LogFAQs > #943696619

Aaantlion posted...

If Hollywood is calling, they must have the wrong number. It's not like he's done all that much. Hell, I had to check his wikipedia to see what he's been in -- something I don't even have to do for Batista (who got big in the WWE right at the same time as Cena, but had major opportunities sooner and more consistently left to pursue other opportunities).

Let's be honest though, he's still done more than most. If you were ranking your list of top wrestlers-turned-actors, Cena would be right up there. Likely more so than either Hogan (who mostly starred in C-list films alongside his small role in Rocky III) or Piper (who had one memorable cult-hit film and a bunch of stinkers). Batista could potentially outrank him (Guardians pulls Batista up, but most of his other roles are either in much smaller films, or have him in bit-roles in larger movies), and the Rock is pretty clearly the #1 of all time, but Cena is very much seen as a Hollywood success (at least according to wrestler standards).

(Possibly to the annoyance of HHH, whose own push towards acting failed miserably, or Edge, who sort of went into acting because he had no other choice, and who hasn't really seen the same level of mainstream acceptance or high-paying jobs.)

Cena's almost certainly making more money (with much less effort) in Hollywood now than he was or still would be in wrestling - which is why he's NOT really in the WWE any more (apart from the occasional guest spot). It's also why he had both the clout and the motivation to turn down Saudi Arabia offers - he doesn't want to jeopardize his rep outside of the WWE.

I would never paint him as "guy who loves the business" in the same way I would a Bryan Danielson or Mox. I'd probably lump him in the exact same category as guys like Hogan. Cena doesn't love the business or do what's best for the business - he loves Cena and does what's best for Cena.

It's why you have moments like him politicking to go over the entire Nexus in spite of his own teammates (Jericho and Edge) saying it was a terrible idea, and why when they finally did beat him it just became an excuse for him to humiliate and belittle them for a few weeks so he could long stronger at their expense. Most of Cena's career was him always angling for the most personal advantage even when it was bad for others or the business as a whole. It's only towards the end as he's seen wrestling as less important to his personal value that he's been more willing to "give back".

It's just that, for most of his career, what was "best for Cena" WAS what was "best for business" (at least in Vince's eyes), so his politicking was a bit less obvious than it was for someone like Hogan (especially in later years). It's easy to play the babyface who does whatever the company wants when everything the company is doing is what you want anyway.

In the same vein, Roman has always come across as the company "yes man" who does what he's told very much in the Cena mold - because for most of his career, the company (Vince) was 112% behind him and pushing him to the moon anyway. This year is the first time where he really seems to be digging his heels in against the corporate will (and if we're honest, if things get more back to normal and he comes back next year, Vince will go right back to fellating him anyway). And that mostly because a) he's had at least some positive response to his own acting jobs, and b) because the world is currently self-destructing. For the first time he's seeing his own personal advantage and that of the WWE as being at odds, which is why he's pulling back.

If Cena had been in a similar position in the past, I can easily see him doing exactly the same thing.



Aaantlion posted...

It's not a matter of being "loyal to the company" (although some wrestlers have had good careers simply for being company men and there's certainly something to be said for talent having long-term arrangements), it's about being loyal to the business. Indie guys like Bryan Danielson and John Moxly eat, sleep, and breathe wrestling. They're a world apart from somebody like Roman Reigns who only got into it because he saw the kind of success his cousin had. I've never been a fan of Bryan, but I can respect him. Even if I'm someday a Reigns fan -- and it won't be for his wrestling -- I'll never respect him... at least not as a wrestler.

I wasn't really arguing against whether or not Roman was truly a paragon of wrestling dedication and love, as much as I was dismissing Cena as being that guy. Cena was never really that guy.



Aaantlion posted...

Doesn't even Austin kinda regret that now?

In the sense that his own injuries eventually cut his career short so that essentially became his ending, yes.

In the sense that he feels like he was in the wrong, not really. He generally says things like "I should have handled things differently", but he's never gone so far as to say he was wrong. Because, generally speaking, in that scenario, in the climate of the company at the time, he really wasn't.

Though if anything, I think what he really regrets was the heel turn. It killed a lot of his own personal momentum (and the company's momentum) for no real gain. Which is part of why I feel like Vince has always been so damned resistant to people calling for a Cena heel turn or a Roman heel turn - in his eyes, it risks destroying their #1 babyface champion appeal forever. Even in cases where they don't really HAVE #1 babyface champion appeal in the first place *cough*Roman*cough*.



Aaantlion posted...

Those contracts would be tossed out if they tried firing you a week later. You can have whatever on paper, but good luck enforcing a non-compete under those conditions.

That's essentially what they did to Gallows and Anderson, though.

They negotiated a deal at a time when they had bargaining power and multiple options. They took the most financially beneficial deal (with the WWE), but once circumstances changed (only a few months later), the WWE cut them without hesitation, knowing they no longer had bargaining power.

So essentially, they signed a deal in good faith, then got fucked and dropped into a situation where they were much worse off than they would have been if they'd signed with literally anyone OTHER than the WWE. The WWE can easily enforce no-competes and exclusivity, but have no real enforceable obligations of their own. And because they're a large company with great lawyers, they can afford to take any potential disputes to court (and likely win) in spite of the fact that they're extremely abusive and potentially illegal contract requirements.

When you say you'll work for the WWE for 5 years, you can't leave. When the WWE says you'll work for them for 5 years, they can fire you whenever they want.
---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family