CM Punk = Brian Pillman??

[Papa Pillman]

Does anyone else think that CM Punk's "voice of the voiceless" character is very similar to Brian Pillman's "Loose Cannon" character that he portrayed in WCW, ECW, and WWF from early '96 until his death?

Punk seems like the perfect man to ressurect the "loose cannon" legacy from the grave(no pun intended).

The characters are almost eerily similar(in a good way). I can't wait to see how long Punk can maintain this character, and far he will go with it. I'd love to see Punk continue on this path for the longterm, since Pillman sadly didn't get that chance.

I know that alot of people are speculating now that the current CM Punk angle is the jumping-off point of a new WWE-era to replace the PG/Cena-era, which is also a strange coincidence because... in alot of ways the signing of Brian Pillman could be looked at as the catalyst that created the "Attitude Era".

 

[ratedrdestiny]

I'm trying see the comparison. As I remember, Pillman was more of a crazy man than some loose tongue care free attitude. Maybe you can be a little clearer with the comparisons

 

[Profit]

While I do see similarities in comparisons people make between CM Punk's character and former superstars such as Stone Cold Steve Austin, Brian Pillman, and even Chris Jericho, I believe to compare his character and gimmick to former greats isn't the right thing to do.

CM Punk is his own unique character, his "reality" based gimmick where he consistently breaks the 4th wall is both refreshing and adds a nice bit of drama and suspense to WWE programming.

Is he a rebel? Sure. Is he speaking his mind, not holding back? Yes. But like each of the superstars mentioned above, he's doing it in his own way and as he has stated a few times he's really just trying to make wrestling fun and exciting again, which seems to be working pretty well so far.

 

[mozenwrath]

Does anyone else think that CM Punk's "voice of the voiceless" character is very similar to Brian Pillman's "Loose Cannon" character that he portrayed in WCW, ECW, and WWF from early '96 until his death?

Punk seems like the perfect man to ressurect the "loose cannon" legacy from the grave(no pun intended).

The characters are almost eerily similar(in a good way). I can't wait to see how long Punk can maintain this character, and far he will go with it. I'd love to see Punk continue on this path for the longterm, since Pillman sadly didn't get that chance.

I know that alot of people are speculating now that the current CM Punk angle is the jumping-off point of a new WWE-era to replace the PG/Cena-era, which is also a strange coincidence because... in alot of ways the signing of Brian Pillman could be looked at as the catalyst that created the "Attitude Era".

Hell no not even close. When Brian Pillman was shooting he was really shooting and almost got released from WCW because of it. He wasn't called the loose cannon because he was just playing a character. He was called the loose cannon because you really didn't know what he was going to do or say next CM Punk will come close to the line of what's considered too far but won't cross it. Brian Pillman had no problems going too far. Try as he might I really don't think CM Punk will ever cut a promo as great as "I respect you booker man."

 

[Papa Pillman]

I'm trying see the comparison. As I remember, Pillman was more of a crazy man than some loose tongue care free attitude. Maybe you can be a little clearer with the comparisons

For example what I'm talking about is something like this...

At SuperBrawl VI in February of '96, Pillman outed Kevin Sullivan as the "booker" of the company. The event is now an infamous angle for how shockingly Pillman broke the fourth wall(much like punk's infamous raw rant). Even the guys in the lockerroom didn't know what was work and was shoot about the angle, and watched stunned at what happened(another similarity). It led to Pillman's firing, which Bischoff claims the firing was a plan for him to go to ECW to refine the character than return, but the plan backfired(the situation played out like the Mcmahon attempting to fire Punk except they actually made the mistake of letting Pillman go). He then went to back to ECW(much like Punk threatened to return to ROH, and likely would have if they really couldn't get a deal done) and in his first appearance he delivered a shoot on Bischoff calling him a piece of shit, and them lamented the audience for being "smart marks"(I think you get the picture).

I hope that that clarifies some of the charcter similarities I'm speaking of.

Also of interest is the fact that when Pillman came over to WWF in June of that year he was suffering from an ankle injury and worked as a commentator to set up the character... reminiscent of Punk beginning his "Raw Rise" by doing commentary months back while rehabbing.

