Sympathetic Storylines - Would you buy them?

[waylonmercy]

I remember WWE would tell parents future storylines and what their goal was from it in teaching the views.

I am curious though what your feelings are with regards to sympathetic scenarios being portrayed by wrestlers and would you be more interested?

Say a wrestler suffers an injury and isntead of being written off television they come on tv and announce they may have to retire and have the wrestler break down in tears.

What about a wrestler who in GOOD taste is diagnosed with cancer and has to go through chemotherapy. If WWE does it right which is rare they could have that wrestler go to hospitals to bring light of people who have cancer and have on the WWE website a donation options and have the wrestler beat the cancer.

I am sure some people will HATE this and some may not but I am curious would you be more interested in the product if you have more dramatic scenarios that evoke sympathy?

 

[johnbragg]

I never ever favor having a wrestler cry. Choke back tears, okay. Cry, never. A man can cry, in private, when a first degree relative (parent/sibling/child/spouse) dies. That's is. I'm old school that way.

But, in my opinion, one of the most effective angles at getting a wrestler over as a face was the shoot (I think) videos of HHH and Stephanie McMahon meeting with Dr. James Andrews and training and whatnot when HHH ripped up his quad in 2001.

As for cancer, people would raise holy hell if it weren't a shoot. If it were real, then yeah the wrestler could Raise Awareness and build face credibility with the fans for his comeback.

The problem, er, one problem with this is if the wrestler has a serious chance of not coming back, then from the company's point of view this storyline has no payoff. He's sucking up TV time with his Lifetime movie and then, at the end, he announces that he can't come back--there is no glorious comeback match on PPV or surprise Royal Rumble entry. Either he becomes a manager, road agent, etc. or he dies, which has to put a damper on overall merchandise sales.

 

[mindgame218]

it's an interesting idea, but i think i would agree that a lot people would get pissed if it wasn't real. WWE(F) has done the sympathy story before though, just on a different scale. it was back in '91 or '92 and Sgt. Slaughter was admitting he made a mistake by siding w/ the Iron Sheik and Gen. Adnan (Gulf War storyline for those who don't remember) and during his apologizing on camera, he was in tears looking directly into the camera. i was a little kid then, but it made me want to forgive him (lol!) Point being tho, sometimes the sypmathy card can be played, given it has the right direction...

 

[CaptainZaltan]

Well, we've already had Zack Gowen, and every time I saw him I was hoping Rhino would run out and gore him through a table. Not sure why. And the Shawn Michaels 'falling on hard times' feud with JBL made me want to wretch. And lets not forget about the 'sympathetic' Eugene. Or how about Big Shows 'daddy's cancer death being used to further a feud with the Bossman? Well...that one was hilarious at least. Anyways, generally, IMO, when pro-wrestling stories and gimmicks revolve around anything other than competition and personal/professional hatred, it gets really stupid really fast. After all, the payoff is always a wrestling match, and you can't resolve story lines like cancer or aids in a wrestling match (unless its a 'cure for cancer on a pole match. don't let Russo hear about that one...). And I really don't want to see any more real life tragedies exploited to put over pro wrestlers. Does anyone want to hear JR say "Mah Gawd, hes beaten cancer and Randy Orton!"?

If you're talking about utilizing wrestlers real life medical or personal issues in a story, even that is a slippery slope. Keeping us up to date on the surgery/recovery of injured wrestlers can certainly garner a sympathetic boost in popularity (HHH, Cena, etc). On the other hand, exploiting Jake the Snake's alcoholism for a story was just in poor taste. Personally, I don't think that pro-wrestling is the proper format for these topics, and I don't believe that there are enough skilled writers or actors in the industry to make such a story seem anything other than 'in bad taste'.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I'm absolutely in favor of sympathetic storylines.

I am in favor of ANY type of storyline that elicits emotion from the audience, as that is the key to drawing fans in and forming a connection with the product.

Anything that makes viewers excited, sad, laugh, angry, confused, etc. Compelling storylines that makes the audience actually care about the performers as opposed to sticking any two guys in a match, who the audience could care less about. If the company and it's loyalist smarks want the fans to get excited and actually "be a good crowd" (like I see so many smark fans bitch about), you need to understand that you can't put the cart before the horse.

