SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Aug 26, 2014 9:15:55 GMT -5
I think the fact that this seems to have a 99-1% ratio of being buried to praised, that it would more be indictment on you not watching the same show as everyone else to be honest. Cena's ability or move-set is not in question here. It was the complete illogical booking direction they're going in. There's nothing "illogical" about booking a challenger as strong going into a rematch. You just don't like it, which is fine, but the accusation that it makes no sense storyline wise is just flat out wrong. No, it's completely illogical and "outright wrong" because it undoes the story they did at Summer Slam. He was battered to a pulp and destroyed. He should have sold that beating, but then at the ppv kept fighting as per his credo. In no world is Cena perceived as physically being in the same stratosphere as Brock to anyone other then children. The "logical" story, if this was real, which is how it SHOULD be, is that he'd have to be smart, cunning and resilient. The Cena beast mode thing was asinine and came across as WWE being petrified to have him show or maintain a slight bit of weakness. Last night was Exhibit A as to why so many people hate the character. There is no rationally defending it. And I've yet to see anyone do it yet successfully. If anything, the few people that are are the ones who blindly like it, without debunking why it's not a detrimental idea. I'm not a blind hater. I give Cena props all the time, and gave him credit for doing and taking what he did at Summer Slam. But as a writer myself, and others who do it professionally like Kevin Hamilton I'm sure will agree, it drives me nuts wen the rules of exposition and hero's journey are shattered for panicked Poochie-booking.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Aug 26, 2014 9:18:16 GMT -5
I'm sick of the Clubber Lang and Rocky III comparisons here. Lang got a really cheap win over Rocky after he taunted everyone before the match and Mickey had a heart attack. Rocky went back to the drawing board with Creed and came up with a new game plan and easily won the rematch. Lang was never a serious champion and to me is probably the weakest antagonist of the first 4 Rocky movies.
I think NOC ends in some kind of DQ finish. Let's face it, HIAC is the next PPV and what exactly would be the main event of that show other than a Lesnar/Cena blow off?
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Aug 26, 2014 9:18:21 GMT -5
There's nothing "illogical" about booking a challenger as strong going into a rematch. You just don't like it, which is fine, but the accusation that it makes no sense storyline wise is just flat out wrong. If the challenger is saying all the same things he said before the first match, then yes it is illogical. What's changed? Why would Cena be stronger this time around? Actually, its not. There's nothing illogical about a character still believing in himself even after getting the mother of all beatdowns. That's kind of what heroes do: have faith in their abilities and that, despite setbacks, good will triumph over bad. Again, you might not like it because it's not booked the way you want it to be, but don't confuse something you don't approve of with it being "not logical". That's why most of the arguments about "logic" and "bad business" in these stories are such horseshit. It's really just cover for "I don't like something and instead of just saying that and sounding like a fan I'm going to try and rationalize it to seem smart."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 9:22:25 GMT -5
Y'know, there are ways to build up a rematch other than "have Cena effortlessly squash three guys who he's already beaten numerous times." Since everyone compares this storyline to Rocky III, Rocky spent the lead-up to the rematch training harder than ever before; he didn't go out and beat the shit out of Spider Rico to show that he was "making a statement."
