Open the Muggy Gate Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 When he came out at WM XX, we marked for the entrance, we marked for his return, and then looked at his costume and screamed NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! It was Undertaker: Texas Ranger! But now, 5 months later, have we gotten used to this Undertaker? What did you think of him at first when he came back, and what do you think of him now? Personally, I've adapted to this "new" Taker, and I love it.
Guest JMA Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I could really do without the whole "summoning lightning bolts" stuff. Other than that I don't really have too much of a problem with the character.
iliketurtles Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 5 Months...man. Seems literally like yesterday. I have no problem with it, but I think it's run it's course...I'd like to see him really go back to the old, OLD Deadman...or just give it up and do something else.
SamoaRowe Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I'm pretty okay with the character now, but whenever I think back to his entrance at Wrestlemania XX, I still get angry.
Guest Rrrsh Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I would like it far more if he wasn't in the Main Event now.
Kizzo Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 This was somewhat of a good transformation.....but it would never top his best transformation in 2000 when he debuted as the Biker Taker...that has to be the biggest make over I ever witnessed...
Styles Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I'm incredibly bored with it. I would rather him go back to his human streetfighter character where he at least wrestled realistic looking matches and gave non-cartoon interviews.
Cuban Linx Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 It hardly feels like Taker's been back for 5 months, probably because he seems to only actually shows up on TV every two or three weeks, if that, since his 'Mania return.
Guest netslob Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 i wouldn't mind the whole thing if he didn't take until THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST to get to the goddamn ring...never thought i'd miss the motorcycle...at least he got to the ring alot faster.
Use Your Illusion Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Judging from the way Taker has been half-assing his gimmick as of late, I'd say he isn't too keen on keeping it around much longer. I love it though, being the delusional Taker mark that I am.
Guest Bad Brad Jacobs Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I always liked Taker better as a heel, wether he was deadman or biker style. I think I was one of the only ones who was entertained by Taker's feud with Hogan in 2002. Hog-tying and dragging someone behind your motorcycle into boxes and poles (or ANYTHING, for that matter) is just badass.
Krankor Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I must admit I have mixed feelings about the undertaker. I'm very happy that all of the biker bs is done and he's back to being the undertaker of old. I don't really like him in the main event but if he is going to destroy JBL then I am very happy with it. The lightning bolts are ridiculous and need to stop. Him saying Paul Bearer was his week link seems kind of like a lie since he has his WIFE's name tattooed on his neck. Aww.. the undertaker is a softy for the ladies. Isn't that sweet. Those are my two biggest gripes about the undertaker right now.
Krankor Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I always liked Taker better as a heel, wether he was deadman or biker style. I think I was one of the only ones who was entertained by Taker's feud with Hogan in 2002. Hog-tying and dragging someone behind your motorcycle into boxes and poles (or ANYTHING, for that matter) is just badass. That was classic. I marked heavily for Hogan being drug behind the motorcycle. I felt no sympathy for Hogan. Just laughter.
Guest Bad Brad Jacobs Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 yeah......hogan stalling out the motorcycle was great too. and i agree as far as the lightning bolts go. when the wwe fans demanded the return of the deadman, i think they probably meant mostly just a wardrobe change and a change in the way he worked his matches. not pyrotechnic outbursts. its stuff like that where if im talkin to my gf on the phone durin SD! i usually dont mention what im watchin.
Just call me Dan Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I hate it. I think he looks like a jackass (especially after getting a dumber looking hat than the one he wore at WMXX), his hiar looks horrible, his attire is the same but even more bland without the writing on the side, and his matches blow. I absolutely loved Taker from his title run and beyond, and felt like he was making strides in the ring. His look was bad ass, he was in great shape, he was occasionally putting people over and trying to sell, and he had left the abomination that was himself in 2001 behind. All he did was take 2 steps back and stayed in great shape. This shit is old and overdone. For those of you who like the character, I ask, what character? It made sense for him to return to his roots to off his backstabbing brother. He didn't even give Kane a minor injury. Kane tombstones people on stairs and theyre out for a week and have another PPV match with him the next month. Taker does one on the mat and it's BAM! end of feud. Now what? Taker now has no reason to be in his current persona
Guest Trivia247 Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 well the original gimmicky concept the clothing itself was supposively to depict an old west Undertaker type..They then added the whole undead concept and being an instrument of Paul Bearer and a hired cold gun for hire (In terms of working for Ric Flair and Jake Roberts before his face turn) Where the character is now seems to be the Deadman without the Gimmmicky look of 91. He keeps some aspects of the character originality, the hat and coat..though those are new... more of a cowboy hat and the coat is more leather looking than the form fitting duster he sported. They relegated Undertaker's role as an Attraction like Hulk Hogan in the last stint, The babe ruth treatment. his appearances are sparse and just comes out waving his proverbal little hat does his thing and goes back into the dug out and lets the other wrestlers work.. Its good to put him with JBL and the world title because I know with some certainity that his match will be interfered by Heyman's latest big thing. Johnny boy. basically the gimmick's fine because he is still the dead man, just leaving the embalming gloves and the old west garb at home.
