Anderson Says Wrestling Needs to Evolve; Speaks to Heel/Face Issues in Wrestling

[It's Damn Real!]

http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/TNA/article10020979.shtml

On the frequency of heel and babyface turns in TNA:"Here’s where sometimes people don’t understand the full story. There are reasons why somebody will suddenly change from heel to babyface, from a logistics concern. Maybe somebody is hurt and maybe somebody needs to fill a spot that was originally intended for somebody else. And we can’t think of somebody else to fill that role, so we need you to fill that role. Part of me thinks that wrestling needs to evolve again.

"There’s this thought that, in wrestling, it needs to be black or white. You’re either a good guy or a bad guy. I don’t know anybody in my life that is wholly evil or wholly good. With Breaking Bad, or Sons Of Anarchy, or Weeds—you look at these shows and there’s a guy who is a chemistry teacher who sells meth. Is this a good guy? By society’s standards, no. But we look at the TV show and we can sympathize with him. So I don’t know what the answer is. But I do believe that sometimes in the wrestling business, it’s almost forced. And it can be insulting to the wrestling audience, whereas on a TV show like Sons Of Anarchy, you decide. But in wrestling, it’s ‘Hey, I’m the bad guy. Boo me,’ or ‘I’m the good guy. Cheer for me.’"

He also goes on to talk about the adaptation of his "asshole" character, as well as his cage match with Kurt Angle at Lockdown 2010 and his WWE departure among other things, but to me this question and answer really stood out most among all the others.

I find myself agreeing with him, to an extent, but at the same time disagreeing due to the fact that as forced as it may be, a clear distinction between who's good and who's bad is somewhat required in order to establish the foundation of the program. I don't think either is a clear cut answer, which is why both exist in the same realm, but he brings up a great point nonetheless.

Thoughts on this?

 

[This Is My Name Thank You]

This is coming from the guy who switches from face, heel, face, and heel then neutral, to face in a matter of a month. I think he is leaning towards characters becoming more neutral (tweener, I hate that word so I will use neutral) as in if they want to do something bad they do it. If they want to do something good they do it. It allows more fans to get behind the wrestler that they like. I can understand what he is saying since I have always thought Anderson is trying to portray a SCSA type of character while he sucks at it. So maybe that is what he is talking about during his interview.

I also see that we need clear heels and faces on the show because if they were all neutral characters it would make the show boring and bland. As it would also make guessing who is heel or face ten times harder. I rather the show have faces along with heels and if the character is really good at being a neutral person then they work as well. I also think we need more neutral characters in wrestling as they become edgy as to knowing what they do next. One week they shake the baby faces hand and a week later they kick his ass. So on and so on, but I guess I see where he is coming from.

 

[klunderbunker]

Couldn't disagree more. Here's the thing that all these people that say wrestling needs to evolve don't get: wrestling isn't like other TV shows. Anderson talks about how people aren't all good or evil in real life. I don't watch wrestling to see real life actions. If I wanted to see that I'd go out into the real world and talk to them. Pro wrestling can work in the good guy vs. bad guy fashion but people are so used to swerves and twists and turns and tweeners because Russo decided a long time ago that fans aren't smart enough to accept clear faces and heels. It's easy to have faces and heels, but wrestling seems to think its fans don't want that. I'm as tired as anyone by Anderson turning every month and a half. If you try to figure out motivations etc, it makes things way more complicated than they should be. Totally disagree with Anderson on this and I don't think this idea of tweeners and people turning because that's how people really are is a good idea at all.

If nothing else, look at the two biggest stars ever: Hogan and Austin. Tell me: how many people in your life do you know that act like they do or do the things they did? They're two of the most over the top characters you'll ever see in pro wrestling or anywhere in all of entertainment. They did pretty well for themselves didn't they? Same can be said for guys like Rock and Flair: both totally over the top and no one in real life acts like that and gets away with it. Can you imagine someone like Rock in real life? Constantly spouting catchphrases and popping his eyebrow up and down? You'd get so sick of him you'd want to kill him yet in wrestling he's incredibly popular. It doesn't work that way in wrestling but wrestling constantly tries to make it that way.

