I just finished watching the whole first season of "GLOW" on Netflix. What drew me in, initially, was a lingering interest in the actual GLOW that existed during the 1980s. I was a young child then, and I don't really remember anything about it at the time, but the GLOW documentary that came out a few years ago was enough to get me intrigued.
First, what this isn't: it isn't GLOW that existed in the 1980s. In many regards it's based on it, but to what extent the Netflix series actually resembles what it really was could be, and perhaps should be, debated. The characters are based on the types of characters that appeared in GLOW, and that much is clear. What motivated the actresses though to partake in the production, the real-life characters vs. the Netflix series characters, may be a bit more muddied in the latter. Some of the ladies who were involved with GLOW in the 1980s have expressed that while they see the surface similarities in the characters, little to nothing else resembled the actual production. Many of them went as far to say the boozing and drug use of "Sam Sylvia" in no way resembled the life or professionalism of director Matt Cimber, and that genuinely upset them. In other words, don't look too far beyond the surface comparisons to find any real insight into what was the real GLOW.
What it is though, and I think this is fair to say, is really a commentary now on what was the commentary then. GLOW was not a "wrestling promotion" in the sense of WWE, or TNA, or ROH. Those promotions are not so much commentary on society as they are about promoting sports entertainment within the confines of story and character development. GLOW was, more or less, a television show with broad reaching stereotypes, that cast actresses to play wrestlers to provide some commentary on society. It was, in a way, familiar to what fans of professional wrestling knew in terms of the moves and athleticism, but in another sense, the ladies were simply actresses playing wrestlers playing off stereotypes. Sure, there has to be some sense of acting involved in professional wrestling then (and now), but I believe that many, if not most, professional wrestlers today (men and women) are athletes first, actors and actresses second. I believe that script was flipped with GLOW.
Beyond the surface though, I believe Netflix's GLOW expands its commentary to the decade of the 1980s, with so much nostalgia that exists and other shows are latching onto in some sense or another. You see that with the characters making comments about the political climate, which really has nothing to do with wrestling or even pretending to wrestle. You see that with the causes that are undertaken. You even see that in the willingness to so openly embrace stereotypes and base characters off them which, in our PC world, wouldn't happen today.
Ultimately, what I believe Netflix's GLOW is, is a look back to an era more than a cult phenomenon of that era, but uses that cult phenomenon to promote the overall commentary.
First, what this isn't: it isn't GLOW that existed in the 1980s. In many regards it's based on it, but to what extent the Netflix series actually resembles what it really was could be, and perhaps should be, debated. The characters are based on the types of characters that appeared in GLOW, and that much is clear. What motivated the actresses though to partake in the production, the real-life characters vs. the Netflix series characters, may be a bit more muddied in the latter. Some of the ladies who were involved with GLOW in the 1980s have expressed that while they see the surface similarities in the characters, little to nothing else resembled the actual production. Many of them went as far to say the boozing and drug use of "Sam Sylvia" in no way resembled the life or professionalism of director Matt Cimber, and that genuinely upset them. In other words, don't look too far beyond the surface comparisons to find any real insight into what was the real GLOW.
What it is though, and I think this is fair to say, is really a commentary now on what was the commentary then. GLOW was not a "wrestling promotion" in the sense of WWE, or TNA, or ROH. Those promotions are not so much commentary on society as they are about promoting sports entertainment within the confines of story and character development. GLOW was, more or less, a television show with broad reaching stereotypes, that cast actresses to play wrestlers to provide some commentary on society. It was, in a way, familiar to what fans of professional wrestling knew in terms of the moves and athleticism, but in another sense, the ladies were simply actresses playing wrestlers playing off stereotypes. Sure, there has to be some sense of acting involved in professional wrestling then (and now), but I believe that many, if not most, professional wrestlers today (men and women) are athletes first, actors and actresses second. I believe that script was flipped with GLOW.
Beyond the surface though, I believe Netflix's GLOW expands its commentary to the decade of the 1980s, with so much nostalgia that exists and other shows are latching onto in some sense or another. You see that with the characters making comments about the political climate, which really has nothing to do with wrestling or even pretending to wrestle. You see that with the causes that are undertaken. You even see that in the willingness to so openly embrace stereotypes and base characters off them which, in our PC world, wouldn't happen today.
Ultimately, what I believe Netflix's GLOW is, is a look back to an era more than a cult phenomenon of that era, but uses that cult phenomenon to promote the overall commentary.