Rain said:
Then the past year, he had his horrible "WWE Superface" run, where every time he opened his mouth he sounded like Cena, and then the heel character you discussed. Neither one has really caught on, honestly I've felt like I was cheering for Punk just because he was putting on semi-entertaining segments amid a bunch of meaningless filler. Not to mention he did a complete 180 with his personality just because he attacked the Rock (something his character would do, yeah that's wrestling logic but just frustrating).
What made Punk's 180 specifically frustrating for me, to the point where I slowly stopped watching (granted it wasn't just because of that), was that up to that point Punk had pretty much managed to avoid that 180 flip. His heel turn back in 09 was perfect because it was actually a slow build towards it from a moment that traditionally would've just been an automatic thing (cashing in on Hardy). Instead of a 180 flip, we a got something like two months of character development leading to his actually turn.
As a side note, I never actually cared about the SES Punk, granted I only watched consistently for the first month or so then it became sporadic. When he hit the mark, he really hit the mark but for the most part, it felt like I was just tuning in to hear the same exact promo I did the week before. Same thing with Jericho, at one point I was able to recite their promos before they did. And I understand the philosophy behind that, it's easier to hate someone who just keeps shoving the same crap down your throat week in and out but that just get's me bored. My favorite Punk era's are always the ones where he is basically playing a tweener, i.e. the months of development during the Hardy feud and most of Summer of Punk (though I loved that angle from Punk's shoot to Night Of Champions [the Raw after it was terrible]). I'll stop now as side notes aren't suppose to be longer than the actually note.
Anyway, I've been trying to avoid this thread because quite honestly this isn't a can of worms I wanted to open. Mainly because once I get started I'm not sure when I'd stop. My brain doesn't exactly allow me to stop once I started something until I'm blank out of anything to say really. For example, my review on the finale of The Legend Of Korra was about MM (2,000; what, I love roman numerals) words long and two episodes out of a twelve episode season isn't exactly on par with the scale of the WWE. On the other hand, I'm bored.
I. Keep booking The Shield strong after their first loss and don't start breaking them up after their first loss. The former sounds obvious but evidently it isn't. Take the Nexus for example. Now, I never thought the Nexus should've lost their SummerSlam match but it could have been fine had they continue to book them as some kind of threat. Instead of doing that, WWE feels the superior choice is on the very next show, to have everyone not called Barrett, Sheffield (Ryback), & Otunga look like complete jobbers only managing to win by the cheapest ways imaginable. Now, understandably the point of Nexus was they were a bunch of rookies who joined up because it was the easiest way for them to all make an impact and benefit from that. So I don't mind them winning in cheap ways and not looking strong in singles competition however I do want them to look competent. I do want them to look like they aren't on the same level as the Brooklyn Brawler just with more luck. Gabriel probably got the worst treatment, he didn't even phase Orton when he attacked him. That night single-handily killed all my in Nexus because most of them looked like nothing and since Nexus was the only thing I was interested in, it single-handily killed my interest in WWE and I went a break for about a whole year, only catching the occasional match until Raw Roulette which I watched due to luck and Punk.
As for the latter, having them break up after their first loss, and especially because of their first loss, destroys what the whole appeal of The Shield is. I love a lot about The Shield, but what's special about them is that even though they all have their own individual idiosyncrasies & personalities, they really do feel like one unit. That's something commendable. I mean, Nexus never once actually felt like one, it felt like Wade Barrett leading a ragtag group of rookies. When they break up, it should be in one of the ways Stopspot stated. Now this isn't currently a problem, but I do think it's a possibility and considering The Shield are currently the most interesting part about the WWE, it's worth throwing this out.
II. Give Dolph Ziggler a legitimate World Championship reign. I don't feel like there is any need to try and explain myself here.
