Who could play Taker in the proposed origin movie?

[Jamesdude]

(Im not saying Taker cant play himself, but it wouldnt hurt to ask.)

Who do you guys think could pull off a good Western Taker in the planned origin movie by WWE Films? Ive posted this on a site called Imagine Casting also: http://imaginecasting.com/titles/results/4818/the-undertaker/

(The votes on the url i posted arent from me, but i agree that Jackie Earl Haley might pull of a decent Taker.)

[RileyTaker]

I think the only person qualified to play the Undertaker is the Undertaker himself, Mark Calaway. Anyone else would not present the character in the way that he needs to be presented. Besides, why make an Undertaker movie without having the true Undertaker in it? That would make no sense.

[Buddyclown]

True, but I'd say any dude who has fair skin and is inches taller than 6 feet stands a chance at getting the part (they can easily slap on a wig and a goatee later). I really don't know how this is going to pan out but I'm still pretty excited. Although I always thought that if they were going to make a movie about Taker that they would make it about the evolution of the Taker, like starting from his and Kane's childhoods, etc.

[Tombstonedvitim1]

I think the only person qualified to play the Undertaker is the Undertaker himself, Mark Calaway. Anyone else would not present the character in the way that he needs to be presented. Besides, why make an Undertaker movie without having the true Undertaker in it? That would make no sense.

I agree.

[Dan]

I should say it's not clear how closely this character will resemble the Undertaker we know. Clearly if it is set in the 1800s then the Undertaker who began life as a human child in the 1960s will not be involved. It seems the story will focus on the western Undertaker persona only, Vince's original creation, so really anyone could play the character because it's not going to be anything like we've seen from Mark Calaway. Still, no matter how loosely based it is on 'Taker's character, I'd love to see him play the role he made so famous.

[Insanity_X]

I'm going to hope for this being complete shit. I mean how in the hell are they going to explain all of the characters in UT's past without it being as convoluted as hell? there's no way in hell that UT's mum lived long enough to ***k Paul Bearer (I believe that's the relation), unless PB was alive then (and therefore Kane was alive in the 1800s too). and then there's the whole urn debarcle...

yeah, WWE shjould stay the hell away from UT's backstory unless they want to confuse everybody and contradict themselves.

[Veritas]

I think if they pitch the movie as a fictionalized version of what could have been? Sure. But as IX has said...UT has a very firmly established backstory with Kane. You need to be careful of what you do with it.

[Dan]

I think if they pitch the movie as a fictionalized version of what could have been? Sure. But as IX has said...UT has a very firmly established backstory with Kane. You need to be careful of what you do with it.

They're not going anywhere near it as far as I can tell. From what we've told it seems they're focusing solely on a character loosely based on the western mortician Calaway played. So basically it's a movie about a dead western mortician from the 1880s and not so much "WWE's Undertaker".

[Jamesdude]

After watching Mortal Kombat.........

Christopher Lambert would make a good Undertaker also. His whisper like voice would be perfect for Taker's personality

[Veritas]

Too old and too small.

[Knife]

This is an outrage.

[Ed Burns]

After watching Mortal Kombat.........

Christopher Lambert would make a good Undertaker also. His whisper like voice would be perfect for Taker's personality

GOOD GOD NO!!!!!!
That's as bad as 'Sad' Nicolas Cage playing the lead in Ghost Rider.