Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted April 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 12, 2011 Read this quote from a Bret Hart interview recently, and thought it would be decent to start a topic about: "He [CM Punk] has got a really good ring presence. Better than anyone else, CM Punk understands his wrestling persona. He's very serious about that character, and I like that passion that he has. It comes across in how he is day-to-day, just being around him. He's a very committed, serious professional. His match with Orton, I thought, was really credible. To put together the match the way they did I thought it complemented both wrestlers, and they really told a good story." Â This quote really interested me, because Bret himself used to get a lot of shit about taking his character to seriously. But that was always one of the things I liked about him. Whats your opinion on it? Where do you think the line should be as far as your character goes? It was always something Austin said on Tough Enough as well, about "I wasnt going to wait for someone to invent Stone Cold for me". Bret and Austin both got criticism, about people thinking they were into themselves and didnt know where the character started or ended. People always blame the writing team, but apparently, if your a good enough contributor, they want to hear your ideas and will go with them. Is part of the problem in wrestling at the minute that people dont believe in themselves and dont buy into there characters and thats why they come across as bland? It isnt like wrestlers from the 80s werent given shit to work with and made it work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 With out going into detail (for the sake of those not wanting TE spoilers), when Austin mentioned that he started "using four letter words and raising the middle finger" I immediately though two things..  1) He's right, it was his own actions that made people notice.  and  2) If anyone tried any of that shit today they'd be jobbed out or released.  When you have virtually no other options for work, you can't afford to "take a big risk and grab your chance" without risking pissing off the wrong stooge and getting canned for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Wrestler`s Wrestler DKJ Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Speaking of "wrestling character" I find this just a little hypocritical from the Hitman  "I also had to scratch my head and wonder how the WWE could pull the Sheamus v Daniel Bryan match and let Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole go for 30 minutes. It just seemed really crazy to me. My biggest disappointment was that two of the best wrestlers in the company, Bryan and Sheamus, didn't get a chance to show what they can do on a WrestleMania. I thought Lawler v Cole was built up really well, with most fans wanting to get their hands round Cole's neck by the time WrestleMania came. But I don't know why they went so long. It's not a match that needs to go very long. Michael Cole clearly can't actually do anything. That's the part I don't get. It should have been about four or five minutes long max. Sadly going so long, meant they really took all the light away from the other wrestlers that earned it through the year."  But as it goes for taking your wrestling character to seriously to be a bad thing I think being INTO your character is a good thing look what it has done for Michael Cole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Speaking of "wrestling character" I find this just a little hypocritical from the Hitman  "I also had to scratch my head and wonder how the WWE could pull the Sheamus v Daniel Bryan match and let Jerry Lawler and Michael Cole go for 30 minutes. It just seemed really crazy to me. My biggest disappointment was that two of the best wrestlers in the company, Bryan and Sheamus, didn't get a chance to show what they can do on a WrestleMania. I thought Lawler v Cole was built up really well, with most fans wanting to get their hands round Cole's neck by the time WrestleMania came. But I don't know why they went so long. It's not a match that needs to go very long. Michael Cole clearly can't actually do anything. That's the part I don't get. It should have been about four or five minutes long max. Sadly going so long, meant they really took all the light away from the other wrestlers that earned it through the year."  Did he really say that? That's brilliant. He must have a dry as fuck sense of humour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted April 12, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 12, 2011 I suppose it depends on what you mean by "taking it seriously". If you mean in terms of how it affects the marketability and therefore profitability of the character, I don't see the problem - Hogan and Austin protected their characters to an almost paranoid level, because they felt they had to if they wanted to keep earning the money they had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdh85 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 The guys that believe their character make you suspend disbelief, and make it real. Suspension of disbelief draws money. It's the difference between two actors in pants pretending to hit each other on one hand, and amazing entertainment which draws you in emotionally to the point you'll pay to see it on the other. It's the reason CM Punk is a multiple time WWE Champion, while most of his RoH playmates are still nobodies. Bret Hart is completely right, everything Punk does in the ring, or on camera, he's living in that moment and IS that character - exactly how Bret lived the Hitman character. Punk's facials and body language are some of the best in WWE, and his matches usually tell logical stories which stem from the characters and previous storylines involved. Â Damn right its a good thing to take your character seriously. Sure it usually leads to wrestlers ending up making a total bellend out of themselves at some stage down the line, but by then they're usually world famous and loaded, so I doubt they really care if some marks on the internet are having a giggle at their expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajmcstyles Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If I can be serious for a minute  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen Quagmire Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I guess Brian Pillman took his loose canon character quite seriously... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Your Fight Site Posted April 13, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 13, 2011 I prefer to see it as, "method acting". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiffingtonClyro Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I guess Brian Pillman took his loose canon character quite seriously... Â That's really offensive imo./ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Freebird Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 What about Flair? He Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJS269 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Alot of guys who have great characters are basically them selves pumped up like CM Punk or Austin (there are a few indy guys [and gals] who do this too) A great feat is having a great character that isn't just an extension of themselves, the best of these is the Undertaker. Undertaker takes his character very seriously, its why we still give his gimmick any respect, if anyone was to start with that gimmick today they would be laughed out the building. Undertaker even takes it to the nth degree, he doesn't do shoots and is very rarely seen outside of character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Is part of the problem in wrestling at the minute that people dont believe in themselves and dont buy into there characters and thats why they come across as bland? It isnt like wrestlers from the 80s werent given shit to work with and made it work. Â I think an earlier part of the problem is that too many of them don't have characters to buy into in the first place. Dolph Ziggler, for instance, has been around forever and spent several months recently in and around the Smackdown main event scene, but I still don't know what personal qualities he has that are supposed to make me love or hate him. Â I'm also not sure how many of them are actually encouraged to work on these aspects in the developmental stage. Sometimes you see the odd bloke on NXT acting in a certain way to try and distinguish themselves from the herd, but usually it just gets no-sold and treated with bemusement by Matt Striker, and they end up looking like fools. Fair enough, most of these attempts are shit, but surely it's more useful for a young wrestler to be throwing shit at a wall to see what sticks than deadpanning the answers in some pointless trivia quiz, especially on a show nobody watches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejeffjarrettone Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think its a sad state of affairs that some wrestlers can't seem to discern the difference between Wrestler X The Human Being and Wrestler X The Character/Persona. Some of the best gimmicks have come from taking a small part of a persons life and blowing it up 1000 times, but living that for extended periods of time can make it difficult for that person to tell what is real and what isn't anymore. Case in point: Hulk Hogan. The guy is clearly a good few miles from the sanity tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think its a sad state of affairs that some wrestlers can't seem to discern the difference between Wrestler X The Human Being and Wrestler X The Character/Persona. Some of the best gimmicks have come from taking a small part of a persons life and blowing it up 1000 times, but living that for extended periods of time can make it difficult for that person to tell what is real and what isn't anymore. Case in point: Hulk Hogan. The guy is clearly a good few miles from the sanity tree. Â Hogan is surely a special case here, though. He's a larger than life character who might seem ridiculous to you or me, but that's why he's a superstar. For Hulk Hogan, read Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lady Gaga, Russell Brand, or just about anyone whose level of fame has ever transcended their ostensible profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.