Skip to main content

Question

By
Question for you and the ranters. Are we too harsh on the creative team? With guys like Lagana and Seth Mates on Twitter now and giving the fans an insight to what it was like working with the WWE on creative, it sounds like it wasn't the easiest job and I can see why. They practically are booking 24/7 and i'm sure Vince isn't the easiest guy to work with, so I can understand why everything they shit doesn't turn to gold. After all, can we really even blame them, don't they have to get approval from Vince on most of the script, so this would in turn be Vince just being Vince then right? 
But then I looked at it the other way, I mean when something fails, no one(except the fans) wants to call out creative, it's let's blame (insert scapegoat talent here) and demote them as punishment. Did they really think Zack Ryder was gonna recover from getting his ass kicked by Kane on a weekly basis, cock blocked by John Cena, and friend-zoned by Eve? It's the elephant in the room that no one wants to address.....
So essentially my question is are we gonna be stuck with this type of booking until Vince decides to give it up or a main eventer like Cena or Punk calling them on their bullshit? 

I don't think anyone thinks it's an easy job, but by the same token WWE specifically tries to weed out people who are wrestling fans, so we're left with people who are accustomed to a totally different type of storytelling trying to adapt it to wrestling.  Really, the whole thing has always been based on one person with a strong vision setting a general direction, and then wrestlers basically improvising around that to craft their own "storylines".   The whole "writing team" dynamic just doesn't work and there's never been any evidence that it CAN work in the first place.  

Comments

  1. livingonapearJune 30, 2012 at 10:56 AM

    Whenever I say "creative" I am by and large talking about Vince, Steph, and Hunter.  I know Michael PS Hayes books and there are other pieces to the puzzle, but those are the three I focus on.  I hardly ever blame the actual writers, because I I too have had good ideas smothered because my boss liked to be a character.  It's kind of funny after a while.

    And in the end, it sounds like Vince really is the guy.  But noone is going to blame him, so there you go.  

    ReplyDelete
  2. cultstatusJune 30, 2012 at 11:00 AM

    Stephanie McMahon doesn't seem to get trashed enought, at least on this blog, for how terrible she is at running creative. And why do they need 45 writers to come up with a half dozen 2 minute backstage skits? 

    ReplyDelete
  3. YJ2310June 30, 2012 at 11:33 AM

    Vince should get all the blame, everybody including Stephanie, has to pass things through him. The one thing I do blame on the writers is the corny Cena promos. Even the Rock's material in his last go around wasnt close to what it used to be.

    ReplyDelete
  4. jobber123June 30, 2012 at 11:52 AM

    To me the creative team/writing team is an example of how embarrassed vkm is to be in the rassling business. He thinks that having it written like a "tv show" will help make it something its not. The only thing its done is make the product worse which only makes it seem more low brow.

    My favorite vkm quote is the one he gives all the time where ted turner calls him after buying wcw and says "guess what Vince, I just got in the rasslin business" and vince supposedly tells him " that's great but I'm in the entertainment business "

    Lol I love vince but thats the dumbest thing he's said. Ted turner had 3 major tv channels and a baseball team etc and was absolutely an entertainment mogul. Vince on the other hand, nothing but a wrestling promoter like jim Crockett or paul heyman or bill watts. Guys like gagne and toots mondt are vinces peers. Guys like ted turner are in a whole other atmosphere.

    ReplyDelete
  5. MatazaJune 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM

    Most writers that have left WWE have praised Stephanie and her work for the company.

    ReplyDelete
  6. bignasty96June 30, 2012 at 12:11 PM

    "Are we too harsh on the creative team?"

    No.

    ReplyDelete
  7. cultstatusJune 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM

    http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/1t0m/

    ReplyDelete
  8. Screamworks09June 30, 2012 at 12:54 PM

    It's definitely harder to write wrestling now than it used to be. Back in the days of jobber matches on Superstars all you had to do was book the guys you want to push to beat up nobodies for a few weeks and then schedule two of them to meet at a pay per view. Have a couple of run ins between them to build heat for the match but the selling point was two "established" guys facing one another. Sometimes for titles, which were a big deal back then.

    It's harder now. How do you make John Cena vs The Big Show something people want to see when they've seen it so many times already and they have to interact with one another every week leading up to the match? Not that it's impossible. Steve Austin/Undertaker was something I wanted to see because there was a storyline behind it, or something at stake, even if they'd met multiple times that year alone. It all starts with the characters. Create characters people care about and they'll follow them through anything, even if they've seen it before or know how it's likely to end. But now they just do the easy "if John Cena doesn't win he'll be fired", when we know he either won't be fired, or if he is, it'll be brief and he'll still be on tv every week until he's officially rehired and nothing will be any different in the end than it was in the beginning.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Greg ParksJune 30, 2012 at 12:57 PM

    I think the creative members who have done interviews after their runs have kind of thrown the notion that "WWE doesn't like to hire people who are wrestling fans" out the window. I know that was a "thing" for a long time, but I don't necessarily know that it's really true.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fillip65June 30, 2012 at 1:13 PM

    http://goo.gl/oeWsF

    ReplyDelete
  11. WaylonMercy24June 30, 2012 at 1:50 PM

    Okay, these spam links are really annoying. Why do they keep popping up?

    ReplyDelete
  12. WaylonMercy24June 30, 2012 at 1:53 PM

    Yeah, considering the shit they put on TV every week and considering how passive we've responded to it, I'd say we're not harsh enough on them.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ryan MurphyJune 30, 2012 at 2:26 PM

     I could name five regular posters on here I'd trade for five spammers in a minute. I won't, but I could.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ryan MurphyJune 30, 2012 at 2:31 PM

    I always think that, even with former writers trying to describe the situations, we don't exactly know the creative processes for WWE very well. It seems very byzantine, and of course there are a lot of people involved trying to push a lot of different ideas and trying to win Vince's favor. I'm sure there's more politics involved than we get a sense of, with different writers undercutting other ones and trying to win favor with Vince, Steph & Trips. Plus the writers aren't the same as the bookers, so even if they don't have good ideas for a certain character, they still have to try & push said character. It sounds like a mess, but I bet we really don't get a full sense of the true chaos of it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mar SoloJune 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM

    Why can't they just look at how they did things back in 1997 and just take notes? It's not like they didn't have multiple shows back then either. 

    ReplyDelete
  16. MatazaJune 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM

    I recall an interview from one writer saying none of their ideas even get to Vince 90% of the time. He claimed it goes to Gerwitz and he tends to ignore their ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  17. ChinJune 30, 2012 at 2:48 PM

     *waves*

    ReplyDelete
  18. SHough610June 30, 2012 at 2:56 PM

    1) It's insanely, ridiculously hard... Actually, let's just say it: impossible to come up with 6 hours of original, entertaining program a week every week all year. I'm not saying we should appreciate the shittier parts of WWE but the armchair boomers who think it'd be easy make me laugh. Not to be condescending or dismissive but I went to college and am attempting to make a living as a screenwriter and it's way, way harder than it looks (but that's another rant for another time).
    2) I've long thought Vince was being conservative in his booking in order to keep turning a profit during a slow recovery. The Attitude Era was a result of desperation.
    3) I'm always a but wary of people trashing ex employers. I've never heard a former writer say, "oh yeah, I pushed that with Vince/Stephanie/HHH and it just totally missed the mark" which seems suspect to me.

    ReplyDelete
  19. JordanJune 30, 2012 at 3:22 PM

    Agreed on the 3rd point especially. It's very easy for any ex-creative to say, "We had (insert angle) planned out 5 months in advance, and then Vince came in and changed everything!" because even if that didn't happen, we'll believe that it did.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mar SoloJune 30, 2012 at 3:49 PM

    Please, he was obviously talking about me.

    ReplyDelete
  21. spicollidriverJune 30, 2012 at 4:27 PM

    if someone who Vince sees as "legitimate" would tell him this he would either have a mental breakdown or his head would instantly explode.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thomas MoreyJune 30, 2012 at 4:37 PM

    You are so right.  Its somewhat like trying to do color commentary or play-by-play.  Looks and sounds easy, but it isn't - all you have to do is try it, sober, and letting other people be the judge.

    My main issue with the creative direction of WWE is that they treat it like acting, with scripts, instead of like jazz, where the performers have the latitude to be more creative.  They have a whole staff of people qualified (well, some of them) to contribute to creative, and they don't really let them.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The FujJune 30, 2012 at 4:48 PM

    you think too highly of yourself... just cuz u were down south beating up some midget named.... JUVENTUD?!?

    ReplyDelete
  24. The FujJune 30, 2012 at 4:50 PM

    waitwaitwait...

    where are all the marks on this board that claim to be in "THE BUSINESS!!!" to tell us that we are mark ass trolls... or troll as marks...

    whichevz...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Ryan MurphyJune 30, 2012 at 5:24 PM

    It's none of the above, but you DID call me a troll re: Star Wars the other night, so.....

    ReplyDelete
  26. Davey_Boy_JonesJune 30, 2012 at 6:46 PM

    But wouldn't the problems associated with 1) be solved if they focused on in-ring action a bit more, by giving two or three matches each show a decent amount of time rather than the endless parade of squash matches they've resorted to lately? That'd cut down on the amount of plot the writers have to come up with each week.

    You're definitely right when you say it's impossible to come up with 6 hours of great material every week. Can you imagine tasking the writers of Mad Men, Breaking Bad etc with doing the same? In that sense, I view wrestling a lot like sketch comedy shows: the ratio is never going to be 100% hit to 0% miss, and some segments are going to fall flat. 

    For me, though, the biggest problem is when the stories stop making sense (like the whole Punk/Nash/HHH mess last year) or just end abruptly, without tying up loose ends (Nexus helping Kane bury the Undertaker). As a viewer, that's like the WWE saying to me: "we don't care enough about the product to actually tell a proper narrative." And if they don't care, why should I? Why invest in any characters or stories when there's every chance they'll just be dropped without explanation.

    "Enjoying the slowburn Drew McIntyre face turn, with Kelly Kelly influencing him to become a better person, making him interesting for the first time in ever? To hell with you, we're bored with that now, we're just going to job him out, then he'll disappear altogether. Here's John Cena overcoming some more adversity. Enjoy!"

    ReplyDelete
  27. SHough610June 30, 2012 at 6:49 PM

    You're exactly right about, "if you don't care why should I?" it's frustrating as shit.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mike S.June 30, 2012 at 7:16 PM

    WWE's main problem is that they are focused on being an entertainment company and not a rasslin company. The writters are ridiculous. Gewirtz is an idiot. Michael Hayes is a fossil. Vince has lost his mind. Stephanie needs to take Linda's old job and get off creative. I honestly would be curious to see what the show would look like if Triple H had absolute free reign. I think it would be some wild old shcool shit. WWE is beyond help in the creative department.

    ReplyDelete
  29. JordanJune 30, 2012 at 7:31 PM

    I don't think it's impossible to come up with 6 hours of programming a week, but I would say that it is when your roster is as thin as theirs is and when you insist on using the same central guys on all of those shows. As goofy as it was, NXT was so different than regular WWE programming that it seemed fairly easy to write. Superstars was an awesome show when it was on TV, and it was basically just 2-3 matches in a 1 hour show and they had their own little "superstars" feuds going on. 


    But yeah, I see your point. They can't even fill 2 hours of Smackdown usually without 15-20 minutes of Raw recaps. A simple solution is to not have matches go 3 minutes unless they are flat out squashes. 

    ReplyDelete
  30. JordanJune 30, 2012 at 7:33 PM

    Also, on your second point: Wasn't it Shane who was really influential in the product going more "attitude" style in 97? I think I remember reading he was a huge ECW guy and was always pushing for implementing more of their style.

    ReplyDelete
  31. AmericanWolves02June 30, 2012 at 7:50 PM

    It seems like having longer matches would eliminate some of the hassle on creative to fill 6 hours. Seems like back 2000, 2001, even 2002, each week there'd be 2 or 3 matches that went 10-15 mins. Especially now, it seems like that would make it a lot easier on creative.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Ioan MorrisJune 30, 2012 at 8:38 PM

    Punk was right: while Vince is alive nothing will change. WWE *is* wrestling as far as the general public are concerned - which is amusing considering their insistence to the contrary - and until some competition magically appears we're getting the same old shit week in, week out. Either watch it, or don't. Or, the third and best option, record the programmes and skip through them. You know a Big Show push isn't gonna be enjoyable so don't subject yourself to it.

    Regarding 'Creative', no, I don't particularly feel sorry for them. As far as I can tell, most of them are hacks. Happy to be corrected, but have any former/current WWE writers worked on anything good? It seems a case of too many cooks spoil the broth, except the cooks' only previous training was microwaving a bowl of soup, and the soup was a long out-of-date Cream of VKM. 

    ReplyDelete
  33. Kenny_ChillJune 30, 2012 at 9:24 PM

    I gave this some thought one day and it seemed to me Zack Ryder's story was the sort of story that would build sympathy for a character on a soap opera, which is where most of these writers come from. But it doesn't work in wrestling where the entire point is to build to a physical altercation where the sympathetic character has to overcome the odds to win the day. In other words, while putting a character through the emotional wringer is good drama, it makes for awful wrestling angles.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Tommy_WiseauJune 30, 2012 at 10:58 PM

    You'd have to be a fan to even want to work there. They probably don't want 'wrestling people' booking, they want entertainment writers, but that doesn't mean the writers don't like wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Stuart_ChartockJune 30, 2012 at 11:16 PM

    "Cream of VKM"

    Fuckin' eww.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Stuart_ChartockJune 30, 2012 at 11:17 PM

    Either that, or Trips beating up low-carders for two hours.

    Scratch that, three hours.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Geoff K,June 30, 2012 at 11:24 PM

     I never thought of that in the context of Ryder...excellent point.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Elmo MacheteJune 30, 2012 at 11:45 PM

    skip skop skallywags

    ReplyDelete
  39. Mar SoloJune 30, 2012 at 11:49 PM

    Are you calling me the Chris Jericho of this place? 

    ReplyDelete
  40. spicollidriverJuly 1, 2012 at 3:41 AM

    as far as we know it is safe to say that the company would be in a much better place creatively if Shane was in charge because of the direction he would put the promotion in. ironically, this might be one of the main reasons he ISN'T in charge.

    ReplyDelete
  41. spicollidriverJuly 1, 2012 at 3:45 AM

    and it's also one of the most basic things and valid in all of entertainment. Mike Patton (Mr. Bungle, Fantomas, Faith No More, for those who don't know him) once said something similar about going crazy on stage regarding the people in the audience (something like "if the guys performing don't get excited about their music, why should I?").

    ReplyDelete
  42. Daniel HodgeJuly 1, 2012 at 4:11 AM

    I don't think it's creative's fault completely.  We do have to keep in mind that people are being hired to perform as "tv writer's" as opposed to "wrestling bookers".


    The problem is, wrestling isn't tv: It's comic books.  Vince would get a lot further along to his goals if he hired someone like Peter David as his head writer.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Curtis WilliamsJuly 1, 2012 at 4:25 AM

    Didn't he say that on the Monday Night Wars dvd? 

    ReplyDelete
  44. PhredericJuly 1, 2012 at 5:06 AM

    Sniff...I thought we were e-friends...

    ReplyDelete
  45. PhredericJuly 1, 2012 at 5:07 AM

    Wah, writings hard.  Boo frickin' hoo.  Life's hard, grow a set and tough it out.

    I'm not saying Vince is right or should overwork his people, but these writers bitching about how hard they have it is extremely frustrating.  Sack up.

    ReplyDelete
  46. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 11:25 AM

     Good point -- I don't hear you bitching about being you -- And that must be extremely frustrating...

    ReplyDelete
  47. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 11:26 AM

     Or Kurt Busiek :-)

    ReplyDelete
  48. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 11:38 AM

    The creative team's job isn't to write compelling wrestling but to write compelling TV so you want to buy the PPV to watch compelling wrestling -- It's a pretty simple formula -- Do they succeed? Not really, and it may or may not be their fault -- The McMahons thank Jebus for the IWC though; if it wasn't for you assholes, they'd be bankrupt -- You may hate the product, but fuck if you don't watch it and bitch about it ALL the time -- Some of us don't like it and just don't watch it anymore -- I couldn't even tell you what Albert Del Rio looks like, I just enjoy reading Scott's stuff and buying all of the old school DVD's they put out...

    ReplyDelete
  49. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 11:39 AM

    Oh yeah, and I even like Caliber, even though he hasn't punched anybody in the dick lately...

    ReplyDelete
  50. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 12:20 PM

     I call bullshit to to that first paragraph -- And for the second paragraph, Vince didn't tell Turner that, he's just swinging his dick on camera -- You know he had a very cordial conversation with Ted and probably kissed his ass to see if they could work together and Ted probably politely told him to go fuck himself -- Love the third paragraph -- If Vince hates wrestling so much, why does he keep putting out bad-ass DVD's consisting of wrestling material he spent MILLIONS on acquiring over the years? -- He wants to expand on what he does -- Can you blame him? The dude's an entrepreneur who doesn't think like we do -- I loved Peter David's run on the Hulk -- Do I still love the Hulk? Yep -- Do I read the Hulk now? Nope -- Do I bitch about it on a blog? Nope -- Do I have nothing better to do right now? Nope (sigh) -- Vince, like Ted did, runs a multi-media company -- What part of "multi" do you not get? Ted sold out and got shoved aside -- Vince, clearly, will not...

    ReplyDelete
  51. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 12:21 PM

    That was a reply to Jobber123, BTW...

    ReplyDelete
  52. YJ2310July 1, 2012 at 5:34 PM

     Glad I was the only one thinking of the Playa Haterz Ball.

    ReplyDelete
  53. PhredericJuly 1, 2012 at 5:34 PM

    Oh, my aching ribs.  Hi-frickin-larious.

    ReplyDelete
  54. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 6:29 PM

     Thanks, man -- Should I apply to WWE Creative? If you think I'm funny, why wouldn't everybody else?

    ReplyDelete
  55. PhredericJuly 1, 2012 at 8:00 PM

    Who cares about me?  If you think you're funny, you obviously must be.  Ergo you should spend your time persuading these "wrestlers" to work on your lines, not their "matches" or "promos".  SKITS ARE THE FUTURE!!!

    ReplyDelete
  56. NateNashJuly 1, 2012 at 8:15 PM

     Not sure who cares about you (if it makes you feel any better, I care about you, Phreddy) but I believe you used "ergo" incorrectly, or at least should have used a comma somewhere -- I'm just amused by the fact that you're telling somebody else to "sack up" when you don't seem to know what that really entails -- What, exactly, do you do for a living?

    ReplyDelete
  57. PhredericJuly 1, 2012 at 11:04 PM

    I'm the first to admit that my grammar ain't no good, but you must be pretty delusional if you think the quality of your grammar makes you a better writer.

    I'm a professional nerd.  And I'm pretty sure I used sack up correctly (hint, Imma talkin' about testicles).

    I really fail to see your point, though that is assuming that you have one.

    ReplyDelete
  58. NateNashJuly 2, 2012 at 12:18 AM

     And a professional nerd is what, exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  59. PhredericJuly 2, 2012 at 12:35 AM

    Student, breh.

    ReplyDelete
  60. NateNashJuly 2, 2012 at 12:58 AM

    Breh? Of course you're a student (smacking myself on the forehead) -- Good luck to you, young man -- And yes, I am a better writer than you (for now) -- Keep your head up, your nose down and listen, and you'll be OK...

    ReplyDelete
  61. PhredericJuly 2, 2012 at 1:43 AM

    I appreciate it.

    And why do you assume I'm male?

    ReplyDelete
  62. The FujJuly 2, 2012 at 5:47 AM

    late to the party...

    but it does work in wrestling when u have the payoff.

    payoff being he overcomes being a pussy and starts fighting back or he goes heel cuz if u cant beat them... join them....

    but you have to pay it off somehow. its like the wwe is fucking us without cumming. yes it feels good at first but then you get dry...

    ReplyDelete
  63. The FujJuly 2, 2012 at 5:52 AM

    busiek cant write good fight scenes.

    ReplyDelete
  64. NateNashJuly 2, 2012 at 9:27 AM

    With a name like that? c'mon...

    ReplyDelete
  65. NateNashJuly 2, 2012 at 9:28 AM

     True -- But he can write -- Unlike Bendis...

    ReplyDelete
  66. PhredericJuly 2, 2012 at 3:30 PM

    ...

    Okay, you got me.

    ReplyDelete
  67. The FujJuly 2, 2012 at 3:35 PM

    wait a second!!!

    bendis has the uncanny ability to make any character sound like ultimate spider man.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment