Vince McMahon as tweener in early 1999.

[agent817]

What did you think of that? I really thought that the way the bookers tried to sell McMahon as a tweener was a bit forced. He was already a top heel in his feud with Austin. So why did they try to get fans to sympathize with him when he was being terrorized by Undertaker? Also, was Undertaker a heel during that time? I couldn't tell. He had the Ministry at his side, but what were they faces or heels?

[GuyOfOwnage]

Sept 27, 2013 16:57:03 GMT -5 agent817 said:

What did you think of that? I really thought that the way the bookers tried to sell McMahon as a tweener was a bit forced. He was already a top heel in his feud with Austin. So why did they try to get fans to sympathize with him when he was being terrorized by Undertaker? Also, was Undertaker a heel during that time? I couldn't tell. He had the Ministry at his side, but what were they faces or heels?

They were definitely heels. Taker solidified his turn after IYH: Judgment Day by realigning with Paul Bearer and claiming responsibility for the fire that scarred Kane.

[Deleted]

What I really want to know is what the hell Bossman was at Mania 15. The Vince tweener thing kind of made sense at the time since it was sort of a being menaced by a greater evil scenario (though we all know how that turned out), but Bossman was, y'know, Bossman, yet he faced Taker who was basically the top heel within a month.

[derangedhermit]

Russo.

[fw91]

Sept 27, 2013 17:35:25 GMT -5 derangedhermit said:

Russo.

yep

[The Baltimore Staircase]

"We also think that you're tired of the same old simplistic theory of "Good Guys VS Bad Guys". Surely the era of "The super-hero urge you to say your prayers and take your vitamins" is definitely, passe"

Nice theory, but this one just resulted in the crowd not knowing what they were supposed to be doing.

EDIT: Although yes, the psycho demon daughter destroyer was the heel, they even had him burn a teddy bear to make sure we knew. But Boss Man is just so dastardly. That big nasty dastard.

[Friday Night SmackOwn]

Sept 27, 2013 17:04:16 GMT -5 GuyOfOwnage said:

Sept 27, 2013 16:57:03 GMT -5 agent817 said:

What did you think of that? I really thought that the way the bookers tried to sell McMahon as a tweener was a bit forced. He was already a top heel in his feud with Austin. So why did they try to get fans to sympathize with him when he was being terrorized by Undertaker? Also, was Undertaker a heel during that time? I couldn't tell. He had the Ministry at his side, but what were they faces or heels?

They were definitely heels. Taker solidified his turn after IYH: Judgment Day by realigning with Paul Bearer and claiming responsibility for the fire that scarred Kane.

Let's not forget that he almost murdered Austin as a sacrifice or some insane crap like that.


What I want to know was what alignment Kane was at the time. Was it the beginning of the Kanefusion to come?

[Big Daddy Bad Booking]

Sept 27, 2013 18:11:33 GMT -5 Friday Night SmackOwn said:

Sept 27, 2013 17:04:16 GMT -5 GuyOfOwnage said:

They were definitely heels. Taker solidified his turn after IYH: Judgment Day by realigning with Paul Bearer and claiming responsibility for the fire that scarred Kane.

Let's not forget that he almost murdered Austin as a sacrifice or some insane crap like that.


What I want to know was what alignment Kane was at the time. Was it the beginning of the Kanefusion to come?

Kane was a face until he sided with the Corporation, which was like in the beginning of 1999. Then Kanefusion became a IWChold name.

[thegame415]

I always looked at as this:

Undertaker was a tweener from KotR 1998 until Judgment Day
He was a heel from Judgment Day until his return in early 1999
He was a face from his return/feud with the corporation until he abducted Stephanie at Backlash.
His heel turn was solidified when the Corporate Ministry formed.

I think Vince was still a heel. Remember, this was 1999. Face/Heel logic was backwards.

I think Vince's face turn came at Backlash when he knocked out Shane.

[agent817]

Sept 27, 2013 18:33:53 GMT -5 thegame415 said:

I always looked at as this:

Undertaker was a tweener from KotR 1998 until Judgment Day
He was a heel from Judgment Day until his return in early 1999
He was a face from his return/feud with the corporation until he abducted Stephanie at Backlash.
His heel turn was solidified when the Corporate Ministry formed.

I think Vince was still a heel. Remember, this was 1999. Face/Heel logic was backwards.

I think Vince's face turn came at Backlash when he knocked out Shane.

True, then came the "Higher Power" deal which we'd all like to forget.

[Deleted]

Sept 27, 2013 17:35:25 GMT -5 derangedhermit said:

Russo.

Shades of grey!

[wildojinx]

Sept 27, 2013 18:33:53 GMT -5 thegame415 said:

I always looked at as this:

Undertaker was a tweener from KotR 1998 until Judgment Day
He was a heel from Judgment Day until his return in early 1999
He was a face from his return/feud with the corporation until he abducted Stephanie at Backlash.
His heel turn was solidified when the Corporate Ministry formed.

I think Vince was still a heel. Remember, this was 1999. Face/Heel logic was backwards.

I think Vince's face turn came at Backlash when he knocked out Shane.

Ministry Taker was not a face. Remember, his return segment involved some weird ritual on Dennis Knight/Mideon, as well as being affiliated with heels like the acolytes and viscera (the brood for a brief time as well).

[Super Nintenjoe KBD]

I for one loved shades of grey, heel vs heel matches and feuds and crazy cults, sacrifices and abductions. From Summer 1998 to WM15 was probably the most excited I ever was as a fan during the attitude era. In saying that I wasnt a fan of Vince as sympathetic.

[Blindkarevik]

See, I figured Vince was still a heel... however, the difference was Vince felt Austin was bad for business. So that made him a heel and Austin a face no matter what.

Undertaker's thing is, they even went out saying Mark Calloway thought he WAS The Undertaker and had taken his gimmick too far (yeah, Russo)... so the idea was, Vince was still a heel as far as the storylines went. But for their "worked shoot" storyline of Undertaker going off script, he became the heel in the "real-life" storyline. Kinda like, while the rules were in place.... Vince was a heel. But when Undertaker would make an appearance, he was the greater evil as he was "off script" and the greater good was just to try to restore order. Which is why Austin came to Steph's aid... as he was saving the business rather than Vince in any way.

Of course, with Vince being the higher power... it took a complicated storyline that had some layers and tossed in the crapper. Of course, I'm also assuming they could've come to any kind of logical end... which is doubtful.

[Deleted]

The Undertaker turned heel at Judgment Day 1998 when he re-aligned with Paul Bearer. Vince was a heel until April 1999 when he basically turned face by asking Austin for his help to get back Stephanie from Taker.

Of course it was all a ruse though. As for Boss Man, I'd say him vs Taker was just heel vs heel.

[DragonMasterP]

All I really remember about Vince in 1999 was when he became the WWE champion about halfway through the year.

[bootytea]

The term tweener just bothers me a lot and is kind of lazy in terms of booking.

Vince Mcmahon was super entertaining back then though.

I was never a big fanatic of WWE during that time period, but it always amazed me how well Vince performed and how good of an actor he was back then.

That character was something that had never been done before so it was really nice to see. Things began to go downhill when he started feuding with Stephanie Mcmahon.

To me, Vince was always a heel then because a good employer should be neutral like Jack Tunney.