Latest
  • Welcome!

    We're a UK based community of cult entertainment fans - so whether you're into WWE, Marvel, DC, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek and more - join us!

    It's free to register, so why not sign up and discuss whatever you're into...

Jim 'Warrior' Hellwig to sue WWE

DraVen

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,399
Points
83
I dunno... for that time period, I don't remember many heels getting very audiable "We want (heel)" chants the country over. Warrior was over for sure, but it was for a shorter time and to a different audience. Plus, he was a face in WCW getting booed. I don't remember Flair in such a position in any promotion.

Maybe the better term is successful, in terms of crowd reaction. They may not have been as loud (bar in the Caralinas) but it lasted longer, he was over as a heel moreso than any other, was considered a true staple of WCW and arguably had wider success in more promotions (Warrior in WCW was a failure, IMO. Even the fans eventually turned on him).
 

fspodjfsjdfsldk

New Member
Messages
149
Points
0
like i said though there is no proof that what wwe did was slander.... if everybody in the tape goes to court and says yes everything that was said was true. then warrior has no case and it will be thrown out.. peopel are taking sides now jsut because they hate the big powerful vince...... vince wil not loose in court nor wil the case ever be settled. warrior also was never going to wrestle again so this is not going to hurt him.. wrestling is fake and people know it. if you talk about a character in a movie the person who played that character could not sue.. warrior was a character in the WWF soaps he has no legal right on what the wwe does or says about his character
 

The Beltster

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,370
Points
113
DraVen said:
I dunno... for that time period, I don't remember many heels getting very audiable "We want (heel)" chants the country over. Warrior was over for sure, but it was for a shorter time and to a different audience. Plus, he was a face in WCW getting booed. I don't remember Flair in such a position in any promotion.
He got those chants in 1998 when he had been screwed with by Bischoff and WCW and when kayfabe was dying, everybody knew what was going on and they chanted for Flair. I dont remember many huge pops or Flair chants during the height of kayfabe in the 80's. Warrior was over huge for 4 solid years (88 - 91) and again in 92 and to a lesser extent, 96. It was indeed a different audience, thats why he was booed in WCW. The southern wrestling fans, WCW fans, didnt like him, nor did they Hogan after about a year of him being there. They prefered their own guys, Flair and so on.

DraVen said:
Maybe the better term is successful, in terms of crowd reaction. They may not have been as loud (bar in the Caralinas) but it lasted longer, he was over as a heel moreso than any other, was considered a true staple of WCW and arguably had wider success in more promotions (Warrior in WCW was a failure, IMO. Even the fans eventually turned on him).
I'd agree with that.
 

The Beltster

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,370
Points
113
fspodjfsjdfsldk said:
like i said though there is no proof that what wwe did was slander.... if everybody in the tape goes to court and says yes everything that was said was true. then warrior has no case and it will be thrown out.. peopel are taking sides now jsut because they hate the big powerful vince...... vince wil not loose in court nor wil the case ever be settled. warrior also was never going to wrestle again so this is not going to hurt him.. wrestling is fake and people know it. if you talk about a character in a movie the person who played that character could not sue.. warrior was a character in the WWF soaps he has no legal right on what the wwe does or says about his character
Yes, there is proof. Vince stated on the DVD that Warrior was fired in 1992 due to a drug violation, however there are public court records from their earlier lawsuit where Vince states, under oath, that Warrior was NOT released in 1992 due to drugs violations. Warrior wasnt released in 1992 at all, he left!

Its not a case of them defaming the gimmick, thats the point! They are defaming the man behind the gimmick, dont you see that?

Oh, and dont be so sure Vince will lose, Warrior beat him before, as did the WWF and many others.
 

SuperKick Kid

New Member
Messages
4,783
Points
0
Ok, this can only be settled one way:

Vince McMahon vs Ultimate Warrior at Wrestlemania 22. In a street fight.
 