III. Stop feeling like they're restricted to just having part-timers like Rock & Lesnar fight the top guys. There is nothing wrong with using them to fight the top guys, however when that's all they're doing then it becomes a problem. Especially when it leads to them facing the same people over and over again. I've brought this up plenty of times before, but there really isn't a reason why they couldn't have Rock wrestle in the Elimination Chamber at Elimination Chamber. It would've been preferable because during Rock's week off you could still build to the match more than what they did, and it would've forced Rock to interact with other members of the roster both in and out of the ring while they still could've kept the focus squarely on Punk/Rock. A sequel to Lesnar/Triple H just really isn't necessary. If they happen to go the route Lockard suggested then fantastic but I don't really feel confident that they will. They could've had Sheamus as a surrogate for Triple H (where Trips could cost Lesnar the match if need be), or some tag match. Basically, it doesn't interest me to see Rock/Cena again or Lesnar/Trips again (okay, I didn't watch the first bout but still). I just would be much more interested if they weren't showing a rematch and instead having a more fresh match with someone who's on the cusp of big success rather then someone who really doesn't need the rub. What makes it particularly bad is that they have four part-timers and they are either fighting each other or one of the top two in the company. Like the buy-rates are going to be that affected if just one of them fights someone a bit lower on the ladder.
IV. Legends. Okay, I've complained about the Raw 1000th show several times on here for being nothing more than nothing but a nostalgia show, which is mostly poorly written crap using past superstars as a crutch in order to get a cheap pop regardless of whether or not it makes sense for them to be there. I hate those type of appearances where their only worth in appearing is to get a cheap pop. Especially when it's one after another of completely pointless cameos. Not that I think WWE should ignore the past, because I love the history and I love continuity. The main reason I still watch How I Met Your Mother is because of the continuity porn. For example, in one season four episode, "Three Days Of Snow" (one of my personal favorites), Ted says there are certain five word phrases that every man says at one point, it then flashes to certain scenes where someone in the cast said it, one of those flashes were to Ted saying "I'm gonna win her back!" The most recent episode of How I Met Your Mother, from season eight by the way, finally gives as context to that flash of Ted saying "I'm gonna win her back!" When I saw that scene I got all giddy and my brother asked me why. I told him and he called me a nerd for remembering that scene from that episode. My brother's a jerk. I did have a point there and that is that those continuity nods or revisiting history (legends) works if they ultimately serve a purpose. Take Edge for example, every time he's appeared it's not just for some cheap spot, he plays a role in one of the stories and it makes sense for him to. I'd rather them be used sparingly and only when it makes sense and/or the play an actually role in the whatever segment they partake in.
V. Less predictability. Predictability in of itself is not a bad thing. For example, let's take a look at the series Master Keaton. For the most part, any of the episodes where people remarked at how surprised they were at a twist, I saw it coming from a mile away (funnily enough, the one time they thought it was predictable, I didn't see it coming). Hell, one time I got the twist within the first minute or two. Not hyperbole. And while I saw the outcome coming, that doesn't change the fact that it was one of the series best, if not the best. It was beautifully layered, great story and characters, and even a nice music motif to bring the whole thing together. I absolutely love it, and I saw the ending coming. So, predictability isn't bad unless what's coming isn't very interesting to begin with. Unless they stick to the strict formula that in typically booking that reinforces it. Unless it's a big time match that's been months ever a year in the making. Unless the outcome is something you don't care to see and ESPECIALLY if they couldn't make it any more obvious that there is no hope for another outcome. You get the picture.
