What is "The Look"

[WWEboy13]

The thing that I keep hearing from many posters in many threads that a superstar has "the look". What is the look? Who has the look? Why?

 

[Disturbed]

I would have to go out on a limb and say John Cena because Cena has the muscular definition to be a big guy. How could a guy like Evan Bourne be taken serious in the
main event? Another guy that has the look is John Morrison because his gimmick reflects his looks. Alberto Del Rio has the look guys who don't have the look are the ones that are more boring, for example Ted DIbiase Jr. He doesn't have the rich look.

Back to Cena, his size and definition reflects his superman gimmick. When The Rock used to raise his eye brow, that showed his gimmick in his facial expression. It is hard to explain so I had to list examples.

 

[Ultra Awesome]

There is no real certain definition to what the "look" actually is. It is expressed in a variet of ways. For example, someone like the Rock could have the look; where as someone like Dolph Zigger has the look as well. Now, do both these superstars look the same? Of course not; yet, they both have the look.

The "look" that everyone talks about is but a vague term. If said superstar gives you the feeling that he looks like what could be considered a furutre world chamnpion, then he has the look. If said superstar does not give you that feeling, then he does not have the "look." There is no real facts to base the "look" from. So long as the overall image of the superstar screams future champion, then he undoubtedly has the look.

In reality, the "look" just depends on the way you interpret the image of a wrestler. The image that YOU decide whether he looks like championship material or not.

 

[Ferbian]

It's hard to specifically say what "the look" is. Because there's many different variations of the look, and there's really nobody that have ever truly reached perfection in terms of the look.

I guess the look in terms of professional wrestling is what makes someone look legitimate. A guy like Matt Morgan for example, looks legitimate without looking upper freakish. He's a big guy with a well trained muscular body, who looks like he could really kick everyone's ass.

But really, in the end it's all about looking legitimate.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Great question and many factors probably need considered. Prior to modern wrestling, the look probably wasn't a major factor - ability was paramount and if there was any sort of look it probably would have been looking like a legitimate hardass as opposed to a bodybuilder. The Hulkamania period was exactly the opposite - the look was unbelievable bodybuilder physiques, and ability wasn't the be all, end all. After the steroid scandal, while physique still mattered - size decreased and ability increased. Now, physique is at a low not seen since pre Hulkamania due to the many tragedies and wellness policies - if I was to pick a 'look' today, I'd say relatively normal sized natural gym addicts with an added extra to give them something unique... tattoos, hairstyle etcetra.

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

When it is said that a wrestler has the correct look, it means that he looks exactly like the character he is playing on screen. A case for example would be Stone Cold Steve Austin. He just looked like a tough beer swilling, take no shit type redneck. Another example is HBK when he started out in his "sexy boy" gimmick. He was a good looking guy and so it was believable that his good looks would lead him to become as arrogant as he was.

The more commonly accepted definition of "the look" is that a superstar who has "the look" looks legit in the sense that it would make a lot of sense if he is dishing out punishment to other wrestlers. But I do feel that that is just a particular example of what "the look" is. The look is all about looking the character you are playing be it a tough guy, a ladies man etc.

 

[Pole Smoker]

To make you more credible in the main event. Cena, Triple H, Undertaker are more credible because they are big guys and look tough to beat.

A look should fit your character. For example Cena is a good superman guy and his look fits the part. The Rock is a jock and fits the part too.

 

[Tech N9ne]

I think "the look" is a basic view of a person and be able to tell they are a pro wrestler. Also, some guys have the "look" of a superstar wrestler. More of the time that means their look appeals to wrestling fans in general.

Something for everyone I guess. Most of the main stars that someone would say has the look, ends up being someone that is easy to look at in the face. The women love him because of his body and what not. A big guy with a muscular physique seems easier to believe winning a match.

Guys with the "look" of a pro wrestler over years have been...

Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, Hulk Hogan, Bret Hart, Curt Hennig, The Rock, Triple H, John Cena, John Morrison, Brock Lesnar and many many more....

The "look" has changed over the year as well... Shawn Michaels was able to change what the "look" was. It was more of a muscular look before. Huge steroid snacking BUFF. LOL... Now it is an evolution of the "look"...

The "look" has a wider variety. Big muscular wrestlers have the "look", and also smaller, more normal guys are considered to have the "look" as well.

To me, I guess I would define the "look" as a person that looks like they are a pro wrestler and you can see being the standard bearer or World Champion.

 

[LitasRevenge79]

I've always wondered this myself. "Look" what exactly is "The Look." We've all heard and wondered about it. I think it goes through trends depending on the years. Some people stay classic no matter what the era is. You've got your HBK, and Undertaker, and Kane, Stone Cole, Roddy Piper, Dusty Rhodes etc. It seems like they supercede the trends and can be 'cool' no matter what year or decade. Now other superstars, its a bit gray, not so black and white. Especially when it comes to the female stars. Let's go back to the days of Mae Young and Moolah. Of course, they were trendsetters for their day and time. Then you moved up to Jumping bomb Angels, then up to the 80's and you saw Wendi Richter and Sherri Martel. Of course, they were innovators and started the trend for more outspoken women and girls to be athletic in the ring, and of course the flashy apparel. Then fast forward to the attitude era with Chyna, Trish, Lita, and Tori, and Victoria, etc. It was all about the sports, and sex appeal. Girls could be different, tattooed, and not afraid to mix it up with the guys, and yet the public was able to be enamored with these girls, they thrived on a side of business with dvd's, calendars, and extras that catered to the sensual side. It was about the sportiness of the girls that were in the ring. Then we moved a bit further, and got Mickie, Melina, Maryse, Kelly Kelly, Beth, Layla, etc, it seems to be an ebb and flow, its still was about pretty but more pretty than participation. Not as much on the sporty as it is the looks. Heaven forbid the girls get a little meat on their bones, or look like a regular girl with tattoos, like Lita did. I'm not saying the girls have to be the best all around like Trish and Lita and win hardbody contests, but certainly Natalya and Beth and Melina are better examples of more real body shaped girls. In terms of the guys, you've got smaller guys who had appeal to those, like Regal, a man's shaped guy, not the best looking man, but a very tech savvy guy with tons of experience to boot. CM Punk, not the most buff guy, but hell of a talker, and great ring experience as well. I think the "LOOK" thing is so open to interpretation for men more than women sadly.

 

[Long Island Iced WXYZ]

The thing that I keep hearing from many posters in many threads that a superstar has "the look". What is the look? Who has the look? Why?

The look is something that makes people notice you, stand out. Batista had a great look.

Batista had it, Sid had it The Rock had it, Hulk Hogan had it, and Cena has it.

This talk of a "look" is interesting.

Guys like Shawn Michaels and Chris Jericho have lessened the importance of "the look" and have made names for themselves based soley on their abilites. Not saying the aforementioned guys didn't have ability. Just that they had it easier.

 

[Calderownz]

To me, the look isn't how someone LOOKS, so to speak. It's how people LOOK at him, and what they see when they LOOK at him.

When I first saw Goldberg, with his first match with Hugh Morris, I said to myself, "This guy looks like more than just a jobber." He was just in good shape, looked intimidating and not in the least bit worried. He had a stance of confidence, and he looked legit.

When I saw him, I saw more than a jobber. More then just some big guy they brought in to lose to Morris. Not only did he have the look, when I looked at him, I could see something different in a sense, something unique. He had "the look."

Certain people have different variations of that look, and you'll look at them differently. But, to me, that's what it boils down to.