It’s Kue. It’s my Korner. You know it, and if not, you should. There’s your intro.
It’s amazing how, as of late, ‘E has had a habit of sweeping the rug out from under many of the potentially incredible feuds, storylines, and wrestlers that have been popping up for the past two or so years. The Nexus debacle, Miz’s failed title run, Morrison’s disappointing depush, and more recently, CM Punk’s supposed rise are simply a handful of ideas that might have broken that glass ceiling, but just wasn’t allowed to build the ground they needed. And, in all honestly, why would the company even want to? Sure, it’s not reaching the heights of popularity and success it once had during the Attitude era, but the company has gained something they deem invaluable: consistency.
One may argue that their storylines have been inconsistent. I argue that they’ve been consistently inconsistent. And so, I concede that, yes, I can bitch about several different booking and character decisions that Creative have made and will make (and I’m sure I will), but I’ve made peace with the fact that the status quo is simply not set to change.
And with that said, I’m not ashamed to say that I’m looking forward to the ‘Mania card with dutiful anticipation. I’m looking forward to cheering for the Rock and booing John Cena. I’m looking forward to my personal favorite wrestler, The Undertaker, take on my second personal favorite wrestler, Triple H, in what may be their curtain call. I look forward to the dream match between CM Punk and Chris Jericho. I look forward to the potential in-ring chemistry that may arise from Sheamus and Daniel Bryan. I’m even looking forward to Beth Phoenix taking on Kharma.
And although I still hear a lot of noise from the IWC, whether rational or not, I think it’s time for nostalgia to be simply nostalgia, rather than a base for angst-ridden comparison. I’ve learned that it’s far easier, and far less strenuous, to let the entertainment simply….entertain.
There seems to be a discourse resembling the mindless back and forth of pre-Stewart “Crossfire” over Mark Henry’s 2011 performance. Thankfully, some of our Pulse Writers have actually had an intelligent conversation about this. The infamous Blair Douglas has, to say the least, not been a fan of the Hall of Pain, and, through several statements made in his entertaining “Interactivity” column, that particular opinion hasn’t remained a secret. So, our very own Jack Newbury decided to retort with a column (for which the title, laced with subtlety about his own viewpoint, is “Why Blair Douglas is Wrong on the Mark Henry Front”) of his own. At this point, I will, both arrogantly and correctly, set the record straight.
Mark Henry is the type of wrestler who will only ever be successful as either an extreme joke (Sexual Chocolate) or an unstoppable powerhouse (Hall of Pain). With that said, the success does depend on many an asterisk. The former character type’s success depends on just how far the envelope is pushed. The latter (which is what Henry was booked as for 2011) depends on both the build up and, most importantly, the outcome. Let’s start with the build.
All things considered, Henry was built well in 2011. He ran through all opposition. He injured two monsters in their own right in Show and Kane. He even took out the top face of his particular brand in Orton. And he did it clean. His promos were passable. His matches were character-building, and in that psychological sense, were purposeful, even if the wrestling itself was poor. And thus, him holding the belt seemed justified. That is, until the ending.
Henry is a veteran who is well past his prime. He worked his character as an unstoppable monster well, but the only satisfying payoff to his title reign is for an up-and-comer to, somehow, dethrone this behemoth. And that, quite simply, didn’t happen. Instead, we received a horrible feud with the Big Show, with the latter gaining the upper hand and only losing when Henry succumbed to cowardly heel tactics. This, in turn, negated the entirety of Henry’s build. It doesn’t matter if the build was adequate (which, in my opinion, it was). If there is no payoff, then, it’s irrelevant.
So, in short, while Mr. Newbury is correct in saying Henry wasn’t terrible, and he did play his part to a satisfactory degree, Mr. Douglas is accurate in saying that Henry’s title reign did not do a damn thing in the long run and, was ultimately, a failure.
‘Round the Bend
I’ve linked this already, but take a look at Jack Newbury’s article on “Why Blair Douglas is Wrong on the Mark Henry Front“. Really great read once you wrap your head around it.
Speaking of Blair, check out his new column, “Air Up There“, as he writes a touching piece on “The Real WWE”.
Mr. Gojira points out some really valid traits about what makes a good heel in his latest “Stomping Ground“. I was surprised he didn’t reference pancakes once in the article, since he seems infatuated with Rosa Mendes’ “ass”. (By the way, Goji, #bootstoasses).
Kyle Fitta reminds us why it’s so easy to like Chris Jericho in “Kyle’s Files“.
Mr. Sanders points to a lack of Flintstone’s brand breakfast cereal this week on Raw on his latest edition of “The Rager“.
And Mr. Adrian Staehle writes of his anticipation for what may be ‘Taker’s last match in his article.
So, a fan of our illustrious site has made mention that I shamelessly plug my other sites on this column. That being said, I’d like to say that, after working on composing a handful of soundtracks for short films this past year, yours truly is coming out with a collection of his own music fairly soon. If you’re interested in hearing Jonah Kue, the musician, simply check out my Youtube page, or my Facebook Music Page. And for the individuals who mentioned my shameless plugging, consider the previous few sentences the equivalent of a middle finger.
Everybody else, much love.