VI. Commitment. The build for Rock vs. Cena II is based upon the idea that Cena placed their first match on a pedestal that is even above his entire career, meaning a loss would render his career meaningless, in his eyes. It was Once In A Lifetime in his eyes. He never once considered that a re-match would happen, so everything was on the line for him, even though nothing actually one the line. He loses the match and then goes on to show the effects, having the worst year of his career. 2013 is a new year however and Cena manages to win the Royal Rumble, meanwhile The Rock wins the WWE Championship. And all of a sudden, Cena get's his second shot. The circumstances have allowed the rematch of a lifetime. Then Cena will win. On paper, this is a really good story. It's the ultimate fall and rise story. In execution though, it only works if you actually have a FALL! I mean, it's not hard to book this kind of story. It's simplistic, it's effective, and when it's done you get a big pay-off. If you showed Cena actually going through the fall, actually having a hard time throughout the year, you would have gotten people on his side. When the rise started to come, more people would've of bought into, more people would be invested because they saw Cena at his lowest. I guarantee if they actually committed to the story they were trying to tell, the buys for this year's Mania would be higher than it's going to be. You can't just book the rise, that makes no sense. There's no satisfaction in seeing Cena return to his former glory because he never left it behind.
It's not just with Cena/Rock II, though that's the most egregious example that pops into my mind, but this also has to do with booking wrestlers with their push (way to many examples to name) or keeping with decisions (Rhodes Scholars for example - though I think they're broken up again and it's sticking this time).
VII. Sometimes give up. Okay, on the flip side of the last paragraph, sometimes people just don't work. Stop shoving them down our throats. Now, I'm not being hypocritical, but sometimes they just try way too hard to get someone over and after a year or so like with Sheamus, it just get's to the point where it's not going to happen to the extent they want it to. I'm just saying, deal with it. You can still book them strong, but not super duper strong.
VIII. Have some characters and stop restricting them. This, and I'm pretty sure plenty other stuff I've been saying, have already been stated but dear god so much of the wrestlers on the roster are bland. Bland, bland, bland. There is very little variety on the roster. Part of the reasons is because WWE is so restricting. The whole system of scripting into promos is BS, just give them bullet points. Have them develop their own characters, and that stuff. I don't want to focus on this as I know for a fact it's been covered. I'd also love some more angles focusing on character development akin to the Punk one I mentioned earlier. Oh and book characters as characters, no just outright confining them to the standard baby face or heel. You can still book the good guy/bad guy schtick without making everyone one so generic in personality.
IX. No more [heel] authority figure angles. Yeah, it's not happening right now but fuck it, I hate these angles and I'm instantly disinterested in the product when one starts. Especially if Vickie Guerrero is the authority figure. I have two main problems with the story. Firstly, it's the same exact thing over and over and over again with the only exception being that the authority figure tends to have a different personality but ultimately has the same exact motives, reasoning, and motives. They've also been done to death at this point, I get the success of Austin/McMahon, but none of the attempts to recreate haven't been anything close to that and chances are they never will. Every single one seems to capitalize on lazy writing due to how predictable they seem to be but by far the worst common theme in these angles is screen time. During Johnny Ace's is was rare to go two seconds without him appearing. During Vickie's (on her Smackdown one) it was the same exact thing, and I only made it through a couple weeks until I stopped watching completely. The second big gripe is, and this may seem lame to some, but they're not wrestlers. And normally this angle forces them to get into a wrestling match. As odd as this seem, no matter how good the booking is, I will never be interested in watching a match between a non-competitor and a competitor. You'd have to pay me to watch Johnny Ace's match against John Cena. I don't care, I don't tend like those matches. Shawn vs. McMahon at Mania was an abomination of a match, the only time I wasn't bored was during the ladder spot.
To go on a side tangent, I recall reading on here awhile ago that when Triple H eventually does this angle, he should do it as a retired wrestler. I have to respectfully disagree because that will make it just like ever other authority figure angle. At least if he's still active, you can now have the threat of dealing with an authority figure who can actually do something. The obligatory match that would come out of that actually has a chance of being a good match. You get a new character, you give the angle a new twist, it would be refreshing for this overplayed angle. I think it would be good, because as he shown during his feud with Taker, he'll try to avoid wrestling so he can still use other big men to accomplish his goals. But when push comes to shove, he is a threat. You set-up a much more interesting and believable heel, so that when times finally comes for him to fall, it's much more satisfying because he's not just beating a dick boss, he's beating a dick boss who's also a bad-ass.
