Are WWE too focused on the past?

Hi everyone,

Just a quick thought, are WWE trying so hard to recreate the past that they lose sight of the present? I wonder about this because on RAW, you have CM Punk, the anti-authority guy going against the big boss who's showing signs of corruption. Austin-McMahon all over again?

On Smackdown (for the past few months anyway, not sure about going forward), you have Orton, the sadistic, does anything he wants face against the crybaby heel, Christian. HHH vs Jericho 2002-ish anyone? All it needs is a HIAC match and a career ending ref bump.

I'm not saying any of these angles are a bad thing, in fact I'm enjoying seeing both develop, I just can't help getting a sense of Déja Vú, like I've seen it all before. And before anyone says it, I know wrestling is a collection of age-old tales adapted to the audience of the time, but I really do think that with all the money WWE have available, they'd be able to hire some creative staff who are...well, erm...creative.

Obviously there are other guys on both rosters who are going through re-hashed storylines too, but I think other than Cena-Del Rio, these are the two most talked about.

Anyways, not looking to argue with folk, just putting across the opinion of a bored fella on a wednesday night (football bores me to tears and the mrs is out so no...you know...

you go from "these angles are old rehased repeats of the past" to "im not saying there a bad thing im really enjoying them"

With that in mind im not really to sure what to make of your article, you seam to be sitting on the fence a bit. Do you think these storylines are re-used and losing sight of the present or are you really enjoying them?

I think with any angle you could go back 50 years into the wrestling industry and find a storyline thats been reused, rehased or redevloped in the present time, its just part of it all. I wouldnt say these particular angles that you mentioned are excatly like anything we have seen before but yes they do bare some comparisons however i think the same could be said of most plots today.

In answer to your question is wwe stuck in the past...imo no, the current storylines esp the punk centric angle is the wwe trying to cater to the anti-cena fans, let all the little jimmys hve their hero and the mature fans and iwc can have theres. I think there is a little something for everyone watching and i cant remember th last time wwe were doing that.

How far can Pro Wrestling go? Wrestling has been recycling storylines since the day it started

Sorry, I didn't mean to come across as having conflicting opinions, but the fact is I AM enjoying the angles, I just feel I'd enjoy them more if I hadn't seen them 10-15 years ago. Also, as I've said, I know angles get recycled all the time, but to me, these two are way too similar to just be coincidence, I personally think it's WWE trying to recreate their most successful era, maybe not in terms of money but certainly in terms of mainstream exposure.

Austin/McMahon peaked in 98/99 and Jericho/HHH was in 02 though

So 10-15 years ago?

Also it should be noted that the Austin/McMahon feud was done 10 years earlier with Bad News and Jack Tunney, it was hot on TV and was supposed to be very well recieved at houses, Tunney went on the road throughout the Summer of 88 because of it, Hogan and Savage wanted the Mania 5 main event spot though and it got dropped, Bad News Brown was a blueprint for the Stone Cold character

Chris Jericho was just doing the whineybitch heel the same way Owen Hart did it in 94

I understand all that, I'm not trying to deny it. All I'm saying is this: Is it time for WWE to get a bit more creative and come up with something new?

There must be something out there that hasn't been done. This is like the South Park episode where the Simpsons have already done everything

If the WWE suddenly come up with something totally unique to Pro Wrestling then it will be the first time in a long time, whats not been done?

If I knew that, I'd have a highly paid job at Titan Towers.

Thing is, the writers are from LA and their speciality is soaps/sit-coms/drama, oot wrestling, you as a wrestling fan would be more likely to think of something

Not neccesarily. I think it was Mick Foley who said "wrestling is just a soap opera with chairshots". If Corrie can stay relevant, so can the E.

I think someone once sad (Jim Cornet perhaps) that stories have a 7 year life cycle. In other words, your fan base only sticks around for 7 years and you can then use the story again (except it ill be picked up by the IWC!)

I think they should bring back the Billy and Chuck story with Santino and Big Zeke

Aaron if you really think that then fair enough, I think Foley must have just fallen throughta cage to come up with that BS, Yeah Maccs Cornette believes in the 7 year rule

One thing that I think is a really unique and interesting idea is the guy who's putting together the wrestling series involving wrestlers but based mainly around the story and will run for a pre agreed set number of parts. Colt Cabana has already signed up and I hope a few more do too.

Here is my opinion why Pro Wrestling, mainly WWE can't be compared to a soap opera

the-gaffer wrote:I think its a flawed view point to compare it to Eastenders or any other soap opera, for a start Eastenders or any other soap isn't filmed live infront of paying fans who are encouraged to cheer for their favourites, live fan reaction has a massive influence on the direction a Wrestling character or storyline will go in, if 15,000 fans where cheering everything Phil Mitchell said, Eastenders would make him a good guy, Pro Wrestlers, particularly those on TV don't have the luxuary of character protection that soap actors do.