One gimmick vs. Multiple gimmicks

[HBK-aholic]

I got this idea for a thread where I was arguing with Sam about HBK being betetr than The Undertaker. Give or take a few moments, Shawn has kept the same gimmick since he debuted - he is the heartbreak Kid. Compared to The Undertaker, who has had many gimmicks, and a wide variety of them too. The American badass was a far cry from his Dead Man gimmick he currently holds.

And then you look at Mick Foley, the man who had so many gimmicks I can't even keep up, yet has millions of fans around the world?

Which do you think is better for a wrestler, one gimmick, or many?

 

[brahma62]

I think it all depends on how a person plays them. Shawn Michaels plays the heartbreak kid gimmick great. The Undertaker plays his gimmicks well, as im sure that his biker gimmick was based on his real life persona. Mick Foley played Cactus Jack, Mankind, and Dude Love all well.

But imagine if they tried switching a gimmick, and it failed....miserably. They would have to resort back to their old gimmick, but what if it never worked out again. What if they failed so bad that it tarnished their whole career. So instead of being known as the person who did this and this well, they would be known as the person who was given a gimmick change, and failed miserably.

So as i said before, i think it all depends on the person playing the gimmick.

 

[NSL]

I actually think Shawn has had more gimmicks than 'Taker. 'Taker has had the Deadman gimmick, and the American Badass. Shawn was a Rocker, then eas the Heartbreak Kid, then was in DX, then came back as the religious sad-sack.

I didn't like the biker gimmick on Undertaker at all, but it never hurt his career as a whole. Everyone will remember him as the Deadman, and that will be how he made his lasting impact on the wrestling world. He's had a great career, with both gimmicks, and no one can deny the success of either.

Shawn will be remembered for all of the gimmicks he used, and also had an outstanding career. I'll remember him as a tag wrestler, as The Rockers are my favorite tag team ever, and for kicking Jannetty through the window, and for winning the Iron Man match, and for his time in DX. I'll also remember him crying, on several occasions, as JBL's bitch. That one hurt his "legacy" in my eyes, if not everyone's. I said on many occasions that I was worried it was going to effect his career. Of course, we ddin't know if the match with Undertaker at Wrestlemania was happening for sure. Putting on a good show there, will make everyone move on a lot quicker from him laying down to JBL on RAW.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I think you've flipped your lid if you think "The Rocker" was "The Heartbreak Kid". SO on that note, he's had just as many gimmicks as the Undertaker has had, in the W.W.F/E.

Now, to answer the question.. having multiple gimmicks in my opinion is bad. It means yu can't make one stick and work for the long go over it, so you have to switch. However, in jumping back to the case that was the Undertaker.. his "American Badass" gimmick wasn't so different.

Sure dead, not dead is a big difference.. but upon his return, he still dressed the same, (barring the occasional pair of jeans) he still wrestled the same. The only thing that changed, was honestly theme music and a finisher because at that time they questioned the Tombstone being an outlawed move to use or not.

But the true story behind all that is, Taker's original gimmick never failed. Obviously, seeing as how he went back to it and it's still working strongly for him. Instead, all he did was the same exact thing you're trying to claim Shawn did.. and that's add another level of persona to his character.

Shawn Michaels was NOT in any way, shape or form "The Heartbreak Kid" during his debut. And the only reason Shawn can resort to teaming with Marty Jannetty now, is because H.B.K. made a big enough name for himself, that the failure that was "The Rocker" can merely be looked at, as a starting step.

So, in conclusion.. multiple gimmicks in my opinion are bad, because it shows you can't hold a character down. However, if you're adding levels to that character, by growing with it through different stages.. that's different.

Taker (Deadman/Badass) = growth.
Kane (Monster/Dentist/Fake Nash) = failure.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I actually think Shawn has had more gimmicks than 'Taker. 'Taker has had the Deadman gimmick, and the American Badass. Shawn was a Rocker, then eas the Heartbreak Kid, then was in DX, then came back as the religious sad-sack.