I also don't like face authority figure angles either or when they're involved too much. They're just aren't as frequent for me to go on a rant about. I'd prefer if the focus just stays on the wrestlers and [to a lesser extent] managers.
X. Get rid of King as a commentator. It'd be much appreciated.
XI. Have some massive story that has several separate parts that eventual combine into one big match. One of my favorite matches of 2011 was CM Punk vs. Triple H at Night Of Champions. Before I continue, the crappy booking post NOC's killed Punk's momentum, not this match. For similar reasons to why Punk wasn't damaged by losing to Cena on Raw. Continuing, the reason I enjoyed that match was the first half was the classic two big guys going at it bout. A lot of big spots, some good brawling, finisher-esque things, like the latter half of most Cena/Punk matches or HHH/Taker at XXVII only sped up. The second half however was several independent threads finally coming together weaving a beautiful mesh of story-telling and action. It was a great climax to the feud that had me excited as hell for the next Raw and then they ruined it. I've heard people complain about the interference part but I don't get it. I've read people say it didn't make any sense but I thought it made perfect sense. Every little thing they did made perfect sense and was based off prior booking. Awesome Truth's interference, Ace coming down with the cell phone, followed by Kevin Nash (though apparently that was a red herring and not subtle development because Nash sent it HIMSELF! *sigh*) it was all perfect. Some people tried to say Truth attacking Punk made no sense considering they wanted Trips to win, but apparently those people ignored the fact that Punk attacked him and that Truth's character isn't exactly known for making logical decisions. Anyway, I'd like something similar to that to happen again. They could easily do it with The Shield or go Heyman Connection. Stories crossing over is just something that's always fun to see. Seeing Elimination Chamber's revitalized with this in mind would be great. Having three feuds mixing in again would be great. Technically I'm kind of mentioning two different things but meh, they're both from the same place.
XII. Returning the Hell In A Cell to it's former glory. I don't mean adding blood, I mean scrapping the PPV and making it only for the biggest feuds of the year and building it like it matters again. There's no more "Oh shit!" reactions when somebody hears that they will be competing in a HIAC match. There's no excitement. It's just, "It's that time of year again, I've got a Cell match, what an inconvenience." I mean, they've even been used to start feuds, that's just illogical based off everything I know to be logical. Maybe just come up with a new gimmick match but I don't that will work. Bottom line is, they need something like this. Why, because if there is a big feud going on, one lasting quite awhile, I'm going to start taking notice of it. I just love the excitement you got when it's announced. I just love the moment when it's announced. And of course, they tend to give more time to it when there isn't three other Cell matches going on.
XIII. Story-lines being devoted to all divisions. Self-explanatory, right? I'll also throw in good writers being hired and crap getting thrown out.
XIV. A musical episode. Okay, here me out, every promo is done through song. No explanation is given but it can be lampshaded constantly. The wrestlers are allowed to chose the song they do it too (melody, and instrumentals only; this isn't a Jukebox musical) and are forced to write the lyrics themselves (with bullet points). They might be given multiple songs if needed too. I think it could be awesome. commentary won't sing though, I don't need that hell. Maybe for one match, they've got a song just blasting through the PA system that fits with what's going on in the match. Will I like this, probably not. But, I'd sure as hell check it out for the sheer ridiculousness of the concept. Who knows, it might be one of those rare things I actually enjoy for being "so bad" (though I prefer to call "so bad it's good" just "good").
Well, I'm finally done. Everything I can think of I covered, even if so briefly. Needless to say, WWE has quite a few things they would have to do in order to recapture my interest, full-time or even just a little bit. I don't need all of them, hell I'd only need a few to start watching DVR'd again but I have a lot of problems with them.
On a completely unrelated note, about a third of the way through this I had to go and get my hair fixed. It took about three hours but I'm finally blonde! . . . I'm not having any more fun. So anyway, I wonder how long I ended up bitching, MMMDI (3501) words long. *sigh* I need a life.
1: