|
Post by Magic knows Black Lives Matter on May 31, 2016 13:07:32 GMT -5
I've never understood why its so hard to separate the character we see on TV from the person off screen. Do you have the same issue with acors in movies and on tv? "Well that guy loves his family, puppies, and sick kids. Can't dislike the savage monster he plays in this new movie." I'm perfectly willing to accept, for example, that Stephanie McMahon the character is an emasculating,egotistical, power hungry spoiled brat of a character. I'm also willing to accept that Stephanie McMahon Levesque is a mom who wears jewelry her kids made for her and someone who enjoys doing charity work. I think this exchange has been had 1,000 times on this board, but there are many differences. They don't have a video package in the middle of The Dark Knight Rises showing Tom Hardy's charity work. Hugh Laurie never appears on talk shows or at conventions as Dr. House. WWE wants to have it both ways and it can't be done the way they're doing it. Thank you because as you said, this exact same argument has been had 1000x over. It's not even apples and oranges. It's apples and pizza.
|
|
|
Post by Lazy peon on May 31, 2016 13:13:49 GMT -5
This is the answer. When they are presented as, teehee this isn't real, just my character... I no longer think they are a bad person. Go back through all of wrestling history and look at the most hated heels. You never saw them riding around with faces, doing charity work, communicating with fans positively. They were presented as real people and they themselves believed in it! I've never understood why its so hard to separate the character we see on TV from the person off screen. Do you have the same issue with acors in movies and on tv? "Well that guy loves his family, puppies, and sick kids. Can't dislike the savage monster he plays in this new movie." I'm perfectly willing to accept, for example, that Stephanie McMahon the character is an emasculating,egotistical, power hungry spoiled brat of a character. I'm also willing to accept that Stephanie McMahon Levesque is a mom who wears jewelry her kids made for her and someone who enjoys doing charity work. TBH if I saw footage of Cersei Lannister's actress being an awesome normal person talking to sick kids in the middle of an episode of Game of Thrones, it would hurt the experience for me.
|
|
|
Post by lesleymoon on May 31, 2016 13:17:38 GMT -5
I think this exchange has been had 1,000 times on this board, but there are many differences. They don't have a video package in the middle of The Dark Knight Rises showing Tom Hardy's charity work. Hugh Laurie never appears on talk shows or at conventions as Dr. House. WWE wants to have it both ways and it can't be done the way they're doing it. Okay but Tom Hardy can appear on Jimmy Fallon or Ellen or whatever promoting said movie and come off super likeable and play stupid games and I still want to see his character defeated. Like I just finished watching the Seth Rollins special. Came off as a super cool dude and I sympathized with his injury and was happy when he got better. But like, I still want to see him get his ass kicked onscreen because onscreen he is an awful heel. Same way I can listen to and love Jericho's podcast and love it, and also boo him to high heaven because he killed Mitch. The monster!
|
|
|
Post by IMPRESSIVE knightwing1047 on May 31, 2016 13:18:23 GMT -5
This is the answer. When they are presented as, teehee this isn't real, just my character... I no longer think they are a bad person. Go back through all of wrestling history and look at the most hated heels. You never saw them riding around with faces, doing charity work, communicating with fans positively. They were presented as real people and they themselves believed in it! I've never understood why its so hard to separate the character we see on TV from the person off screen. Do you have the same issue with acors in movies and on tv? "Well that guy loves his family, puppies, and sick kids. Can't dislike the savage monster he plays in this new movie." I'm perfectly willing to accept, for example, that Stephanie McMahon the character is an emasculating,egotistical, power hungry spoiled brat of a character. I'm also willing to accept that Stephanie McMahon Levesque is a mom who wears jewelry her kids made for her and someone who enjoys doing charity work. This is a very valid point and you're 100% right. But there is a difference. I think we've been conditioned to not separate the wrestler from the person from years of kayfabe. I mean, obviously I know the Wyatts aren't really cultists who possibly kidnap and indoctrinate or murder people in the Florida Everglades. Take Erick Rowan for example. I know he's not a psychopath who does every single thing Bray Wyatt tells him to do while wearing a sheep mask. While I sit there and watch Raw, I see him come out with Bray and I'm thinking... scary dude, this Erick Rowan! Until I'm shown a video of him granting a Make-a-Wish... which is admirable and literally makes me feel good and happy. But then, I'm transported immediately back to scary guy! Why would I want to "boo" someone who just did an incredible thing for a terminally sick child instead of being with his own children and wife. I'm perfectly will to suspend my disbelief. I like to be told a great story. But allow me to digest the story. I can see the great work he does another time. When a movie villain is being a bad guy, they don't break your suspension of disbelief halfway through the movie with a feel good story. Gary Sinise was a bad man in Ransom. I hated him in that movie. They didn't stop in the middle of it and tell me... ya know, he's really not like this. He actually does a lot of work for disabled vets and their families.