Finally, turning all the time makes the turns worthless. Don't believe me? Ask WCW, where people turned almost weekly. Fans got so sick of it that they didn't care anymore. When Hogan FINALLY turned in 96, it was a shock. No one saw it coming and it blew away everything and made millions upon millions for WCW. It was a new idea and it hadn't happened 6 weeks earlier. There's little to no logic to having turns all the time, because wrestling isn't real life.

 

[Skairipa Matrix]

in a way i agree with anderson i think having certain people as heels and others as faces is good but at the same time theres a guy like mr.anderson (...anderson) who i always see as a twigger never a full face,never a full heel and i think he loves being like that it works for him but having everybody be like that just wouldnt work

 

[akrassikauda]

@theneverendingnightmare. A Twigger what the hell is a Twigger. It better not be a combo of twig and insert N word.

It's Just Laughs Man.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

The only bit I agree with is the way some people are made to look TOO face or too heel these days, more so than they would do at a less realistic time in wrestling. It's the very reason Sheamus is getting over well as a face now and Orton got over early last year, they aren't whiter than white characters. (Actually Sheamus might be)

It's the Evan Bourne's of wrestling now that are taking a layer of depth about the product because they are just so unbelievably happy that they aren't really relatable to anyone. Look at some of the big faces of yesteryear. The Road Warriors did not come out and pander to the crowd in any particular fashion, they picked up a microphone and told people they were going to destroy anybody in their way, and that attitude is what you would expect for someone who intends to be a champion in real life and so it works.

It has gotten oversimplified. Some turns these days just feel completely unwarranted, barely instigated, not enough ground for it to be bought by people. It's like, POOF - I'm bad, POOF - I'm good. Case and point being Mason Ryan on Raw. He had no problem being on the wrong side of the field not so long ago, then suddenly he's happy to just switch 'sides'. Real thought, time and explanation needs to be put into the reasons why a given person would turn. Christian's heel turn, for example, had great ammo. He'd been waiting to be champion for x amount of years and suddenly because the GM thinks the belt should be contended on free TV, he loses his title after 5 nights. On the other hand, Justin Gabriel didn't have any good ammo for turning, no real explanation, they just needed another face and his move-set fits that well. That was poor.

But with concerns to heels and faces, that is something that needs to remain in wrestling. All it needs to be is toned down a bit, you down need VIBRANTLY good faces of dastardly bad heels, make them a little more relatable. Tweeners are and always should be rare occurrences though. Tweeners are the height of a wrestler. You need the clear cut heels and faces to make the once in a generation Tweeners stand out and count. Stone Cold, Randy Orton, and more recently CM Punk would all be horribly horribly undervalued if everyone decided they just wanted to start relaying a few home truths to the WWE.

So I guess all in all I agree with him but not to the same extent. Make it obvious who the heels and faces are, but tone it down a bit so there isn't as much of a spectrum. And make sure you don't saturate the market with a bunch of Mr Anderson's because that would fucking suck.

 

[IT Factor]

@theneverendingnightmare. A Twigger what the hell is a Twigger. It better not be a combo of twig and insert N word.

It's Just Laughs Man.

I agree with Anderson. There's a place in wrestling and entertainment for those shades of grey type of characters. They are prevalent throughout television and infact, real life. He brings up a really good point that no one is completely without the whole yin & yang effect. Everyone has a good side and a dark side and making someone an in-betweener appeases both types of fans. In a way, WWE already did that in the Attitude Era with McMahon's whole shades of grey speech and declaring that the era of good guy & bad guy was passe. Look what that did to draw in a major audience and revolutionize not only WWE, but, the entire wrestling business as a whole.

You will always have the John Cena types to cater to the good guy fans. And you'll always have the opposite bad guy types that really appeal to the heel fans. I'd like to see a healthy middleground between that and what Mr. Anderson is talking about. Things would be more interesting and realistically edgy that way.

 

[BigPoppaPunk]

I'm not so sure wrestling will "evolve" to the point Anderson was talking about. Although I do agree that sometimes it's not as simple as heel or face. Life is all about shades of grey, and wrestling is no exception. In the long run though, wrestling has always survived on the good guy vs. bad guy. I can't personally see that standard changing, but some wrestlers have been in between at times. While the comparison is accurate, I can't ever see wrestling completely evolving into no labels for the wrestlers. Heel and face labels have been around since wrestling's inception, and that will never change IMO.

