Turning a Wrestler Heel/Babyface: Death of a Character?

[D-Man]

Obviously, I'm frequently reading different threads in different sections on this forum. I come across many topics of discussion in my travels. Questionable pushes, complaint threads, PPV discussion... I think it's safe to say that I've seen it all. But the most redundant topic that I come across has got to be discussion about specific wrestlers turning heel/face. When it comes to this topic, opinions are like ass holes: everyone's got one. While many WZ posters make great points when suggesting superstars' face/heel turns, I don't think that you all put enough thought into what you're actually suggesting. Allow me to explain.

Ever since the PG Era began, the WWE has made a habit of drawing a fine line between the persona of a heel and a babyface. Behind-the-scenes rules have been put in place to ensure that the audience cheer a babyface and boo a heel.

For example, heels are no longer allowed to have a catchy ring entrance, hand-gestures, or anything else that identifies or catches on with the audience. They are strictly supposed to be bad guys with a lack of appeal for the purpose of keeping the audience from "liking" them. Also, they take on a bit of a "mean streak" to keep them acting like bad guys.

Babyfaces are just the opposite. They have nothing that even resembles a "mean streak." They are encouraged to do whatever it takes to gain "appeal" from the audience. The more the audience catches on, the better the babyface is doing to get over with the audience.

Now, there are many occasions where the wrestler is doing such a great job as a babyface or heel that it only makes sense to turn them to the latter. For example, Randy Orton and his RKO gained so much appeal as a heel that the WWE felt it was necessary to turn him into a babyface character. Another example would be when MVP was at his hottest as a heel (after his feud with Matt Hardy) the WWE felt it necessary to change him into a babyface.

This brings me to the point of this thread...

The crowd cries out for a wrestler to change his/her persona but never takes into consideration the magnitude of the changes they are asking for. If they want a heel to change into a babyface, they are asking a character to lose their sinister and dry nature, put a smile on their face, create a hand gesture and a few catch phrases, and leave the appeal they attracted in the dust. In the same sense, when we ask for a babyface to turn heel, we're going to lose the redundant use of the same factors I just mentioned.

Over the past few years, because of the factors and rules that the WWE has put in place in order to properly distinguish babyfaces from heels, babyface and heel turns have been killing the WWE's characters. Examples of this are as follows:

MVP
As I previous mentioned, he was white hot after his feud with Matt Hardy. The WWE knew the crowd was taking a liking to him so they decided to turn him babyface in the angle where he lost his pyro and support of Teddy Long on Smackdown. He began a long losing streak and was supposed to gain the crowd's support during his comeback. Since this babyface turn made drastic changes in his character's personality, the crowd lost interest in him. Now he's in babyface limbo.

Mark Henry
I don't care how many people think he's "shit." The guy was a monster on the reincarnation of ECW. When his music hit and he walked towards the ring with his mean-streak in tow, the crowd know that (just like his music says) "someone's gonna get their ass kicked." Due to the pops he received during that time period, the WWE decided that turning him babyface was a good idea. Man, were they wrong. Once Henry began donning the Kool-Aid tights and smiling on his way to the ring, he lost every bit of appeal that he worked so hard to gain. Now he can join the MVP club for dying babyfaces.

And everyone's favorite...

John Cena
This one could go both ways. Some feel that his babyface turn killed his appeal. But judging by the buyrates of PPV's and merchandise sales, it seemed to give him a whole new life. Now he's the top superstar and the face of the WWE. However, this has split his crowd appeal dramatically. When he was "Wordlife" Cena, even though he was the WWE's top heel, everyone enjoyed his work. But he had so many catchphrases, hang gestures, and likability as a heel that the WWE was forced to turn him babyface. But in doing so, the WWE stripped away every bit of appeal he had as a heel except for his "You can't see me" catchphrase. It was both a blessing and a curse.

Here's my question for discussion: Do you feel that babyface or heel turns are mostly beneficial towards characters or hurtful?

NOTE: This is not a thread for discussion of John Cena turning heel. If you do not wish to discuss the topic stated in the boldfaced question, then do not post in here. Spam will not be tolerated, which includes posts that attempt to derail the original topic.

 

[Ferbian]

It truly depends on how it's handled D. Considering some truly could use a heel or a face turn, some have definitely benefited from being turned. However some have definitely been hurt by turning.

It's all about how the crowd reacts to it, and how they welcome the turn. If it's handled properly, as well as if it's handled steadily. Triple H is one that is arguably successful in turning both ways if you ask me. While a guy like MVP will most likely get killed once again by turning heel, like he did with his face turn.