You bring up a really good point, one I thought someone would come up with. But I think Shawn has still always been the Heartbreak Kid. I mean, in DX, he and Triple H were a team but they still both had their separate gimmicks. Shawn has always been known as the Heartbreak Kid, even with this awful shit with JBL recently, and Raw this week showed Shawn going back to that.

As for this thread, I agree with brahma62 that it depends on who is using the gimmick, and how good they are. Some people, like Mick Foley, can have a lot of separate gimmicks yet sell them all to us because they're that good.

 

[NSL]

So, in conclusion.. multiple gimmicks in my opinion are bad, because it shows you can't hold a character down. However, if you're adding levels to that character, by growing with it through different stages...that's different.

Where does Edge fall in? He started off as some sort of odd vampire, as part of Gangrel's brood, and then it turned into "5 Second Photo Ops", and then basically no gimmick, and now he's the Ultimate Opportunist.

Yes, there's definite growth. The vampire shtick was dead in the water, and wouldn't have gotten him anything then a few short reigns as a mid-card champ. Turning him into the Ultimate Opportunist has done wonders for him, like get him a few short reigns as a main event champ.

Main Event Champ > Mid-Card Champ

With Christian, they won a number of tag titles, and everything they did worked. They could've stayed as a tag team, and he would've still had a spot in the WWF/E Hall of Fame. When he first became a singles wrestler, I wasn't sure where they were going with him. I liked when he turned heel again, and cashed in the MiTB to win the title. It worked. However, the Ultimate Opportunist gimmick is starting to wear thin, and is turning from "growth", to making me wish I had a growth. Each title win lessens his career, and makes me wish Vince never gave up on tag wrestling.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Where does Edge fall in? He started off as some sort of odd vampire, as part of Gangrel's brood, and then it turned into "5 Second Photo Ops", and then basically no gimmick, and now he's the Ultimate Opportunist.

Yes, there's definite growth. The vampire shtick was dead in the water, and wouldn't have gotten him anything then a few short reigns as a mid-card champ. Turning him into the Ultimate Opportunist has done wonders for him, like get him a few short reigns as a main event champ.

Main Event Champ > Mid-Card Champ

With Christian, they won a number of tag titles, and everything they did worked. They could've stayed as a tag team, and he would've still had a spot in the WWF/E Hall of Fame. When he first became a singles wrestler, I wasn't sure where they were going with him. I liked when he turned heel again, and cashed in the MiTB to win the title. It worked. However, the Ultimate Opportunist gimmick is starting to wear thin, and is turning from "growth", to making me wish I had a growth. Each title win lessens his career, and makes me wish Vince never gave up on tag wrestling.

Fact is, if Edge didn't alter his gimmick and drop the original "Enigma/Goth" gimmick he began with.. you wouldn't be watching him today. Same goes for Kane and the Dentist/Fake Diesel stuff.

But that doesn't mean they didn't fail with their gimmicks. The Undertaker was an "undead, dead guy" for crying out loud.. and he MADE IT WORK. That takes true dedication and talent. Edge was a gothic loner, who hung out in the crowd. He was one step away from being Raven, without a perm, gut, or groupies.

I've never been one to shy away from admitting the truth, and Edge didn't make anything big until he screwed Lita. And even though, he never did that with the intent to make it big. But the fact is, he's found something now that works and will work for the rest of his career.

Not just that, but it'll likely be what vaults him into the Hall of Fame as a true name to go in, not just some second-rate has-been that never did shit, or accomplished anything.

Edge is a winner, not a failure, because he found a gimmick that could work, and he's running with it.

Whereas Kane's gimmick of a monster is failing, even though it's the best gimmick he's had, it's still failing through my eyes, because he's no longer scary.

 

[NSL]

Whereas Kane's gimmick of a monster is failing, even though it's the best gimmick he's had, it's still failing through my eyes, because he's no longer scary.

Kane's scariness changes on a case-by-case basis. The angle with Rey, didn't scare a pre-schooler. But, when he had Kelly backed into a corner, I'd bet there was women everywhere saying "That bastard! He's going to hurt her!". Not "monster scary", but still scary.

