*Ask A Question About WWE* FACTUAL QUESTIONS ONLY!

[rods2123]

To be honest I can see Undertaker never really leaving... and hopefully will mentor another dead-man like superstar... making him a legend like he is... Does anyone think they can see Undertaker keep coming back to do these one time matches like Foley is now?

[4 Gold Scorpio]

can some one answer me this
what is vaders gimmick what was he all about what was the story behind him?
what was with the mask and what was vader all about

Vader didn't really have a gimmick past a ringname & ring gear. There was never really a reason given why he wore his mask or named Vader (originally Big Van Vader). I know he was a big name in Japan for a while and also dominated WCW during the early to mid 90's. He's actually was one of the best "big men" in the business but you didn't really see that in WWF for various reasons (ala HBK's backstage politics).

[Gary]

can some one answer me this
what is vaders gimmick what was he all about what was the story behind him?
what was with the mask and what was vader all about

His character (as Big Van) was basically adjectives describing him, Big and Van like in size and power.

As far as I know, the name Vader was given to him when he was in Japan and it just stuck.

As for the mask, I was puzzled by that myself, cos he would frequently take off the mask, therefore there seemed to be no or very little reason for him wearing it.

Vader didn't really have a gimmick past a ringname & ring gear

EVERYONE in wrestling has a gimmick, some are over the top, some are bland and simple, but everyone has one, like I said, Vader's in WCW/Japan was to be basically, the metaphorical truck that was going to run over you and not stop.

In WWF, his "Vader Time" became his little phrase, which I didn't see much of, so I don't know it's origin.

He was basically an destroyer type for his manager, whether it be Race, Cornette or Bearer, he was most commonly someone's muscle.

Does anyone think they can see Undertaker keep coming back to do these one time matches like Foley is now?

I doubt it. Try and keep the questions trivial, not opinionated.

[4 Gold Scorpio]

EVERYONE in wrestling has a gimmick, some are over the top, some are bland and simple, but everyone has one

Fine then what's London & Kendrick's? What's Samoa Joe's? What's Jerry Lynn's? What's Rhino's? What's Senshi's? What's Charlie Hass'? What's Gregory Helms'? What in the world was Billy Kidman's? You say EVERYONE in wrestling has a gimmick so please tell me what their's are because from what I can tell, they don't have one & just because you have a nickname or catch phrase doesn't mean you have a gimmick. A gimmick is a character or personality given to you...which none of these guys currently or never have had.

[Gary]

Fine then what's London & Kendrick's? What's Samoa Joe's? What's Jerry Lynn's? What's Rhino's? What's Senshi's? What's Charlie Hass'? What's Gregory Helms'? You say EVERYONE in wrestling has a gimmick so please tell me what their's are because from what I can tell, they don't have one & just because you have a nickname or catch phrase doesn't mean you have a gimmick.

A nickname is a gimmick you muppet lol
"No gimmicks needed" Chris Candido, that's a gimmick.

I'll not go into the TNA guys, cos quite frankly, this is the WWE section.

I suggest you search for my threads I made in Raw, Smackdown and ECW, gimmick/character discussions, cos I mention my views on the character and how I think I can or can't relate to them.

IMO good threads, but never got off the ground due to air heads.

[4 Gold Scorpio]

Muppet, how mature...I expected better from someone who's a mod. And you still avoided the question in what was the gimmicks of the wrestlers I just named. This is the "ask a question" thread so answer it or move on. Here's more, what's Steven Richards? When WWE brought in Danny Doring & C.W. Anderson for ECW, what was their gimmicks? What was Chris Jericho's gimmick in ECW & in WCW before his heel turn?

[Gary]

you muppet lol

Hardly a threatening or offensive thing was it, more of a childish thing, I just can't believe that you didn't realise that when on camera, EVERYONE is playing a character. As I said before, some over the top, like The Undertaker, some life like, Austin and some as simple as hired gun, Diesel is an example.

Muppet, how mature...I expected better from someone who's a mod. And you still avoided the question in what was the gimmicks of the wrestlers I just named. This is the "ask a question" thread so answer it or move on. Here's more, what's Steven Richards? When WWE brought in Danny Doring & C.W. Anderson for ECW, what was their gimmicks? What was Chris Jericho's gimmick in ECW & in WCW before his heel turn?

