Characters in Wrestling (Chapter Three, P2)

Think many of you who've stuck with me throughout these mini-blog entries will have clocked onto the fact i can't ignore inconsistency. Having dualities is fine, that's what forms the foundation of interesting people and indeed interesting characters. What i can't ignore are complete u-turns in a characters basic philosphy, it sends flashing lights around my brain and i'm automatically disconnected from the character. CM Punk is a constant flashing beacon. Everything that surrounded the creation of his character i'm in full support of, and CM Punk was as good a choice as any for the role, it's the character himself that sends me round the bend.

I can understand people getting lost in the heat of what was undoubtedly a very exciting feud between himself and Cena, but i'm AMAZED that i've only found one other person who noticed that the circumstances surrounding his return after the MITB PPV made no creative sense??? In a cheap effort to squezze out minimal ratings for a 4/5 week period, the WWE instantly ruined the integrity (literaily) of Punk's character by rushing him back so quickly. Stripping the situation apart, CM Punk spent the entire build up to MITB proclaiming he was going to spite the WWE by robbing them of their belt, which he achieved. So begs the question, how was HHH able to tempt him back into the ring after a collosal 2 WEEKS??? The on-screen reasoning if i remember correctly was because he had some sort of moral epiphany ..... really? It's like the character completely forgot about the mountainous leverage he had at his disposal. Pretty much everything that followed in the feud against HHH from a storytelling prospective he could've avoided by demanding HHH's resignation as a clause in his new contract, he had the leverage to demand ANYTHING. The only possible way that angle would've worked the way they did it is if he'd have played on his own morality upon his return, but the fact that he continued to try and be this revolutionary leader portrayed him as being either incredibly stupid or easily manipulatable - two of the worst qualities to have in a 'leader'. And to put it bluntly, Del Rio cashing in and beating him at Summer Slam was EXACTLY what his character deserved.

But fast forwarding to after his feud with HHH, and his reclaiming of the championship at Survivor Series. At this point, i was just starting to forgive his character's idiocy mentioned in the last paragraph because Phil Brooks himself was extremely entertaining. He was practically redefining the ancient 'contract signing' segment, floating around that fantastic borderline between face and heel, while his intensity and showmanship on the mic were stellar. But just like every other face in WWE, with a realisation that he was fast becoming a staple of the company came the traditional dilution of his character. Now while it's bad enough on other wrestlers, on a character that's foundations are build around a rebellious mentality it's dreadful ..... and the result has been just that. The intensity disappeared, the directness only arrived as a spot apposed to being a part of the characters natural demeanor, the constant deflection of the point he used to call Cena out on started creeping in, everything in complete conflict with his rebellious nature yet he still upheld those morals when WWE needed a mark out moment. So he was essentially becoming "the rebellious boy scout" lmao .....

It's only recently Chris Jericho, the miracle worker he is, that has started resurrecting that edgy freedom fighter that closed out 2011. But Y2J isn't going to be around forever, sooner or later Punk's going to have to maintain a consistent character to keep my attention cos atm i can see him going in either direction. As i mentioned in part 1 of this chapter, he worked so hard to dig himself out of a grave no other superstar has gotten out of in the E era, it would be a tremedious shame if he were to go off the creative rails now.