Naitch

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,479
Points
63
BeltMark said:
He got those chants in 1998 when he had been screwed with by Bischoff and WCW and when kayfabe was dying, everybody knew what was going on and they chanted for Flair.
Yeah I got nothing really to add to the thread, other than to say that Flair got the chants big time at Great American Bash 91, the now infamous Ric Flair protest show or the 'We Want Flair' show. Take a horrible card, add a pissed off crowd upset that Flair had been allowed to leave and you get possibly the worst big two wrestling show of all time. The talk of Flair reminded me of this show and I felt the need to post. I'm just thinking out loud. Yeah...
 

Thirteen

New Member
Messages
3,448
Points
0
Drake said:
Please explain, cause im gonna love seing this.
If you don't know the difference between a good worker and a good wrestler you can't really call yourself a truw wrestling mark now can you?:thumbup2:
 

Drake

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,331
Points
63
Thirteen said:
If you don't know the difference between a good worker and a good wrestler you can't really call yourself a truw wrestling mark now can you?:thumbup2:
I know what a good wrestler is and a good worker is, I just typed wrestler instead of worker. :thumbup2:
 

Brad

Formerly Shawn_Michaels
Messages
2,255
Points
0
Drake said:
Im not gonna waste my time with you, just read Beltmarks last post.


Dude I couldn't care less about you, yeah im trying to destroy you'r reputation.:rolleyes2:

But when you make stupid comments such as ''Warrior wasn't a good worker so he doesn't deserve a good legacy, simple as that.'' and then when you go to explain why he was a good worker you fail miserably, then yeah im gonna argue you'r posts.

And are you sure that you weren't the one that put the wrong age?:lol:
Positive about the age, because all I did was state my opinion and then you got personal about it, you didn't state that i was wrong like Beltmark did and explain it, you personally put it against me, and how is that being mateur on this forum.
 

Brad

Formerly Shawn_Michaels
Messages
2,255
Points
0
Drake said:
I know what a good wrestler is and a good worker is, I just typed wrestler instead of worker. :thumbup2:
I don't think you did actually Drake, you attacked my comment that Warrior wasn't a good worker, so thats exactly what you meant and you didn't mean wrestler, and you typed worker in the first place, so you f*cked up not me, so go and start on someone else and try and make them look as small as they can because they believe something you don't.
 

fspodjfsjdfsldk

New Member
Messages
149
Points
0
yes warrioir won against the WWf before but that was a long time ago.. vince has way to much cash now that he could bury this in courts so that warrior would not be able to see a cent as long as he lives... im not taking vince side.. i jsut know what big companys can do to people... peopel win less of these kinds of suits then they did 10 years ago..


say warrioir won by some chance what we he get.. his wrestling days have been over for a while so he cant say that WWE hurt his chance to wrestle. so no money will b awarded there.. the most he would get form a court is a 100k wich im sure vince will make more of the movie sells then that. so in turn vince still wins...
 

Drake

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,331
Points
63
Brad said:
I don't think you did actually Drake, you attacked my comment that Warrior wasn't a good worker, so thats exactly what you meant and you didn't mean wrestler, and you typed worker in the first place, so you f*cked up not me, so go and start on someone else and try and make them look as small as they can because they believe something you don't.
I typed wrestler but I meant to say worker. I don't care if you think Warrior was a bad worker (Wich I think he wasn't), it was just the stupid comment that because you claimed that he was a bad worker so he didn't deserve a good legacy.
 

The Beltster

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,370
Points
113
fspodjfsjdfsldk said:
yes warrioir won against the WWf before but that was a long time ago.. vince has way to much cash now that he could bury this in courts so that warrior would not be able to see a cent as long as he lives... im not taking vince side.. i jsut know what big companys can do to people... peopel win less of these kinds of suits then they did 10 years ago..


say warrioir won by some chance what we he get.. his wrestling days have been over for a while so he cant say that WWE hurt his chance to wrestle. so no money will b awarded there.. the most he would get form a court is a 100k wich im sure vince will make more of the movie sells then that. so in turn vince still wins...
When people sue and win, the opposition have to pay ALL court costs, so even if it goes for ages (the last one ran over 5 YEARS), if Vince loses, Warrior wont be down a penny because Vince would have to pay ALL legal fees and whatever Warrior is awarded on top.

We'll have to see what happens because we obviously cant see into the future, but Warrior has a strong case.
 

Simon

New Member
Messages
3,452
Points
0
DING DING DING~!

Lawyer in the hizz-ouse.

I've watched the DVD, and come on people, I think Vince (surely after the number of lawsuits he's lost in the past) and the WWE would have made the DVD with Warriors likely-to-sue nature in mind..

Saying that, this is America, and you can sue anybody for anything over there so who knows. If you want my opinion, and even if you don't I'm giving it, they might have said Warrior was a crap wrestler and unprofessional at times but did the WWE really attack Warrior, I mean Jim Helwig's character? I don't think Warrior was made to look as bad in the DVD as he could have to be honest, and I think unless Warrior paid me a lot of money I wouldn't take his case on. Think about how some of the people got slagged in the Monday Night Wars DVD... didn't hear any lawsuit actions being raised there after all did we.

I'd be very surprised if WWE lost the action but if they do then SURELY this must put to rest the idea of Vince being a genius because you think the guy would learn to not leave his ass exposed by now.

edit: Actually, shut up me. I would take the case, because the more I think about it the more I then remember this is the same company that churns out such awful crap each week and has a track record of serious, serious stupidity with legal matters. ie. 'Oh we can get away with this Hassan character recreating Iraqi executions, its entertainment!'. Warrior will probably win.

edit edit: Oh hi me, bit of a schizophrenic I see.

edit edit edit: Yeh. Going a little insane. You had some good points there though.
 
Last edited:

Brad

Formerly Shawn_Michaels
Messages
2,255
Points
0
Drake said:
I typed wrestler but I meant to say worker. I don't care if you think Warrior was a bad worker (Wich I think he wasn't), it was just the stupid comment that because you claimed that he was a bad worker so he didn't deserve a good legacy.
Yes that was my opinion, now if I thought someone was a bad worker then I wouldn't of thought they deserved a good legacy. For example, if you thought someone was a bad worker, like if you disagreed with Jeff Jarrett never letting go of the title, you would think that he doesn't deserve the legacy he may get if he does, works both ways really, but it isn't a stupid comment, it's an opinion, and I am sure you have different opinions to me too.
 

Drake

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,331
Points
63
Brad said:
Yes that was my opinion, now if I thought someone was a bad worker then I wouldn't of thought they deserved a good legacy. For example, if you thought someone was a bad worker, like if you disagreed with Jeff Jarrett never letting go of the title, you would think that he doesn't deserve the legacy he may get if he does, works both ways really, but it isn't a stupid comment, it's an opinion, and I am sure you have different opinions to me too.
Dude you said the was a crap worker and didn't deserve a good legacy, fine that you'r opinion and then I asked you, how is Warrior a bad worker and you responded well he is mean, he is rude those things don't make someone a bad worker. Do you even know what you're tallking about?
 

Brad

Formerly Shawn_Michaels
Messages
2,255
Points
0
Drake said:
Dude you said the was a crap worker and didn't deserve a good legacy, fine that you'r opinion and then I asked you, how is Warrior a bad worker and you responded well he is mean, he is rude those things don't make someone a bad worker. Do you even know what you're tallking about?
Well I know what the difference between a worker and a wrestler so I must know for then you for a start. Being rude and arrogant does make someone a bad worker.

Being arrogant means you think you are the best and think you are above certain people, thats not good for any job but especially this sort of buisness where you have to think of everyone as equal especially your opponents and you can't think yourself better then Vince.

Being rude makes you a bad worker also because no-one would want to work with you if you was a rude man and you will have no respect as a person given to you.

Are you saying that being rude and arrogant makes you a good worker? I think this might show that you don't know what you are talking about, or maybe it's different in Puerto Rico, but in England and the US, it isn't a good thing being rude or arrogant.
 
Top