When he doesn't have a feud going on, and his pyro randomly goes off in the middle of someone's match, it scares the crap out of everyone. The announcers go silent, the guys in the ring piss themselves, and everyone in the crowd knows shit is about to go down.

Even when he has a feud, if he's playing the heel, as he did with Edge, his pyro is scary, because he plays the heel character to well. As a face, like in the Snitsky storyline, it didn't phase anyone.

I'll admit the gimmick is nowhere near what it was when he had the mask, and even shortly after that. When he had the mask, there was something about the way he walked, and the way he manhandled everyone he faced. His pyro even seemed to have that extra "BOOM" before they went off. The mask itself was enough to scare most people. There's something missing now, more than just the mask.

 

[Scott Free]

Nobody mentioned Stunning Steve/The Ringmaster/Stone Cold Austin.
He's a textbook example as to why multiple gimmicks work, you keep changing till
you hit the jackpot.
Ask Rocky Maivia also.

 

[AgeOfOrton]

i think many because of the fact people get bored after a while of the same old stuff. many gimmicks give a superstar a chance to refresh a superstars gimmick

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

I wouldn't say many gimmicks was a bad thing, unless it's made obvious that the same guy has had several gimmicks.

For example, Mick Foley. What exactly was the point of having 3 gimmicks in WWE? Dude Love was something he never wanted to do in his professional career. Cactus Jack was his WCW/ECW gimmick and Mankind was his fledgling WWE gimmick. He was over as Mankind, to a high degree. Why did they need to have his other gimmicks come into play? What benefit did it give anyone? At the end of the day he may as well have been 'Mick Foley, the crazy fucker'. It's still the same guy taking the same ridiculous life shortening bumps, and giving pure gold on the microphone, except he occassionally changed his ring attire and catchphrase, and sometimes danced like it was the 60's and sometimes wore a sock on his hand. What else? Would HIAC have been any less of an iconic moment if Taker had thrown Dude Love off the Cell? Would his retirement match at NWO have been any less emotional if HHH had pinned Mankind? NO! The only thing the world would have missed out on was Mick Foley in the '98 Royal Rumble 3 times. Big whoop!

In other instances, it can indeed help a guy become a superstar, provided they don't mention the fact that he was once someone else. Did they mention that Rikishi used to be the Sultan? Did they make a big song and dance about Festus being the fake Kane? Are they going to mention that Umaga used to be Jamal in 3MW? Of course not. Because it wouldn't help anyone, and would probably only make things worse for that superstar.

In Rock, Austin and HHH's case it's different. They are characters that have developed.

Rocky Maivia started getting pissed off at the fans for jeering him constantly and dropped the happy go lucky mid card guy look, joined some pissed off black guys and became The Rock who wasn't going to take shit from anyone anymore.

Stunning Steve Austin doesn't need mentioning, it was a shit WCW gimmick and isn't relevant to his WWE career. The Ringmaster was Ted Dibiase's puppet and once Dibiase was 'forced to leave' it meant Steve Austin had to go it alone, and became Stone Cold. I didn't watch WWE back then, so someone tell me, did he leave and re-debut as Stone Cold, or did he just turn up one day and start flipping the bird and drinking beer?

HHH the blue blooded asshole made a couple of high profile friends and became just an asshole. He didn't leave for months and come back as someone else did he? He just changed his mannerisms and abreviated his name to something cooler.

In Kane's case it hasn't helped him at all and i don't feel i need say anything else about that.

Basically what i'm saying is, when a guy stops wearing genie pants and decides to carry a styrofoam head around, it's not going to help him get over if you remind people that 'Hey, The Snowman Al Snow was once Avatar', because then people will say 'Really? Avatar was shit, so therefore Al Snow will probably be shit too,' and some 60-75% of those people who learn that this new guy is someone they used to see, will switch off and not give him the time of day, and won't notice that the Head gimmick was actually pretty fun and a laugh to watch.