If you want the fans to care about the match, they have to first care about the participants involved. That is where the Creative Department earns Failing and Near Failing grades from me.

I'm sorry, but the ROH bots who expect fans to cheer and boo wrestlers with zero personality and base their reactions solely and ONLY on the wrestlers' quality of matches, just aren't living in reality with the Casual Fanbase.

 

[The_Real_WrestleManiac]

The truth is all babyfaces should get sympathy. Just think back. This is why there is heat in every match. The babyface gets beat up and, if we sympathise with him, we will cheer when he overcomes his opponent.

As for the cancer thing.... thats a little over the line don't you think? I mean... I don't think there is a tastefull way to make money off pretending to have cancer.

 

[waylonmercy]

I, personally, wouldn't be offended if they had that wrestler touring hospitals and bringing cancer patients to WWE events and having on their website a link to donate to cancer research and at the end have the wrestler announce he/she no longer has cancer. WWE prides themselves for their involvment in the make a wish foundation. This would be a great way to garner POSITIVE publicity. When they ran the Billy/Chuck marriage angle GLAAD presented Billy & Chuck a wedding gift on some show which was a gesture WWE should have used to garner positive publicity. Instead they had Billy & Chuck a week or two later be grossed out about the thought of marriage and said it was a joke that they were getting married.

I understand that people are going to think that the WWE is doing this in poor taste just to make money but there are movies and television shows that deal with these fictitious situations on screen for the exact same reasons. Would it be in poor taste if the WWE did such an angle to raise awareness, educate and to use their name to generate money for research?

 

[Billie Jean]

I, personally, would love to see if WWE done any story lines or such to show wrestlers emotions. Like a previous poster said, men should not cry, except in private, but for anyone to say that they have never showed their emotion out publicly weather it be through tears, or anger or something of this such would be such a lie. It could also be a great way to get a wrestler over as either a heel or a face. Obviously this would be tears representing face and anger representing the heel.

One of the most personal and most powerful promos of all time, in my opinion, was when Shawn Michaels had "lost his smile", this relay made a connection. I relay thought that this may have been the end of his career if I was a normal watcher round the time of 1996. This, I think, is a great example of how to get a wrestler over using emotion as it relay solidified Michaels promo cutting ability to show how versatile he could be.

Through, as someone said, using a wrestlers real life problems could reely be putting you on a slippery slope. Like most things, bad things and negative things should be left un-said.

Originally posted by waylonmercy

What about a wrestler who in GOOD taste is diagnosed with cancer and has to go through chemotherapy. If WWE does it right which is rare they could have that wrestler go to hospitals to bring light of people who have cancer and have on the WWE website a donation options and have the wrestler beat the cancer.

I can see what you are trying to say here and I actually like your thinking. I just think, weather it is real or not, that cancer is too much of a touchy subject to do a storyline on. Through, in WWE, we have seen some ludicrous things, so I would never rule it out.

Good thread.

 

[Midnite Express 2009]

Wow, are you serious? Cancer? That's one of the most deadly and seemingly incurable dieases known to man, EVER. Having an angle like this would be the death toll for the WWE and wrestling in general. No one in their right mind would work this program whatsoever, IMO. To "pretend" a person (wrestler or otherwise) has cancer is a direct insult to the hundreds of thousands of lives everyday who batte this, their friends and family and most of all, the people who buy into this angle. It's a terrible idea. People do time in prison for stuff like that.
Having someone feel sorry for the sake of feeling sorry is low class and just God-awful. I would completely stop watching wrestling forever if this ever happened.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

Wow, are you serious? Cancer? That's one of the most deadly and seemingly incurable dieases known to man, EVER. Having an angle like this would be the death toll for the WWE and wrestling in general. No one in their right mind would work this program whatsoever, IMO. To "pretend" a person (wrestler or otherwise) has cancer is a direct insult to the hundreds of thousands of lives everyday who batte this, their friends and family and most of all, the people who buy into this angle. It's a terrible idea. People do time in prison for stuff like that.
Having someone feel sorry for the sake of feeling sorry is low class and just God-awful. I would completely stop watching wrestling forever if this ever happened.

I still have mixed feelings about the cancer storyline, but not from a standpoint of being "distasteful". Rather, I would worry about it getting over with the audience.

But I am curious to hear your thoughts on the number of TV dramas in which actors portray cancer patients. Are they also "insulting the hundreds of thousands of lives everyday who battle this"?

I honestly want to take my Reality and Anti-Kayfabe Sticks and beat them both over the number of fans who say they are smarks, but in reality act like marks when they say stuff like this.

With your concern about it getting over with the audience, like I said, I agree with you on as it is a concern. As far as it being "distasteful" and an "insult" .... please get with the times.

 

[The_Real_WrestleManiac]

I am not a smark or a mark. It is distastefull. The difference is many storylines in wrestling are based on reality and many fans of wresting can not tell which are real and which are storyline. There are people, especially children, that will tune in to support a person they think is dying.

 

[Chill]

'Sympathetic' storylines can be a great way of getting the audience emotionally involved in the product and so from that standpoint I support them. However, I'm not so sure about the proposed cancer storyline, it may be a bit too complex for a wrestling program and WWE would have to be very careful in how they handled it because (obviously) cancer is a sore subject for a lot of people.

Vince would need to make sure he didn't handle the stroyline in the same manner as he did other sensitive issues such as the exploitation of Eddie Guerrero's death, otherwise it would probably be recieved in a hostile manner.

Nonetheless, a cancer storyline could be interesting but given that wrestling is meant to provide a sense of escapism (supposedly), I think it's probably best they steer clear of it. It's too complex for a wrestling story in my opinion.

Although, Lord Sidious made a good point in that a cancer storyline (in a make believe wrestling show) may not necessarily be 'distasteful' just because it is a sensitive issue...many TV shows use the disease as an intrical theme and they aren't normally taken in bad taste.

Overall though I think sympathetic stories can be a great way of engaging the audience if handled correctly...

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I am not a smark or a mark. It is distastefull.

If you want to respond to my comments, then feel free to answer the question.

Do you feel that when actors on TV sitcoms portray cancer patients, do you feel that this is an insult to "real" people who have cancer?

The difference is many storylines in wrestling are based on reality and many fans of wresting can not tell which are real and which are storyline.

That really is their problem. All I can say is that these fans need to grow the fuck up and understand that what they are watching is a TV show, not reality.

Vince has admitted that his product is a work well over 10 years ago. When asked "what percentage of his audience he believes thinks wrestling is real", he replied "2%". Now, does it makes sense to coddle to 2% of your audience or the other 98% of the audience?

Now, where as it should be noted that I think it is probably a little higher than 2%, in reality it probably is no more than 8-10%. So the lame logic applies.

What honestly is the problem with fans not understanding this?

There are people, especially children, that will tune in to support a person they think is dying.

And what about children who saw Old Yeller get shot because he had rabies? Or children that heard Bambi's mother get shot on the famous Disney animation?

I'm really tired of the excuses.

You need to treat wrestling just like any other TV sitcom because that is exactly what it is. It isn't real and people need to start accepting this.

Come to think of it, maybe Hornswoggle is an appropriate "Goo Goo Ga Ga" character for some of the adults out there, who obviously want to keep telling themselves that "it's fake" by day, and "it's REAL" by night.

"It's still REAL to me, DAMN IT!!"

You keep hearing "My intelligence is insulted. My intelligence is insulted." Well sadly many of these people are the ones that insult their very own intelligence.

 

[The_Real_WrestleManiac]

and I think you need to understand that there are huge differences in "sitcoms" (as well as any other show on tv) and wrestling. Yes, wrestling is a work. Everyone knows this (even the children I mentioned). If a wrestler is hurt they would acknowledge it on TV. If an actor on a sitcom is hurt they would not. If an actor had cancer in real life they would not acknowledge it on TV. If a wrestler had cancer in real life they would most likely acknowledge it on TV.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

and I think you need to understand that there are huge differences in "sitcoms" (as well as any other show on tv) and wrestling. Yes, wrestling is a work. Everyone knows this (even the children I mentioned). If a wrestler is hurt they would acknowledge it on TV. If an actor on a sitcom is hurt they would not. If an actor had cancer in real life they would not acknowledge it on TV. If a wrestler had cancer in real life they would most likely acknowledge it on TV.

I am going to ask this question one more time, and maybe you will actually answer the question. It really is a simple yes/no question.

When actors on TV sitcoms portray cancer patients, do you feel that this is an insult to "real" people who have cancer?

 

[RVDgurl]

I'm absolutely in favor of sympathetic storylines.

I am in favor of ANY type of storyline that elicits emotion from the audience, as that is the key to drawing fans in and forming a connection with the product.

Anything that makes viewers excited, sad, laugh, angry, confused, etc. Compelling storylines that makes the audience actually care about the performers as opposed to sticking any two guys in a match, who the audience could care less about. If the company and it's loyalist smarks want the fans to get excited and actually "be a good crowd" (like I see so many smark fans bitch about), you need to understand that you can't put the cart before the horse.

If you want the fans to care about the match, they have to first care about the participants involved. That is where the Creative Department earns Failing and Near Failing grades from me.

This is exactly it. Stoylines are supposed to make the crowds feel something. Anything. People can laugh, cry, scream, love or hate- it doesn't matter as long as they feel something. The whole point of wrestling is for the fan to care about a wrestler. Storylines that create emotion are the most effective and genuine way to get the fans to care about a wrestler. Which in turns makes the fans care about the matches that said wrestler is involved in.

I'm sorry, but the ROH bots who expect fans to cheer and boo wrestlers with zero personality and base their reactions solely and ONLY on the wrestlers' quality of matches, just aren't living in reality with the Casual Fanbase.

Well....you had me until this. This is absolute rubbish. Do some homework on ROH instead of buying into the kool aid that some people sell. ROH runs on angles and storylines just like any other wrestling company.

 

[The Doctor]

Sympathetic storylines can work very well provided they are done well, in good taste, and aren't turned into sickly sweet Very Special Episodes. If they are based on real events, they could work extremely well provided it doesn't become overly sentimental or ridiculously over-the-top.

 

[Tastycles]

While I don't think that there's really anything particularly offensive about having a wrestler with cancer, it doesn't really make sense in a wrestling context unless you do trivialise it. You can't blame anyone for cancer, and unless you have some sort of ridiculous "evil radiologist" angle, then there's not really a fight there at the end. The only thing that would work is a "he's finally fighting again" kind of match, but that would simply involve keeping someone out of the ring for ages, shave their head and then have them return with the only benefit of an emotional win. It seems a bit too much effort for minimal pay off.

That's obviously just one storyline, and the idea as a whole isn't a bad one. The problem lies in that wrestling is all about conflict, obviously, and angles and stories that don't end there or get there by ridiculous means aren't really beneficial to the product. Most dramatic storylines that could go this way have been done at some stage or another, and they weren't that bad, so in short, I wouldn't be against dramatic angles, but there has to be a little thought brought in, otherwise wrestling will become a second rate soap opera.

 

[Dave]

I remember WWE would tell parents future storylines and what their goal was from it in teaching the views.

I am curious though what your feelings are with regards to sympathetic scenarios being portrayed by wrestlers and would you be more interested?

Say a wrestler suffers an injury and isntead of being written off television they come on tv and announce they may have to retire and have the wrestler break down in tears.

What about a wrestler who in GOOD taste is diagnosed with cancer and has to go through chemotherapy. If WWE does it right which is rare they could have that wrestler go to hospitals to bring light of people who have cancer and have on the WWE website a donation options and have the wrestler beat the cancer.

I am sure some people will HATE this and some may not but I am curious would you be more interested in the product if you have more dramatic scenarios that evoke sympathy?

Don't get me wrong, sympathetic story lines are good but the ones you have suggested are pretty horrific.

The crying wrestler was pretty much done by Shawn Michaels last year and to be honest, I pretty much hated it from start to finish. I mean, I watch wrestling to be entertained and watch matches that grip me. I don't want wrestling to see some one who is supposed to be brick hard, break down on live TV. I didn't buy into Shawn Michaels then and I doubt I would buy into another one if WWE were to push it my way.

The cancer one is just horrible. I mean, I can see where you are coming from but that is where the line is. You cannot pretend to have a deadly disease just to get yourself over. Think of all the flak they would get from sufferers for lying about a disease just for storyline purposes. Even if they set up a charity for it, it still wouldn't help because people would think that they are making light of the disease.

I don't buy into them, to be honest.