWE and ECW. During the time of the documentary, he was still working the independents and sending tapes into the WWE. They kept telling him that he was “too old”.

Toward the end of the film there were very candid discussions of Mike Bell’s problems with drugs, and his inability to cope with not being a “success” in pro wrestling and life. His father said he was worried Mike was going to end up dead. Up until that point in the movie I had a feeling that there was something about the name Mike Bell that I couldn’t quite remember. After that line, I thought of it– Didn’t this guy end up dying?

After I watched the end of the film and didn’t see any mention in the credits, a minute with Google confirmed it. Mike Bell died a few months after the film came out (but possibly years after those scenes were filmed). The coroner eventually concluded it was from the “accidental” inhalation of a chemical used in a “household maintenance product”.

This documentary is definitely worth a rental (it’s also available on Instant Watch from Netflix). You don’t have to be a wrestling fan or a sports fan to enjoy it. The director does a great job of presenting the facts without taking sides. I would be surprised if you can watch this and not have your perspective change, regardless of what side of the discussion you started out on. It is definitely not black and white.

Photos: imdb

Back in July of 2008, I decided to keep track of my viewing time of WWE Monday Night Raw, ECW, TNA, and WWE Smackdown to see if I would be able to tell anything about the direction of the quality of the programming. This is assuming that if the quality (in my opinion) is better, I will watch more, and if the quality drops (again based on my tastes), I will watch less.

I tracked all four shows for a year before deciding to change things up and measure them differently (you can find the results of the that year-long experiment, including the charts and data, on the TV Viewership Stats page).

In July of 2009, I started collecting some different data about the same wrestling programming. What I was measuring this time was the number of matches per hour, and the quality of those matches as judged by a simple rating system.

The rating system I used was not one to five stars. It was closer to how I rate programming using my TiVo (Thumbs Up/2 Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down).

Since the WWE decided to shut down the ECW promotion, I stopped reporting on ECW and just did the other three.

The Final Results

After 52 weeks of collecting data from July 7th 2009 to July 9th 2010, here is a summary of the rating results. If you want to see more details, take a look at the TV Match Ratings page.

Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down Rating Totals

For each of the three brands, the thumb ratings have been totaled since I started collecting data the week of July 7th, 2009. Just to be clear, each “One Thumb Up” rating counts as one point, each “Two Thumbs Up” rating counts as two, and each “Thumb Down” rating counts as negative one (which subtracts from the total).

Here are the Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down ratings for the three programs:

Total Thumbs Up Ratings

Despite all of the negative press it gets, TNA pulled out ahead of Smackdown and way ahead of Raw in the quality of the matches (in my opinion). TNA would have been even farther ahead on positive ratings, except that they have had so many bad matches since Hogan and company showed up that it pulled their total down (remember a really bad match gets a Thumbs Down which reduces the total by one).

Avg Ratings Over Time

One other thing of note was the average ratings per match over time for each brand.

Avg Thumb Rating Per Match

The Raw guest host format has certainly affected the WWE programming. They are consistently at the bottom, even though it is supposedly the WWE’s “flagship” program. About 1 in 20 Raw matches is considered great.

If you take a look at the trend of TNA, you can see the damage Hulk Hogan and his cronies inflicted after the first of the year (about the midpoint of the charts). The average rating of each TNA match was climbing until Hogan took over. At its peak about 1 in 3 matches was great. It has been steadily falling since then, up until the last few weeks where it leveled out.

Smackdown has been fairly consistent over time, equaling TNA in the last couple of months. About 1 in 5 matches are considered great.

Take a look at all the stats and my “brilliant” conclusions over on the TV Match Ratings Page

Apparently something broke in the site theme I was using. There are no problems with viewing postings on the main page, but when you went to each article individually the formatting and comment system was broken.

Not sure when it happened, but probably after upgrading WordPress.

I switched over to a different theme that worked with the latest version. I’ll probably tweak it over the next few weeks and see if I like it.

Has TNA started their own “Attitude” era? Over the past few weeks, I’ve noticed a few changes to the programming that by themselves seem pretty insignificant, but combined seem to indicate an actual company direction. I know, I’m making the assumption that TNA Management actually has a plan. Or even that they have the idea that they need a plan.

With the turn of Abyss and a more serious Jay Lethal, there aren’t any “cartoonish” characters left. On top of that, they’ve gone from bleeping the word “ass” on the broadcast, to allowing the word a**hole to be said multiple times per episode. It’s even part of Mr. Anderson‘s gimmick. Add the bit with Angelina Love‘s backstage camera shot and you’ve got the start of a more “adult” TNA.

Back in 1998, the WWE started running more edgy angles, violence, and swearing to compete with WCW. TNA has dipped their toes in the deep end a little bit with some hardcore thumbtack matches and flaming tables (I’m not going to comment on the “glass” this time). Now it looks like they’ve got their whole foot in.

Will it be the start of something good, or just another attempt of TNA copying what was successful in the past and keeping their fingers crossed?