OK, this Taker crap...

[The Amazing Rando 0]

I stick with 2GOLD's post...

 

 

If you bury someone alive...and they come after you throwing lightning bolts and shit... I don't care how badass you are or what kind of powers you have... you techinically killed them --> and coming back isn't an option unless your initials are J and C

[Guest Astro]

Taker invented the match, so he knew enough to have a secret trap door underneath to survive in case he happened to lose

[Guest Choken One]

Why is Kane scared?

 

I'd be scared by the prospect of a dead man following me around..

[Ultra Violence 0]

I don't see why anyone thinks its the undertaker! ITS AL WILSON MAKING HIS RETURN!

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

The fact that you're trying to logically work in Taker and Kane's histories into this match is just sad. It just doesn't work that way.

 

The bottom line is that the fans at every live event that they've teased Taker have gone NUTS, hell the WWE.com poll says that most fans find the Taker tease to be the best part of the Rumble.

 

I mean, either you love it or hate it, but rattling off stuff about Taker's wife and Katie Vick (Not saying it's you, but a lot of people on this board in general) proves nothing because a very small number of fans actually care about that stuff now.

No it isn't. Logic is important in wrestling. I will continue to question everything WWE puts out there.

 

If they (WWE) want to ignore this stuff it's their call. But I never will.

Hey JMA, Kane would be afraid of lightning blots, because he didn't summon these, they came out of nowhere, presumably from a man Kane thought he killed and buried alive. Taker's got him spooked, and in your rush to look smart, you forgot a simple fact of life: loud, unexpected flash of light and sound = surprise and alarm.

 

Oh and this isn't an absence of logic, it's ret-conning of failed past angles. Everything in the feud is consistant with the Psycho Kane and Old School Taker characters we know, they're just disregarding the bullshit angles of the past.

 

Keep bringing it up if you like, but you're not changing anyone's mind.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

 

People aren't going to get tired of it, dude. They'll get tired of guys like Benoit who can't carry the mic quicker than a guy like Taker who the Marks ADORE.

UT is good on the mic? His dead-man style on the mic fits the gimmick, but besides the voice itself, I wouldn't really call it great mic work, and let's not even get started on the "it's my yard" mic work.

1997-1999 were two years that UT had badass mic work. I can remember his promos against Vince, Bret, Shawn, Austin, Rock, etc.

Old School Taker (obviously) had a huge aura around him that made the marks sit up and take notice. Benoit doesn't have this, and he doesn't have mic work either to capture the marks. He HAS to bring them in with the in ring stuff.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Old School Taker (obviously) had a huge aura around him that made the marks sit up and take notice. Benoit doesn't have this, and he doesn't have mic work either to capture the marks. He HAS to bring them in with the in ring stuff.

 

Absolutely. But the reason he should get pushed is because he DOES bring them in with the in-ring stuff. Plenty of other wrestlers get bigger pops when they walk out, but very few wrestlers (Angle, Jericho, and yes...HBK) have people as excited at the end of his matches as Benoit.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Old School Taker (obviously) had a huge aura around him that made the marks sit up and take notice. Benoit doesn't have this, and he doesn't have mic work either to capture the marks. He HAS to bring them in with the in ring stuff.

 

Absolutely. But the reason he should get pushed is because he DOES bring them in with the in-ring stuff. Plenty of other wrestlers get bigger pops when they walk out, but very few wrestlers (Angle, Jericho, and yes...HBK) have people as excited at the end of his matches as Benoit.

I was explaining why Benoit not having mic skills was different then Taker not using his for most of his career. I certainly wasn't bad mouthing Benoit here.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Old School Taker (obviously) had a huge aura around him that made the marks sit up and take notice. Benoit doesn't have this, and he doesn't have mic work either to capture the marks. He HAS to bring them in with the in ring stuff.

 

Absolutely. But the reason he should get pushed is because he DOES bring them in with the in-ring stuff. Plenty of other wrestlers get bigger pops when they walk out, but very few wrestlers (Angle, Jericho, and yes...HBK) have people as excited at the end of his matches as Benoit.

I was explaining why Benoit not having mic skills was different then Taker not using his for most of his career. I certainly wasn't bad mouthing Benoit here.

Gotcha. Taker got over because he had this aura about him (largely due to the gimmick) that just drew people in. Simple as that. He's certainly not bad on the mic. He's better than HHH for an example of someone else who has been around a long time.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Gotcha. Taker got over because he had this aura about him (largely due to the gimmick) that just drew people in. Simple as that. He's certainly not bad on the mic. He's better than HHH for an example of someone else who has been around a long time.

To be fair to mark, it wasn't JUST the gimmick. He played so well, that wrestling fans were unaware of the total absurdity of the character. They totally bought into the mystique.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Gotcha.  Taker got over because he had this aura about him (largely due to the gimmick) that just drew people in.  Simple as that.  He's certainly not bad on the mic.  He's better than HHH for an example of someone else who has been around a long time.

To be fair to mark, it wasn't JUST the gimmick. He played so well, that wrestling fans were unaware of the total absurdity of the character. They totally bought into the mystique.

It wasn't just the gimmick. He played it extremely well. I'm just saying that he wouldn't have gotten nearly that far without the gimmick. It was still extremely important. Had his debut role at Survivor Series 1990 been changed with Hector Guerrero's, things would have been much different.

[NoCalMike 0]

the deadman aura held the audience captivated when it was dominated by 8-12 year olds though. Little boys in the crowd would be scared. Now we are all grown up and UT does not come off scary anymore. Cool? Possible...but not scary.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

the deadman aura held the audience captivated when it was dominated by 8-12 year olds though. Little boys in the crowd would be scared. Now we are all grown up and UT does not come off scary anymore. Cool? Possible...but not scary.

The same audience that watched then... watches now.

 

The diehards grew up, and they still like Taker for the most part. Plus, has the audience drastically changed since 1999? Other than the casual fans (who thought Taker was silly anyway) I don't think so.

[Guest BionicRedneck]

At the end of the day it's just ANOTHER Taker vs. Kane feud. As long as it ends at Mania, I'm fine with it. Just so long as it doesn't drag on and on.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

You don't honestly think it won't drag on??

[Guest Choken One]

Here's the kicker...

 

Logically, if Taker wins...shouldn't that be the VERY end of Kane as we know it?

 

I mean I can't see how kane can job and then a week later start a feud with HBK or something.

[Guest BionicRedneck]

I dunno what to think. I mean it's pretty ridiculous to think that in the current rasslin' climate one wrestler died and now is haunting the other with lightning bolts. God knows what will happen next.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Druids.

[Guest Choken One]

I figure after that they'll do the Casket thing...

[Nighthawk 0]

Here's the kicker...

 

Logically, if Taker wins...shouldn't that be the VERY end of Kane as we know it?

 

I mean I can't see how kane can job and then a week later start a feud with HBK or something.

Ya, but I didn't even consider him losing. I thought it would be Taker putting Kane over and quitting. If they do something else, they suck.

[Guest JMA]

Keep bringing it up if you like, but you're not changing anyone's mind.

Right. And you speak for everyone. That's just pure egotism.

 

Why can't you ever handle opinions contrary to your own?

[Guest JMA]

Personally, I enjoyed the original Undertaker character (before he became a zombie with magic powers).

 

I don't think Taker officially became that until RR '94.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

At the end of the day it's just ANOTHER Taker vs. Kane feud. As long as it ends at Mania, I'm fine with it. Just so long as it doesn't drag on and on.

 

Its 7 years in the making BAH GAWD!!!

[Guest SP-1]

Did this suddenly become the comics folder? What's with all this continuity talk? It's wrestling. Continuity is rare in wrestling. We all know it. We like to think it all comes together somehow but it rarely ever does. Especially in the WWF/WWE world. Vince blatantly ignores some bits of history while acknowledging others. It's like the place exists in Hypertime or something.

 

Know what we really need? Crisis on Infinite Pay-Per-Views. bring back all the variations of gimmicks into a big Royal Rumble. Whomever of each version is the last to be eliminated is forever acknowledged.

 

I'd pay 30 bucks for that.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Keep bringing it up if you like, but you're not changing anyone's mind.

Right. And you speak for everyone. That's just pure egotism.

 

Why can't you ever handle opinions contrary to your own?

I'd say the fact that you are literally the only person in this thread thusfar who's problem with this feud has been the integrity of the two characters involved being preserved speaks volumes in and of itself, buddy.

 

Oh, and it was nice of you to ignore the rest of my post, I guess the truth hurts.

[Guest JMA]

I'd say the fact that you are literally the only person in this thread thusfar who's problem with this feud has been the integrity of the two characters involved being preserved speaks volumes in and of itself, buddy.

No I haven't. Others have pointed out the flaws. I'm not the first and I doubt I'll be the last. Retroactive continuity may work in comics, but in wrestling (especially with important angles like this) it just doesn't work well, IMO. I don't really care about the original Kane character or the changes Taker has gone through, really. To be honest, the original Kane concept was comparable to B-level horror movies and soap operas (Glen Jacobs somehow made it work). Nothing to really preserve in that character. But if they are going to continue to use a character like that (bad as it may be) they at least need to be consistent. They cannot simply drastically change things when it's convenient. That's lazy and and creatively lacking.

 

Oh, and it was nice of you to ignore the rest of my post, I guess the truth hurts.

Who said I ignored it? On the contrary, I read every word of it. Just because I didn't quote it doesn't mean I didn't read it. But, if you believe I should quote EVERYTHING you post from now when responding to you...I will. Promise.

