iamthedoctor Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Do wwedvd.co.uk have any plans on releasing the films Silver Vision didnt release? Â I think they had No Holds barred, a John Cena, Edge & Triple H film which didnt get a release over here. Not sure if there was any others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 How many cage matches have Angle and Anderson had against each other in TNA? I count 3 (Lockdown, the match last week and one from last year), but I'm sure there's been another one at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshC Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 At what point in time in 1996/97 was the Bret Hart heel turn pencilled in? The injustice stuff which built into the turn started around the time of In Your House in December, so was it pretty much then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Accident Prone Posted February 27, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 What was the deal with 1PW closing up shop? Was it the result of bad management or is their underlying drama to it all? I've seen snippets of things here and there but nothing substantial. I ask because i've came across a few DVD's going cheap and its made me a wee bit curious as to why it all ended so suddenly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted February 27, 2013 Moderators Share Posted February 27, 2013 Which time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Accident Prone Posted February 27, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 If possible, both times. Or whichever is the most scandalous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted February 27, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 At what point in time in 1996/97 was the Bret Hart heel turn pencilled in? The injustice stuff which built into the turn started around the time of In Your House in December, so was it pretty much then? Â According to Bret's book, March 9th 1997. Â Don't forget, Bret was meant to work with Shawn right up until his injury/"injury". The In Your House finish was just to build tension between the pair, he was only screwed out of the Rumble because Russo had let slip he was winning it that very weekend, and he was only shafted out of the title on the 17th Feb Raw because in the ensuing panic after Michaels' withdrawal from 'Mania they had to get the belt onto Sid. Â Vince outlined a "year and a half long" storyline to Bret that involved Austin turning babyface and told him he could stay baby in Canada. He presented Bret two sets of opponents - (according to Meltzer) if he turned heel he would work with Austin, Michaels, Undertaker and Ken Shamrock. If he stayed babyface, Austin, Vader and Mankind. Bret decided he could draw more with the "heel" list and acquiesced. He also alludes in his book to the (un-named) "face" opponents being "stiff and reckless" so I guess he didn't want to work with Vader or Foley more often than necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scouseman Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Just been watching on YouTube when Jake the snake was in the Undertakers Funeral Parlor. I remember watching it while I was kid. When he got has hand stuck in the casket and he was dragging it behind him. What I want to know is was it ever explained why Undertaker turned on Jake and became a face? It seemed so sudden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro Red Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Just been watching on YouTube when Jake the snake was in the Undertakers Funeral Parlor. I remember watching it while I was kid. When he got has hand stuck in the casket and he was dragging it behind him. What I want to know is was it ever explained why Undertaker turned on Jake and became a face? It seemed so sudden.  They said at the time that taker decided Jake had gone too far in his torment of Savage and Liz, Liz in particular so turned on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted February 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 It probably was fairly sudden/poorly explained because of the haste with which they had to turn Taker (with Sid going fully fledged heel on the same SNME taping as the Savage/Roberts blow off, 27/01/92) in order to facilitate the shuffle of 'Mania VIII from Flair/Hogan, Savage/Roberts and Justice/Taker to Hogan/Justice, Flair/Savage and Taker/Roberts, and allow maximum telly build up time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshC Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) At what point in time in 1996/97 was the Bret Hart heel turn pencilled in? The injustice stuff which built into the turn started around the time of In Your House in December, so was it pretty much then? Â According to Bret's book, March 9th 1997. Â Don't forget, Bret was meant to work with Shawn right up until his injury/"injury". The In Your House finish was just to build tension between the pair, he was only screwed out of the Rumble because Russo had let slip he was winning it that very weekend, and he was only shafted out of the title on the 17th Feb Raw because in the ensuing panic after Michaels' withdrawal from 'Mania they had to get the belt onto Sid. Â Vince outlined a "year and a half long" storyline to Bret that involved Austin turning babyface and told him he could stay baby in Canada. He presented Bret two sets of opponents - (according to Meltzer) if he turned heel he would work with Austin, Michaels, Undertaker and Ken Shamrock. If he stayed babyface, Austin, Vader and Mankind. Bret decided he could draw more with the "heel" list and acquiesced. He also alludes in his book to the (un-named) "face" opponents being "stiff and reckless" so I guess he didn't want to work with Vader or Foley more often than necessary. Â That's a great answer, thank you. I asked as I was watching a bit of the post-Rumble 1997 Raw, where Bret quits the company only to come back once the Final Four matchup is made by Gorilla Monsoon. The wheels seemed to be in motion there, but I guess a lot of it must have been happy coincidences that they built upon once they decided to go with the heel thing. Â *EDIT* I forget, as it's been largely revised out of history, but that winter of 1996 through early '97 saw a lot of 'shades of grey' booking introduced, so what might be seen as the acorns of a heel turn could I suppose be part of that. Edited February 28, 2013 by AshC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted February 28, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) That, and what necessitated the turn was a fairly organic shift in who a lot of the fans were favouring. Austin gets a good amount of support in MSG on Bret's very first night back, you can hear some boos when Bret tosses him out of the Final Four and so on. Vince will have sat down and thought, in the words of Diamond Joe Quimby, "If that is the way the winds are blowing, let no one say I don't also blow." Â Since I've dipped my toe in on that particular time period, to answer the question as to who Austin was originally planned to wrestle at 'Mania 13, I always got in my head it would be Vader for some reason. Well, for no other reason than neither would have had anything to do if all the confirmed plans had come off, and they'd have had a good fight. I would hope they wouldn't have thrown Austin (getting more cheers than most heels) in there with Rocky (reactions tepid at best) at that point. In fact, I read that the Hunter/Rocky title switch was only scheduled as a means of still giving Lowell a title change to placate them for not getting the Shawn/Sid title match (which would have featured Sid winning according to Meltzer), if you recall they had announced and promoted build for Hunter vs Ahmed Johnson at the Final Four PPV. Â Mankind was (according to Foley's book) approached about working with Mero prior to him getting hurt in a storyline that would have centered around Mankind thinking Sable was his "mommy" if you recall. I also speculated that Owen & Smithers would have wrestled Furnas & LaFon in a final match where we probably would have seen the full explosion of their split, which seemed to have the wheels fully in motion (until Bret turned). I also considered that they might have split after Final Four and had the European title rematch at 'Mania but in hindsight that would have been premature. Out of all the top guns, that would really only have left Austin and Vader with each other, which certainly would have done nothing to quell the cheers for Austin seeing him take it full force to a monster like Leon, but wouldnt have been the launchpad the submission match turned out to be. Â So, here is my speculated "original draft" for WMXIII : Â WWF Title Sid VS The Undertaker Bret Hart VS Shawn Michaels Ahmed Johnson & Road Warriors VS Nation of Domination Steve Austin VS Vader I Title Hunter Hearst Helmsly VS Goldust Tag Team Title Owen Hart & DBS VS Furnas & LaFon Marc Mero VS Mankind Edited February 28, 2013 by air_raid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz Windham Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Â Â Where is Christian? I know he's injured, just wondered how long for, seems to have been gone ages. Don't particularly miss him but he's a good one to have round to fill gaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelEdge Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Think I read that he's been cleared to return for the last month or so. Maybe they're just waiting to give him something to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarTheSlouch Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Just been watching on YouTube when Jake the snake was in the Undertakers Funeral Parlor. I remember watching it while I was kid. When he got has hand stuck in the casket and he was dragging it behind him. What I want to know is was it ever explained why Undertaker turned on Jake and became a face? It seemed so sudden.  They said at the time that taker decided Jake had gone too far in his torment of Savage and Liz, Liz in particular so turned on him.  I was watching the PPV version of Summerslam 93 last night - 30 mins in they cut to the 'Superstar Line'. Some dickwad asks a question that goes from asking if Taker wanted to form a team with Hogan (!) to asking why he turned on Jake. His response (before being cut off by Heenan likely at Vince cringing at it) was basically 'I didnt turn I just evolved for the better' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts