Eric Weddle
rOOkie 
Posts 43
Registered 3-10-2011 Location San Diego CA Member Is Offline Mood: Charged Up
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 04:58 PM |
|
|
PPV's A Big Blowoff or More Questions??
I have been reading a lot of the comments left by our posters on the SummerSlam topic regarding the ending. It seems a lot of the people are turned
off that there is now a lot more questions regarding the title. They are upset there was no big Payoff to the Cena/Punk feud. And now there are more
questions. This to me makes for great business. Wrestlemania 17 is regarded as one of the best PPV's of all time. The ending to that PPV saw
Austin turn heel and continue the Austin/Rock feud instead of ending.
So do you guys prefer when a PPV ends a feud or when it gives us a swerve with more questions?
|
|
|
Devineman
Fella 
Posts 453
Registered 10-7-2006 Location UK Member Is Offline Mood: Cynical
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 05:08 PM |
|
|
It entirely depends on what PPV it is. If it's the Elimination Chamber, I don't expect everything to be settled, but at
Wrestlemania/Summerslam, I would expect some things to be completed yes.
Swerving the fans is what writers do when they worked out that the fucked up the build.
|
|
|
C.MontgomeryPunk
Man of a Thousand Holds 
Posts 1700
Registered 1-6-2010 Member Is Offline Mood: ButtViper-y
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 06:43 PM |
|
|
Wrestlemania doesn't even blow-off feuds as Backlash is mostly return matches. I usually look for much better, longer matches on PPV's
and less "sports entertainment" skits and promos.
If folks wanted a big blow-off from Summerslam they knew they weren't getting it from the Punk/Cena match going in because there was no way that
was going to be their final encounter-type match where winner is crowned undisputed champion and moves on to another challenger.
I remember Eddie Guerrero.
|
|
|
DevilSoprano
Pee Wee's Plaything 
Posts 5024
Registered 11-16-2002 Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 06:53 PM |
|
|
My issue is Cena/Punk and HHH by extension didn't need a fourth and fifth person involved at all.
|
|
|
Flash
Man of a Thousand Holds
Posts 1016
Registered 4-22-2005 Location Brantford, Ontario Member Is Offline Mood:
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 08:15 PM |
|
|
I've always kind of preferred when WM was the culmination of a years worth of stories, with Summer Slam being kind of a wrap up/reset in its own
right.
Monthly PPV's should, IMO, offer some kind of resolution to some of the lower card feuds, and the two guys who just faced one another should be
kept away from each other in weekly matches for a bit to help cement that this was the ending.
In saying this, it hasn't been that way in a long time (maybe since the birth of backlash?), if it ever truly was since the birth of the monthly
PPV's that we got blow off finishes instead of story beats at PPV's.
I have a hard time believing that anyone who paid for Summer Slam last night tuned in expecting a complete resolution to the current Punk-Cena
storyline as given the bigger issues (HHH, the promise Rock title match, ADR MITB) I think people had to know there would be a number of loose threads
or an emphasis on "story" (I mean really, when have we had a special ref match that went right?). Punk went over in enough of a way that it was a
strong win for him (not knowing Cena's foot was on the rope) and also sufficiently protected Cena. It also did a good job of resetting the
landscape for good or bad.
Like I said in my first post on SS last night, I think its getting to the point where we can't judge whether or not the finishes to these
PPV's are good or bad until we get some distance from them and see how they play out.
For example; Punk's MITB win and the good by kiss... absolutely awesome moment... a moment lessened a few weeks later when Punk was already back
(The ongoing story is something I'm still enjoying, but that moment is a bit damaged).
Tonight we'll find out if that was a blowoff between Punk and Cena, and where they go with the rest of the stuff... from there I think we can
decide if its the end of the book (which would be kind of a shitty ending) or just the halfway mark (which could be kind of awesome). I was
disappointed by both the match and the ADR finish, but it did get the wheels spinning about where they could go with it... So I guess time will tell.
|
|
|
S Kid J E T S 48
Man of a Thousand Holds 
Posts 1651
Registered 10-12-2007 Location New York Member Is Offline Mood: You Know It
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 09:38 PM |
|
|
PPVs can be like season finales in regular shows...sometimes they resolve a story, but sometimes they shape a new story, completely start a new story,
keep a story going, etc. It's just another chapter in whatever they're telling. In theory, a pay-per-view is sort of the fans saying
they enjoyed the previous month or two's stories that you got for free each week. If I enjoy it like I've enjoyed the previous few
weeks' TV, then I couldn't care less if I didn't get the correct amount of closure I needed...it just sets me up to watch even more
in the future. It's not like at the end of a PPV I'm not going to watch wrestling anymore for a while...its on the next day...why
can't it just go on and on and on and end when the story feels right to end...not just on an arbitrary 3-4 week block?
As for Wrestlemania and Summerslam, they basically exist as times when the biggest matches happen rather than end and start points for feuds.
It's not like we have a huge break from PPVs from March to June/August and from August to November anymore...so why do those have to exist to
start and end feuds...any PPV can do that. And WWE would be stupid to end and start things all at the same time. You want feuds to end at different
times so each PPV gets bought. If Backlash and Night of Champions were always the PPVs with beginnings of feuds, who the hell would necessarily buy
those PPVs unless they had something like Punk/Cena I headlining it? They'd wait until the concluding PPVs. That's good for one or two
big buyrates, but its not good for any sort of consistency. Christian and Edge ended last night, but Punk/Cena probably just moved onto a new chapter
of their story...I like that...a little of everything.
FREE ZACK RYDER
|
|
|
Firebreaker Chip
Showstopper
Posts 881
Registered 1-21-2004 Location WCW Special Forces Member Is Offline Mood: Wolveriffic
|
| posted on 8-15-2011 at 11:51 PM |
|
|
I am going to answer with a cop-out answer and that it really should be both for the Big Four PPV's. Wrestling storylines should closely mimic
real-life in that they seamlessly transition from one angle to the next logically. My favorite example of this is from Wrestlewar '89. Flair
goes over Steamboat clean in a tremendous match to end the feud. The immediately afterwards they set-up the killer Flair-Funk angle in the post-match
progression. The goal should always be to bring closure to one angle while transitioning to the next angle in a logical fashion. The WWE has gotten
away from this model in the past years with Backlash and Extreme Rules being rematch heavy. Couple this with discontinuity between main event angles
(like the transition between Truth and Punk challenges to Cena) and storylines no longer feel organic but full of hot-shots and shoe-horning. I hope
we get back to the days of long-term continuity when each main event set up the next main event in perpetuity.
Steiner Brothers vs Sting & Lex Luger
|
|
|