I didn't avoid the question, if anything, you avoided my pointing you in the right direction, I neither have the time nor the desire to have to search through my own posts or worse re-type my views merely to answer someone who clearly doesn't know half as much as he thinks he does, harsh maybe, but true.

[4 Gold Scorpio]

Don't know half of what I think I do? Look in the mirror, I've seen your post on how "everyone has a gimmick" or "it's the wrestler's fault if their gimmick fails no matter how horrible it is" and all you do is site the most obivious examples of your theories being & avoid or make excuses for examples of your theories being proven wrong.

I'm not going to argue this anymore with you since you don't feel like answering my questions here when this is a thread to ask questions & get answers so I'll bottom line this. Not every single wrestler that has stepped thought those ropes into a professional wrestling ring has had a gimmick.

[Gary]

Don't know half of what I think I do? Look in the mirror, I've seen your post on how "everyone has a gimmick" or "it's the wrestler's fault if their gimmick fails no matter how horrible it is" and all you do is site the most obivious examples of your theories being & avoid or make excuses for examples of your theories being proven wrong.

Look mate, I'm not avoiding anything, true, I don't know everything, or probs most of the stuff I may think I do, I have opinions, based on facts and personal feelings.

I can't see how in anyway, by not even understanding that wrestlers portray a gimmick is proving anything I have ever said wrong.

If you have a problem with me take it to the BB.

If you want me to spell it out on the gimmicks and hold your hand, then so be it.
My threads regarding gimmicks:
http://www.pwsforums.com/showthread.php?t=75497
http://www.pwsforums.com/showthread.php?t=75614
http://www.pwsforums.com/showthread.php?t=75747

Now these were done at the end of April, so some may be outdated.

As for the guys you mentioned:
CW Anderson: Well, he was clearly in no position to be put over, considering he was a squash loss to most, therefore, there wasn't much character expressed, if you saw him in his ECW days however, he was the enforcer, an apparent member of the Anderson clan, who like those, would work a body part, so that was his gimmick then. Due to WWE's lack of desire to use him, as I said, no (significant) time was given to him to get across his character.

Doring: Similar to CWA, no real desire to push him, so like the old Superstars jobbers, was there to do the job, although, they did put him over as a young guy looking to make the next step, that in itself can be seen as a small piece of a character in itself.

Richards: Oposite to Doring, Richards has been portraying the guy who made it (so far) and is trying to get back there, lookign for that second chance, persistant, shown in his series with Punk, not necesarily a gimmick in terms of his attire etc, but showed characterisitcs similar to those of a vet trying to make it back on top.

Jericho (ECW/WCW pre turn): Lionheart, ever heard that nickname?
Truley described him, a young guy looking to make it, using his intestinal fortitude and big heart, X-Pac used that as his character throughout 99, before going the Giant killer aswell.

[4 Gold Scorpio]

If you have a problem with me take it to the BB.

I didn't have a problem with you, you just quoted something I said & responded to it with your thoughts & I returned my thoughts...basically, what the point of this fourm is in the first place. However, your the one who started this with me by turning the attention from the debate into a having a problem with me with your side comments & name calling. Just like you just did with the "hold out your hand" line, this was a thread where you ask questions in this thread & get answers in this thread. If you didn't want to directly answer my question for whatever reason then back off, plain & simple. I'm not going to search all around for your post & your answer when you just don't feel like it YET your trying to prove a point to me, you put up the effort or back down. So if you have anymore to say, lets take it to the Bitch Board but I'm willing to just drop this part of the issue, are you?

CW Anderson: Well, he was clearly in no position to be put over, considering he was a squash loss to most, therefore, there wasn't much character expressed (...) Due to WWE's lack of desire to use him, as I said, no (significant) time was given to him to get across his character.

Well then he didn't have a character. You just said it yourself, character wasn't expressed. Your original statement that started everything was that EVERYONE (and I'll repeat EVERYONE) in wrestling has a character. That means from main eventers & on screen characters to midcarders and yes, EVEN JOBBERS. If you ment those in line for a push then I'd agree with you but you said EVERYONE and that's a very bold statement proven to be false.

Richards: Oposite to Doring, Richards has been portraying the guy who made it (so far) and is trying to get back there, lookign for that second chance, persistant, shown in his series with Punk, not necesarily a gimmick in terms of his attire etc, but showed characterisitcs similar to those of a vet trying to make it back on top.

This is nothing more than your personal view on Stevie Richards which was the same case for some of your "character" views on those "B-C team" wrestlers in your other threads you linked me to. However WWE has not established any of this though promos, interviews, or even commentary during his matches. Stevie is just a body in the ring, nothing more or less. WWE has to openily establish his character like they did when he returned to Big Stevie Cool for the bWo back in 2005, Right To Censor in 2000, or even Victoria's boyfriend back in 2003. Again, Stevie Richards does not have a character established by WWE creative despite your own personal views of what he may or may not be. You can look & have thoughts on who he is but so can millions of other people but until WWE clearly establishes that so there is no debating on it, he doesn't have one.

[Gary]

Well then he didn't have a character. You just said it yourself, character wasn't expressed. Your original statement that started everything was that EVERYONE (and I'll repeat EVERYONE) in wrestling has a character. That means from main eventers & on screen characters to midcarders and yes, EVEN JOBBERS. If you ment those in line for a push then I'd agree with you but you said EVERYONE and that's a very bold statement proven to be false.

How is it proven to be false?
A gimmick isn't just being a cop or a binman, it's a build up of characteristics used to attract and maintain an audience through emotional connections.
And as I explained to you, despite not having much opportunity to get across those characteristics, he still had them as a performer.

[Reinheimer]

I've always looked at a gimmick as something extra that the wrestler brings to the ring. Like Ric Flair and his robes, HHH being 'The Game', Jarrett and his guitar, and now 'Black Machismo' Jay Lethal. A wrestler however, isn't a gimmick. What a wrestler portrays inside the ring is a character, and that character in a lot of cases in the WWE is a larger than life professional wrestler. Now I say 'larger than life', because when you compare characters from the WWE to characters from other companies like ROH (not TNA though), the use of physical gimmicks are so overdone it makes the act they are actually doing seem more and more unrealistic. This of course makes the money, as the WWE have shown.

Now I haven't seen much of him, but Vader is/was a character. His mask was a gimmick, the name 'Big Van Vader' was a gimmick, BUT Vader was still a character. That is also what companies like the WWE, and WCW portrayed him as, a larger than life character who was a professional wrestler.

If you look at guys like Chris Benoit, Bryan Danielson, Shelton Benjamin, or even Low Ki, you will see that they are also being portrayed at characters, but the characters they are portraying are REALISTIC professional wrestlers. Some of them have gimmicks, but they are not done to the extent as a lot of wrestlers from the WWE's gimmicks are done, and this also makes these guys seem more realistic inside the ring. In Shelton Benjamin's case, I personally don't think he has a gimmick. All he does is go out and plays a character, and when it comes to performing in the WWE, that isn't what is going to get you over. In ROH though, the fact that he plays a professional wrestler, and a very skilled, and sometimes cocky one at that, would get the character over.

A Jobber is a character. A jobber would normally have no gimmicks, but they are acting which makes them characters.

Vader didn't really have a gimmick past a ringname & ring gear.

I would also like to say that I think this is correct. The name and gear were both gimmicks used by the character. The character which was Vader. The character WAS made up with gimmicks, but isn't a gimmick itself.

[Gary]

Gimmick - A wrestlers character, what bookers think will separate one wrestler from another.

Gimmick, a wrestler's personality, behavior, attire and/or other distinguishing traits while performing.

This is how I've defined a gimmick, a make up of manerisms and characteristics, some which may have props, like a guitar as Rein mentioned, or a mask.

As I said earlier:

A gimmick isn't just being a cop or a binman, it's a build up of characteristics used to attract and maintain an audience through emotional connections.

[Reinheimer]

This is how I've defined a gimmick, a make up of manerisms and characteristics, some which may have props, like a guitar as Rein mentioned, or a mask.

As I said earlier:

On one of those it says a gimmick is a wrestlers character. IMO it should be 'What makes up a wrestlers character'. I agree now that personality and all of that are gimmicks, but the overall product is a character.

[Parasrampur]

Hello

i would like to know if there r any Blu-Ray WWE dvd's released yet? or r there any coming out that any1 knows of? id appreciate it if some1 could help me

thanks
cya
take care
bye
-----
Gurjeet.