|
|
Sicho100
Hank Scorpio
Easily Confused.
Posts: 5,964
Member is Online
|
Post by Sicho100 on May 31, 2016 13:29:45 GMT -5
I'd agree with those that have blamed the booking, the unwillingness to let heels be heels (No eye poking, etc.), and the way they are pretty upfront about the fact that it's a show during the show.
One thing I'd add, though, is regarding some of the indy guys (Owens, Punk, Heel Bryan): to a not insignificant part of the audience, they are babyfaces. By that I mean, if you are someone who follows the indies - even just a little - you know who Kevin Steen is. You know how important his family is to him, you know he doesn't have the WWE look, you know his best friend got signed while they passed over him for two more years. You may have bought his shirt or even talked to him at an indy show. Hell, you probably know about his love of zoos! That isn't a heel. That's a very sympathetic figure. That's a babyface. So, even when Kevin Owens is being a prick, you see babyface Kevin Steen. And the same was true with guys like Punk and Bryan.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on May 31, 2016 13:36:33 GMT -5
One angle to consider is that even guys like Owens and Punk play the heels, people cheer them as a sign of intense support to tell the office 'This guy. f***ing push this guy. Give him the world. Do it." Whenever people complain about how they want new faces in the main event and complain when it's someone like Roman Reigns, they get told "Well then who do you want?" and get told that instead of booing Cena or Roman, they need to cheer who they want. So people do. But you can't say that "WWE needs better writing" is an oversimplification of the issue, but then turn around and say that indie guys will never get booed ever no matter what they do. But this is also part of the same issue as well. Quite simply, for as "smart" as the fanbase trying to say that claim to be, they forgot the most important fact for heel performers: BOOS ARE A HEEL WRESTLER'S CHEERS!!!!!It's a simple part of the program. If you really love what a heel wrestler is doing, BOO THEM OUT OF THE ARENA! That's how you show you support them, and that they're doing a great job. If you're really trying to cheer them as a sign of intense support to tell the office "This guy. f***ing push this guy. Give him the world. Do it", then boo them like they're the second coming of Hitler. If you do that, then you're eventually going to see them rise up the card as one of the most hated heels in the company and be pushed to the moon, given the world, and actually being allowed to be the same character you love in the process. By cheering the heel you want, on the other hand- BEST CASE SCENARIO, the WWE listens to all the cheers this supported heel gets and turns them face by the fans' popular opinion...and then, that primarily leads to a lot of the times where an amazing heel people love turns face, and suddenly loses all the things that made people love them in the first place to become a generic lame babyface. At worst, you're NOT HELPING- on the contrary, you are openly hindering your favorite heel's rise to the top by cheering them (after all, how good a heel can this person POSSIBLY be if the crowd cheers them? The guy's entire job description is "make people boo you", and they aren't getting booed- this person must be terrible as a heel. Give the big rub to Eva Marie or The Drifter...can you hear that hatred they get? The crowd wants them dead- THAT'S a great heel.)
|
|
|
Post by kendrickisking on May 31, 2016 13:36:55 GMT -5
I think this exchange has been had 1,000 times on this board, but there are many differences. They don't have a video package in the middle of The Dark Knight Rises showing Tom Hardy's charity work. Hugh Laurie never appears on talk shows or at conventions as Dr. House. WWE wants to have it both ways and it can't be done the way they're doing it. Okay but Tom Hardy can appear on Jimmy Fallon or Ellen or whatever promoting said movie and come off super likeable and play stupid games and I still want to see his character defeated. Like I just finished watching the Seth Rollins special. Came off as a super cool dude and I sympathized with his injury and was happy when he got better. But like, I still want to see him get his ass kicked onscreen because onscreen he is an awful heel. Same way I can listen to and love Jericho's podcast and love it, and also boo him to high heaven because he killed Mitch. The monster! How is Rollins's an awful heel though? He's mostly a coward who was completely subservient to HHH and Stephanie for his entire run as champion. I guess the Edge thing was morally questionable but a single incident shouldn't qualify someone as irredeemably evil. The problem with Rollins is that cowardice isn't evil, it's fear. The writers don't seem to understand that though so all "villains" in the WWE end up being cowards despite true villains being the opposite of cowards. There's a lot of words to describe Lorne Malvo or The Joker, Coward is not one of them.
|
|
barelybeastmode
Trap-Jaw
I don't have haterz, only fans and deniers...
Posts: 494
|
Post by barelybeastmode on May 31, 2016 13:45:18 GMT -5
Okay but Tom Hardy can appear on Jimmy Fallon or Ellen or whatever promoting said movie and come off super likeable and play stupid games and I still want to see his character defeated. Like I just finished watching the Seth Rollins special. Came off as a super cool dude and I sympathized with his injury and was happy when he got better. But like, I still want to see him get his ass kicked onscreen because onscreen he is an awful heel. Same way I can listen to and love Jericho's podcast and love it, and also boo him to high heaven because he killed Mitch. The monster! How is Rollins's an awful heel though? He's mostly a coward who was completely subservient to HHH and Stephanie for his entire run as champion. I guess the Edge thing was morally questionable but a single incident shouldn't qualify someone as irredeemably evil. The problem with Rollins is that cowardice isn't evil, it's fear. The writers don't seem to understand that though so all "villains" in the WWE end up being cowards despite true villains being the opposite of cowards. There's a lot of words to describe Lorne Malvo or The Joker, Coward is not one of them. That Edge thing made me sit up and take notice of him for the first time since the Shield broke up. "You should know me better than that. I'm gonna kill him anyway." and going for the curbstomp was fantastic. And was probably the last time we saw him be complete and totally evil. This is what I was saying earlier. The heels are never heel enough. They don't do nearly enough to make people hate them. At most they tend to ride the fence depending on who they're feuding with.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on May 31, 2016 13:56:51 GMT -5
One angle to consider is that even guys like Owens and Punk play the heels, people cheer them as a sign of intense support to tell the office 'This guy. f***ing push this guy. Give him the world. Do it." Whenever people complain about how they want new faces in the main event and complain when it's someone like Roman Reigns, they get told "Well then who do you want?" and get told that instead of booing Cena or Roman, they need to cheer who they want. So people do. But you can't say that "WWE needs better writing" is an oversimplification of the issue, but then turn around and say that indie guys will never get booed ever no matter what they do. But this is also part of the same issue as well. Quite simply, for as "smart" as the fanbase trying to say that claim to be, they forgot the most important fact for heel performers: BOOS ARE A HEEL WRESTLER'S CHEERS!!!!!It's a simple part of the program. If you really love what a heel wrestler is doing, BOO THEM OUT OF THE ARENA! That's how you show you support them, and that they're doing a great job. If you're really trying to cheer them as a sign of intense support to tell the office "This guy. f***ing push this guy. Give him the world. Do it", then boo them like they're the second coming of Hitler. If you do that, then you're eventually going to see them rise up the card as one of the most hated heels in the company and be pushed to the moon, given the world, and actually being allowed to be the same character you love in the process. By cheering the heel you want, on the other hand- BEST CASE SCENARIO, the WWE listens to all the cheers this supported heel gets and turns them face by the fans' popular opinion...and then, that primarily leads to a lot of the times where an amazing heel people love turns face, and suddenly loses all the things that made people love them in the first place to become a generic lame babyface. At worst, you're NOT HELPING- on the contrary, you are openly hindering your favorite heel's rise to the top by cheering them (after all, how good a heel can this person POSSIBLY be if the crowd cheers them? The guy's entire job description is "make people boo you", and they aren't getting booed- this person must be terrible as a heel. Give the big rub to Eva Marie or The Drifter...can you hear that hatred they get? The crowd wants them dead- THAT'S a great heel.) On a fundamental level the wrestling business has changed and the way that fans interact with the show has changed; it's not as straightforward as "good heels get booed". Not people are thunderously applauding Triple H murdering Roman Reigns. The Drifter's heat does not make him a good heel and to say that he does is a tonedeaf statement that ignores what the boos actually mean. It's what people say when they're not understanding the way that how audiences interact with all media and especially wrestling has changed, and hold to sentiments from back in the day that just don't apply anymore. People will boo the heel if you give them a story they care about; the NXT crowds booing Owens during his match with Sami proved that. But they won't simply boo heel behavior, because they aren't marks to be worked anymore. They know what heat is, they know what's done to get it, and if you don't put it into the confines of a narrative that people can get invested in, they're not going to react like the guy they like is being loathsome. The audience is not a part of the performance. They are not scripted. If WWE wants them to follow the script, then they have to elicit the reactions they want through storytelling, and they need to do it like the actual work of fiction that we now know it is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2016 13:57:02 GMT -5
If there are certain guys that will get cheered no matter what, maybe WWE should book them as the faces.
|
|
RIHT
Hank Scorpio
Wanted a title with "YOU'RE WELCOME!" Close enough.
Hey-yo.
Posts: 5,897
|
Post by RIHT on May 31, 2016 14:02:04 GMT -5
Miz is one of the best heels on the roster. I miss more legitimate choruses of boos for heels. Now we get mixed reactions for top babyfaces instead.
|
|
|
Post by honsou on May 31, 2016 14:05:17 GMT -5
Also in regards to the charity work, it doesn't help that for the most part the kids are getting the character to come visit them. Its not "Colby Lopez visits sick children", its clearly a Seth Rollins visiting a kid. So to continue using the Dark Knight Rising example, its as if in the middle of the movie you see a commercial Tom Hardy visiting sick children as Bane, but only ever referred to as Bane
|
|
Sicho100
Hank Scorpio
Easily Confused.
Posts: 5,964
Member is Online
|
Post by Sicho100 on May 31, 2016 14:08:00 GMT -5
If there are certain guys that will get cheered no matter what, maybe WWE should book them as the faces. Vince likes to book on hard mode. That's why his heels get cheered and his faces get booed.
|
|
|
Post by BatPunk on May 31, 2016 14:16:32 GMT -5
WWE should take note of the trios title match this past week on Lucha Underground. Mundo, Darewolf and Jack Evans are pure heels that you'll love to boo and for good reason.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,109
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on May 31, 2016 14:23:38 GMT -5
[The guy's entire job description is "make people boo you", and they aren't getting booed- this person must be terrible as a heel. Give the big rub to Eva Marie or The Drifter...can you hear that hatred they get? The crowd wants them dead- THAT'S a great heel.) To get heel heat in WWE now, you basically have to be seen as someone hand-picked by the company to eat up all the screen time that the crowd thinks belongs to somebody more talented and more deserving. That's why Roman, Eva, and That Damned Drifter are so hated. Even Miz still has residual shades of this (despite being more respected than That Damned Drifter or Eva, he still carries a little bit of the "Reality TV Star trying to play Wrestler" stink on him that'll never 100% wash away).
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2016 15:09:52 GMT -5
There's tons of factors here, not the least of which is the way WWE has conditioned its audience to be terrified that at any moment, they're going to stop caring about your personal favorite wrestler and start super-pushing whomever the office is in love with at a given time. That's the issue Roman ran into, it's a big reason why Bryan was so beloved (though obviously his own amazing work contributed the most to that), etc.
However, if we want heels to get booed more, then wrestling companies need to focus on creating actual dramatic tension, something WWE may be the worst at compared to almost any other near mainstream company. As was said previously, most WWE heels feel like goobers; it's ok to book most feuds to have the babyface win, but in an era of two weekly "super shows" and regular PPV style shows, there's just no real recovery time between feuds, so the heels lose...and lose...and lose...and lose...with maybe a dirty win thrown in a couple of times for good measure.
