|
Post by Dave the Dave on Sept 17, 2013 13:04:48 GMT -5
Guys, I was being sarcastic. There isn't a good font for it.
|
|
|
Post by subject2 on Sept 17, 2013 14:59:21 GMT -5
You know what I notice ive enjoyed the most about this feud....the fact that the main event face is actually getting a face pop against the heels...that's the thing about Cena as the face of the WWE...sure at first it was cool to see a face getting booed but now its just boring. You don't want the heels to win because they are so evil but you don't like Cena so a lot of matches become abit 'whatever'
|
|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Sept 17, 2013 15:43:46 GMT -5
I can understand fans being happy that Cena's absence is allowing them to use different story dynamics. But if the sentiment is "ding dong the witch is dead till January", then I couldn't disagree more. His omnipresent dominance is one thing, but an able Cena is not something you want to willingly pass up. Here's kind of the thing with Cena with me... I'm just tired of him. He's had a ton of great moments and matches, and I can always go back to those, but for the moment I'm just hoping January is a long, long time coming. Wish him a speedy recovery and all but I'm hoping he takes his sweet time about coming back afterward. To add, what else can you do with Cena as a character? Barring a feud with the Undertaker going into Wrestlemania, maybe another match with Lesnar, and some throwaway matches with single members of the Shield on Raw, there really isn't a match-up that I would want to see Cena in once he's back. Either he's tangled with the guys on top too many times (Punk, Orton, Big Show) or his status as The Guy means he can't be shuttled down the card (Damien Sandow, Antonio Cesaro, Fandango). Either he scales back how often he works TV like the Undertaker has done on Smackdown the past few years or he switches from babyface booking to heel booking so that at least makes the dynamic of his matches fresh (imagine face Sheamus vs. heel Cena for example).
|
|
ededdneddy
Hank Scorpio
ededdandembed
Posts: 5,697
|
Post by ededdneddy on Sept 17, 2013 17:33:19 GMT -5
Ehhhhhhhhhhh... I wanna agree with you but...I am so feeling the "**** John Cena" vibe. I'd be fine if he never came back to a wrestling ring again, but since that ain't gonna happen... So you'd be happy if one of the best wrestlers and talkers in the industry never appeared in a ring again? Not my view, but to each their own. Um.......that one statement. I'm sorry but yeah Cena is by far not the best "Wrestler" or talker in the industry.
|
|
ededdneddy
Hank Scorpio
ededdandembed
Posts: 5,697
|
Post by ededdneddy on Sept 17, 2013 17:40:15 GMT -5
Ehhhhhhhhhhh... I wanna agree with you but...I am so feeling the "**** John Cena" vibe. I'd be fine if he never came back to a wrestling ring again, but since that ain't gonna happen... So you'd be happy if one of the best wrestlers and talkers in the industry never appeared in a ring again? Not my view, but to each their own. Um.......that one statement. I'm sorry but yeah he is by far not the best "Wrestler"
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Sept 17, 2013 17:47:31 GMT -5
So you'd be happy if one of the best wrestlers and talkers in the industry never appeared in a ring again? Not my view, but to each their own. Um.......that one statement. I'm sorry but yeah Cena is by far not the best "Wrestler" or talker in the industry. I think Cena is probably the top overall performer in WWE. He can talk, he brings it in the ring constantly having excellent matches, and he gets the crowd involved. Very few have been able to match Cena in terms of consistent match quality.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 18:05:51 GMT -5
I'd be happy with a Cena return in his own isolated storyline ala Punk. If he gets involved in the New Corp angle, he'll eclipse the other stars and likely dilute the storyline. Bryan, Rhodes, Miz and Big Show are hugely benefitting from this. Awesome heroes. They sort of tried that last year with giving Cena feuds independent of Punk's title reign. He ended up jacking Punk's storylines (Johnny Ace, AJ Lee) twice. I know this is getting old, but Cena needs to go heel. Have him return as his goofy self, but in the end, Cena backstabs Bryan and takes Orton's spot as the Corporate Champion. No
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 19:53:04 GMT -5
Here's kind of the thing with Cena with me... I'm just tired of him. He's had a ton of great moments and matches, and I can always go back to those, but for the moment I'm just hoping January is a long, long time coming. Wish him a speedy recovery and all but I'm hoping he takes his sweet time about coming back afterward. To add, what else can you do with Cena as a character? Barring a feud with the Undertaker going into Wrestlemania, maybe another match with Lesnar, and some throwaway matches with single members of the Shield on Raw, there really isn't a match-up that I would want to see Cena in once he's back. Either he's tangled with the guys on top too many times (Punk, Orton, Big Show) or his status as The Guy means he can't be shuttled down the card (Damien Sandow, Antonio Cesaro, Fandango). Either he scales back how often he works TV like the Undertaker has done on Smackdown the past few years or he switches from babyface booking to heel booking so that at least makes the dynamic of his matches fresh (imagine face Sheamus vs. heel Cena for example). WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2013 20:06:22 GMT -5
To add, what else can you do with Cena as a character? Barring a feud with the Undertaker going into Wrestlemania, maybe another match with Lesnar, and some throwaway matches with single members of the Shield on Raw, there really isn't a match-up that I would want to see Cena in once he's back. Either he's tangled with the guys on top too many times (Punk, Orton, Big Show) or his status as The Guy means he can't be shuttled down the card (Damien Sandow, Antonio Cesaro, Fandango). Either he scales back how often he works TV like the Undertaker has done on Smackdown the past few years or he switches from babyface booking to heel booking so that at least makes the dynamic of his matches fresh (imagine face Sheamus vs. heel Cena for example). WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual. No
|
|
|
Post by "Trickster Dogg" James Jesse on Sept 17, 2013 20:34:10 GMT -5
To add, what else can you do with Cena as a character? Barring a feud with the Undertaker going into Wrestlemania, maybe another match with Lesnar, and some throwaway matches with single members of the Shield on Raw, there really isn't a match-up that I would want to see Cena in once he's back. Either he's tangled with the guys on top too many times (Punk, Orton, Big Show) or his status as The Guy means he can't be shuttled down the card (Damien Sandow, Antonio Cesaro, Fandango). Either he scales back how often he works TV like the Undertaker has done on Smackdown the past few years or he switches from babyface booking to heel booking so that at least makes the dynamic of his matches fresh (imagine face Sheamus vs. heel Cena for example). WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual. Huh? Wouldn't serialized entertainment in today's era of television precisely be the opportune time to have characters grow, change, and develop as individuals over time? And wouldn't one-off events work more optimally as televisual entertainment by emphasizing actions and responses of characters in particular situations within an allotted timeframe? Watching "Breaking Bad" isn't the same as watching a football game. "Breaking Bad" is qualitatively different week to week, whereas one football game is hardly different from the next when only the names and scores change. Methinks you have it backwards. Mind you, John Cena as a character has hardly changed over the past eight years, so he proves you right, albeit unintentionally. Because we can only see the same actions, the same Attitude Adjustments and STFUs, over and over again before we as members of the audience get bored, stop caring, and/or stop watching altogether. Which is why, perhaps, that Bryan has been getting the reactions that he has from the fans for the past year and a half: because he ISN'T that guy we've seen since 2002, and as such he appears to be a breath of fresh air.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,792
|
Post by fw91 on Sept 17, 2013 20:37:27 GMT -5
Bottom line, I love how things are going and really hope things don't change when Cena comes back. you are gonna be SO disapointed
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Sept 17, 2013 20:58:54 GMT -5
To add, what else can you do with Cena as a character? Barring a feud with the Undertaker going into Wrestlemania, maybe another match with Lesnar, and some throwaway matches with single members of the Shield on Raw, there really isn't a match-up that I would want to see Cena in once he's back. Either he's tangled with the guys on top too many times (Punk, Orton, Big Show) or his status as The Guy means he can't be shuttled down the card (Damien Sandow, Antonio Cesaro, Fandango). Either he scales back how often he works TV like the Undertaker has done on Smackdown the past few years or he switches from babyface booking to heel booking so that at least makes the dynamic of his matches fresh (imagine face Sheamus vs. heel Cena for example). WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual. That is, quite literally, the opposite of what happens in storytelling. Like life, reactions, motives and traits constantly evolve as time goes on. Or else you just have the same stale idiot, doing the same stale things forever, and the story comes crashing to a screaming halt. If you're character never grows, changes, adapts or evolves, it means you're a shitty writer.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 21:09:29 GMT -5
WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual. Huh? Wouldn't serialized entertainment in today's era of television precisely be the opportune time to have characters grow, change, and develop as individuals over time? And wouldn't one-off events work more optimally as televisual entertainment by emphasizing actions and responses of characters in particular situations within an allotted timeframe? Watching "Breaking Bad" isn't the same as watching a football game. "Breaking Bad" is qualitatively different week to week, whereas one football game is hardly different from the next when only the names and scores change. Methinks you have it backwards. Mind you, John Cena as a character has hardly changed over the past eight years, so he proves you right, albeit unintentionally. Because we can only see the same actions, the same Attitude Adjustments and STFUs, over