The internet is currently a war zone over AEW Redemption
If you spent your Saturday night doom-scrolling, you know the vibes. AEW Redemption was supposed to be the moment Tony Khan put the critics back in their boxes, but instead, it turned into the most polarizing event of the calendar year. My Twitter feed looks like a Gallagher show, with half the timeline throwing champagne and the other half throwing chairs.
We have reached that specific point in the cycle where the hardcore defenders are typing manifestos about storytelling nuances while the contrarians are busy counting every single botch. It's the classic wrestling fan dance: if you aren't fighting with a stranger about a four-star match that felt like a three-star car crash, are you even really living?
The enthusiasts vs. the reality show
The die-hards are out here acting like we just witnessed the second coming of the Tokyo Dome. I read a thread this morning from a user who claimed the main event pacing was a stroke of genius. Apparently, if you don't appreciate a 25-minute staring contest that ends in a schmoz, you just don't have the palette for modern technical wrestling. It’s a brave take, if ultimately wrong.
Conversely, the skeptics are having an absolute field day. One breakdown on a popular subreddit pointed out that the show felt less like a wrestling production and more like a fever dream directed by someone who had three too many espresso shots. They aren't entirely off base. As Wrestling Inc noted in their post-show analysis, the distinction between winners and losers became blurred about two hours into the broadcast.
Where the show actually bled out
Let's talk about the production gripes because they were loud. You cannot have a high-stakes title match ruined by a camera angle that captures the referee getting a cramp in the background. It takes the audience out of the moment, snapping the suspension of disbelief faster than a bad superkick.
The pacing issues were the real culprit of the night. At one point, the show felt like it was running in mud. When you have a roster this stacked, you should be moving like a sports car, not a rusted-out minivan stuck in a driveway. There were moments where it felt like the talent was trying to compensate for a lack of direction by simply doing more spots, which is the wrestling version of shouting when you lose an argument.
The verdict: A show with peaks and valleys
If you ask me, the truth is sitting somewhere in the middle of this dumpster fire. There were individual spots that stood out as elite, but they were consistently undercut by questionable booking decisions. You can't just throw talent into a ring and hope for the best if the narrative structure is made of wet cardboard.
I lean towards the side of the skeptics here. We expect better than 50% execution from a company of this stature. It's great to have a wrestling alternative, but being an alternative shouldn't mean inheriting the worst habits of the genre. If you want to see how the industry is reacting to the fallout, check out the full breakdown on Wrestling Inc because they capture the absolute whiplash of the night perfectly.
The company needs to stop chasing that 'moment' and start building a foundation that doesn't collapse under the weight of its own ego. You don't need a 40-minute epic when 15 minutes of coherent logic would do just fine. Wrestling is simple: keep the crowd invested, tell a story that makes internal sense, and for the love of everything, watch the damn camera queues.
Is this the end of the world for the promotion? Obviously not. But it is a wake-up call that the audience is getting tired of the same old excuses. Maybe next time, they'll prioritize flow over frequency and put together a show that doesn't require a Reddit thread to explain why something actually happened.