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Aug 26, 2014 9:22:50 GMT -5
There's nothing "illogical" about booking a challenger as strong going into a rematch. You just don't like it, which is fine, but the accusation that it makes no sense storyline wise is just flat out wrong. No, it's completely illogical and "outright wrong" because it undoes the story they did at Summer Slam. He was battered to a pulp and destroyed. He should have sold that beating, but then at the ppv kept fighting as per his credo. In no world is Cena perceived as physically being in the same stratosphere as Brock to anyone other then children. The "logical" story, if this was real, which is how it SHOULD be, is that he'd have to be smart, cunning and resilient. The Cena beast mode thing was asinine and came across as WWE being petrified to have him show or maintain a slight bit of weakness. Last night was Exhibit A as to why so many people hate the character. There is no rationally defending it. And I've yet to see anyone do it yet successfully. If anything, the few people that are are the ones who blindly like it, without debunking why it's not a detrimental idea. I'm not a blind hater. I give Cena props all the time, and gave him credit for doing and taking what he did at Summer Slam. But as a writer myself, and others who do it professionally like Kevin Hamilton I'm sure will agree, it drives me nuts wen the rules of exposition and hero's journey are shattered for panicked Poochie-booking. Having Cena beat the holy hell out of Bray Wyatt doesn't undo what happened at Summerslam. The only way that would be undone would be if Cena destroyed Lesnar. Which hasn't happened. So, again, nothing illogical about it. Just the usual complaining.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 26, 2014 9:23:05 GMT -5
If the challenger is saying all the same things he said before the first match, then yes it is illogical. What's changed? Why would Cena be stronger this time around? Actually, its not. There's nothing illogical about a character still believing in himself even after getting the mother of all beatdowns. That's kind of what heroes do: have faith in their abilities and that, despite setbacks, good will triumph over bad. Again, you might not like it because it's not booked the way you want it to be, but don't confuse something you don't approve of with it being "not logical". That's why most of the arguments about "logic" and "bad business" in these stories are such horseshit. It's really just cover for "I don't like something and instead of just saying that and sounding like a fan I'm going to try and rationalize it to seem smart." If he was being humble about being humbled I might agree. He hasn't. It's the same old "come get some, I'm gonna kick some ass blah blah blah" posturing bullshit that we've all heard before. The reset button pressed, Cena back in typical Cena mode, as if the last match with Lesnar didn't even happen. It's not a matter of personal dislike, but is a matter of illogical booking that seems to disregard what has occured for the sake of keeping the character perpetually stuck in a particular persona, however detrimental it might be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 9:24:06 GMT -5
I think the fact that this seems to have a 99-1% ratio of being buried to praised, that it would more be indictment on you not watching the same show as everyone else to be honest. Cena's ability or move-set is not in question here. It was the complete illogical booking direction they're going in. There's nothing "illogical" about booking a challenger as strong going into a rematch. You just don't like it, which is fine, but the accusation that it makes no sense storyline wise is just flat out wrong. The illogical part of it is that the guy Cena struggled with for months, who put him through the wringer and tortured him (well, until after Mania Cena started shrugging that off), could have been easily overcome in seconds if Cena were sufficiently pissed off, and that eight days after being mercilessly mauled to the point of having to receive medical attention Cena's better than ever and has not remotely had his confidence shaken by it.
|
|
|
Post by Ash Kingston on Aug 26, 2014 9:29:13 GMT -5
But guys, don't you understand? This is the most important rematch of John Cena's career. Like how his rematch with The Rock was the most important rematch of his career. And this time, he's not just going to beat Brock, he's going to kick his ass! Even though he said something similar during the Bray Wyatt feud.
...god, at least Hogan would sell an ass-whoopin'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 9:31:21 GMT -5
But guys, don't you understand? This is the most important rematch of John Cena's career. Like how his rematch with The Rock was the most important rematch of his career. And this time, he's not just going to beat Brock, he's going to kick his ass! Even though he said something similar during the Bray Wyatt feud. ...god, at least Hogan would sell an ass-whoopin'. Honestly, with how he is right now, I'm kind of expecting the Cena and Reigns (not singling out Reigns here, he's just the closest Macho Man comparison presently available) vs. the Wyatts, Lesnar, Orton, Rollins, Kane, and Triple H cage match any day now.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Aug 26, 2014 9:37:48 GMT -5