Also I guess you could say it depends on the time you're turned, and the momentum you have going into the turn. If you're a lower mid-card wrestler who turns face from heel, nobody will really care. But if you're the top heel that turned face after the momentum of winning a world title against another big heel. Or for that sake a CM Punk like turn, after the champion had truly been chasing the championship, wanting to regain it so eagerly, only to have the dreams torn away by a championship contract.

All these kind of things will determine what makes, or breaks your turn.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Ah, I have a few schools of thought here. I got D-Man's e-mail on this thread on my way to pick up lunch, and as I waited for the freight train to finish passing, I had time to cogitate a response.

I base my opinions of heel and face turns after certain all-time great film characters.

The Darth Vader Rule

This, to me, is far and away the most effective turning strategy possible. The Darth Vader rule starts with a character who is largely a babyface (or in Cena's and Hogan's case, a babyface for the more critical part of their career, as both were originally heels for a cup of coffee) and create this massively successful, though flawed, hero. Cena's flaw is that he tries to often take on more than he can handle and doesn't pick his battles. Austin's flaw was that his mouth often got him into more trouble than he could handle. The Rock's flaw was that he was an egomaniac. Savage's flaw was jealousy.

From there, when the crowd sympathizes with and cares about the character (see - emotionally invested), some major, dramatic event occurs that rips the character away from the fans and makes him into a full-vested and partially evil heel. Hogan had the nWo. Austin had Wrestlemania 17 against the Rock and the Invasion. Bret Hart had the arrival of Austin. The Rock had the formation of the Corporation. Savage saw Hogan walking away holding Elizabeth.

As that character embarks on the heel character long-term, the fans begin to respect and sympathize with the character, especially as some form of sympathy or a tie to his or her past comes to light. It enables the character to reconcile and earn forgiveness, sometimes becoming more popular than ever before. The Rock after he was booted from the Corporation. Hogan at Wrestlemania 18. Savage reunited with Elizabeth. You get the idea.

The Darth Vader face --> heel --> face technique is highly effective with major stars.

The Michael Corleone Rule

This rule involves a babyface character who, once power and success come to fruition, begin to devolve into a form of controlled madness, often due to a fatal flaw. Edge is a terrific example. He was an uber popular babyface for a long while, but he was twisted by jealousy and fear that he would never break through and earn his stripes. Triple H was warped by his selfish desire to possess the WWF Title.

Now there is nothing saying there cannot be redemption for the character down the line, but for the noteworthy part of their career, it's only the face-to-heel dynamic we're concerned with.

The Ivan Drago Rule

Here, we have a character who starts off as a heel, but for whatever reason, turns his back on his old ways and shows a degree of sympathy / respectability. Maybe they are sick of someone else holding the strings (Kamala, Abyss) or maybe they just get sick of seeing harm done to the innocent (The Undertaker's first turn against Jake Roberts).

The Jigsaw Rule

A new one. This involves a character who was quasi-relevant as a face, but felt the need to "serve a higher purpose" by punishing people "for their own good. CM Punk and Right to Censor are great examples of The Jigsaw Rule.

What do all of these rules have in common? Each of the characters (hence the reason they become iconic in Hollywood) has plausability and a fatal, driving flaw.

What kills a character is when they are turned numerous times, often without reason, strictly because creative is just trying to make them work. Paul Wight has been an obvious victim of this. Kane is another. Mark Henry is another. These are consistent performers who just seem to never have long-term momentum and as a result, are turned far too regularly and with no explanation or build-up.

 

[Viola Moonlight]

The most beneficial way for a wrestler to turn is when the opportunity presents itself and literally begs for it. It all depends on the situation, and there are many things to take into account such as:

• Storyline
• Gimmick
• Length of face/heel run
• Crowd response
• Success
• Potential foes
• Time left working in the company

... the list just keeps going on. Essentially here, if there is a combination of three or more, then the turn could be considered something wise. CM Punk would be a great example here for a successful turn. He had been a face for a few years and began losing momentum/interest with the crowd, essentially lost in the shuffle. Bam... he wins MITB and goes after a championship held by a face whose character is the complete opposite of Punk's. The obvious thing would be to turn Punk into a heel as there is so much potential for success and new storylines. Look at it today... the Straight-Edge Messiah gimmick has been heavily praised and that's not because he came from ROH. He earned out respects as someone who love to hate. In a review, Punk needed this to stay relevant and allow his character to run it's course. Another quick example to use via comparison would be Batista. FAR too long as a heel, Dave didn't want to continue as a face and the situation with turning on his long time friend Mysterio came to fruition.