However, not changing your gimmick can be the death of you professionally sometimes. Gangrel's teeth will prevent him from ever ditching his vampire gimmick, but that's his real lifestyle. Perhaps if the Mean Street Posse had come up with some new ideas, they wouldn't have been reduced to jobber status and ditched. If Steve Blackman, Lance Storm and Dan Sevren had been a little more up beat, they'd have been given better runs in WWE. Kurrgan got over didn't he? He was 1997's equivalent of Kozlov now. Then he joined the Oddities and people liked him.

Other guys change gimmicks and the world stops caring. I bet Headbanger Mosh wishes he'd never become Chaz, because he was shortly unemployed after that gimmick change. Kama Mustafa got a few cheers as the Godfather, and nothing else. Bull Buchanan was B2 for like 3 weeks before they ditched him.

Could Muhammed Hassan have become a big time player if he'd dropped the pissed off Iraqi and become someone else? Did they HAVE to make Taker bury his career by powerbombing him off the stage and never mentioning him again? Or could they have given him a mask and some new tights and say 'hear you go, try that on for size and pray no one blows up a bus wearing a similar outfit this time around'

Sorry i've babbled a lot, here's my main point. Giving a guy a lot of gimmicks but letting the World know that three guys are in fact the same person ruins the mystique and aura, not only of all three gimmicks, but also the wrestler himsef, and the profession overall in one foul swoop. For me it's the same with shoot interviews and guys who have tantrums and shout at the bookers on TV when they aren't scripted to i.e every instance that Bret Hart got in Vince's face on Raw. Here's a traditionalist with absolute dedication to the business and its inner workings, and he goes and pisses all over kayfabe by shouting directly at Vince in front of the world because he doesn't appreciate being booked to look weak.

Vince McMahon kinda ruined HHH's character a little by calling him Paul on live TV. The audience is supposed to believe his name is ACTUALLY Hunter Hurst Helmsley, and in two seconds Vince McMahon ruined that facade for ANY wrestling fan that is committed to believing the lie. The Undertaker's wife did the same thing when she called him Mark during the DDP stalker angle, which is probably why they nver gave her a microphone again after that.

Multiple gimmicks? An ok idea if done properly, totally counter-productive for everybody involved with that company when they try to mix real life with kayfabe in the same instance imo. How big a joke would Kane be if all the new marks knew he was once Jerry Lawler's dentist and was of absolutely no relation to the Undertaker in any regard? (and yes, i'm sure people are going to say he's a joke now, but it'd be a fuck load worse if they mentioned his previous alter egos)

 

[Slyfox696]

The number of gimmicks someone has doesn't matter in the least. It's the way you play those gimmicks, and more importantly, how the fans respond to those gimmicks that matter.

For example, Hogan played the gimmick of the ultra-cocky heel, both early in his career and in the nWo. He did it VERY very well. He played the gimmick of the All-American hero, and did it VERY very well. Are people going to argue that Hogan is a worse wrestler than someone because he had two gimmicks? Not if they were smart.

A change of gimmicks is usually necessary when there is a change in face/heel disposition. Being a hero is not a good heel gimmick, and cheating is not usually a good gimmick for faces. It's the way you play those gimmicks that determines quality, not the number of gimmicks you have.

So, in the end, I don't think it matters if its one or many, just the way you play them.

 

[TwistofRKO]

I got this idea for a thread where I was arguing with Sam about HBK being betetr than The Undertaker. Give or take a few moments, Shawn has kept the same gimmick since he debuted - he is the heartbreak Kid. Compared to The Undertaker, who has had many gimmicks, and a wide variety of them too. The American badass was a far cry from his Dead Man gimmick he currently holds.

And then you look at Mick Foley, the man who had so many gimmicks I can't even keep up, yet has millions of fans around the world?

Which do you think is better for a wrestler, one gimmick, or many?

The Undertaker was definitely the wrong choice for an example. Minus three years he's had the EXACT SAME gimmick. HBK has had numerous gimmicks, just within the same character. The point that can be made is a combo of both. William Regal now is a far cry from his "Man's Man", but because he also completely changed everything about him. When you look at the Undertaker, he never broke character that much while in that stupid biker gimmick. He had a different look, but he didn't have to neccessarily change his gimmick, like throwing on a mask and start talking all the time... does that make any sense?