Honestly, I thought Cena would have gotten a lot of praise for not grinning his way through the Brock loss, taking the situation seriously and showing more of a mean streak, which is what a lot of both his fans and detractors have asked for. Also some sweet suplexes on his part, expanding the moveset. Sometimes I wonder, are we even watching the same show anymore? Here's the thing though, outside of the smiling he did the exact same thing. Cena has two reactions to every situation: jokey mode or serious preacher voice. It's the only two things he does, and none of them are actual emotional responses. They tried to sell this story of how 'vulnerable' Cena was/is. That'd have been interesting. Hell even the useless panel at the beginning spoke to that at first until Cena himself strolled out there and goes "No. You're wrong. He kicked my ass, but now I'm gonna beat his ass." Then they STILL tried to push the vulnerable angle, and instead he walked out and immediately decimated the Wyatts, rendering them no threat whatever. Hell, to be honest, Show and Henry didn't even need to come out there. That's the thing people are crapping on; every word or action by Cena was belied the story they were presenting of Cena being vulnerable. It was completely phony, which is how Cena always comes across whether he's smiling or preacher-y. Even the idea of Cena trying to be more vicious would have merit if they built to that over a period of time. It wouldn't have made MUCH sense, as he's not gonna out-vicious Lesnar; but it'd be something. They didn't even build to it over the course of one match. He just immediately goes out and steamrolls a guy that's supposed to be really dangerous. Hell Bray, by their own words was supposed to be a real rival to Cena. When you kick someone's ass every time out, only losing by weirdo shenanigans, that's not a rivalry. That's what people hate about this and Cena in general; nothing in the stories they try to tell with him are ever actually reflected on-screen, they just pay lip service to it while showing you the exact opposite. He DID shrug off Summerslam like it was nothing in the end. The sole difference was he wasn't joking, but that's all. Hell, if history is any indication, that's coming next week. That sort of thing IS illogical, cuz it flies in the face of what they're trying to to. They have the pieces there for a really good story, but if they don't actually put em together, all they've got is a mess. That's what last night was, a big phony mess.
|
|
"Magic" Mark Hurr
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Here, have some chili dogs
Not related to Phantasmo
Posts: 15,486
|
Post by "Magic" Mark Hurr on Aug 26, 2014 9:38:56 GMT -5
It's not in the bag of Brock losing to Cena at Night of Champions. Cena will put up a way better fight but will still ultimately lose the match. While it sucked that Bray got treated like a 5 dollar whore by Cena, they had to rebuild Cena after the most one sided asskicking in a world title match since Diesel beat Bob Backlund. Using someone like Miz, Fandango, or RybAxel wouldn't done shit. Bray talked a big game but got exposed. I would take this time to bench the Wyatts and retooled them because they need a break. If no one believes Cena stands a chance, no one will pay to see the rematch. But yeah, it's Rocky 3 but Clubber wins. I've always wondered why I was supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber Lang?
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Aug 26, 2014 9:46:23 GMT -5
It's not in the bag of Brock losing to Cena at Night of Champions. Cena will put up a way better fight but will still ultimately lose the match. While it sucked that Bray got treated like a 5 dollar whore by Cena, they had to rebuild Cena after the most one sided asskicking in a world title match since Diesel beat Bob Backlund. Using someone like Miz, Fandango, or RybAxel wouldn't done shit. Bray talked a big game but got exposed. I would take this time to bench the Wyatts and retooled them because they need a break. If no one believes Cena stands a chance, no one will pay to see the rematch. But yeah, it's Rocky 3 but Clubber wins. I've always wondered why I was supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber Lang? Because they're black. Until Rocky 4, it was Rocky playing the Great White Hope. In real life at the time, the heavyweight boxing scene was dominated by black boxers. Rocky was the fantasy outlet for folks who longed the days of Rocky Machiano ruling the roost.
|
|
|
Post by hossfan on Aug 26, 2014 9:50:11 GMT -5
A question for all those who think Cena is acting "illogically".
When a sports star gets absolutely beaten in competition, beaten to the point that its quite clear who the better man/team is, how often do you see them admit it the next time the two face? How many show actual doubt before the rematch? Doesn't happen often. Its just as likely they're going to puff up their chest and make some kind of bold prediction about them winning. This is what happens in the real world. If it happens in the real world, you cannot claim it makes no sense, because there are concrete examples of it happening.
|
|
"Magic" Mark Hurr
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Here, have some chili dogs
Not related to Phantasmo
Posts: 15,486
|
Post by "Magic" Mark Hurr on Aug 26, 2014 9:53:42 GMT -5
I've always wondered why I was supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber Lang? Because they're black. Until Rocky 4, it was Rocky playing the Great White Hope. In real life at the time, the heavyweight boxing scene was dominated by black boxers. Rocky was the fantasy outlet for folks who longed the days of Rocky Machiano ruling the roost. Trust me. I knew why. I was being facetious. And I apologize now for using "facetious" because I hate when people use it. You see what Cena does to us?
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Aug 26, 2014 9:54:38 GMT -5
I've always wondered why I was supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber Lang? Because they're black. Until Rocky 4, it was Rocky playing the Great White Hope. In real life at the time, the heavyweight boxing scene was dominated by black boxers. Rocky was the fantasy outlet for folks who longed the days of Rocky Machiano ruling the roost. *Language*
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Aug 26, 2014 9:55:59 GMT -5
What's the difference between beating Brock and beating his ass?
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Aug 26, 2014 9:56:28 GMT -5
A question for all those who think Cena is acting "illogically". When a sports star gets absolutely beaten in competition, beaten to the point that its quite clear who the better man/team is, how often do you see them admit it the next time the two face? How many show actual doubt before the rematch? Doesn't happen often. Its just as likely they're going to puff up their chest and make some kind of bold prediction about them winning. This is what happens in the real world. If it happens in the real world, you cannot claim it makes no sense, because there are concrete examples of it happening. You know the difference? This is a narrative, a story. You get invested in it for totally different reasons than you do in sports. You're following character progression here, whereas you're not in sports. Besides, the times that does happen, those players/teams are rightly derided for being stupid. I'll give you a recent example of the thing you're talking about-- the Broncos got their asses collectively kicked by the Seahawks in the Superbowl; they got Lesnar-ed. A few weeks ago, one of the Bronocs players was actually talking about how Denver beat themselves and when they play again blah blah blah. He was actually reacting like Cena like you're advocating. People didn't say "yeah, he's right..." they rightly pointed out how stupid he was being.
|
|
|
Post by ________ has left the building on Aug 26, 2014 9:59:27 GMT -5
Because they're black. Until Rocky 4, it was Rocky playing the Great White Hope. In real life at the time, the heavyweight boxing scene was dominated by black boxers. Rocky was the fantasy outlet for folks who longed the days of Rocky Machiano ruling the roost. *Language* I loved Eddie Murphy's RAW as a kid and this was one of my favorite parts.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Aug 26, 2014 10:00:23 GMT -5
A question for all those who think Cena is acting "illogically". When a sports star gets absolutely beaten in competition, beaten to the point that its quite clear who the better man/team is, how often do you see them admit it the next time the two face? How many show actual doubt before the rematch? Doesn't happen often. Its just as likely they're going to puff up their chest and make some kind of bold prediction about them winning. This is what happens in the real world. If it happens in the real world, you cannot claim it makes no sense, because there are concrete examples of it happening. If the sports star in question is an underdog, as we are constantly being told Cena is, they would firstly show humility before facing a fearsome or formidable opponent, and yes they would be more wary at least of facing that enemy a second time around and would not make bold predictions of winning. In any case, even if the two stars are of equal ability, if a one sided match occurs, the next time around, the loser would certainly show a humble side. If Rodger Federer gets blitzed by Novak Djokovic at a Grand Slam, you will never hear Federer talking shit before their next meeting.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Aug 26, 2014 10:01:53 GMT -5
I've always wondered why I was supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber Lang? Because they're black. Until Rocky 4, it was Rocky playing the Great White Hope. In real life at the time, the heavyweight boxing scene was dominated by black boxers. Rocky was the fantasy outlet for folks who longed the days of Rocky Machiano ruling the roost. Partially, and it was clearly a pretty big ancillary benefit obviously; but you could've told the Rocky story with a black character too if they'd have done it. He didn't HAVE to be a white audience avatar really to be an underdog necessarily. You're totally right obviously in the way it was presented though. Although I will say you were also supposed to boo Apollo and Clubber because of their arrogance and ruthlessness respectively, and because Rocky was the protagonist, so you actually saw his entire character rather than just negative traits like the 'villains'.
|
|