Why aren’t babyface turns as big of a deal?
By Scott Keith on 13 March 2025
This “biggest turns ever” discussion has made me realize that the most shocking turns have almost always been heel turns – Andre, Hogan, Austin, Cena.
Sure, there have been babyface turns that were incredibly consequential (e.g. Austin at WM13) and exciting (The Shield on the RAW after WM30) … but none that had the jaw-dropping, “Holy Shit!” shock value as the heel turns.
Is this just the nature of the beast? If so, why is it this way?
Typically because of the way stories are constructed in media, the heel turn would be the end of the first act, a shocking occurrence that's there to drive the story forward and give the protagonists someone to overcome. The babyface turn would normally be the end of the story, with the formerly terrible person getting some redemption as the story winds down. Obviously there are exceptions to everything, and Batista's babyface turn was pretty darn consequential as one counterexample. But generally the most impact comes from something like Hall and Nash invading (“We're fucked!”) setting up Hulk Hogan turning and joining them (“Oh shit we're SUPER fucked now!”) and then you find the hero to stop them. It's pretty standard storytelling.
Comments are disable in preview.