NWK2000 wrote:I just find it funny that you care enough about Rowan to be mad that the creative team couldn't be arsed to follow up on his exposition. What about the time they passed up on building the character of Dean Ambrose when he escaped a hospital and just re-appeared?
You've got me all wrong. I don't give a sh*t about Erick Rowan. I just get upset at bad creative, and stuff that is a complete and total waste of time, and stuff that hurts the product. Eric Rowan is an amazing example of this:
They bring him up and put him in the Wyatt Family and it works. Then they decide to break up the Wyatt Family with LITERALLY ZERO STORY, simply because their mindset is "well... they've been together for a year already. We need to break them up." Then, to give Rowan some "character," they make up all of this UTTERLY RIDICULOUS SH*T about him being a vintner, a chess master, and a classically-trained guitarist... and yet never get around to answering the f*cking obvious question- the question that should have been the first thing they thought of when they decided to do any of this: "if he has all of this going for him, why did he join the Wyatt Family in the first place? And why did he leave?" That is such a level of either laziness or incompetence that it offends me. And the saddest part about it is that all of this was done to try to give Rowan some "character," but answering those questions would have been the thing they could have done that would have given Rowan much more character than anything else. It's the difference between "giving someone a character" and actually attempting to develop a character.
So they do all of this sh*t... and then Rowan is suddenly teaming with Harper again with no explanation, and then they're both suddenly back with Bray again, with no explanation in Rowan's case and very little in Harper's (and I'd bet you ANYTHING that the little bit of explanation we got in Harper's case was Harper and/or Bray's idea, not creative's).
It infuriates me because THEY COMPLETELY FAILED AT EVERY SINGLE STEP OF DECISION-MAKING:
1. They had an act that was working, so they decided to break them up for no other reason than "they're been together for a while already." Who gives a sh*t how long they've been together if it's working?!
2. The idea that barely over one year is "too long" for a stable to be together is utterly ridiculous, especially with an act that felt as different and fresh as the Wyatt Family did.
3. They did they a break-up that took a guy with NO PROMO SKILLS WHATSOEVER and broke him away from two guys who can cut good promos, then expected him to stand on his own.
4. The break-up had absolutely zero repercussions.
5. It happened with no build-up
6. It got no explanation, which completely destroyed any chance of trying to develop these characters
7. They gave this guy this utterly ridiculous character that no one believed and seem like a joke from day one
8. They just brought the group back together with no explanation, once again passing up a chance to develop these characters.
With Dean they passed up a chance to do something they don't normally do anymore (tell the story of a recover from an injury), and while I do wish they'd do that more often, it's not creating a negative so much as it is not utilizing what you have in order to make a positive. The Rowan thing was about ninety-million negatives. I'd fire someone for f*cking up the way they did with Rowan. With Dean, it wouldn't even bother me.