I think Wrestlemania 20 is my favourite, as it was the return of the deadman, also, Royal Rumble 2008, where Undertaker is the first entrant, Michael Buffer announcing, undertaker chants, awesome.
My top entrances would have to be:
1 - Summerslam 1994
2 - WM 20 2004
3 - Summerslam 1992
The Summerslam 1994 entrance is just amazingly shot and portrayed the version of his gimmick that I like the most. The lighting and his silhouette, the way he slowly walked like a zombie, and not to mention Paul Bearer's part in it all. The lighting effect with the urn, as if we get to see the power behind the Undertaker, and Bearer's acting was all just so cinematic and theatrical. It's too bad that new supernatural characters aren't really accepted in this day and age anymore.
Taker's WM 20 entrance will always be special not just because of the return of the Deadman, but I was afraid I would never get to see that character again because I started watching when Taker was the American Badass. I was totally fine with the idea of a badass biker character, but when I did research and realized the character that the Undertaker used to be I was so upset that I had started so late in the game. I'm just glad that I was able to watch it happen when it happened on tv.
Even though Taker was merely riding behind a hearse, the way he stood perfectly still was haunting enough in itself. Not to mention (in general) when the cameras would catch the few fans who showed up cosplaying as him as if they were in a trance or channeling him. No one in the world could have portrayed and perfected this character like Calaway has.
I'll be honest, I remember being underwhelmed when he returned at WrestleMania 20, I was expecting an extremely dark portrayal of the Deadman and he just returned without the bandana and put on a hat and coat.
Basically I had set myself up for this
instead they tried to keep it as less gimmicky as possible.
I admit that he wasn't portrayed as dark as he could have been, but it was a step in that direction none-the-less. Ever since I first found out about it, I always preferred the hat-and-coat mortician gimmick he first came out with, so for him to come out with the hat and coat made me mark out. I don't think the deadman is going to do anything exactly how he did before. The last time we saw him, although bald, he came out in a hood and an outfit similar to the one in the picture you posted. These days I guess he is just an experimental hybrid of what he is and what he was.
something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
I read somewhere that losing to The Undertaker at Wrestlemania could get people over more than winning a World title at Wrestlemania. I didnt understand that, can someone explain please?
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
He said losing to Undertaker, not winning.
- I think its due to the notoriety the person facing Undertaker gets. Each year the announcers pump up the challenger saying, "The Undertaker's streak has never been in as much jeopardy as it is now."
- Whoever Undertaker faces already gets their name out there as being part of one of the main draws of Wrestlemania each year.
- You could be like Jack Swagger, win the World Championship and fall into obscurity.
- I supposed the same could happen to you if you battle the Undertaker, but I get the feeling his angles are way more thought out than the general World Championship picture.
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
I don't know what to think about the streak. I tend to think Undertaker wants it to end...but I doubt they ever will end it. It's becoming bigger than WrestleMania though and is overshadowing the entire event...which is why I continue to say it should be the Main Event each year until the Undertaker retires.
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
Its true, its a lifetime title run if you end the streak. You can't bury the guy that ends it so don't expect it to ever end. There's literally nobody that deserves a push like that.
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
If the streak was a title ( and in some sense it is) then Undertaker has held it for 20 Years which alone is more prestigious than any title that's been held
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
I see what you mean but it doesn't always work as with Big Boss Man in 99 and Mark Henry in 06- they gained notoriety at the time but the intended boost for their career never really happened. I guess Taker is only human and can't make a star out of everyone.
These days I dare say someone like Ziggler would be better off losing to Undertaker than winning the world title at the moment- he has plenty of time to win titles, he doesn't need it right now but putting on a memorable match with Taker at Mania would solidify him as a main eventer in the way Stone Cold losing to Bret Hart in 1997 did.
I see what you mean but it doesn't always work as with Big Boss Man in 99 and Mark Henry in 06- they gained notoriety at the time but the intended boost for their career never really happened. I guess Taker is only human and can't make a star out of everyone.