and over again before we as members of the audience get bored, stop caring, and/or stop watching altogether. Which is why, perhaps, that Bryan has been getting the reactions that he has from the fans for the past year and a half: because he ISN'T that guy we've seen since 2002, and as such he appears to be a breath of fresh air. I suppose I could be using an outdated definition. I have seen it like you're suggesting when they break up basically one story, like they used to do in magazines, but I had also seen it used referring to comic book, the old radio shows and the old movie serials. The fact is Breaking Bad was always going to be a finite work. Even if the people in charge got to produce new shows without restriction and the fans kept demanding more there would come a point where they would simply no longer make the show. I'm thinking of the sort of storytelling where it's begun with no plans on stopping until you're told to. Try to stick character development in that and you end up with stuff like some of the worse 80's cartoons where the same characters learn the same lessons constantly and so look like idiots. As often as you see a pro wrestler giving that character that same sort of character development you're talking about he may as well have multiple personalities. But then I prefer football games to most shows you see on TV these days, so we're probably not going to agree on this.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 21:12:03 GMT -5
WWE is serial entertainment, not a one off movie or novel or a trilogy. You can't keep doing character development in long term story telling. The focus is on their actions and what happens to them, not their growth as an individual. That is, quite literally, the opposite of what happens in storytelling. Like life, reactions, motives and traits constantly evolve as time goes on. you must have a very chaotic life. I mean your reactions can't be exactly the same in all situations with everyone you encounter. But most people I know maintain the same motives and traits.
|
|
|
Post by xxshoyuweeniexx on Sept 17, 2013 21:22:05 GMT -5
I'm thinking of the sort of storytelling where it's begun with no plans on stopping until you're told to. That's a soap opera, dude. Those things that have been on since like the 50s and 60s and have their characters evolving and changes and revolving in and out all the time because you know, keeping the the exact same way for decades doesn't work. That's basically what wrestling's been on a smaller scale since it's inception. Those shows do it well, WWE does it too.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Sept 17, 2013 21:35:05 GMT -5
That is, quite literally, the opposite of what happens in storytelling. Like life, reactions, motives and traits constantly evolve as time goes on. you must have a very chaotic life. I mean your reactions can't be exactly the same in all situations with everyone you encounter. But most people I know maintain the same motives and traits. We're put here on earth to constantly learn, change and evolve as a person. There isn't one person alive who's "got it all figured out." Only fools or stubborn people stay the same way forever. There's so much more to learn and experience. And those experiences cause you to grow as a person (ideally). I'm certainly not the same person I was at 20. And at 50, I won't be the same person I am now in many ways. As far as fiction goes however, that's just the rules of storytelling. You may not want it to be that way, personally, but that's how it works. That's what an arc is. You start somewhere, learn something, lose something, make mistakes, learn from them, grow, and eventually you're a stronger or wiser person for it. There has to be peaks and valleys --especially in exceptionally long-term storytelling. If your character resets back over and over and never changes or evolves, that's terrible, flat writing.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 21:51:34 GMT -5
you must have a very chaotic life. I mean your reactions can't be exactly the same in all situations with everyone you encounter. But most people I know maintain the same motives and traits. We're put here on earth to constantly learn, change and evolve as a person. There isn't one person alive who's "got it all figured out." Only fools or stubborn people stay the same way forever. There's so much more to learn and experience. And those experiences cause you to grow as a person (ideally). I'm certainly not the same person I was at 20. And at 50, I won't be the same person I am now in many ways. As far as fiction goes however, that's just the rules of storytelling. You may not want it to be that way, personally, but that's how it works. That's what an arc is. You start somewhere, learn something, lose something, make mistakes, learn from them, grow, and eventually you're a stronger or wiser person for it. There has to be peaks and valleys --especially in exceptionally long-term storytelling. If your character resets back over and over and never changes or evolves, that's terrible, flat writing. I agree resetting is a bad thing. Which is why I prefer a fully developed character in the first place. How many flaws must you give a character to have him constantly growing or overcoming? Once of the biggest problems in fictions these days is having so many flawed characters people don't care what happens to any of them.
