Stevolutionary
Dark Match Winner
Been thinking about this for a while, and I have a good answer - himself?
No, not cause himself to lose the match, but to pass the torch on to The Undertaker 2.0 as it were - a debuting, or just debuted wrestler to carry on the gimmick, or a close relation, once Mark Calloway retires. We all know the Undertaker gimmick is a relic of a bygone age to a degree, and is only currently ongoing due to the continuity of Mark Calloway having played the role and been a mainstay for so long that his presence manages the enourmous task of suspending disbelief, but how then do you fill that hole when he's gone?
It could be argued (in very simplistic terms, and to different degrees) that Cena is Hogan 2.0. Swagger is Angle 2.0. Mason Ryan is Batista 2.0. Del Rio is JBL 2.0. Big Show is Andre 2.0. Orton is Stone Cold 2.0. All have their differences, from slight to major, but from a creative standpoint it's easy to see they were moulded in some way by to attempt to fit those character archetypes before evolving further - as wrestling is nothing if it isn't essentially a battle between the same good and evil archetypes over and over. It's such a common device in long-running storytelling (especially in comics) to do this that there's even a term for it - an Expy. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Expy/ProfessionalWrestling
Now here's where the Undertaker comes in. Losing such a central pillar to the company will be a huge blow unless they can somehow fill the hole he'll leave. As mentioned earlier, his gimmick stays tolerable because it has essentially unbroken continuity since inception (yes, he's altered it slightly along the way, but the DNA remains intact) He needs to be replaced by someone carrying the same spirit of the character, and the only way to do it is to dovetail his retirement with their rookie year, culminating in a break of the streak and a passing of the torch in my opinion. He must physically endorse his successor, on screen, while still an active threat himself, for it to have a chance of working on someone else.
Make the character the Undertaker's son in Kayfabe terms or something (like Big Show was in WCW to Andre the Giant) have him "absorb his spirit" at the end of the match of something that fits the inherent comic-book nature of the character. I believe only by passing the torch in this manner can you sucessfully Expy (to a degree) the Undertaker. Do it right, get someone who has the look, has in-ring skill, and has the passion for a 20 year career himself, and you may just get away with it. Whether they should Expy him is another matter entirely, and not one i'm actually making a decision on either way, but if they decided to, this is the only way IMO they'd have any chance of success as such a thing being accepted - continuity is key. Unless you pass the torch to a similar character, it will become nigh on impossible to ever introduce a similar character again in the future.
People may find this disrespectful to Mark Calloway - but it isn't. Even Ric Flair, held by many to be the greatest wrestler of all time, was an Expy of "Nature Boy" Buddy Rogers. This whole process is a traditional part of the business, and this thread is simply about how to sucessfully Expy what actually risks being a laughable gimmick outside of Mark Calloway's hands in the modern world, but is arguably too successful a one to retire.
Please understand that and keep comments respectful! This topic is about if or how you could successfully retain the Undertaker's gimmick once he leaves, not whether you should or not. On that, I have no opinion either way.
No, not cause himself to lose the match, but to pass the torch on to The Undertaker 2.0 as it were - a debuting, or just debuted wrestler to carry on the gimmick, or a close relation, once Mark Calloway retires. We all know the Undertaker gimmick is a relic of a bygone age to a degree, and is only currently ongoing due to the continuity of Mark Calloway having played the role and been a mainstay for so long that his presence manages the enourmous task of suspending disbelief, but how then do you fill that hole when he's gone?
It could be argued (in very simplistic terms, and to different degrees) that Cena is Hogan 2.0. Swagger is Angle 2.0. Mason Ryan is Batista 2.0. Del Rio is JBL 2.0. Big Show is Andre 2.0. Orton is Stone Cold 2.0. All have their differences, from slight to major, but from a creative standpoint it's easy to see they were moulded in some way by to attempt to fit those character archetypes before evolving further - as wrestling is nothing if it isn't essentially a battle between the same good and evil archetypes over and over. It's such a common device in long-running storytelling (especially in comics) to do this that there's even a term for it - an Expy. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Expy/ProfessionalWrestling
Now here's where the Undertaker comes in. Losing such a central pillar to the company will be a huge blow unless they can somehow fill the hole he'll leave. As mentioned earlier, his gimmick stays tolerable because it has essentially unbroken continuity since inception (yes, he's altered it slightly along the way, but the DNA remains intact) He needs to be replaced by someone carrying the same spirit of the character, and the only way to do it is to dovetail his retirement with their rookie year, culminating in a break of the streak and a passing of the torch in my opinion. He must physically endorse his successor, on screen, while still an active threat himself, for it to have a chance of working on someone else.
Make the character the Undertaker's son in Kayfabe terms or something (like Big Show was in WCW to Andre the Giant) have him "absorb his spirit" at the end of the match of something that fits the inherent comic-book nature of the character. I believe only by passing the torch in this manner can you sucessfully Expy (to a degree) the Undertaker. Do it right, get someone who has the look, has in-ring skill, and has the passion for a 20 year career himself, and you may just get away with it. Whether they should Expy him is another matter entirely, and not one i'm actually making a decision on either way, but if they decided to, this is the only way IMO they'd have any chance of success as such a thing being accepted - continuity is key. Unless you pass the torch to a similar character, it will become nigh on impossible to ever introduce a similar character again in the future.
People may find this disrespectful to Mark Calloway - but it isn't. Even Ric Flair, held by many to be the greatest wrestler of all time, was an Expy of "Nature Boy" Buddy Rogers. This whole process is a traditional part of the business, and this thread is simply about how to sucessfully Expy what actually risks being a laughable gimmick outside of Mark Calloway's hands in the modern world, but is arguably too successful a one to retire.
Please understand that and keep comments respectful! This topic is about if or how you could successfully retain the Undertaker's gimmick once he leaves, not whether you should or not. On that, I have no opinion either way.