Post by Aceorton on Sept 1, 2009 20:48:28 GMT -5
I know the Undertaker has been deemed uninductable because of what he's been able to do for 20 years with an outlandish gimmick, and I don't argue with that. But ... Paul Bearer? Surely this character doesn't deserve a pass, right?
Paul Bearer brought us ...
- A name to roll your eyes at
- Six years of Gomez Addams makeup and a "spooky" voice
- Near-constant urn fondling
- The Funeral Parlor, one of the very worst of the "talk show" segments
- The most ear-raking promos of the Attitude Era (until Stephanie McMahon)
- A number of wretch-worthy Coliseum Video segments
- Uncomfortable backstage conversations about doing the Undertaker's mom on the kitchen floor
- A lack of storyline payoff, especially in the later years, because his obesity prevented him from being able to take the finishers/beatings his character had coming
- His on-camera "murder"
And you can easily argue that the Undertaker got over in spite of Paul Bearer, not because of him.
Has his induction ever been discussed?
Paul Bearer brought us ...
- A name to roll your eyes at
- Six years of Gomez Addams makeup and a "spooky" voice
- Near-constant urn fondling
- The Funeral Parlor, one of the very worst of the "talk show" segments
- The most ear-raking promos of the Attitude Era (until Stephanie McMahon)
- A number of wretch-worthy Coliseum Video segments
- Uncomfortable backstage conversations about doing the Undertaker's mom on the kitchen floor
- A lack of storyline payoff, especially in the later years, because his obesity prevented him from being able to take the finishers/beatings his character had coming
- His on-camera "murder"
And you can easily argue that the Undertaker got over in spite of Paul Bearer, not because of him.
Has his induction ever been discussed?
