The Commentary: Raw’s Ending Proved We Don’t Need The Attitude Era Back

It flooded not just the timeline of the Wrestling Rumors Twitter account as I sat on coverage, but it even was all over my personal account’s.

Two words: Attitude Era.

The ending of “Monday Night Raw” undoubtedly brought back some memories from 1998. Vicious, violent and brutal beat-downs that (usually) saw the babyface left motionless in a pool of their own blood as the malicious heel towered over them. It was common, and was plentiful and it was powerful.

Monday night, Triple H and Stephanie McMahon used theatricality and deception to fool Daniel Bryan into a corner, and Bryan took one of the more difficult-to-watch beatings we’ve seen on WWE television in a long time. There was even a chair shot to the head (albeit, one that wasn’t very close), something we haven’t seen since WrestleMania 27 (nor should we see again). It told a great story of Triple H secretly being intimidated by Bryan and becoming worried that he can’t beat him at WrestleMania. It was a special segment, and a beating we haven’t seen since Chris Jericho put Shawn Michaels through a television.

And that’s the thing. We haven’t seen it in a long time. It was special.

This past week, I read an article on Elite Daily that essentially said the golden age of wrestling was over and PG ruined it all. While the piece read as if it was written by an 11-year-old who wasn’t even alive for the Attitude Era, it made the point that wrestling, and more specifically, WWE,  is reliant on “daredevil” action and that it is “too much of a damn soap opera” currently.

The sad part is, this is a sentiment that a lot of people actually share. They believe that professional wrestling should only be about brutality, high-flying moves, sex, blood and violence. But I have a message for these people.

Go watch mixed-martial arts. Go into a back alley and hope that you stumble across a fist fight. Go watch a mindless Jason Statham action movie with little plot coherence. Or if you really want to feel the empty-headedness, go watch any of the Transformers films.

Professional wrestling, or at least, the best form of it, is hoisted upon one single foundation: Storytelling. Telling a story can be done in a variety of ways, whether it be in the ring itself, on the microphone, or even over a period of time that allows for character development in any way that can be comparable to any other television drama. Last week, I spoke about the beauty of a payoff in long-term storytelling, especially in reference to the story between Triple H and Daniel Bryan.

WWE currently runs a PG product because its target audience is the average family. Children. But there is an audience in every age demographic, and the beauty of being PG is that it does allow for WWE to, every now and then, have an awesome moment that targets one of these other demographics and provides for something memorable. Because it’s not being seen every week, it can have meaning.

That’s what happened on Monday night. The people who clamor for violence got just that. Triple H was the MVP of “Raw” without a question, and elevated Bryan’s credibility as a threat by delivering a vicious licking. It turned heads. It felt special. It defined Triple H’s current character as the ultimate bad guy, and pushed Bryan on a pedestal as the guy everyone wants to root for headed into WrestleMania XXX.

But imagine if that brutality was happening every week. Would we have been as moved by it as it seems the general public was? The post-show on the WWE Network featured 15 uninterrupted minutes of the panel and other characters reacting to Triple H’s savage actions towards Bryan. It helped push the story forward, and the believability of the COO actually being threatened by the man with a beard.

Let’s turn the clocks back, though. In the Attitude Era, this kind of attack happens all the time. And yes, there were some phenomenal moments during that time period, many of which did involve massive violence. But there was an underlying factor of main event character development that existed in that period that gave the audience more than one or two credible stars. Guys who could get a reaction from any crowd in any city, and Triple H was undoubtedly one of them. Yes, he may have used a sledgehammer every week to enforce that, and it even became part of his character. Yet that brings up the ultimate point.

WWE doesn’t need violence and insane stunts to deliver a good product. It needs main event character development that utilizes special moments to build to a climax. And that’s what “Raw” brought to the table.

The WWE World Heavyweight Championship will be defended at WrestleMania XXX in a triple threat match of some sort, but people are not talking about who will win that match. They want to know who will win in the Bryan/Triple H feud to get the opportunity for that championship fight. That’s how you know WWE has done it well.

Off point, I’m looking forward to seeing the continued progression of this story. Stephanie and Triple H keep disregarding Vince McMahon in mentioning their status within the company. Batista doesn’t seem interested in beating Randy Orton or Daniel Bryan or HHH, but just wants the belt instead. To me, that says we’re in for quite the ride post-WrestleMania.

Assuming Bryan wins, which I believe he will, The Authority will chase and use all the goons they have to do so. But Vinny Mac himself could find himself in the equation as well.

Maybe, as this unfolds, we’ll get some major mark-out moments that will leave some characters standing tall above others. And those moments won’t need violence, nor will they need blood. But when that one instance does happen, it, like those characters, will stand above the others.

And that, my friends, is how you can tell a story.

Follow Jon Alba on Twitter!