IYO when did the Attitude era start?

[Muskrat]

I can live with either Mania 13 or the first Raw with the new set as answers. When Raw got the new set in fall of ‘97 it really felt like a different show

[sungod2020]

Jun 27, 2022 17:46:01 GMT -5 James Fabiano said:

'96 was kind of a cross between New Gen and Attitude, and it began the tail end of 1995...with Goldust, as well as table spots starting to show up in WWF matches, some blood, and the start of pushing Sunny as a sex symbol. And you even had a quasi-shoot promo when Diesel decried the corporate suits after Survivor Series.

When the MNW started, both companies were already starting to take ECW influences, but didn't quite go all in yet.

I think it applied more to 97 than 96. As far as presentation goes(at least in my view), 1996 was mostly New Generation since they still had those goofy gimmicks(Bob Holly, Duke Droese, The Goon) with some hints of Attitude sprinkled in there(Austin wreaking havoc week after week, Brian Pillman blurring the lines between kayfabe and reality, Sunny's expose etc etc). 

With 97, it became edgier and edgier as the year progressed. If you stopped watching in January and then got back into in December, it's almost like you were watching a different show, something 1996 didn't have.

I would say even as late as the beginning of 1998, there were still some remnants of the New Generation(they were still using the block logo half the time). It didn't officially become Attitude until Austin won the championship at Wrestlemania XIV. I find it fitting that he was last holder of the classic winged eagle championship, and the first holder of the big round blue belt. That to me felt like it was the beginning of a new era, and as J.R. famously put it, "The Austin Era has begun."

Everybody has their own opinion, but I feel little things like that showed that things were about to change going forward.

[Ecks Ecks Ringout Ecks Ecks]

According to legend, it began the day Vince Russo first uttered the word "bro".

Prior to that, he'd been saying "duuuuude" with five Us, and it just wasn't working out.

[fg]

Not really when it started but

SSeries 95, Kevin Nash pushed Bret into a table (which was ONE of the first table spots in WWE history. Hulk/Harley Race match I think was the first.) You can tell that it was one of the first times since the commentators in kayfabe didn’t know how to react.

The following month when the Bulldog vs Bret Hart that was so bloody that when they advertised this match on an episode of Raw, they advertised that parental discretion was advised. (This was before the days of parental TV ratings showing up on the screen and in tv listings.)

[Aceorton]

I see it as three phases to go from New Generation to Attitude.

Phase 1 - Late '95 through fall '96: Goldust and the give-no-F's tweener version of Diesel, then Mankind, then the Nation
Phase 2 - Late '96 through SummerSlam '97: Austin's foul language, Pillman and the gun, tweener Sid cheered over Michaels at MSG, Austin steals the Rumble, Bret cursing on TV, the hate-fest between multiple parties entering WM13, the double-turn, sourpuss Bret hates America, Shamrock brings in the UFC stuff, Foley with multiple personalities, Undertaker more layered and human, Gang Warz, Rocky goes heel, Michaels stops pretending to be a babyface
Phase 3 - SummerSlam to Survivor Series: Kane arrives, DX forms, New Age Outlaws form, Montreal Screwjob, Mr. McMahon hatches from his cocoon

It was a long process, but if I have to pick where it switched over, it was the Bret-washing right after Montreal: the midget Bret sketch with DX, "Bret Screwed Bret" and McMahon's speech about no more "good guys and bad guys." That was mid-December 1997. Everything from that point on feels inarguably Attitude Era to me.

[Oh Cry Me a Screwball]

I think Bret Hart's turn is a good time to point to, because there's a lot of changes that happen around the same time, and that's generally a good indicator that you have a good benchmark. Right before WrestleMania 13, Monday Night Raw becomes "RAW is War" and becomes a two hour show, both of which were key changes, particularly when it comes to production (think about how important going from the Raw letters to the giant Titantron was). Alongside the Bret/Austin double turn, you have the reformation of the Hart Foundation as a heel faction. Also around this time, the Nation of Domination splintered into the all-black Nation, the skinhead biker club Disciples of Apocalypse, and the Los Boriquas gang faction. The Undertaker is crowned champion during this transitional time, but Paul Bearer tells us that the character was truly darker than we realized, as there is a younger brother coming for vengeance. Shawn Michaels starts hinting towards a heel turn of his own once he's back on TV, even if it takes longer than expected due to Shawn Michaels in 1997 being...Shawn Michaels in 1997.

This is why I hesitate to say the Attitude Era began in 1996, because although the King of the Ring was a good starting point, the early days of Stone Cold are still sharing a lot of screen time with the likes of Aldo Montoya and Spark Plug Bob Holly.

