|
Post by The Dude on May 15, 2008 4:34:52 GMT -5
Anyone who thinks that was a work is a ing idiot, seriously come on. My thoughts exactly, it's pretty obvious that it wasn't a work.
|
|
|
Post by undertakerfan16an0 on May 17, 2008 2:53:24 GMT -5
i dont think so
|
|
|
Post by undertakerfan16an0 on May 17, 2008 3:02:07 GMT -5
if u watch the footage and alll that back stage stuff ull see its not a work vince screwd bret and i think shawn was in on it
|
|
|
Post by Chip on May 20, 2008 8:51:13 GMT -5
i think its very possible
how do we really know? we only know whats been reported on the internet, and what's been said on RAW & DVD's there are no "credible" sources. anyone could say anything about it however, how many things in wrestling history have been 100% real? im just going with the odds here. but who knows, it was a little before its time actually. because there weren't too many "real" angles back then
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 29, 2024 5:40:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2008 1:14:13 GMT -5
Just my opinion here,but,that incident that happened was nothing more than a kick to the groin to bret from vince!!
|
|
|
Post by wwe4ever on May 25, 2008 12:08:10 GMT -5
I think that Bret didn't know about it. Just look at the reaction on his face after the bell rang.
|
|
|
Post by mrindy on May 27, 2008 6:11:53 GMT -5
Doubt it
|
|
|
Post by OmegaGaijin on May 27, 2008 9:34:58 GMT -5
bret never realised though that the screwjob could have been a bleesing in disguse,because he never lost to hbk,and the fans knew it.being the oblivious mark i was back then(the good old days).bret losing to hbk cleanly would have been career suicide and would have deeply upset his fans,because of the real divide in fans back then. whenever it suits wwe they present results as 'real' and alter history to there liking.shawn having two clean victories over bret would have set up michaels as being far supieror over bret,and that he was sent to wcw with his tail between his legs(as was the ruthless ways of the monday night wars) would have really affected his stock imo,i woulnt have been able to show my face in school for a month aswell lol
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on May 27, 2008 9:43:29 GMT -5
Am I the only one that find it extremely odd that they happened to be filming a Bret documentary at the time and just happened to get the enitre incident on tape including backstage?In my mind it will always be the greatest work of all time. exactly The only reason I think it was a work because of that video. If it were real, why would Bret's wife call HHH Hunter and not Paul?
|
|
vivalaraza1331
Main Eventer
Joined on: Nov 3, 2006 9:48:08 GMT -5
Posts: 1,001
|
Post by vivalaraza1331 on Jun 21, 2008 0:51:37 GMT -5
I think the Montreal Screwjob was part shoot and part work. I do believe there was alot of tension between Bret Hart and Vince McMahon and I do believe both sides were very disappointed about Hart's impending jump to WCW. But at the same time, Bret and Vince both gained from the situation. The events allowed Vince to complete his turn from announcer to billion-dollar heel owner of WWE, a turn that was beginning before Montreal, despite what WWE might have you believe. As for Bret, he left the victim of a screwjob, a sympathetic hero to millions and, despite WCW's horrid use of him, Bret still remained the hero who escaped from WWE with his legacy. As far as him not appearing on WWE TV today, think about the reprecussions of admitting it was a work. All of the admiration he gained from the event would turn to backlash because the fans would feel, in the end and rightfully so, that they had been screwed. Recapping, the Montreal Screwjob allowed both men to get what they wanted. Vince became the monster heel and, as a result, his business prospered and Bret became an everlasting hero in the eyes of the fans.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago on Jun 21, 2008 11:16:46 GMT -5
The only reason I think it was a work because of that video. If it were real, why would Bret's wife call HHH Hunter and not Paul? It's probably just a nickname he adopted in the wrestling business much like when people refer to Shawn Michaels as "Shawn" rather than his actual name "Michael." Sean Waltman, or X-Pac, was also called "the Kid" a lot, too, based on his 1-2-3 Kid gimmick. And, yes, I know Shawn is Michael's middle name, but it sort of fits in with the argument I was trying to make.
|
|
|
Post by markallenkellner on Jun 21, 2008 14:26:06 GMT -5
I still think it's a work. Bret was free of his huge contract that Vince was no longer obligated to pay out. Bret goes from the company's top heel to the world's biggest babyface overnight and technically didn't have to lose the title in a clean win as he was "screwed" out of it. Unfortunately, WCW was too stupid to capitalize on Bret's popularity. Also, the Mr. McMahon character was born and Vince became the company's top heel.
Wait and see, years from now this will be revealed as a work.
|
|