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

The Undertaker was definitely the wrong choice for an example. Minus three years he's had the EXACT SAME gimmick. HBK has had numerous gimmicks, just within the same character.

Not really. He's always been Shawn Michaels, except instead of being in a tag team where he was a pretty boy with some charisma, he was a pretty boy with charisma in a singles role. Like Rock, Austin and HHH his gimmick evolved, it didn't chnage.

The point that can be made is a combo of both.

This is where it gets confusing

William Regal now is a far cry from his "Man's Man", but because he also completely changed everything about him.

Technically he's not even the same guy. Steven Regal was the Man's Man, and then William Regal was the goodwill ambassador. Now Matt Stryker once explained that he changed his first name because he found out that he was related to WEilliam the Conqueror, and that's when i decided that Stryker sucks dick.

When you look at the Undertaker, he never broke character that much while in that stupid biker gimmick. He had a different look, but he didn't have to neccessarily change his gimmick, like throwing on a mask and start talking all the time...

His gimmick changed COMPLETELY during the Badass run. He went from summoning lightning and rolling his eyes into his head, and not being able to string a sentece together without a reference to death or corpses, to his Ministry persona where he brainwashed people to help him terrorize the WWE, to a Biker who simply wanted to kick people's asses and cripple them if the urge arose, and then back to the undead, lightning summoning demon. His character evolved, changed completely , and then reverted back to its original state.

does that make any sense?

It didn't really make sense to me. You gave 2 examples and then didn't make a point.

 

[TwistofRKO]

I believe you made the point for Regal yourself. He changed EVERYTHING, which is why he's still around. He didn't just use a different gimmick. What I took from the initial post in the thread was along the lines of changing gimmicks to stay fresh... Regal changed everything about him. Much like Jamal and Umaga. Keep the guy around, wrap him in something completely unrelated.

The Undertaker changed his GIMMICK under the biker crap, but he didn't break established character. He didn't get on the microphone and talk like Mark Callaway.

 

[Lee]

I'm sure you had a thread similar not too long back...but anyways I digress.

I think the best is actually a mix of the two, as we know most people will have different gimmicks until they try and find the right one..>Steve Austin, The Rock, Edge to name a few. Yet a feel the gimmicks that will be remembered are those that involve within itself;

HBK and Taker are two prime examples. Both men have had sort of different gimmicks, yet really they have stayed under the banner...HBK and the deadman, yet we know Shawn's had lots of incarnations of the HBK gimmick, as has Taker with the deadman gimmick. It's taking one, yet adapting it to different times in their lives, that's what keeps it fresh!

 

[Milkyway!]

It all depends. Nearly all of these two mens gimmicks you have chosen, aren't really diffrent. They match with the times, and they all have one central core. Folly, being a hardcore bad*** that will take risks, outside neccaccarry measures. Taker being a sadistic freak, that would beat on anyone, anyday, anyhow. Shawn's gimmick has been changed, but not overall. The heel shawn, is more serious. Is willing to do whatever it takes to get the win, and the title. Face shawn, is the natural babyface, does the right thing, and is (now anyways) willing to put people over. DX shawn, is silly charasmatic, and frankly the only good shawn to watch. >.>

 

[klunderbunker]

I don't have a problem with multiple gimmicks. A lot of the time people find their true calling in anothe gimmick. Taker broke into the business as just a big strong guy. Someone suggested to him to be a zombie. That worked pretty well. Sandman was a surfer. That turned out great didn't it? It's very rare to find someone's perfect gimmick. By switching it around, it allows them to find what works best for them. It worked for HHH, Austin, Hogan, ROck etc. Another facotr is that if you have a successful gimmick and go away from it, it makes it that much better when the original returns.

 

[The Magic Taco]

I also think that it depends how the wrestler plays it. If they are using one gimmick that isn't really working for them (like Jack Swagger), then they definitly need to change it. If they are playing their part well then they should keep it. Simple as that.