WWE & TNA - The Turn of the Screw....

Well, it's certainly shaken things up in the WWE.  This Monday, just 24 hours after making a major contribution to an epic Payback main event, Seth Rollins turned his back on The Shield and joined Evolution.  Let me first say that I think this is a huge mistake.  For one thing, it's very abrupt and rushed, as there were no signs that Rollins was anything other than totally committed to The Shield; if anything, the storylines had teased possible tension between Ambrose and Reigns for some time.  Then there's the point that at Payback, The Shield and Evolution had an absolute war, and Rollins was the key to The Shield's eventual triumph.  But just 24 hours after beating up Evolution mercilessly and plotting their downfall, he joins Evolution's ranks? Eh?  This doesn't work psychologically on any level.  Doubtless on tomorrow night's Smackdown we will get an attempt at justification from a heel who had only turned face a couple of months ago.  Good luck with that....

This is not the first time this year that WWE has botched a heel turn.  Famously, they had Daniel Bryan turn heel by joining the Wyatt Family during their feud.   Yet when 'Daniel Wyatt' started to fight as a member of this sinister family, he was still getting much bigger babyface pops that the nominal faces he was opposing.  Realising this looked ridiculous, WWE reversed the heel turn within a fortnight, and the whole sorry business was never mentioned again.  Bryan then started a fresh face run which led to the Championship belt.   I think WWE deserves credit for realising that it wasn't worth digging deeper with a storyline that wasn't working and essentially owning up to their mistake.  However, they showed a total lack of foresight.  Given the depth of Daniel Bryan's popularity (he is probably more over than any face since Stone Cold), wasn't it obvious what would happen here?

There is a deeper issue here.  Isn't the whole concept of heel and face turns inherently ludicrous?   On a dramatic level the notion that someone who is supposed to be a baddie can, overnight, become a good guy and vice versa seems somewhat absurd.  If this happened in a television drama or a film, you'd struggle to take it seriously unless the script gave a convincing psychological explanation for this sudden change.  In wrestling, this happens all the time, usually with scant justification.

As I've said previously, TNA is currently something of a blur.  Storylines are developing so quickly that it's hard to keep up with what's happening.  MVP joined the company as a face in late January, but turned heel a few weeks ago.  Even more jarringly, Bully Ray, who, as leader of the Aces & Eights, was the company's star heel is, somehow, now the principal face.   As it happens, Ray is a strong enough performer to pull off his new face role, but this seems a waste given that his re-invention as a monster heel was one of the most triumphant performances in modern American wrestling.  He's worked so hard on the character, and now he's had to adjust it further as a not-entirely-convincing good guy.  It doesn't seem natural at all.  And it seems as if over half the roster has turned over the past six months.  This is all too much.

I apologise if I'm about to come across as a nostalgic old man banging on about how 'it used to be all fields round here', but when I watched British wrestling as a child, characters were far more coherent and consistent.  Turns weren't unknown, but they were rare.  Mick McManus was a career heel who was surely playing to his strengths by being a villain.  In fact, as the principal booker for Joint Promotions during the 70s and 80s he could have changed this at any time, but he was happy to remain a bad guy.

This touches on another point.  Most modern wrestlers are more comfortable in one particular role.  Edge is an example of a wrestler who could play a face if needed, but, surely, people will recall his heel runs more.  He was far more convincing as the conniving, opportunist character that dominated Smackdown in the mid 00s.  To an even greater extreme, The Miz is a wrestler who can only play a heel; when he's a face, he comes across as too smarmy to be likeable.   On the other side, Daniel Bryan is the reverse of Edge; he has played a heel pretty well, but the character is far more suitable for a face role.  Performers who are equally effective in both roles are rare: examples include C M Punk and the aforementioned Bully Ray.   Perhaps the oddest example is Austin Aries.  He's been turned so often in TNA that it's often hard to remember what his current role is.  And yet, he never actually changes at all; he's always the same cocky, superior character with a series of crowd-pleasing moves.  He genuinely seems beyond classification.  And he has a cool cape....

So why are turns so popular?  Well, on a basic level, they help shore up flagging storylines by altering the dynamic, so writers can always reach for a turn when a story has reached a dead end.   TNA actually used Bully Ray creatively during the Aces & Eights saga.  Before he was unmasked as the leader of the faction, he was given a fake face turn, as he pretended to be on the side of Hogan and TNA's other senior faces.  This led to a real shock when he revealed his duplicity.  The story sold us a very effective dummy here, and they sealed this with a superb montage section featuring Bully's explanation.

As an aside, it has also been argued that Rollins' heel turn could also be fake, and is a ruse to infiltrate The Authority.  Sounds a bit convoluted, but we'll see....

Of course, the most famous swerve of all was Hulk Hogan's heel turn to form the NWO in WCW.  This worked because it was so unexpected.  Hogan had spent the 80s as the embodiment of all that was good about the vitamin-taking, prayer-saying American dream.  Now, suddenly, he'd laughed off everything he previously stood for and betrayed every last one of his fans.  The crowd went ballistic, and an avalanche of garbage was thrown into the ring.  Eric Bischoff must have been delighted!

It's fair to say that no other turn could ever have the impact of this, and overuse of the device has robbed it of a lot of its power.  Usually at this point, it is customary to drag out pro-wrestling's ultimate scapegoat, Vince Russo, for another beating.  Here, he probably deserves it.  From WCW through to TNA he was singularly uninterested in storyline coherence.  Inspired by the sensational nature of reality TV, he wanted programming to rely on a series of shocks to hold the viewer's attention.  And, of course, swerves of all descriptions would be utilised as the rug would be repeatedly pulled from under the audience's collective feet.  In defence of Russo, it could be argued that his approach was revolutionary and helped shake up a stale culture.  If you really wanted to be contrary, you could draw parallels with the French cinematic 'nouvelle vague' of the 1960s.  There, young directors such as Jean-Luc Godard and Alain Resnais would react to what they saw as a dying French film industry by throwing out the rulebook and gleefully breaking well-established narrative rules.  Reportedly, Godard's 1965 film Pierrot le fou was almost entirely improvised.

I think this line of thought ultimately breaks down because a long-running episodic broadcast is a very different beast to a 90-minute movie.  In the latter, it's easier to maintain the illusion of a world out-of-kilter as you only have a limited timespan.  But in a serial, after a while this approach will get a little tiresome when viewers are struggling to make sense of each show every week.  David Lynch, the surrealist-inspired American film director, has made a number of weird but compelling films.  However, when he got to make a major network TV serial, Twin Peaks, he struggled a bit.  The show's originality and daring led to some brilliant moments but the programme ultimately collapsed as it was getting too strained and confusing by the end.  In the same way, Russo's philosophy of throwing stuff at a wall and seeing what sticks would eventually just become migraine-inducing.

Today, wrestling has moved away from Russo's chaotic approach, but it still feels like his influence remains in the need for shocking moments.  Rollins' apparently inexplicable actions on this week's Raw is just the latest example of this.

Before I end this piece, I must consider the one event that so many wrestling fans have been longing to see: the fabled John Cena Heel Turn.  The argument correctly notes that Cena is currently beyond stale, and as a result faces a mixed audience reaction which is noticeably getting more negative.  So, as he already is a heel in many fans' eyes, he should become a heel.  It would arguably be almost as big a shock as Hogan's turn in WCW.  There is a certain logic here, but it's still a flawed idea.  For one thing, modern fans are so contrary, that heel Cena would probably get cheered by those who are currently booing him, so the mixed reaction would remain and a lot of kids (who form Cena's main fanbase) would get needlessly upset.   Also, it wouldn't be as much of a shock as so many people have anticipated the heel turn for years.  It's for these reasons that I feel that the real answer is to keep Cena face but change his character so he is more serious and less of a cartoon Superman character.  He should evolve rather than change overnight.

And maybe that is the conclusion that should be applied more generally.  Sudden swerves too often look awkward, but if a character is allowed to change gradually, it is far more dramatically convincing.  WWE has on occasion managed it.  When C M Punk delivered his famous pipe bomb worked shoot in 2011, he has actually at the start of a face turn.  He was still berating the audience heelishly, but he was also delivering a message that many fans agreed with, so the speech was couched in ambiguity.  Punk would continue to be a tweener prior to a full face turn that seemed almost organic.  WWE has apparently announced that there is no such thing as 'heels' and 'faces' anymore.  This is obvious nonsense, but it's still intriguing, suggesting that there should be more room for shades of grey.  The problem is that the approach I suggest requires patience and long-term planning.  WWE in particular struggles with this concept, with reports saying that Vince McMahon demands re-writes at whim.  I even read that one peculiar edition of Raw was actually being re-written as it aired!  Maybe what I'm suggesting goes against the grain of that company's current ethos, sadly.

WWE: Story Problem

A common complaint about WWE these days is that they can only be bothered to write a handful of stories, leaving most midcarders without serious feuds or even noticeable gimmicks.  This lack of effort means that editions of Raw, like last week's go-home show for Payback, are often chores to watch.  However, how do the storylines that are in place play out?   Are any of them compelling enough?

Clearly, the main storylines involve the Authority, and part of WWE's problem has been that recently it has relied too much on the tried and tested idea of the corrupt management figures cheating the faces out of their rightful position.  HHH and Stephanie McMahon are just too dominant, and have been for a while.  This effectively peaked, however, at Wrestlemania XXX, with Daniel Bryan at last triumphing to finally signify that he really is an A+ player.  At the moment, there are two storylines driven by this, so we'll start there.

Evolution vs The Shield

This has at least solved the problem of what to do with Batista.  His intended face turn was effectively ruined by his petulant attitude, which meant he garnered X-Pac heat from angry fans.  By resurrecting the stable that represents Batista's most notable WWE spell, they've at least found a suitable role for him.  He doesn't have to carry any matches, and his genuine heat can transfer to HHH and Randy Orton.   Speaking of which, I'm not entirely convinced by Trips in his current heel role, even though his performances are essentially decent.  Maybe it's the fact that he spent too long wrestling as a face, that it becomes jarring that we suddenly are supposed to hate him (unnecessary turns are one of my biggest bugbears; as a TNA fan, I find it so annoying that virtually their entire roster has turned in 2014).  Or maybe it's the fact that Vince McMahon pretty much wrote the book on how to portray a heel authority figure, and HHH feels like a pale shadow of his father-in-law.  There's also the point that TNA has somehow managed to end up with two separate heel authority stables, so in current American wrestling this whole idea really is too prevalent.

On the other hand, the collective face turn for The Shield has been a surprising success, even though their characters are essentially unchanged.  In particular, Dean Ambrose is still the same unhinged character who looks like he would deck anyone he suspected of looking at him the wrong way.  Somehow, this doesn't matter; he comes across as crazy rather than evil, so he can work that way as a face.  This has extended the life of this group, and I'm very pleased about that.  I've always felt that the three of them are perfectly matched, each offering something slightly different; that kind of chemistry doesn't occur often.  At present, I would not like to see Roman Reigns pushed as a solo star. His lack of mic ability and his somewhat green ring skills (even though he's developing fast) mean that he might become just another big man hyped beyond his capabilities, and there have been too many of those in WWE.  But, as the Shield's principal enforcer he is cast perfectly.  I really think there's more mileage in this group. 

I expect The Shield to prevail at Payback, if only because Batista is taking time off to promote his new movie.  This means that Evolution will either break up tonight or on tomorrow's Raw, or they'll draft a replacement (possibly Sheamus after a heel turn).  So a Shield victory seems most likely.

Verdict:  A mixed bag.  Evolution feels a little forced, but this has extended the life of The Shield, so I'm broadly in favour.

Stephanie McMahon (and Kane) vs Daniel Bryan (and Brie Bella)

Now this one's intriguing, particularly as I'm not sure where this is going.  Of course, this involves no ring action as Steph isn't a wrestler and Bryan is currently injured.  However, it's a good idea to keep the champion onscreen so he doesn't get forgotten, suggesting that they may keep the belt on him after all.  Meanwhile, I really feel that Steph is a better heel than her husband.  She may only have one note, but it's a good note.  Her patronising, insincere tone is perfectlyweighted, as she repeatedly lies about not being involved in Kane's latest beatdown of Bryan, and I find myself enjoying her promos.

At the moment, the storyline is that, unless Daniel Bryan gives up his belt at Payback, his wife Brie Bella will be fired.  Here we have the big problem: Brie is a terrible actress.   Her shrieking performance a couple of weeks ago as she escaped from Kane was an insult to eardrums everywhere.  She's dragging down a decent angle every time she appears.

Verdict: This largely works, and I'll be interested to see how Bryan can keep the belt while his wife keeps her job.  Unfortunately, if Brie appears, the volume goes down on my TV set.

John Cena vs The Wyatt Family

How refreshing is Bray Wyatt?  In a business where ideas are endlessly recycled, it's so pleasing to see something that, by wrestling standards, is original.   Of course, the sinister Southern preacher is a familiar film character, and usually fans have noted borrowings from Cape Fear, although I reckon there are touches of Night of the Hunter and Wise Blood here too.  But the former Husky Harris has been absolute gold on the mic.  His cryptic speeches have been delivered faultlessly with an impressive sense of theatre.   The segment where the children's choir sung his theme song was one of the most effective and chillingly unforgettable scenes WWE has ever staged.  Meanwhile, the angle has also elevated Harper and Rowan, who could be an effective tag team once they split from their leader.

As for Cena, the start of this feud contained some of his best promo work.  We saw a different John Cena, one consumed by doubts and unnerved by his opponents.  When Cena gets serious, he's actually an impressive performer.  Unfortunately, in recent weeks he's reverted to type, and has delivered the standard blustering promo that he's delivered for the last ten years. You know the one; he declares in a loud voice that he'll never give up, you can't change him, yada yada yada.....The problem with this Superman character is that it's one-dimensional.  Ultimately, there's no drama as you know he'll prevail ultimately.  I'd argue that this is the real reason Cena gets booed; if he had a more interesting character, fans might forgive the problems Cena has with the technical side of his game.

At present, this is stuck in a holding position.  Bray's promo delivery is still great, but his material has started to get repetitive.  Meanwhile, Cena continues to bellow away. It feels like they're filling time until the feud ends.

Verdict:  This has got bogged down recently, but can be rescued by a good battle at Payback.  I'm confident both Wyatt and Cena will deliver.  And if, for once, Wyatt can win the feud against Cena he'll be set up for a main event title shot.  WWE must book it this way.

Rusev vs Big E

The rise of the 'Bulgarian brute' seems like rather dated booking.  Since the end of the Cold War, characterising an Eastern European as an evil Bond-villain type is a little old hat.  They've tried to update this by getting his Russian valet/manager Lana to deliver speeches in praise of Vladimir Putin, though I suspect these speeches go over the head of most fans, who are unaware of the current situation in Ukraine.  There's also disquiet at the fact that Rusev has predominantly been squashing black wrestlers; is this racist booking?  At best, it's clumsy.

Big E has different problems.  Initially booked as a dominant big man, this push cooled partly because he's plainly too short, even if he has the right physique.  He's somewhat fallen down the rankings, though he's been allowed to not look completely helpless in his feud with the Bulgarian.   He needs a stronger personality too, though this is surely the fault of creative, who have again been lazy.

Verdict: the booking is rather too one-sided here, as Rusev looks too strong for anyone else in the midcard.  I actually enjoy Lana's verbal tirades (her accent is convincing, given that she's really from Florida), but Rusev's matches have been tiresome and predictable.  I also can't get behind Big E as I should, because the booking hasn't really told me who he is.  This is a problem across the midcard, with just one exception....

Bad News Barrett vs....America, basically

Initially, Wade Barrett's new gimmick looked unpromising. He stood at a podium and delivered sarcastic, sneering denunciations of the American way of life.  Very cheap heat.  Yet, this has actually worked in giving the Englishman a solid character to work with.  Getting back in the ring, he's regained the Intercontinental belt, a clear sign that WWE likes where this character is going.   This is some turnaround, given how aimless his career had become before he took a break.  Barrett also deserves praise for coming up with this idea, honing it on JBL and Michael Cole's YouTube show before taking it to television.

Verdict: I'm afraid I've got some good news for Barrett: he finally stands out from the midcard!

Alicia Fox vs Paige (and anyone else unfortunate enough to be ringside)

Meanwhile, as the Divas division is reduced to a series of interchangeable Barbie dolls who are reality TV stars first and wrestlers second, two women stand out.

Alicia Fox has been booked very strongly recently, as a total loose cannon.  Following her matches she loses control and steals objects from around the ring while attacking random ringhands.  These beatdowns often last longer than her actual matches.  This may not be the most creative idea ever, and some have noted that it's basically a reprieve of AJ Lee's 'crazy chick' character, but it's working.  Alicia is performing with considerable gusto, looking like she's enjoying herself while performing atomic wedgies.  She realises that this is setting her apart from her bland colleagues in the Divas locker room.

Paige is a real talent, but since debuting on Raw, she's been let down by questionable decisions.  Firstly, on her first night, she became Divas champion.  A nice moment, but no-one even knew who she was unless they followed NXT.  She needed a build before having the belt.  Meanwhile, in many of her fights, she's effectively picked up fluke pins after being dominated by her opponent, so she looks more like a plucky underdog.  On NXT, she was a fearsome hellcat, and she needs to recapture this mood.   She had a stronger performance against Tamina Snuka on Smackdown this week at least.  Hopefully, her title defence against Alicia will be memorable.

Verdict:  These are two of the better performers in the Divas division, so despite my fears that Paige has not been booked to her strengths, I think this could go places.

3MB and Hornswoggle vs Los Matadores and El Torito

Oh God...every time I see Rockstar Spud being hilarious on Impact, I wonder why WWE's attempts at comedy are so juvenile and lame.   The wrestler who performs as El Torito is actually a decent worker, and Heath Slater certainly deserves better than to be a punchline to a joke that only Vince McMahon thinks is funny.  Ultimately, I can't even analyse this properly as it's too ridiculous. 

Verdict: More poor booking at Payback.  Hornswoggle will face El Torito in a 'hair vs mask' match.  As El Torito's gimmick is his mask, he won't lose.  Not that it matters.

Adam Rose vs Zeb Coulter and Jack Swagger

I do like the Adam Rose character, a party animal accompanied by the 'Exotic Express', a hedonistic cast dressed in costumes and masks.  Their free-wheeling spirit is an affront to a repressed bigot like Zeb, whose sourness is coming to the fore in this feud.  However, the problem is that Rose is struggling to get over; he got a crowd reaction in London and nowhere else.

Verdict:  This is a logical and coherent feud which could be a decent midcard attraction.  But if crowds don't appreciate it, it may get canned.  Rose needs to win over crowds with strong in-ring performances. 


There really is little else of interest.  Even Cesaro hasn't been given a proper storyline, despite his obvious promise, and has gone backward since teaming up with Paul Heyman.  Payback on paper looks like a decent event, with a number of interesting matches, but the build has really been so poor.  It's an issue WWE needs to address before Money In The Bank.