Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:18:13 GMT -5
It's because the booking team is made up of failed Hollywood writers. If they could write a good story, they'd still be in Hollywood. I'm fed up of creative always getting a bad rap. If you listen to podcasts and interviews with ex members of creative most of them are usually really knowledgable and passionate for the business (you have to be passionate to work their hours and workload) The issue is the political system of WWE. Someone on creative comes up with a great idea, then Michael Hayes takes it and changes it, presents it to Vince, Vince likes it, but then Kevin Dunn convinces Vince to change it, then the changed idea goes back to creative who try and salvage it, then creative present their workaround to get the idea more to their liking, then Steph decides she doesn't like it, then Steph presents an idea unlike the original to Vince who likes it and goes with it, then just before Raw Vince changes his mind and tells the writers what he wants and makes them rewrite it, then it fails miserably so the next week Vince decides it should go ina different direction to where it was planned etc etc etc. Just an example with random names at random places, and alot of the stories from various ex creative members are similar to the clusterf*** I explained. Also on top of all that you have people at the corporate level to deal with, advertisers, the network. all of which will insert themselves if they dont like something. So WWE have to tow an incredibly safe conservative line creatively nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Dec 19, 2013 10:28:21 GMT -5
Some of it is due to the fundamental problems with certain storylines from the beginning. For instance, Nexus. Okay, WWE had a bunch of rookie jobbers run roughshod over everyone. Now what? There's nowhere to go with the angle because the guys involved by and large weren't any good and the crowd didn't buy it in the long run (after the initial crazy angle). If WWE had debuted the Shield guys in such fashion, decimating everyone, it would have worked better because those guys are better than the Nexus guys anyway.
Or the Punk angle? Maybe I'm at a loss here but I don't quite understand where WWE could have gone or should have gone with Punk leaving with the belt. The build to the angle is cool, the match was great, but after it? TNA has done a somewhat similar storyline with AJ Styles with him sending clips in from Mexico, Japan, and the "Friends of AJ" ads. So what? At the end of the day too many wrestling fans cannot understand or comprehend why a guy with the world title would want to leave the company. If someone can explain to me how a champion leaving with a belt is a money drawing angle (as opposed to something you find kinda cool), by all means explain it. About all Punk could have done is wait until after Summerslam and show up. That's probably what I would have done. Cena vs. Rey at SS for the vacant title, then Punk shows up the next night on Raw to challenge the winner. What WWE did was dreadful post MITB 2011, but booking that angle to a satisfactory conclusion is tougher than people want to admit.
Now, Daniel Bryan. Given Orton's MITB win it was inevitable he would cash in on Bryan at some point. Given Cena's arm injury WWE couldn't simply do a rematch with Bryan, so another angle was needed. Barring Cena's injury Bryan could hold it maybe a month before Orton does the cash in, but either way WWE doesn't have enough heel challengers for Bryan to have a long title run. Orton as champ at least gives them a variety of scenarios (Bryan, Cena, Big Show, maybe Punk later). The problem with both the Punk and Bryan angles is HHH rearing his ugly head into both storylines.
|
|
saintpat
El Dandy
Release the hounds!!!
Posts: 7,664
|
Post by saintpat on Dec 19, 2013 10:32:24 GMT -5
Some of it is due to the fundamental problems with certain storylines from the beginning. For instance, Nexus. Okay, WWE had a bunch of rookie jobbers run roughshod over everyone. Now what? There's nowhere to go with the angle because the guys involved by and large weren't any good and the crowd didn't buy it in the long run (after the initial crazy angle). If WWE had debuted the Shield guys in such fashion, decimating everyone, it would have worked better because those guys are better than the Nexus guys anyway. Or the Punk angle? Maybe I'm at a loss here but I don't quite understand where WWE could have gone or should have gone with Punk leaving with the belt. The build to the angle is cool, the match was great, but after it? TNA has done a somewhat similar storyline with AJ Styles with him sending clips in from Mexico, Japan, and the "Friends of AJ" ads. So what? At the end of the day too many wrestling fans cannot understand or comprehend why a guy with the world title would want to leave the company. If someone can explain to me how a champion leaving with a belt is a money drawing angle (as opposed to something you find kinda cool), by all means explain it. About all Punk could have done is wait until after Summerslam and show up. That's probably what I would have done. Cena vs. Rey at SS for the vacant title, then Punk shows up the next night on Raw to challenge the winner. What WWE did was dreadful post MITB 2011, but booking that angle to a satisfactory conclusion is tougher than people want to admit. Now, Daniel Bryan. Given Orton's MITB win it was inevitable he would cash in on Bryan at some point. Given Cena's arm injury WWE couldn't simply do a rematch with Bryan, so another angle was needed. Barring Cena's injury Bryan could hold it maybe a month before Orton does the cash in, but either way WWE doesn't have enough heel challengers for Bryan to have a long title run. Orton as champ at least gives them a variety of scenarios (Bryan, Cena, Big Show, maybe Punk later). The problem with both the Punk and Bryan angles is HHH rearing his ugly head into both storylines. As near as I can tell, the logical progression of the Punk Pipebomb was that he comes out every week and cuts promos about how bad WWE is and how no one in their right mind should watch it. Then they hire Colt Cabana and all is right in the world.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Dec 19, 2013 10:35:28 GMT -5
Because you can't have good longterm stories if 75% of your attention is directed to what live crowds are responding to and the other 25% is directed to what TV watchers are responding to RIGHT NOW THIS VERY SECOND.