Guest brethart Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 The thing is the Undertaker gets a mainevent push. A winning streak, gets to bury talent, but why? I mean he has never drawn shit. He is just a over pushed midcarder.
Aero Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I don't hate Taker, now, but these "rare TV appearances" are really annoying. Why can't he just be on TV every other week like Eddie or Cena, especially when he's in the SD main event for Summerslam. At this point though, I wish he was still the Taker from last year, WM XIX on to Survivor Series 03.
Jobber of the Week Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I don't hate Taker, now, but these "rare TV appearances" are really annoying. Why can't he just be on TV every other week like Eddie or Cena Fans: Taker is old and boring. Taker: Whoa. I guess I better go back to what's popular and limit my TV exposure. Fans: Why the hell is Taker not on TV more? Is he too good for free TV or something?
EdwardKnoxII Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Fans: Taker is old and boring. Taker: Whoa. I guess I better go back to what's popular and limit my TV exposure. Fans: Why the hell is Taker not on TV more? Is he too good for free TV or something? No, what they're trying to say is that since UT is in the SD main event for Summerslam then he needs to be on TV every week to build up the match. The fact that UT or JBL weren't on the show after what happened last week makes the match and the belt look like nothing.
theintensifier Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Eh, don't really like Undertaker anymore, at all. He has sucked since the Ministry went down. He's getting old, can't move very well, always gets injured when things are going wrong, doesn't sell for anybody, and holds everyone down on SmackDown!
theintensifier Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Oh, almost forgot, Undertaker can not lose a 2-1 Handicap match, even if it's against the Dudley Boyz.
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 I would like it far more if he wasn't in the Main Event now. MUGATaker had the best match on SD in MONTHS when he faced Cena. Plus he, JBL, Angle, Eddy, and Cena are the only NAMES on SD! He deserves the ME.
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Eh, don't really like Undertaker anymore, at all. He has sucked since the Ministry went down. He's getting old, can't move very well, always gets injured when things are going wrong, doesn't sell for anybody, and holds everyone down on SmackDown! Bullshit. 2003 was the best year he had in FOREVER. He was good in the Rumble, had a really underrated match with big Show, and another with Show and A-Train, gave Cena the first really good match of his career, had a TREMENDOUS TV match with Angle for the belt... Taker has been great for a while now.
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 The thing is the Undertaker gets a mainevent push. A winning streak, gets to bury talent, but why? I mean he has never drawn shit. He is just a over pushed midcarder. Yeah... like Bret Hart was a draw.
Kahran Ramsus Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Taker was pretty good in 2002 too once he got past that Austin, Hogan & HHH bullshit in the spring. The match where he lost the title was arguably the best PPV main event of the year.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 Taker was awesome in 2003. I missed alot of 2004, because Smackdown was totally unwatchable for a while, but I thought the Cena match was pretty okay too.
Guest JMA Posted July 31, 2004 Report Posted July 31, 2004 The thing is the Undertaker gets a mainevent push. A winning streak, gets to bury talent, but why? I mean he has never drawn shit. He is just a over pushed midcarder. Yeah... like Bret Hart was a draw. Bret was a pretty decent draw for the time period in which he was champion. He did have to carry the company when Hogan left. Not to mention he had to do this in such a cartoonish and uncreative era.
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Posted August 1, 2004 Report Posted August 1, 2004 The thing is the Undertaker gets a mainevent push. A winning streak, gets to bury talent, but why? I mean he has never drawn shit. He is just a over pushed midcarder. Yeah... like Bret Hart was a draw. Bret was a pretty decent draw for the time period in which he was champion. He did have to carry the company when Hogan left. Not to mention he had to do this in such a cartoonish and uncreative era. We actually had this discussion a while back. Bret Hart wasn't a "draw" in that attendance didn't go up or down when he was Champ as compared to Yoko or (later on) Undertaker. It's not like Diesel's run (dear God), but he wasn't the Stev Austin stype champ.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now