>>14253350>I stopped watching wrestling in 2003you stopped watching right before he turned back to deadman, which is when he got really good. only judging his career up to 2003, he was just a big dude who was always around and i remember people being tired of seeing him at that point. taker really hit his stride in his 40s. just bangers every year until he was like 50 and against a wide variety of workers. HBK, Edge, Lesnar, Orton (especially in 2003), Cena, even got great matches out of Batista.
>>14253363combination of that plus going back to deadman at WM20 really did it too. it had the feeling of going back to something classic, purposely nostalgic but very modern at the same time. sort of lent the impression that it's like a timeless gimmick. i love both the old campy Undertaker from the early-90s as well as the over-the-top dark and edgy Attitude Era stuff, but the 2004-onwards is like the gimmick finally matured kinda like a fine whiskey.