In the same token, for CM Punk to turn from his current heel state into a face character would be quite impossible considering his character being straight-edge. Let's say that it's a time when his heel persona became stale. They have explored all the avenues that Punk can do as a face and he has achieved the maximum success in that area, thus the reason for the heel turn in the first place. What does the E do here... they have to kill the character they created for something totally re-vamped, old (done before) or a new gimmick entirely. It's like what Edge has recently experienced... when he returned from injury he came back as the face Rated R Superstar character. There is nothing that this character can do as a babyface that could work other than cheap jokes, which won't get him far. His psychotic state is something that heels would use, not a face... ever. Unless Edge created a new persona, he wasn't going anywhere but back to his old self... which has evidently been hurtful for him.


There are so many factors that the topic can't be discussed in general without giving examples. You'd have to analyse them all, but you'd get the same gist. The character, the person playing him and the situation for both of them all come to play different roles here... some are more influencing than others. All I can say is that the turn has to be logical for it to work.

 

[The Scarred One]

Ah, I have a few schools of thought here. I got D-Man's e-mail on this thread on my way to pick up lunch, and as I waited for the freight train to finish passing, I had time to cogitate a response.

I base my opinions of heel and face turns after certain all-time great film characters.

The Darth Vader Rule

This, to me, is far and away the most effective turning strategy possible. The Darth Vader rule starts with a character who is largely a babyface (or in Cena's and Hogan's case, a babyface for the more critical part of their career, as both were originally heels for a cup of coffee) and create this massively successful, though flawed, hero. Cena's flaw is that he tries to often take on more than he can handle and doesn't pick his battles. Austin's flaw was that his mouth often got him into more trouble than he could handle. The Rock's flaw was that he was an egomaniac. Savage's flaw was jealousy.

From there, when the crowd sympathizes with and cares about the character (see - emotionally invested), some major, dramatic event occurs that rips the character away from the fans and makes him into a full-vested and partially evil heel. Hogan had the nWo. Austin had Wrestlemania 17 against the Rock and the Invasion. Bret Hart had the arrival of Austin. The Rock had the formation of the Corporation. Savage saw Hogan walking away holding Elizabeth.

As that character embarks on the heel character long-term, the fans begin to respect and sympathize with the character, especially as some form of sympathy or a tie to his or her past comes to light. It enables the character to reconcile and earn forgiveness, sometimes becoming more popular than ever before. The Rock after he was booted from the Corporation. Hogan at Wrestlemania 18. Savage reunited with Elizabeth. You get the idea.

The Darth Vader face --> heel --> face technique is highly effective with major stars.

The Michael Corleone Rule

This rule involves a babyface character who, once power and success come to fruition, begin to devolve into a form of controlled madness, often due to a fatal flaw. Edge is a terrific example. He was an uber popular babyface for a long while, but he was twisted by jealousy and fear that he would never break through and earn his stripes. Triple H was warped by his selfish desire to possess the WWF Title.

Now there is nothing saying there cannot be redemption for the character down the line, but for the noteworthy part of their career, it's only the face-to-heel dynamic we're concerned with.

The Ivan Drago Rule

Here, we have a character who starts off as a heel, but for whatever reason, turns his back on his old ways and shows a degree of sympathy / respectability. Maybe they are sick of someone else holding the strings (Kamala, Abyss) or maybe they just get sick of seeing harm done to the innocent (The Undertaker's first turn against Jake Roberts).

The Jigsaw Rule

A new one. This involves a character who was quasi-relevant as a face, but felt the need to "serve a higher purpose" by punishing people "for their own good. CM Punk and Right to Censor are great examples of The Jigsaw Rule.

What do all of these rules have in common? Each of the characters (hence the reason they become iconic in Hollywood) has plausability and a fatal, driving flaw.

What kills a character is when they are turned numerous times, often without reason, strictly because creative is just trying to make them work. Paul Wight has been an obvious victim of this. Kane is another. Mark Henry is another. These are consistent performers who just seem to never have long-term momentum and as a result, are turned far too regularly and with no explanation or build-up.

Those are some brilliant observations, dude! I applaud you. But I have some additonal characters that can translate to face and heel turns.

The Jason Voorhees Rule

You have a face character who has done nothing wrong but, in once sense of another, is considered misunderstood or an outsider. Usually a heel would point out the fact to the point that the face in question just snaps and goes apeshit. They end up doing this because they think people don't understand them and disregard what they could understand because they are different. Kane, when he lost his mask, is a good example of this when he felt people were making fun of him because of his appearance. This mostly would apply for monster heels like Kane, Big Show and Abyss or freakish wrestlers like Raven, Vampiro or Goldust.

The Machete Rule

This is based on the Machete movie coming out as I couldn't really think of one. But this would apply to a heel who is betrayed by someone close to him and pretty much beaten within an inch of his life. After some time, he comes back to get his revenge on his former allies. The Big Show back in WCW is a good example when he was kicked out of the NWO and wanted to gain vengeance.