[agent817]

I remember doing a thread about this many years ago, like sometime in the early-2010s (I think it ranged from 2012 to 2013) about the change from the New Generation Era to the Attitude Era. Someone on that thread mentioned that the seeds were planted in 1995. One example that a user said was the character of Waylon Mercy, who was a pretty dark character for the New Generation Era. Sure, you may have had Undertaker and Mankind, but a character who was a potential stalker and killer, that is dark even for those days.

[David-Arquette was in WCW 2000]

Jun 27, 2022 18:34:00 GMT -5 Muskrat said:

I can live with either Mania 13 or the first Raw with the new set as answers. When Raw got the new set in fall of ‘97 it really felt like a different show

The new set was a week or two prior to Wrestlemania 13. It may have been the week with the Bret promo, IIRC. If not it was certainly around that time.

[fw91]

I mean a lot of things were planted seeds, but the cure for the common show promo was an official introduction and acknowledgment of the new direction. So imo, that’s the correct answer.

[Fundertaker]

I consider the de facto beginning of the Attitude Era when Austin wins the title from Michaels, but the period between KOTR 96 and then is proto-AE or transition years, as there was a lot of remnants from the New Gen era still and the actual core of what drove the AE wasn't really there until late 97 after Bret left. So Austin winning seems like the most fair start point for this era as it was where everything was in place. IMO, of course.

[Mike Bockwinkel]

Everything before Montreal was still the transitioning period. After that night, the switch was flipped and it was full steam ahead from there.

[flowercity]

I think Summerslam 97 is a good starting point

[ANuclearError]

This is a really interesting topic is the Attitude Era arguably has the fuzziest transition period of any era in arguably any promotion.

By contract, Hulkamania and New Gen eras are much more straightforward to outline their beginnings. And the Attitude Eras demise is much easier to pinpoint as well (though you could argue that the period between the invasion and Cena/Batista's coronation is difficult to define).

Honestly the only other part of WWE that's difficult to break up into sensible eras is the start of the WWE Network to now. Feels too long to be a single era, but also kinda samey?

[wendytorrancev1]

Jun 26, 2022 12:31:03 GMT -5 john84 said:

For me they start doing the build for Attitude Era in the lead up to Bret's heel turn and it is then made official when he turns heel.

[nickcave]

Survivor Series 1997

[sungod2020]

Jun 28, 2022 14:51:45 GMT -5 ANuclearError said:

This is a really interesting topic is the Attitude Era arguably has the fuzziest transition period of any era in arguably any promotion.

By contract, Hulkamania and New Gen eras are much more straightforward to outline their beginnings. And the Attitude Eras demise is much easier to pinpoint as well (though you could argue that the period between the invasion and Cena/Batista's coronation is difficult to define).

Honestly the only other part of WWE that's difficult to break up into sensible eras is the start of the WWE Network to now. Feels too long to be a single era, but also kinda samey?

Well according to most wrestling historians that period is considered the "Ruthless Aggression" era, though that seems kinda fuzzy as well.

While I can generally accept that Wrestlemania X-7 was the end of the Attitude Era for valid reasons stated in that thread months ago, it's not it immediately became the Invasion Era the next day as that started late Spring or so. In fact, that period when "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Triple H running rampant as the Two-Man Power Trip(which was from April 2nd to May 21st) seemed kinda Attitude-ish when it comes to the presentation the company had at the time.

The Invasion angle wasn't even 6 months so it seemed too short to be considered an era, it seemed like a weird continuation of the Attitude Era(it had mostly the same stars along with new WCW/ECW guys). Then after immediately the Invasion angle, they hit the reset button making it seem like this whole mess never happened and that period(November 2001 until late 2002/early 2003) came off like an Attitude Era hangover with their laughable attempts to still be edgy(Billy and Chuck wedding, Katie Vick, Dawn Marie sexing Al Wilson to death).

Then there's the Ruthless Aggression era. When did that start exactly? When did it end? I would say the general consensus is mid 2002 to somewhere in 2008 when WWE went PG but I don't know exactly.

[ANuclearError]

Jun 29, 2022 15:12:57 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Jun 28, 2022 14:51:45 GMT -5 ANuclearError said:

This is a really interesting topic is the Attitude Era arguably has the fuzziest transition period of any era in arguably any promotion.

By contract, Hulkamania and New Gen eras are much more straightforward to outline their beginnings. And the Attitude Eras demise is much easier to pinpoint as well (though you could argue that the period between the invasion and Cena/Batista's coronation is difficult to define).

Honestly the only other part of WWE that's difficult to break up into sensible eras is the start of the WWE Network to now. Feels too long to be a single era, but also kinda samey?

Well according to most wrestling historians that period is considered the "Ruthless Aggression" era, though that seems kinda fuzzy as well.

While I can generally accept that Wrestlemania X-7 was the end of the Attitude Era for valid reasons stated in that thread months ago, it's not it immediately became the Invasion Era the next day as that started late Spring or so. In fact, that period when "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Triple H running rampant as the Two-Man Power Trip(which was from April 2nd to May 21st) seemed kinda Attitude-ish when it comes to the presentation the company had at the time.

The Invasion angle wasn't even 6 months so it seemed too short to be considered an era, it seemed like a weird continuation of the Attitude Era(it had mostly the same stars along with new WCW/ECW guys). Then after immediately the Invasion angle, they hit the reset button making it seem like this whole mess never happened and that period(November 2001 until late 2002/early 2003) came off like an Attitude Era hangover with their laughable attempts to still be edgy(Billy and Chuck wedding, Katie Vick, Dawn Marie sexing Al Wilson to death).

Then there's the Ruthless Aggression era. When did that start exactly? When did it end? I would say the general consensus is mid 2002 to somewhere in 2008 when WWE went PG but I don't know exactly.

Yeah, the only catch-all term I can think of is the "Attitude Hangover" period, which I think gives a good description of how that time feels.

I think you could make the argument that the Ruthless Agression doesn't start until Lesnars coronation at Summerslam 2002, as you then definitely reach the point of Rock & Austin being full time main eventers.

I suppose in an era we have both the "take-off" moment which signals the oncoming change and the "leaves orbit" moment where it becomes undeniable things have changed. Thus, for the Attitude era, we could say that either of the Bret vs Austin matches where the take-off, but it left orbit during the "cure for the common show" promo.

[Hit Girl]

KOTR 96

[Timeless Hayterade]

I voted KOTR 96, though there were other moments prior to it such as:
- Diesel's tweener run prior to becoming a full fledged Heel.
- Shawn Michaels being a more risque babyface than one would expect.

[sungod2020]

Jun 29, 2022 15:31:33 GMT -5 ANuclearError said:

Jun 29, 2022 15:12:57 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Well according to most wrestling historians that period is considered the "Ruthless Aggression" era, though that seems kinda fuzzy as well.

While I can generally accept that Wrestlemania X-7 was the end of the Attitude Era for valid reasons stated in that thread months ago, it's not it immediately became the Invasion Era the next day as that started late Spring or so. In fact, that period when "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Triple H running rampant as the Two-Man Power Trip(which was from April 2nd to May 21st) seemed kinda Attitude-ish when it comes to the presentation the company had at the time.

The Invasion angle wasn't even 6 months so it seemed too short to be considered an era, it seemed like a weird continuation of the Attitude Era(it had mostly the same stars along with new WCW/ECW guys). Then after immediately the Invasion angle, they hit the reset button making it seem like this whole mess never happened and that period(November 2001 until late 2002/early 2003) came off like an Attitude Era hangover with their laughable attempts to still be edgy(Billy and Chuck wedding, Katie Vick, Dawn Marie sexing Al Wilson to death).

Then there's the Ruthless Aggression era. When did that start exactly? When did it end? I would say the general consensus is mid 2002 to somewhere in 2008 when WWE went PG but I don't know exactly.

Yeah, the only catch-all term I can think of is the "Attitude Hangover" period, which I think gives a good description of how that time feels.

I think you could make the argument that the Ruthless Aggression doesn't start until Lesnar's coronation at Summerslam 2002, as you then definitely reach the point of Rock & Austin being full time main eventers.

I suppose in an era we have both the "take-off" moment which signals the oncoming change and the "leaves orbit" moment where it becomes undeniable things have changed. Thus, for the Attitude era, we could say that either of the Bret vs Austin matches where the take-off, but it left orbit during the "cure for the common show" promo.

Don't you mean no longer full timers? Austin was on hiatus after that walk out in June and The Rock officially went off to Hollywood and wouldn't come back until February 2003 with his Hollywood Rock gimmick. Wrestlemania XIX can also be seen as another moment with Rock defeating Austin as closure to their rivalry but at the same time trying to say the Attitude Era is officially behind them now. I'm probably saying this wrong, but you put it best as this being a "leaving orbit" moment, because I can't think of any of remnants of the Attitude Era after that. 

Also, I really don't think that "cure for the common show" promo that Vince did was as revolutionary as the company makes it out to be. That took place in December 1997, but the company was going through a transition for well over a year and a half at that point. Two years if you want to be technical. It was one of Vince's trademark "shake up" moments before they became a thing and beat it to the ground. At least in this case, things DID become better, but they certainly didn't need that promo to tell us things were going to be different from there on out.