These days I dare say someone like Ziggler would be better off losing to Undertaker than winning the world title at the moment- he has plenty of time to win titles, he doesn't need it right now but putting on a memorable match with Taker at Mania would solidify him as a main eventer in the way Stone Cold losing to Bret Hart in 1997 did.
I dont think those matches were about the streak though. I distinctly remember the Big Boss Man vs Undertaker being about the Ministry vs. the Corporation. I skipped that Wrestlemania where Undertaker fought Mark Henry.
I think when people talk about getting over by losing to Undertaker at Wrestlemania they are referring to these days, where its all about ending the streak.
I agree with you, but it didnt get Orton more over than John Cena and Batista who won the World titles in seperate matches at that Wrestlemania.
Did losing to The Undertaker at Wrestlemania 23 get Batista more over than winning his first World title at Wrestlemania 21? No, he lost his spot as the face of Smackdown there and also it put John Cena even more ahead of Batista in terms of who is considered the face of the enitre WWE landscape at that time.
Re: something i dont understand (Undertakers streak related)
The fact that you're even in the ring with the Undertaker at Wrestlemania means you've earned the respect of The Undertaker (bare in mind he picks his opponent now days) and when you earn the respect of The Undertaker you (in theory) should earn the respect of the entire lockeroom.
Respect is worth more than any title. Ask The Miz. Beat Cena at Wrestlemania and held the WWE title....... But I bet apart from the few he travels with nobody particularly respects the Miz for what he's done. Or Swagger.
If the creative team went to The Undertaker and his opponent and said this is it, we're ending it (as somebody said) whoever he was facing wouldn't let it happen. The only person I could see ending it, was Triple H last year in some screwy finish with HBK.
There was talk back when Nexus hit the stage that Officals were high up on Barrett and to get him over even more have him end it.....but Nexus failed, well it didnt fail, it just went in the wrong direction with the whole Cena etc.
The fact that you're even in the ring with the Undertaker at Wrestlemania means you've earned the respect of The Undertaker (bare in mind he picks his opponent now days) and when you earn the respect of The Undertaker you (in theory) should earn the respect of the entire lockeroom.
Respect is worth more than any title. Ask The Miz. Beat Cena at Wrestlemania and held the WWE title....... But I bet apart from the few he travels with nobody particularly respects the Miz for what he's done. Or Swagger.
If the creative team went to The Undertaker and his opponent and said this is it, we're ending it (as somebody said) whoever he was facing wouldn't let it happen. The only person I could see ending it, was Triple H last year in some screwy finish with HBK.
There was talk back when Nexus hit the stage that Officals were high up on Barrett and to get him over even more have him end it.....but Nexus failed, well it didnt fail, it just went in the wrong direction with the whole Cena etc.
indeed no wrestler would agree to end the streak each TOP wrestler has there own legacy eg big show holding every title or Kane (most people eliminated in a single rumble) Y2J First undisputed champion ect Streak is undertakers legacy
How does everyone feel about the likely Punk V Taker match for the streak? I for one enjoy punk, and I'm sure this match would be better than people believe, however, I still don't want to see it, it's such a wasted opportunity when Cena, Brock and Rock could all be involved with the streak, I'd love the idea of Undertaker going over Cena, and The Rock, having beaten Brock, comes out the night after WM, issuing the challenge for Wrestlemania 30.
Punk/Taker is a match they are going with for Mania. It should definitely be for the title and I think the belt will gain the meaning that it desperately needs.
Streak vs streak match hurts the belt. We all know Taker is winning that match and then has to drop the belt ASAP. The guy wrestles once a year nowadays.
At least Rock is putting in the work to win the belt. Pretty much booked every week from now til Wrestlemania and working some Smackdowns.
Personally I think it should be Brock vs Taker. I just don't see the transition from Rock to Taker and let's be honest Brock vs Taker is a 10x better matchup for the streak.
Punk can feud with Triple H. Personally I'd love to see Punk and the Shield versus DX Triple H, NAO, and X Pac. More of a fun match.
the streak is broke...nothing more to be said...they wont let cenaboy lose 3 wrestlemanias straight unless there setting up for a heel turn...and if wwe should decide to make it a i quit match, then by god the streak is broke.... and it looks like what wwe has planned since cena has no serious feuds right now.... ziggler doesnt fucking count since we see cena vs ziggler wayyy to much
the streak is broke...nothing more to be said...they wont let cenaboy lose 3 wrestlemanias straight unless there setting up for a heel turn...and if wwe should decide to make it a i quit match, then by god the streak is broke.... and it looks like what wwe has planned since cena has no serious feuds right now.... ziggler doesnt fucking count since we see cena vs ziggler wayyy to much
they should do Cena/Taker this year so he can lose(well hopefully) and then he has his rematch against the Rock at WM 30 so he can get his win back and close WM 30
plus it means Brock/Rock and the show will easily do over a million buys - Vince would be stupid not to do it
Mine is as follows- Team Hell No drops titles at Royal Rumble opening Kane up for a feud with Taker. What happens during the feud and how it happens doesn't matter (though obviously it has to be very well done) The two meet at Wrestlemania in a No DQ match. Match goes back and forth for the better part of a half hour. Finally in the climax, Kane reverses a Last Ride from Taker and turns it into Tombstone. 1-2-3 pin fall. Kane wins. After a short celebration Taker stands up, shakes Kane's hand, and the two of them look out to the crowd. Lights go out. The gong sounds 3 times. Lights back on. Taker and Kane are gone. All that's left in the ring is Kane's mask sitting right by Taker's hat with Paul Bearer sitting behind them, crying. Zoom in on the items, cut to black. If executed correctly, this could become one of, if not the most, incredible moments in WWE history.
- Another star from Texas who is expected tonight is The Undertaker. It is confirmed that he will be wrestling at WrestleMania 29 and his most likely opponent is CM Punk. We may see the beginning of that feud tonight on RAW.
Well I certainly hope for fans sake who want to see Undertaker/Cena at WM 30 that WM 29 doesn't get 1 million buys. Otherwise look for Rock/Cena III and a rematch of Punk/Taker at WM 30. Let's face it the whole reason Mcmahon booked Cena/Rock II this year is because he got over 1 million buys last year for WM 28. He doesn't care about Undertaker's match this year. Anything he can do to rob peoples' money he'll do it. And as much as Punk/Taker at WM 29 will be an instant classic in my mind, it alone isn't enough for me warrant paying $75 for a WM ticket that I paid for. A match to look for is Lesnar/HHH as that has a classic setup for Orton/HHH at WM 25 and well you know what I'm saying.
Boy, if Taker/Punk manages to pull a classic whie the crowd shits all over Rock/Cena and Lesnar/HHH, this may very well be the most priceless WM after WM 20.
Fuck that, it's PUNK that's getting the short straw. This match is a complete slap in his face. He's been WWE Champion for 400+ days and is the absolute best, most entertaining performer in the business, but he's getting thrown in the match 3'rd from the top at Mania because Cena just HAS to get his win back on Rock? Absolute disrespect. He's above this. This match DOES NOT MATTER.
That is no way to treat the best commodity you have, they might as well just piss in his face. He should be facing Rock in the main event.
CM Punk is way more than credible enough to face The Undertaker at WrestleMania. Please explain to me how in the world a guy who will likely be coming off of a fourteen-month reign as WWE Champion could possibly lack the credibility to be in that match. And Punk is already about to face The Rock in the main event of Royal Rumble for the title. He's on the biggest roll of his career. He has become one of the top guys in the company. He's no longer the "is he credible enough?" guy.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Wrestling Forum
23.4M posts
266.5K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to all Wrestling enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about WWE, AEW, Ring of Honor, Impact and all forms of professional and amateur wrestling.