BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Dec 22, 2012 23:35:06 GMT -5
EXCUUUSSSSEEE MEEE! A good chunk of the audience. That better? I suppose. Although considering WWE does aim for kids more nowadays I'm not sure how true even that would be. But even with the WWE aiming more towards children, they're still in the minority.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 22, 2012 23:35:27 GMT -5
Hogan was the most similar to Cena as the proud/hero/defender of the faith type character
But at that time, there was plenty of other stuff for people to enjoy. A robust IC and tag team division. It seemed as though the roster was loaded with entertainers who were distinct.
Now, there doesn't seem to be as much effort made by WWE to build a top to bottom card. Most of the emphasis is on a few select guys and the rest are just fodder to be fed to them, or directionless.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Dec 23, 2012 0:20:02 GMT -5
Give me a face that a large portion of the people don't bitch and moan about?
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Dec 23, 2012 0:22:49 GMT -5
In real life? Yeah, that's up for debate, and it might be proving detrimental to his health. But within kayfabe, this really shouldn't be a hurdle for the adult male crowd. Why not? Because the "bad-ass anti hero" characters like Austin and Rock were just as much company guys as John. They did roughly the same amount of spokesperson appearances on behalf of WWE and WWE wouldn't shut up about them, even while they feuded with Vince and pissed off officials on TV- just as Cena often does. Their hyping of Rock's appearances on SNL and political conventions and Austin's Nash Bridges run are in the same vein as Cena's Make-A-Wish and Komen segments. And since we're in an era where real life seems to be bleeding over into the stories more than ever, you'd think more fans would be aware of just how prefab the Austin character's sense of "rebellion" was, and wouldn't hold it against Cena so much. But for some reason people look past that and act as if Cena's somehow more hypocritical than they were. As with a lot of things that have similar circumstances, wrestling or no, I chalk it up to nostalgia. Because, really, the way I see it is it's the only feasible explanation. Attitude Era with Austin and The Rock = Good, PG era with Cena = Bad.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Dec 23, 2012 0:24:31 GMT -5
Give me a face that a large portion of the people don't bitch and moan about? Every main event face, other than Cena.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Dec 23, 2012 0:26:43 GMT -5
Give me a face that a large portion of the people don't bitch and moan about? Every main event face, other than Cena. Like Sheamus? Or The Rock? Or Miz?
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Dec 23, 2012 0:35:41 GMT -5
Every main event face, other than Cena. Like Sheamus? Or The Rock? Or Miz? Two of those 3 have never been main event faces and the hatred in Rock pales in comparison to the love for him.
|
|
Sparkybob
King Koopa
I have a status?
Posts: 10,990
|
Post by Sparkybob on Dec 23, 2012 0:37:38 GMT -5
Every main event face, other than Cena. Like Sheamus? Or The Rock? Or Miz? A lot of people moan about fella on here and most places. The miz has gotten criticizes a lot as well. Basically the only relevant faces that have escaped it has been Bryan and Kane.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Dec 23, 2012 0:38:00 GMT -5
Like Sheamus? Or The Rock? Or Miz? Two of those 3 have never been main event faces and the hatred in Rock pales in comparison to the love for him. Sheamus is a main event face. But, look around here, the principal is the same. It transfers more with Cena to live crowds because Cena has been around the ME scene much longer, and is continued to be pushed despite a mixed response.
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Dec 23, 2012 0:44:40 GMT -5
Two of those 3 have never been main event faces and the hatred in Rock pales in comparison to the love for him. Sheamus is a main event face. But, look around here, the principal is the same. It transfers more with Cena to live crowds because Cena has been around the ME scene much longer, and is continued to be pushed despite a mixed response. To be a main event face you kinda need to main event at least RAW on the regular as a face which Sheamus hasn't. At best he's a mid card face. I'd give ya Punk who was catching a lot of crap for how bad his character got post-Wrestlemania though.
|
|
Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
Celestial Princess in Exile.
Posts: 46,085
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Dec 23, 2012 0:52:36 GMT -5
Give me a face that a large portion of the people don't bitch and moan about?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2012 0:56:13 GMT -5
I tired of him because he's been THE guy for far too long. The only person who compares to him in consistently strong booking was Hogan, and that was before the mass adoption of the internet and the constant shows. Even in a limited environment, people tired of Hogan. Is it realistic to expect any less with Cena in an environment that's caused him to be plastered everywhere wrestling-related?
|
|
Rave
El Dandy
Perpetually Bored
Posts: 8,098
|
Post by Rave on Dec 23, 2012 1:11:43 GMT -5
Hogan wasn't promoted nearly as much as Cena is. Back during the heyday of Hulkamania, it was fairly uncommon to get a Hogan match on free TV. It's not the same with Cena today. Cena's plastered everywhere, and even if he doesn't have a match we get countless recaps, vid-packages, promotional fluff, and promos featuring him. We're not allowed to forget he exists. We're not allowed to miss him. That's the problem. Additionally, as was already mentioned, we don't really have an alternative to him. Instead of "You don't like Rock? Here's Austin. Don't like him? How about some Foley? No? Would you like some HBK?", we have "You will support Cena and YOU WILL LIKE IT." and there's no real alternative built up that isn't a heel or isn't treated as Cena-lite (Sheamus).
