Post by polarbearpete on May 5, 2024 8:21:23 GMT -5
I need someone, could be you that's fine, to explain to me like I am a complete rube. How/why WWE is cooking. Like I don't get it...maybe I'm missing what it is.
Like the last PPV I watched was literally 5 matches in 4 hours..with incredibly long entrances, mixed with constant videos that felt like a tourism infomercial for the city they were in. By the time it was over my frustration level was peaked.
-With the worst of Vince's booking habits gone, WWE has done a good job of not getting in the way of wrestlers who are getting over; they let them come out, let the crowd react to them, let them talk, etc., without all the dumb "yeah, but are you REALLY over? Let's take away every good thing about you and find out!" stuff that used to happen. WWE may feel at times like an "entrance promotion", but hey, the fans like what the stars doing those entrances do and then what they say and some of their key spots, so why get in the way of something that's working?
-It's not all passive on their part, though; they've also done a pretty good job of taking some of those wrestlers and rewarding the audience with moments that show them reaching a higher level. I wouldn't say this has been done at all perfectly, but even just Cody rising to the top title, Gunther's IC run leading into what's likely a rise to the main event, that sort of thing, does allow fans to feel like they're justified and, again, rewarded for viewing/following certain wrestlers. It's honestly something AEW should do more often; they'll tell stories with certain wrestlers, but it can be easy for certain acts to get sort of stuck in a particular position on the card (e.g. Kingston is very over, he's in a strong position, fans would probably go nuts for a World title win for him, but you still get the vibe he's not going to beat the tip top guys, at least not yet).
-It also has to be acknowledged that while I think it's fair to argue a lot of their recent title runs went way too long, they did a good job of making a lot of the matches involving those titles feel important. I may not have liked the matches in many cases; hell, in the case of Roman I thought his matches basically became reruns that weren't telling any kind of compelling story or showing any interesting character development, which sucks because the motivation and initial execution of Roman's heel turn was one of the best things WWE's booked in twenty years. But I can't sit here and say crowds didn't care about Roman matches (well, ok, maybe outside of the Rumble this year) - people showed up, people were into the whole schtick, even if I couldn't really get it, but that's largely on the company for making sure those title matches felt like events.
Now, for me, their actual in-ring product lacks too much for a lot of this to resonate with me - they have good matches, yes, but I feel like the "formula" for many WWE matches is too repetitive and not effective enough at communicating stories and characters in the ring, and while there are exceptions to that (hi again, Gunther!) it's just a general vibe much of the time. I also don't think WWE is particularly sharp when it comes to actually telling an unfolding story; they'll present their characters very well, they'll let them get over and not mess with a good thing, but to me it's still too "moments-based", even when a "moment" might be someone like Drew saying something on the mic so people go "ooh, he ethered him!", but it doesn't really show us those characters evolving due to what they're going through. Hell, I just outlined my complaint about Roman in the last paragraph, but he's just one example of that.
But for now? It's working for them. Will it keep working, especially as some major names cycle out for awhile? Hard to say, but for now they've got the positive feeling going for them. What absolutely should be noted, as well, though, is the impact that WWE's leaning on the media is doing for them; people pooh-poohing this are just ignoring what guys like Nick Khan and the guys he works with are tip top at, which has contributed to all kinds of stories over the last long stretch that makes WWE a "babyface company" - I mean, shit, look at how some reports came out after this latest round of firings with the headline/descriptor "yeah, it's bad, but these were done much more nicely and gently than they were under Vince...don't worry, he's 1000% gone, we mean it, investors!", even at the very moment Cameron Grimes was talking about being misled. And, yes, that media strategy has fully involved working to throw dirt at AEW, which Tony Khan has finally seemed to begin forming a larger strategy to respond to with more focus, because it's something that could definitely impact AEW's media rights negotiations.
Agree with most of what you wrote. But I would push back on the idea that WWE hasn’t done a good job showing their characters evolving. I think that’s another one of the biggest differences in the company under Triple H vs under Vince’s. Almost all of the major talent have had slowly evolving attitudes/characters with changes that make sense. Whether it be Drew growing into this heel character because he never got his moment to win the title in front of a crowd, or the whole Bloodline saga and changes in character we saw with Sami, Jey, Jimmy, KO and now Solo, Dom’s whole evolution, the Santos story with Rey, Damage CTRL and Bayley, Liv slowly turning heel, Gable’s evolution into a heel recently, even down to minor characters like Candice LeRae slowly turning heel, the comedy angle with Truth/Judgment Day, etc. You can tell there’s a ton more long term planning going into stories and characters than ever before.