 

[Papa Pillman]

Hell no not even close. When Brian Pillman was shooting he was really shooting and almost got released from WCW because of it. He wasn't called the loose cannon because he was just playing a character. He was called the loose cannon because you really didn't know what he was going to do or say next CM Punk will come close to the line of what's considered too far but won't cross it. Brian Pillman had no problems going too far.

I think that we haven't yet seen how far Punk may go, he may yet cross the line. He may not pull out a gun or say "fuck" on live TV, but this is the PG era, there are different rules.

As for the reality of the "bookerman angle", Eric Bischoff and Kevin Sullivan both went on to claim that the whole thing was all worked, but very few were in-the-know. Even the firing was supposedly only a temporary thing and they planned to bring him back (like the WWE did Daniel Bryan for example).

Heyman and Styles have also admitted that the infamous ECW shoot was all worked as well, and the fan that caught the business end of Pillman's "boot-fork" was a plant.

The "Loose Cannon" was defintely a character, Pillman was just damn good at playing it. And the same can be said of Punk today. It's just that in this "information-era" and with the internet being what it is, there is always less of the realism element in an angle like this because we know so much more about what is really happening behind the scenes.

 

[bigbootydaddyV]

I think there is more similarity to the men than the characters. Both have/had great minds for the business and are breaking down 4th walls while keeping kayfabe alive and well. It's brilliant and working wonders for punk and but for Pillman's unfortunate accident it would've worked for him as well. Neither man has the size to really get over in the industry yet both busted their asses, they were creative in the ring, they created characters that were amazing, and were still able to get over. Their characters on the other hand are pretty different, only real similarity is they are both cool.

 

[XXJJ]

Hell no not even close. When Brian Pillman was shooting he was really shooting and almost got released from WCW because of it. He wasn't called the loose cannon because he was just playing a character. He was called the loose cannon because you really didn't know what he was going to do or say next CM Punk will come close to the line of what's considered too far but won't cross it. Brian Pillman had no problems going too far. Try as he might I really don't think CM Punk will ever cut a promo as great as "I respect you booker man."

I agree with this. The difference with the two is Pillman was really shooting. Punk stuff is storyline related....WWE is having him cater to the anti-Cena audience. With Pillman you really didn't know what he was going to do.

 

[mozenwrath]

I think that we haven't yet seen how far Punk may go, he may yet cross the line. He may not pull out a gun or say "fuck" on live TV, but this is the PG era, there are different rules.

As for the reality of the "bookerman angle", Eric Bischoff and Kevin Sullivan both went on to claim that the whole thing was all worked, but very few were in-the-know. Even the firing was supposedly only a temporary thing and they planned to bring him back (like the WWE did Daniel Bryan for example).

Heyman and Styles have also admitted that the infamous ECW shoot was all worked as well, and the fan that caught the business end of Pillman's "boot-fork" was a plant.

The "Loose Cannon" was defintely a character, Pillman was just damn good at playing it. And the same can be said of Punk today. It's just that in this "information-era" and with the internet being what it is, there is always less of the realism element in an angle like this because we know so much more about what is really happening behind the scenes.

I see your point. I don't see CM Punk doing anything like threatening to pull out his junk and take a leak in the middle of the ring like Pillman did when he was in ECW. Sure he may touch on some things but if he were anything like Pillman he would've threatened to take the WWE title to Impact on Thursday or address the fact that even tho she quit they won't release Gail Kim or something. I dunno I guess it's just too soon to tell at this point.

 

[ZUMBOdriver]

While there is a similarity or two between Punk and Pillman, the characters just don't remind me of each other. Punk also didn't seem to take the comparison either when asked the same question by Mark Madden on his radio show on Monday. Same goes for the Piper comparison. There are a number of different elements in Punk's character that can remind fans of a number of wrestlers. Obviously, similarities have been drawn to Pillman already in this thread. Punk is an anti hero like Piper and Austin. Punk is an in ring technician like Hart. I also like the previous comparison to Jericho. Both him and Punk are complete packages and took similar paths working step by step until they made it to the WWE main event level.

While all of these different comparisons to Punk make sense, Punk's character is still very different from all of them as well. On Madden's radio show, Punk said he doesn't really model himself after anyone and it shows. Punk takes basic elements that past greats were known for, while putting his own personal touch on his character to make it unique.

 

[HorsemenNo4]

Punk being the major wrestling fan he is probably drew some elements of the Pillman character for his own. I don't see a side by side comparison but there are parts of his character that remind me of Pillman.
He's taken elements of the best and crafted his own character.

 

[The Brain]

I understand your comparison. Both these guys used a gimmick where their characters would walk the line between kayfabe and reality. Fans love it when wrestlers take little shots about things they’re not supposed to and bring up behind the scenes activities. There are a lot of fans that don’t realize as soon as something is mentioned on tv it is no longer behind the scenes material and has become part of the scripted storyline. Those who think Pillman was shooting for real simply fell for his gimmick because that kind of thing was uncharted territory back then. Punk has the same gimmick. Fans are just a little more wise to the game now and realize it’s just a work.

 

[GameOver]

Don't see it.

CM Punk is CM Punk. with shades of Ric Flair and Stone Cold if there's any comparisons.

Brian Pillman - loose cannon was one of a kind

 

[Sub-Xero]

I definately see the similarities, however it's definately not a rehashing of Pillman's "Loose Cannon" gimmick. Punk is excellent at taking bits of other wrestlers and incorporating it into his own personality. Not that Punk's personality isn't all his own, its just that he's finding different ways to express his ideas. The SES had Right to Censor written all over it, but it seemed fresh because of Punk's unique delivery. The main difference I see between Punk and Pillman is that where Pillman looked like he would take a bite out of your hand as soon as look at you, Punk is always in control. Even when he's in a state of High Piss-Off, he's never more than a single step away from Calm, Cool and Collected. Punk is ALWAYS in control.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

Interesting question, and I'd say yes. I loved Pillman's work during those years. In CM Punk's case, I can see where this would be similar, especially since you never know what you're gonna get from Punk. My only regret in this is that they had booked him as the disrupting guy who'd interfere in John Cena's matches, and then just run off. Sure, that's been done before too, but not from the person who's the champion. That would add more of a mystery to Punk. But if they play this the same way they could have and were playing Brian's angle, it will go off great. In this case, the fans are behind this 1000%, so they need to make sure everything is still rolling a few months from now. But I like the comparison, I certainly see it...

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

There are similarities certainly but at the same time there are huge differences as well. Pillman seemed crazy, and by crazy I mean literally off his chump. I mean the dude brought a freaking gun on Raw and even peed in front of the crowd. I cannot see Punk doing anything nearly as crazy. He is more calculated and more intelligent. Both guys are shoot happy promo cutters but with Punk it looks as if every word of his is planned while in Pillman's case it looked as if he was saying whatever came to his mind.

Also, in the longer run, I would not want Punk to become a loose cannon. I would not want him to only cut worked shoot promos. It is great if it is done once in a while but you should not try to shock the audiences every week. That takes away the novelty of the shock. Also a good number in the audience does not understand worked shoots and for Punk to be a successful main eventer in the longer run, he needs to connect with each and every single member of the audience.

I think that things would become a bit easier for Punk if HHH turned heel. That way Punk can become an antihero without having to shoot every single time. Because of the fact that both the guys he is feuding with currently are babyfaces, Punk is having to rely on shoots to get the crowd on his side.

 

[Million Dollar Dream]

Not at all. Brian Pillman was my favorite of all time and CM Punk has been my favorite since day 1, however they are not alike at all.

CM Punk is not allowed to just say anything he wants it's all been passed by Vince. It is awesome seeing what comes out of his mouth each time he speaks but that's more attribute to Vince letting him do that.

Brian Pillman lived the loose cannon persona. Eric Bischoff even said that he had a hard time turning it off when the camera's were off. Pillman said what he wanted to say and didn't care about the consequences.

Both were/are great on the pipe bomb but Pillman and CM Punk are not comparable.