|
|
Lancers
El Dandy
Oh you
Posts: 7,951
|
Post by Lancers on Dec 19, 2013 10:43:34 GMT -5
It's a combination of what pretty much everyone here has said...
- Too many people involved in the creative process - Vince is crazy - Ideas that work great short-term, but fizzle out long-term - Backstage politics/appeasing corporate interest
It's most certainly not one thing that screws up storylines.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:51:12 GMT -5
I stand by my assertion that Punk should have stayed off of TV longer, but once a week hijacked the Raw feed while wearing a Vince mask Max Headroom style. How awesome would that have been.
|
|
Injustice45
Fry's dog Seymour
Consider me the Athena/Yoshimitsu of Avatars and Signatures.
Posts: 22,458
|
Post by Injustice45 on Dec 19, 2013 10:51:39 GMT -5
The Higher Power angle comes to mind, but it did leave us with the memorable "It's me Austin!" line and JR's reaction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2013 10:53:58 GMT -5
I feel like subconsciously they prefer to fail on purpose than by accident.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Dec 19, 2013 11:11:56 GMT -5
It's because going all the way with big stories would result in change, which would require WWE to actually innovate. WWE prefers to maintain a holding pattern, which means things always resort to the status quo, usually with an establishment guy going over, or assuming the focus of the angle. change is not automatically innovation. Everyone watching these angles hopes they'll result in the next big thing/ next major star popping up. But considering WWE is constantly airing if every major angle resulted in the new next big thing then that means every previous big thing is a choke artist who fails when it's his turn to stand up to pressure and a lot of previous NBTs are put out to pasture with a ton of shelf life on them, Too many next big things would be a nice problem to have. The issue is that WWE's system and mentality makes it virtually impossible for one to emerge.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,809
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Dec 19, 2013 11:42:59 GMT -5
It's because going all the way with big stories would result in change, which would require WWE to actually innovate. WWE prefers to maintain a holding pattern, which means things always resort to the status quo, usually with an establishment guy going over, or assuming the focus of the angle. Yep, it all comes back to their priority being pleasing shareholders and corporate partners before fans. Actually that brings up and interesting point, if hypothetically Vince wanted to follow through with the Summer of Punk angle how would he explain to those stakeholders that the WWE champion defending his title in a rival company is best for business? It's not something that's easily explainable by using of normal tactic of Kevin Nash talking them through some easy to understand charts.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Dec 19, 2013 11:50:57 GMT -5
Yep, it all comes back to their priority being pleasing shareholders and corporate partners before fans. Actually that brings up and interesting point, if hypothetically Vince wanted to follow through with the Summer of Punk angle how would he explain to those stakeholders that the WWE champion defending his title in a rival company is best for business? Easily, because stakeholders have no idea what any of that means, nor do they care. You guys are nuts if you think corporate, business types give a damn about booking and storylines, beyond something being offensive to the point of getting Raw cancelled. Summer of Punk wasn't screwed up because of that. It was screwed up because they wanted to keep popping live crowds, so they brought Punk back immediately. They sacrificed the long-term for the short-term. Like always.
|
|
|
Post by Sumbody Gon' Get Dey Kneelift on Dec 19, 2013 12:04:39 GMT -5
It's really easy to answer, actually.
They're too changeable. They clearly start out with good plans, but then get brain worms and they don't stick to stuff. I guarantee there are dozens if not hundreds of awesome longterm angles that got ruined because they chickened out or got distracted half way through.
|
|
wisdomwizard
King Koopa
Too Salty
Watching you.
Posts: 11,087
|
Post by wisdomwizard on Dec 19, 2013 12:05:25 GMT -5
Because the creative team aren't satisfied with keeping things simple, straight forward and obvious. They always need to throw in needless twists (Nash sexting himself rather than ADR which was the obvious choice and should have been what they went with) or overcomplicate things by hinting at an ulterior motive (The bigger picture). Keep things simple. This isn't The Usual Suspects... it's WWE. There's no need to over complicate everything. ...I thought the obvious route was HHH or Vince texting him?
|
|
|
Post by molson5 on Dec 19, 2013 14:12:12 GMT -5
Because when an angle starts, it's largely and usually a surprise, and fans don't have pre-conceived specific ideas about what's supposed to happen. It's just something new and exciting and different, and who doesn't like that in pro wrestling?
Once a storyline starts, the more cynical fans have a specific idea about what has to happen every step along the way after that. If the WWE doesn't manage to conform with their expectations exactly, the fans aren't going to like it. And of course, it's impossible to fulfill the expectations of every fan.
I don't even see the objective "problem" with how Nexus evolved and eventually ended. But ask that certain type of fan what they didn't like about it, they'll tell you what was "supposed to happen", and since that exact thing didn't happen, it was terrible.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Dec 19, 2013 14:13:37 GMT -5
Because the creative team aren't satisfied with keeping things simple, straight forward and obvious. They always need to throw in needless twists (Nash sexting himself rather than ADR which was the obvious choice and should have been what they went with) or overcomplicate things by hinting at an ulterior motive (The bigger picture). Keep things simple. This isn't The Usual Suspects... it's WWE. There's no need to over complicate everything. ...I thought the obvious route was HHH or Vince texting him? The obvious would have been Johnny Ace. Since they kept showing Johnny texting on his phone.
|
|
wisdomwizard
King Koopa
Too Salty
Watching you.
Posts: 11,087
|
Post by wisdomwizard on Dec 19, 2013 14:19:00 GMT -5
...I thought the obvious route was HHH or Vince texting him? The obvious would have been Johnny Ace. Since they kept showing Johnny texting on his phone. Forgot about Johnny. That had to have been what they were planning. I wonder who shot it down?
|
|
|
Post by tekkenguy on Dec 19, 2013 14:20:50 GMT -5
The obvious would have been Johnny Ace. Since they kept showing Johnny texting on his phone. Forgot about Johnny. That had to have been what they were planning. I wonder who shot it down? I thought it was supposed to be Stephanie.
|
|
|
Post by molson5 on Dec 19, 2013 14:21:09 GMT -5
Because the creative team aren't satisfied with keeping things simple, straight forward and obvious. They always need to throw in needless twists (Nash sexting himself rather than ADR which was the obvious choice and should have been what they went with) or overcomplicate things by hinting at an ulterior motive (The bigger picture). Keep things simple. This isn't The Usual Suspects... it's WWE. There's no need to over complicate everything. People also bitch when angles are predictable and formulaic.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,809
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Dec 19, 2013 14:51:23 GMT -5
Or the Punk angle? Maybe I'm at a loss here but I don't quite understand where WWE could have gone or should have gone with Punk leaving with the belt. The build to the angle is cool, the match was great, but after it? TNA has done a somewhat similar storyline with AJ Styles with him sending clips in from Mexico, Japan, and the "Friends of AJ" ads. So what? At the end of the day too many wrestling fans cannot understand or comprehend why a guy with the world title would want to leave the company. If someone can explain to me how a champion leaving with a belt is a money drawing angle (as opposed to something you find kinda cool), by all means explain it. About all Punk could have done is wait until after Summerslam and show up. That's probably what I would have done. Cena vs. Rey at SS for the vacant title, then Punk shows up the next night on Raw to challenge the winner. What WWE did was dreadful post MITB 2011, but booking that angle to a satisfactory conclusion is tougher than people want to admit. The difference is WWE were getting some mainstream exposure on the Punk angle and lapsed fans were returning to see what was going on, if they had carried on that momentum by having Punk appear on comic-con style youtube videos, RoH/NJPW shows and talk shows it would have garnered more attention and in theory more money. WWE must have made a ton of money on that white t-shirt that was debuted at MitB (even people that hadn't worn a wrestling shirt in years were buying it) so it's not complete fantasy to imagine them making a lot more money if the angle continued for longer. There was no reason Punk couldn't still appear on WWE TV as an outsider, either by the usual "fired" employee antics or eventually being forced to defend the title on WWE sanctioned shows through some obscure kayfabe loophole that Otunga uncovered. Although I agree that aspect of the angle shouldn't have lasted very long and concluding the whole storyline may have been difficult there was still a lot more mileage they could have got out of it.
|
|
Sam Punk
Hank Scorpio
Own Nothing, Be Happy
Posts: 6,317
|
Post by Sam Punk on Dec 19, 2013 14:57:25 GMT -5
Because the creative team aren't satisfied with keeping things simple, straight forward and obvious. They always need to throw in needless twists (Nash sexting himself rather than ADR which was the obvious choice and should have been what they went with) or overcomplicate things by hinting at an ulterior motive (The bigger picture). Keep things simple. This isn't The Usual Suspects... it's WWE. There's no need to over complicate everything.
|
|