I love the analogies to Breaking Bad, SOA and Weeds. It perfectly compares characters as well as scripted shows. There are alot of similarities in that both are TV shows and weekly dramas. However, a TV character is not quite as limited as wrestling is. Shades of grey do occur in wrestling, but aren't as excepted as a TV character.

 

[Shakin' Abe]

I've been saying that we need heels and faces for a long time. Black and White. The fans will cheer for a heel if they want to...Piper, Austin, Orton, just to name a few over the years. I think a turn should come from a storyline, not from t-shirt sales, and that's the problem with the business...it's a business! Gen Me is a good example. You didn't know week to week if those guys were faces or heels. One week TNA would run a vignette on them talking about Jesus, the next week, they are cheating fools!

 

[wtfhappened]

If anything I completely disagree with his analogy. Sympathizing with a bad guy does not make him a good guy. There's a difference between a bad guy with redeeming qualities and a good guy who does bad things with good intentions.

As far as shades of gray, I think a lot of posters have already nailed the fact that it's gotten cartoony. Maybe we're at the point where winning with heel tactics isn't enough to get you heat, we also don't need people killing (or damn near, i.e. Janice, Orton's Punt etc) just to get some heat.

I feel like pro wrestling done right can be very simple. However, you have TNA were the bad guys always win and WWE were the bad guys never win (and if they do they don't keep the strap for long and they wind up looking weaker with the belt than they did without it).

So if anything I'd say wrestling needs to devolve. It's gotten to complicated, over the top, and to the point that you have to shoot a guy just to get a 3 count. Fans are getting numb that's why they can't get anything over.

 

[itssoeasy123]

Wrestling doesn't need to evolve, at all. The standard heel vs. face stature has worked for a few decades now, so why change it?

A heel and face feud is basically the selling point for every wrestling promotion out there, no reason to evolve from something that has worked for 30 years. You need a clear indication of who's good, and who's evil. Because if there's nobody to root for, who is there going to be to root against.

 

[New Hot Fed]

That's like watching Dallas back in the day and saying "yea that JR is so boring, he needs to be good now!" even though his shanigans were the lifeblood of the show.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I'm not buying into Anderson's idea overall. The over the top element of pro wrestling has been a major key to it's continued success. People want over the top storylines filled with wrestlers who have over the top personalities or characters. Over the top situations & scenarios are a key factor in any form of escapism entertainment. Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, any comic book inspired film, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc. are all genres filled with interesting & over the top stories and characters. That's why they stand out. Taking that aspect of out of wrestling is merely making it like every other television show that's out there.

That doesn't mean that some degree of realism doesn't have it's place, however. A dash of realism here and there can be a benefit as long as it's done properly without ultimately going over the line. In WWE, internet fans have dubbed what's been happening over the course of this summer the "Reality Era" due to the use of real life backstage frustration & resentment revolving around CM Punk. It's been interesting because the over the top element is still there and they haven't really tried repeating it with the entire roster. It's an angle that stands out because of the various over the top personalities and aspects.

As far as the heel/face dynamic, I think Anderson's pov is a result of the lasting effects of the Attitude Era. Hardly a week goes by where I don't see a thread or posts in which someone is basically saying that they want wrestlers that aren't heels or faces but something in between. Nothing generally wrong with that because that sort of character can be interesting and adds a different dynamic to things. The problem, however is that it seems that's what they want all the wrestlers to be. One reason why Stone Cold Steve Austin continues to be a stand out guy is because he was the first of a new breed: the tweener, the anti-hero, the morally ambiguous badass, etc. Eventually, just about every relevant wrestler on the WWF roster during the AE wasn't good or bad, it all depended upon the situation. The problem is that you can't have a roster full of "edgy" anti-heroes because then the edginess is gone. In comic books, movies, video games, television shows or whatever; you always need someone clearly to cheer for and someone clearly to boo for. Without clear cut good guys and clear cut bad guys, the morally ambiguous/situationally ethical character loses what makes him interesting in the first place. He doesn't stand out, he doesn't have that edgy quality and generally just becomes another face in the crowd.