|
Post by Hit Girl on May 29, 2018 12:46:53 GMT -5
No
They just need a justification for their actions.
|
|
Brood Lone Wolf Funker
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 62,157
|
Post by Brood Lone Wolf Funker on May 29, 2018 20:24:28 GMT -5
Terry Funk was great at being a heel
|
|
Sephiroth
Wade Wilson
Surviving
Posts: 28,955
|
Post by Sephiroth on May 29, 2018 20:40:07 GMT -5
It can help-but it just depends on who is doing it and in what context. Heck, part of what got Andy Kaufman as much heat as he had was that he would diss the USWA audience as a bunch of backwoods rednecks-and it definitely helped that a lot of them actually were. Alternatively, Jeff Jarrett tossing burritos at the audience in Mexico was as lame as could be.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on May 29, 2018 23:20:25 GMT -5
Technically speaking, a heel has to offend in some manner. It's the job description.
You can offend someone by talking down to them just as you can talking trash at them. Cheating in itself offends the sense of morality and doing right.
|
|
|
Post by BrodietheSlayer on May 29, 2018 23:23:32 GMT -5
It depends on the heel.
|
|
Strotha
Hank Scorpio
In heaven, everything is fine
Posts: 6,384
|
Post by Strotha on May 29, 2018 23:39:39 GMT -5
As someone who likes to write and create characters, my philosophy on this is that it really depends on the character's overall personality and behavior. The JBL character being racist/homophobic/jingoistic/etc. makes sense because that's the kind of character who would be those things. Uncomfortable or tasteless, sure, but it suits him as a villain. If a character is just randomly racist out of nowhere apropos of nothing like Triple H in the Booker feud (and then winning), then I think it's done badly because it has nothing to do with the character and is just racist just because, never mind how bad it becomes once the racist f***ing wins.
I'm an artsy fartsy type and characterization is very important to me, it's one of my few artistic qualities I actually take pride in. So no, a heel doesn't HAVE to be offensive by any stretch, but they can be if it fits the character, they're bad guys, they're allowed to have bad qualities. Wrestling isn't real. These people are playing fictional characters, even the ones using their real names are still playing fictitious characters. Bad guys should do bad things so we know they're bad and want to see them get what they deserve.
So no, don't just be offensive just because, that's stupid. If the offensiveness fits the character's personality and seems like something they would do/think/say, then it's different. But I think variety is the best thing about wrestling, so not all heels should be alike. Whatever logically works for the character within the presented reality.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on May 30, 2018 0:59:49 GMT -5
Heels shouldn't have to be offensive to be good heels, but the problem does boil down to the fact that fans in this day and age cheer anyone who is good at their job, even if that job is being a classic villain in wrestling.
The problem is that you still need to boo someone, and by cheering the heels who are GOOD at portraying heels, then you make the biggest boos (and thus, the biggest villains) be people who can make you hate them in other ways that are less sustainable for a good heel- be it "they're a heel because they're perceived as being inept at their job", or "they're a heel because they said or did something so offensive no right-minded fan could take their side after that."
When that happens, it's sending the wrong message to the promoters, because they hear the crowd cheering this heel and think "...that's a crappy heel. We shouldn't go further with them", while hearing the boos and thinking "Can you hear how much the crowd hates this person? THIS is the person we should have fighting our top heroes!".
If you want heels to not be offensive, then start by being willing to boo the heels who are good at being classic, old school heels without resorting to offensive tactics. And if someone tries offensive tactics to be a heel, then don't reward it with boos, reward it with the only true show of disdain in the sport: Dead silence. A Conway Pop works better than X-Pac Heat ever could.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on May 30, 2018 1:16:20 GMT -5
Look at the heat that Ciampa gets from smark crowds, that love what he can do in the ring. He doesn't need to be offensive, he just f***s with and screws over Gargano and Candice, and doesn't even try to be cool or likeable. He doesn't even have any solo merchandise.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on May 30, 2018 5:35:39 GMT -5
Absolutely not.
The villains in movies have never needed to be offensive to be villains. Or any other medium.
Bad guys do bad things. Bad things don't have to be offensive.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 30, 2018 5:58:44 GMT -5
Heels shouldn't have to be offensive to be good heels, but the problem does boil down to the fact that fans in this day and age cheer anyone who is good at their job, even if that job is being a classic villain in wrestling. The problem is that you still need to boo someone, and by cheering the heels who are GOOD at portraying heels, then you make the biggest boos (and thus, the biggest villains) be people who can make you hate them in other ways that are less sustainable for a good heel- be it "they're a heel because they're perceived as being inept at their job", or "they're a heel because they said or did something so offensive no right-minded fan could take their side after that." When that happens, it's sending the wrong message to the promoters, because they hear the crowd cheering this heel and think "...that's a crappy heel. We shouldn't go further with them", while hearing the boos and thinking "Can you hear how much the crowd hates this person? THIS is the person we should have fighting our top heroes!". If you want heels to not be offensive, then start by being willing to boo the heels who are good at being classic, old school heels without resorting to offensive tactics. And if someone tries offensive tactics to be a heel, then don't reward it with boos, reward it with the only true show of disdain in the sport: Dead silence. A Conway Pop works better than X-Pac Heat ever could. Honestly, I don't agree with this at all. That's not a problem to me. Fans should be able to cheer and boo for whatever faces and heels they want. They paid to be there, so they shouldn't be obligated to respond in a certain way. There's always going to be a face that gets booed and a heel that gets cheered somewhere. It's been occurring in wrestling since the beginning. Sometimes it just can't be helped no matter how good a promotion writes characters. Watch old NWA shows on the Network, and you can hear Flair's fanbase jeering Dusty.
|
|
|
Post by celtics543 on May 30, 2018 6:05:20 GMT -5
Absolutely not. The villains in movies have never needed to be offensive to be villains. Or any other medium. Bad guys do bad things. Bad things don't have to be offensive. To be fair, the villains in movies actually are murdering people in the movie. If Kevin Owens came out and blew up a hospital like the Joker did then I'm sure he'd get booed but also would offend a lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on May 30, 2018 6:07:34 GMT -5
Absolutely not. The villains in movies have never needed to be offensive to be villains. Or any other medium. Bad guys do bad things. Bad things don't have to be offensive. To be fair, the villains in movies actually are murdering people in the movie. If Kevin Owens came out and blew up a hospital like the Joker did then I'm sure he'd get booed but also would offend a lot of people. Not all villains, though. That's my point. Some villains blow up hospitals. Some steal your lunch from the fridge every day. It's a scale, and you don't have to tip over into American History X to be hated.
|
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,434
|
Post by FinalGwen on May 30, 2018 6:19:16 GMT -5
I think it's also worth noting that when we delve into this territory, it kind of salts the earth for them ever being acceptable as faces again, and in wrestling most people will switch alignments at least a few times.
|
|
segaz
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,381
|
Post by segaz on May 30, 2018 6:46:37 GMT -5
It depends what you mean by 'offensive'.
Did you find what Jake Roberts did to Elizabeth, repulsive and by extension, 'offensive' in that it offended you that he would hit her?
The word Offensive to me has been hijacked so that it must mean a real life social injustice only. If I say I found that Jake/Elizabeth segment offensive, I don't mean how dare the wwe continue to demean women by running such a segment, I mean, it offended me that the character would do that and I dislike the character in the storyline because of that, his actions make him a heel. I hope the character gets his comeuppance in the future
But it's easy to misinterpret that as the 'character' existing at all offends me, and should be removed from television.
Heels should offend us in some way, that's why they're considered heels. It's all about how you use the word and context "offensive".
Even a CM Punk or a NWO, or an Austin, a cool heel who we root for, we understand does things that, in the storyline, 'offends' the company.
My point really is that Heels should do "bad" things, and those bad things have to be considered offensive in storyline, if not to us the viewer, to the establishment in which they take place.
I cheered million dollar man when he stuffed money in his opponents mouth. But i still understood he was a bad guy, and in kayfabe I'm sure his actions offended his opponents, as well as the announcers and by extension, the 'spirit' of the competition. I understood that even if i couldn't break it down like that at a young age
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 30, 2018 6:50:15 GMT -5
To be fair, the villains in movies actually are murdering people in the movie. If Kevin Owens came out and blew up a hospital like the Joker did then I'm sure he'd get booed but also would offend a lot of people. Not all villains, though. That's my point. Some villains blow up hospitals. Some steal your lunch from the fridge every day. It's a scale, and you don't have to tip over into American History X to be hated. Right, it's like what Madison was saying: to be a villain you have to offend on some level, but it's clear here that there's a distinction being made between the types of offense they're perpetuating, whether it's a simple "this heel breaks moral codes within the context of the fictional world of this promotion", "this heel offends proper sensibilities due to cheating/their mannerisms/their tone of voice/etc.", all the way up the scale to "this heel is a misanthrope and/or a bigot". Each involves incurring offense on some level, but obviously that level of offense varies quite a bit; once they're up that scale and moving toward something that involves, say, insulting people over the identities they're born with (ethnicity, sex, orientation, etc.), that's a level that either must be handled with care or just not at all.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on May 30, 2018 6:51:05 GMT -5
Not really, the just need to be decent storytellers that are less likable than the face they're up against. People don't want to chew the heels if they have a connection to the face, unfortunately many faces these days don't have that, so heels need to be grating aholes.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,145
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on May 30, 2018 7:05:59 GMT -5
As someone who likes to write and create characters, my philosophy on this is that it really depends on the character's overall personality and behavior. The JBL character being racist/homophobic/jingoistic/etc. makes sense because that's the kind of character who would be those things. Uncomfortable or tasteless, sure, but it suits him as a villain. If a character is just randomly racist out of nowhere apropos of nothing like Triple H in the Booker feud (and then winning), then I think it's done badly because it has nothing to do with the character and is just racist just because, never mind how bad it becomes once the racist f***ing wins. I'm an artsy fartsy type and characterization is very important to me, it's one of my few artistic qualities I actually take pride in. So no, a heel doesn't HAVE to be offensive by any stretch, but they can be if it fits the character, they're bad guys, they're allowed to have bad qualities. Wrestling isn't real. These people are playing fictional characters, even the ones using their real names are still playing fictitious characters. Bad guys should do bad things so we know they're bad and want to see them get what they deserve. So no, don't just be offensive just because, that's stupid. If the offensiveness fits the character's personality and seems like something they would do/think/say, then it's different. But I think variety is the best thing about wrestling, so not all heels should be alike. Whatever logically works for the character within the presented reality. I think the issue is that some promotions (WWE in particular) has intentionally crossed the wires between "performer" and "off-camera person". And therefore, when somebody likes what glimpses they get of a performer's "real" self (whether from a non-kayfabe interview, social media, reports of what events they've been seen attending "off the clock")), and decide they like them as a person (from what fragmented bits of information they glean about their interests, social views, etc.), purely in-character stuff either gets ignored, or a "I don't know why they make him do/say those things when it's just not who he is!" reaction. It's much easier to have that layer of separation, though, in something like Lucha Underground, because of how it's presented with the over-the-top characterizations and disconnected-from-"our reality" storylines.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2018 8:17:10 GMT -5
Exactly what Polaris said and what was said earlier it really is dependent on how you present yourself first and foremost if you wanna be grounded in reality and and aknowledge real world issues there is almost nothing that wont be offensive to people.
But in LU there is that clear seperation where you understand what is taking place is in its own reality it is a television show with no pretense of trying to be realistic....so lets break everyones arms , lets have our boss doing lines while the show is on going , lets have a woman literally have another being decapitated because he disobeyed an order.
LU can get away with being with pretty much as offensive as they want for cheap heat but they don't instead they craft amazing stories and make sure to give heels very different motivations and none of them fall into something like Jinders promo on Nakamura......hell the closest comparison I can make is when Mundo made fun of Macks appearance but unlike the Jinder promo making fun of Nakamuras appearance etc this actually was for a reason and it made sense because the match they were going to have was all night long...so Mundo of course bragged about himself being physically superior and how Mack was fat and out of shape and there would be no way he could keep up with him for an entire hr.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 30, 2018 8:23:24 GMT -5
It depends what you mean by 'offensive'. Did you find what Jake Roberts did to Elizabeth, repulsive and by extension, 'offensive' in that it offended you that he would hit her? The word Offensive to me has been hijacked so that it must mean a real life social injustice only. If I say I found that Jake/Elizabeth segment offensive, I don't mean how dare the wwe continue to demean women by running such a segment, I mean, it offended me that the character would do that and I dislike the character in the storyline because of that, his actions make him a heel. I hope the character gets his comeuppance in the future But it's easy to misinterpret that as the 'character' existing at all offends me, and should be removed from television. Heels should offend us in some way, that's why they're considered heels. It's all about how you use the word and context "offensive". Even a CM Punk or a NWO, or an Austin, a cool heel who we root for, we understand does things that, in the storyline, 'offends' the company. My point really is that Heels should do "bad" things, and those bad things have to be considered offensive in storyline, if not to us the viewer, to the establishment in which they take place. I cheered million dollar man when he stuffed money in his opponents mouth. But i still understood he was a bad guy, and in kayfabe I'm sure his actions offended his opponents, as well as the announcers and by extension, the 'spirit' of the competition. I understood that even if i couldn't break it down like that at a young age I felt Jake striking Elizabeth was a great character moment. Even if you did it in 2018, I wouldn't see it as anti-women or anything like that, since Elizabeth wasn't a fighter so of course she'd be at Jake's mercy. But I really don't want to watch stuff like He-Man Woman Hater Jeff Jarrett vs. Chyna again. It's obvious that we're supposed to sympathize with Chyna, but another problem with that over-the-top misogynist heel is how shoehorned and forced they feel. That's just cheap lame heat in my eyes. Broad heels are ok, but Jarrett was lacking in any sort of subtlety with his character, and it was just eye-roll inducing to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2018 8:26:54 GMT -5
To me, it's like asking if movies have to be violent or have swearing. Of course not, if you're making a children's moving or romantic comedy, there's no need for either. But if you're making a gangster or money heist film, it's a tool that makes sense to use.
The problem in wrestling is most promoters, writers and performers don't really have the talent to pull off a racist/sexist/homophobic character without it coming off as weird and awkward. But I have no problem if they want to try.
|
|