|
|
SEAN CARLESS
Hank Scorpio
More of a B+ player, actually
I'm Necessary Evil.
Posts: 5,770
|
Post by SEAN CARLESS on Sept 17, 2013 21:54:35 GMT -5
We're put here on earth to constantly learn, change and evolve as a person. There isn't one person alive who's "got it all figured out." Only fools or stubborn people stay the same way forever. There's so much more to learn and experience. And those experiences cause you to grow as a person (ideally). I'm certainly not the same person I was at 20. And at 50, I won't be the same person I am now in many ways. As far as fiction goes however, that's just the rules of storytelling. You may not want it to be that way, personally, but that's how it works. That's what an arc is. You start somewhere, learn something, lose something, make mistakes, learn from them, grow, and eventually you're a stronger or wiser person for it. There has to be peaks and valleys --especially in exceptionally long-term storytelling. If your character resets back over and over and never changes or evolves, that's terrible, flat writing. I agree resetting is a bad thing. Which is why I prefer a fully developed character in the first place. How many flaws must you give a character to have him constantly growing or overcoming? Once of the biggest problems in fictions these days is having so many flawed characters people don't care what happens to any of them. If a character has no more room to grow, it's time to retire that character. It's complete. You can't just manufacture or write things around a character who has already learned and experienced everything. At that point, it's time to move on.
|
|
mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319
|
Post by mrjl on Sept 17, 2013 22:01:13 GMT -5
I agree resetting is a bad thing. Which is why I prefer a fully developed character in the first place. How many flaws must you give a character to have him constantly growing or overcoming? Once of the biggest problems in fictions these days is having so many flawed characters people don't care what happens to any of them. If a character has no more room to grow, it's time to retire that character. It's complete. You can't just manufacture or write things around a character who has already learned and experienced everything. At that point, it's time to move on. so if you enjoy the completed character more than the journey you're out of luck then? and if the performed is say 28 and in a business where the fans are quite happy to always remind you they know who you used to be, you're also out of luck? That's poor logic when athletic prowess can more than make up for storytelling deficiencies. I have no more desire to see a chracter go away because he's a complete person than I would seeing a football player retiring after he won a Super Bowl.
|
|
kidglov3s
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants her Shot
Who is Tiger Maskooo?
Posts: 15,870
|
Post by kidglov3s on Sept 17, 2013 22:10:01 GMT -5
If a character has no more room to grow, it's time to retire that character. It's complete. You can't just manufacture or write things around a character who has already learned and experienced everything. At that point, it's time to move on. so if you enjoy the completed character more than the journey you're out of luck then? and if the performed is say 28 and in a business where the fans are quite happy to always remind you they know who you used to be, you're also out of luck? That's poor logic when athletic prowess can more than make up for storytelling deficiencies. I have no more desire to see a chracter go away because he's a complete person than I would seeing a football player retiring after he won a Super Bowl. But in real football, or any kind of athletic endeavor, there are elements of chance and competition that force everyone involved to adapt and respond to the new situations that arise regularly. I think a better comparison for John Cena, and specifically the idea that John Cena should never change and be frozen as the same he is right now, is The Harlem Globetrotters. How much can you really get out of The Harlem Globetrotters after a certain point, where it's always the same thing again and again? Even the way things are now Cena is constantly changing, growing, adapting.
|
|