If Cena took a good long break, say a couple months, then came back and wasn't as heavily promoted (allowing for people to be built up as alternatives to him), I bet a lot of the negative opinion of him would be reversed for a while.
|
|
BigWill
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,619
|
Post by BigWill on Dec 23, 2012 1:13:19 GMT -5
Every main event face, other than Cena. Like Sheamus? Or The Rock? Or Miz? I'd hardly call a handful of people on the internet a "large portion". And much as a lot of the IWC like to bitch about them, they still generally get a positive reaction with the audience. Once half the crowd starts chanting about how much one of them sucks, then we'll talk.
|
|
|
Post by Cry Me a Wiggle on Dec 23, 2012 1:20:32 GMT -5
Because being the company guy at a time when the product is arguably stale, tired, and uninspired is seen as selling out, buying in, and being a soulless stooge. There's a reason CM Punk blew up after his "pipe bomb" promos: Even though it was all orchestrated, he was still going against the grain and saying what many longtime fans feel: The WWE is far from perfect. Cena, on the other hand, is just a mouthpiece for whatever strikes Vince's fancy that week.
If the product were better, Cena wouldn't be as grating. Mick Foley, while not the face of the company, was a WWF stooge in 2000, but the fans didn't hate on it because the television backed up the claims.
As far as Cena being the face of the company, that's another issue entirely. It merely reflects Vince's desire for their to be a "main star" of his company, instead of having a strongly promoted roster up-and-down. For example, did Cena really need to be the face of their Breast Cancer Awareness campaign?
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 23, 2012 1:20:35 GMT -5
But the character is just, for me at least, terrible ... just because he has nothing to win, no one that he really can't beat, and if he does get beat he just doesn't give a crap, as far as kayfabe goes, he's on top and no one's even making it seem like he might get off of it So how is that different from the Undertaker? His character has evolved far less than Cena's in the last 5 or 10 years (take your pick), he's 1,000 times more 'Superman' than Cena, in the rare instances where he has lost in recent memory he also doesn't give a crap and shrugs it off like it was nothing ... I could go on and on. Yes, Taker hasn't been a full-timer for the past couple of years, but it's still just as true when he shows up for his annual WM buildup, and the {Spoiler}Cena wins thing is obviously much more true for Taker at WM -- or otherwise -- than it is for Cena. Go back a few years when he was full-time -- feuding with Punk or his long run with Edge or go back further and everything people complain about Cena being is more true of Undertaker. OK, he has a cool intro, but it kind of stop being cool to me after I had seen it about a million times. Same for his lame promos, his older-than-Moses character that hasn't grown in any meaningful way since BikerTaker's brief run. Hey, I like Undertaker just fine. I like Cena too. I just don't see where the things the IWC seems to loathe about Cena are unique to him. Which makes it much harder for me to understand.
|
|
|
Post by joebob27 on Dec 23, 2012 1:23:24 GMT -5
Taker's done like 10 appearances in the last two years. Cena's done over 100.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 23, 2012 1:44:53 GMT -5
Taker's done like 10 appearances in the last two years. Cena's done over 100. Rewind to when he was active and show me where he ever got grief for the things Cena gets grief over, even though they are equally or moreso true of Taker.
|
|
The OP
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
changed his name
Posts: 15,785
|
Post by The OP on Dec 23, 2012 1:47:39 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't think that's what people have against him. It gives Punk a talking point promo-wise because it allows him (Punk) to be the anti-establishment character if he can paint Cena as the company man who, as Jesse Ventura put it, "goes along to get along." That might not be fair, but it was a useful storytelling device for his feud with Punk as it has been at other times. Wrestling's all about exaggerating.
|
|
|
Post by joebob27 on Dec 23, 2012 1:52:53 GMT -5
Taker's done like 10 appearances in the last two years. Cena's done over 100. Rewind to when he was active and show me where he ever got grief for the things Cena gets grief over, even though they are equally or moreso true of Taker. Fulltime? I mean I didn't post on the wrestlecrap forum but Taker... was not very popular on the internet.
|
|