 

As for your "truth" comment...how exactly IS what you're saying the truth? It's your opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. To claim it is anything more is egotistical.

[Guest JMA]

Know what we really need? Crisis on Infinite Pay-Per-Views. bring back all the variations of gimmicks into a big Royal Rumble. Whomever of each version is the last to be eliminated is forever acknowledged.

 

I'd pay 30 bucks for that.

Only if Marv Wolfman is booking it.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

I'd say the fact that you are literally the only person in this thread thusfar who's problem with this feud has been the integrity of the two characters involved being preserved speaks volumes in and of itself, buddy.

No I haven't. Others have pointed out the flaws. I'm not the first and I doubt I'll be the last. Retroactive continuity may work in comics, but in wrestling (especially with important angles like this) it just doesn't work well, IMO. I don't really care about the original Kane character or the changes Taker has gone through, really. To be honest, the original Kane concept was comparable to B-level horror movies and soap operas (Glen Jacobs somehow made it work). Nothing to really preserve in that character. But if they are going to continue to use a character like that (bad as it may be) they at least need to be consistent. They cannot simply drastically change things when it's convenient. That's lazy and and creatively lacking.

 

Oh, and it was nice of you to ignore the rest of my post, I guess the truth hurts.

Who said I ignored it? On the contrary, I read every word of it. Just because I didn't quote it doesn't mean I didn't read it. But, if you believe I should quote EVERYTHING you post from now when responding to you...I will. Promise.

 

As for your "truth" comment...how exactly IS what you're saying the truth? It's your opinion. Nothing more, nothing less. To claim it is anything more is egotistical.

Others pointed out the flaws, but not the ones you are, and none attempted to build any kind of serious case against the feud based on that basis alone. If your biggest qualm with it is you feel it goes against some of the dumber angles the characters have been involved in, that's just great. The problem is that no one else really seems that concerned about it, their arguments are more along the lines that they feel it's just silly. Not that they feel that it goes against earlier, sillier, angles. I trust you note the difference.

 

Dude, just admit it, the argument is WEAK (Almost as weak as your lightning bullshit that was rebutted twice to no response from you). If you have a legit problem with the program then give it, but please stop acting like I, or almost anyone on this board for that matter, care about the histories of Kane and Taker. As far as I'm concerned your arguments have been rebutted, and if you'd like to add more retarded prattlings to this thread, BE MY GUEST.

 

 

Oh, and the Taker and Kane characters ARE B Movie types, so is this angle. That's why it works for their characters.

[Guest JMA]

Others pointed out the flaws, but not the ones you are, and none attempted to build any kind of serious case against the feud based on that basis alone. If your biggest qualm with it is you feel it goes against some of the dumber angles the characters have been involved in, that's just great. The problem is that no one else really seems that concerned about it, their arguments are more along the lines that they feel it's just silly. Not that they feel that it goes against earlier, sillier, angles. I trust you note the difference.

 

Dude, just admit it, the argument is WEAK (Almost as weak as your lightning bullshit that was rebutted twice to no response from you). If you have a legit problem with the program then give it, but please stop acting like I, or almost anyone on this board for that matter, care about the histories of Kane and Taker. As far as I'm concerned your arguments have been rebutted, and if you'd like to add more retarded prattlings to this thread, BE MY GUEST.

 

 

Oh, and the Taker and Kane characters ARE B Movie types, so is this angle. That's why it works for their characters.

Look what I said when you first replied to me. I was MOCKING the situation. I thought that was quite clear. My main problem IS with the silliness and my suspension of disbelief being shattered. I didn't try to build any "serious" case. Let's take a look at what I said.

 

So, does this mean Taker's marriage is null and void? What happens to Sara?

 

Does WWE legally have to pay a dead guy?

Notice the third sentence in particular. Now, doesn't that just scream "mocking"? How is that serious? You of course no-sold the aforementioned silliness and things turned *ahem* serious. Let's look for more signs of mocking...

 

Another continuity question: Why would Kane be afraid of lightning bolts? He's summoned them before as well. Let's also not forget his ability to start fires with his mind.

 

Hm. Doesn't seem too serious to me. Why would I care about these so-called rebuttals in the first place? You were the one who started this whole "debate." I said what I did because of the absurdity of the angle. Now that we've gotten the "serious case" stuff out of the way, let's move on to other things. I'm not interested in going back and forth with you, Zsasz. Based on your overly confrontational nature, you don't even care about the subject at hand. All you want as a distraction. Your no-tolerance of different opinions is proof of that.

[Downhome 0]

I stick with 2GOLD's post...

 

 

If you bury someone alive...and they come after you throwing lightning bolts and shit... I don't care how badass you are or what kind of powers you have... you techinically killed them --> and coming back isn't an option unless your initials are J and C

You're crazy.

 

I know that Jim Cornette is awesome, but I highly doubt that even he could come back from the dead.