Worse, WWE babyfaces are horrible at evolving over time, with Cena as the poster boy: even the "worst year of his career" back a few years ago when Rock beat him did absolutely nothing to change his character or present new wrinkles in his approach to wrestling or interactions with others. That means there's no stakes in anything that happens. Without dramatic tension, there's no reason to believe a babyface is in true peril, that he/she may not only lose or win a match, but may win or lose much more depending on the circumstances.
This is one of my favorite examples of making this work, and it involves the ultimate babyface, the guy people say gets "boring" because "he's too perfect/invincible/etc.": Superman.
For much of Superman: The Animated Series, Superman was what you'd expect him to be: the Blue Boy Scout, the ultimate good man, the guy who's stronger, faster, and quicker thinking than almost anybody else. He faced crises and problems, and the show did them well, but still, it's Superman: he can't be beaten.
However, in the final season, the show did a season long arc building to a battle between Superman and Darkseid, arguably the Big Bad of the entire DC Universe. In the build to the final episode, "Legacy", Darkseid threatened Earth, killed a friend of Superman's, and managed to capture, torture, and brainwash Superman into thinking Darkseid was his father and that Superman should conquer Earth. Superman breaks free of the control, but his image on Earth, his legacy, is now tarnished. Enraged, he goes to Apokolips, Darkseid's seat of power, and goes on a great Roaring Rampage of Revenge, until he and Darkseid are face to face.
If this were a wrestling match, it'd be a tough but decisive babyface win to end a feud. Superman got the 3 count on Darkseid. But the aftermath? "Here...I am God." Darkseid lives to fight another day, and Superman must return just as Darkseid said: a pariah, distrusted by the world he worked to gain the admiration of for so long. Superman got the 3 count, yes. But even in defeat, Darkseid won.
Fast forward to the sequel series to Superman, Justice League, and the next time Superman and Darkseid have a chance to throw down, in "Twilight (Part Two)":
Darkseid defeats his rival and son Orion, but Superman appears and comes across differently than he has the entire Justice League series: he's looking to end this. Superman does not kill: for Darkseid, he makes an exception. He is fully willing to kill in this situation, and is so zeroed in on defeating his nemesis that he even swats aside Batman, who calls him "Kent", a reminder that he might lose himself if he fully gives in to his hatred for Darkseid. Left out on this video? After Boom Tubing away, Superman chews Batman out for what he did; he's not over it. A wrinkle in his character is introduced: Superman is not the 100% paragon of virtue we hope for him to be, as his enemy's toxic influence had eaten at him. He's still a hero, he's still THE hero...but he is a flawed hero.
Now, bring it to the end, the final episode of Justice League Unlimited, "Destroyer", and you get the no holds barred feud finale, and the awesome World of Cardboard speech.
Get this baby in a steel cage.
Darkseid is a Magnificent Bastard villain in many ways, but he is pure evil and authoritarianism, as well: nobody could rightly cheer him, even if they think he's an awesome bad guy. Superman is still the top dog, the big hero, the top babyface, but he's been put through hell and back and, most importantly, it shows in his actions and demeanor. He doesn't swat it away, he doesn't walk away from the fight unchanged...he doesn't turn evil, either, nor become jaded and cynical, but he is not unaffected by what he's gone through.
That's dramatic tension, and a way to ensure your audience is invested in a feud's outcome and hoping for the babyface to win.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on May 31, 2016 15:14:07 GMT -5
Heels aren't heel enough, and faces aren't likeable. That's the story of the WWE. Heels don't do more than the stock beatdown/stand over fallen face shot. Faces don't get to do more than the cringe worthy juvenile wakka wakka jokes. Maybe if faces reacted to heelish things like a real person would, or have character development so their character can react accordingly, people could get lost in a storyline instead of being so transparent that fans have to grasp hold of anything that entertains them in this creative wasteland.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2016 15:28:45 GMT -5
A frequent discussion on here is the cheering of heels and booing of faces. Personally, I find the booing of faces largely funny simply because WWE largely has themselves to blame for it happening. The general consensus is frequently that if WWE wants us to cheer or boo the right people, they should have better writing. Is this not a slight oversimplification of the issue? I think there is a good point there as far as babyfaces go, because people like Cena and Reigns are often booked so badly that many can't help but boo them. On the other hand... if Kevin Owens had debuted on Raw by buttf***ing every audience member's mother, one by one, he would still have got a face pop because he's Kevin Owens. I think that applies to any of the 'indie' guys like Cesaro, Punk, Sami, AJ, in some towns, they will always get cheered regardless of what they do. i still blame WWE in regards to Punk and Styles. See, they decided to make them antagonists out of the blue when the vast majority of the crowd was still solidly behind them. They turned Punk heel a year after the Pipe Bomb; that promo was still fresh in everybody's minds. And HOW did he turn? He attacked The Rock. "Everybody loves Rock," they likely thought. "Punk will get booed for suddenly and inexplicably GTSing and scowling." Of course such poorly-conceived tripe was ineffective. I mean, if Punk had brutalized him and put him on the shelf or something, then maybe it woulda helped... They did the same thing with Ryback and Cena. One night, we're cheering Ryback after he lost to Mark Henry ( ), the next, he Shell Shocks Cena (after saving him... ) and we're suddenly supposed to think "Oh, my God, what a psychopath!" You know, even though his whole goddamn gimmick "Eat, smash, eat, repeat." Now, contrast that with heels everybody hates/hated. The Miz has pretty much been a perennial heel. He's cultivated being hated for like 10 years, and now it's finally paying off. Rollins was part of the hottest stable in recent history and deliberately broke it up. They failed to meaningfully capitalize on that...then he got injured. I dunno, man. When it comes to heel/face relations they don't seem to understand timing or impact.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on May 31, 2016 15:41:27 GMT -5
But this is also part of the same issue as well. Quite simply, for as "smart" as the fanbase trying to say that claim to be, they forgot the most important fact for heel performers: BOOS ARE A HEEL WRESTLER'S CHEERS!!!!!It's a simple part of the program. If you really love what a heel wrestler is doing, BOO THEM OUT OF THE ARENA! That's how you show you support them, and that they're doing a great job. If you're really trying to cheer them as a sign of intense support to tell the office "This guy. f***ing push this guy. Give him the world. Do it", then boo them like they're the second coming of Hitler. If you do that, then you're eventually going to see them rise up the card as one of the most hated heels in the company and be pushed to the moon, given the world, and actually being allowed to be the same character you love in the process. By cheering the heel you want, on the other hand- BEST CASE SCENARIO, the WWE listens to all the cheers this supported heel gets and turns them face by the fans' popular opinion...and then, that primarily leads to a lot of the times where an amazing heel people love turns face, and suddenly loses all the things that made people love them in the first place to become a generic lame babyface. At worst, you're NOT HELPING- on the contrary, you are openly hindering your favorite heel's rise to the top by cheering them (after all, how good a heel can this person POSSIBLY be if the crowd cheers them? The guy's entire job description is "make people boo you", and they aren't getting booed- this person must be terrible as a heel. Give the big rub to Eva Marie or The Drifter...can you hear that hatred they get? The crowd wants them dead- THAT'S a great heel.) This is weird to say, but boos are more cerebral than cheers, at least in this context. Cheers are immediate, automatic responses to seeing something you like. The automatic, immediate response to seeing something you dislike is grimacing. It's quiet. To boo is a conscious decision the way that a cheering isn't. But the bigger thing is, booing is not supposed to be an expression of anger or disgust. It's never good to show something your audience hates, even if it's on purpose. Booing is supposed to be a way to participate in a show, because it's super-fun to boo. This is harder than it looks, because it requires trust on both sides. Real booing is playing along... you can't be worried that you're being suckered or that there's real-world consequences. Bo Dallas in NXT, once he actually turned heel, is a good example of real booing. Hating him was clearly fun for the audience, and they were clearly aware that the bookers knew that was the point, too. Bo was having fun, the audience was having fun, the writers were putting on a good show... it was great all around. But the point is, booing requires a holistically good show in a way that cheering doesn't. Cheering is YEAH THAT THING I JUST SAW. Booing requires a lot more context and trust.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,852
|
Post by Dub H on May 31, 2016 15:59:36 GMT -5
There's tons of factors here, not the least of which is the way WWE has conditioned its audience to be terrified that at any moment, they're going to stop caring about your personal favorite wrestler and start super-pushing whomever the office is in love with at a given time. That's the issue Roman ran into, it's a big reason why Bryan was so beloved (though obviously his own amazing work contributed the most to that), etc. However, if we want heels to get booed more, then wrestling companies need to focus on creating actual dramatic tension, something WWE may be the worst at compared to almost any other near mainstream company. As was said previously, most WWE heels feel like goobers; it's ok to book most feuds to have the babyface win, but in an era of two weekly "super shows" and regular PPV style shows, there's just no real recovery time between feuds, so the heels lose...and lose...and lose...and lose...with maybe a dirty win thrown in a couple of times for good measure. Worse, WWE babyfaces are horrible at evolving over time, with Cena as the poster boy: even the "worst year of his career" back a few years ago when Rock beat him did absolutely nothing to change his character or present new wrinkles in his approach to wrestling or interactions with others. That means there's no stakes in anything that happens. Without dramatic tension, there's no reason to believe a babyface is in true peril, that he/she may not only lose or win a match, but may win or lose much more depending on the circumstances. This is one of my favorite examples of making this work, and it involves the ultimate babyface, the guy people say gets "boring" because "he's too perfect/invincible/etc.": Superman. For much of Superman: The Animated Series, Superman was what you'd expect him to be: the Blue Boy Scout, the ultimate good man, the guy who's stronger, faster, and quicker thinking than almost anybody else. He faced crises and problems, and the show did them well, but still, it's Superman: he can't be beaten. However, in the final season, the show did a season long arc building to a battle between Superman and Darkseid, arguably the Big Bad of the entire DC Universe. In the build to the final episode, "Legacy", Darkseid threatened Earth, killed a friend of Superman's, and managed to capture, torture, and brainwash Superman into thinking Darkseid was his father and that Superman should conquer Earth. Superman breaks free of the control, but his image on Earth, his legacy, is now tarnished. Enraged, he goes to Apokolips, Darkseid's seat of power, and goes on a great Roaring Rampage of Revenge, until he and Darkseid are face to face. If this were a wrestling match, it'd be a tough but decisive babyface win to end a feud. Superman got the 3 count on Darkseid. But the aftermath? "Here...I am God." Darkseid lives to fight another day, and Superman must return just as Darkseid said: a pariah, distrusted by the world he worked to gain the admiration of for so long. Superman got the 3 count, yes. But even in defeat, Darkseid won. Fast forward to the sequel series to Superman, Justice League, and the next time Superman and Darkseid have a chance to throw down, in "Twilight (Part Two)": Darkseid defeats his rival and son Orion, but Superman appears and comes across differently than he has the entire Justice League series: he's looking to end this. Superman does not kill: for Darkseid, he makes an exception. He is fully willing to kill in this situation, and is so zeroed in on defeating his nemesis that he even swats aside Batman, who calls him "Kent", a reminder that he might lose himself if he fully gives in to his hatred for Darkseid. Left out on this video? After Boom Tubing away, Superman chews Batman out for what he did; he's not over it. A wrinkle in his character is introduced: Superman is not the 100% paragon of virtue we hope for him to be, as his enemy's toxic influence had eaten at him. He's still a hero, he's still THE hero...but he is a flawed hero. Now, bring it to the end, the final episode of Justice League Unlimited, "Destroyer", and you get the no holds barred feud finale, and the awesome World of Cardboard speech. Get this baby in a steel cage. Darkseid is a Magnificent Bastard villain in many ways, but he is pure evil and authoritarianism, as well: nobody could rightly cheer him, even if they think he's an awesome bad guy. Superman is still the top dog, the big hero, the top babyface, but he's been put through hell and back and, most importantly, it shows in his actions and demeanor. He doesn't swat it away, he doesn't walk away from the fight unchanged...he doesn't turn evil, either, nor become jaded and cynical, but he is not unaffected by what he's gone through. That's dramatic tension, and a way to ensure your audience is invested in a feud's outcome and hoping for the babyface to win. And the WWE had the chance to do it with Cena so many times,with CM Punk ,Bray Wyatt. Honestly,if Bray Wyatt had been able to bring ONE cheap attack from Cena ,or make him give in to anger and Cena then wins the match.. Cena won the match,the feud ,but Bray wins the story and the feud can continue later. What they did? Cena keeps being what he always was,and wins cleans.Bray is just another guy that failed to beat cena.
|
|