Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

ALL movie versions. i don't remember too much about SG movie version, so hopefully it's a good fight.

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/SM-1.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/GL.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/SG-1.jpg

vs

http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/Th.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/Hu.jpg
http://i937.photobucket.com/albums/ad214/prepman005/IM.jpg

Hinges on Superman, imo.

I know a lot people cite his turning back time feat when debating for him in a versus fight, but A.) That was intended as a out of the norm display of power and B.) Means diddly squat in combat context.

Superman solos.

I think Thor would give Superman hell by himself. He can't take all 3.

It depends...if you look at everything as a whole...he could solo. He has held up a continent, reversed time, moved a moon.

Superman solos. He lifted an entire continent while extremely weakened. I don't see thor doing anything similar soon.

Yeah, movie Supes solos easily imo. I fail to see what they can do to him physically, or what defenses they have against his retaliation. The movie versions aren't the comic book versions. Also, wrong part of the forum, I think this belongs in the movie section.

Team marvel wins.

DC Team wins by a small margin, Supergirl is a non factor. Superman is overall alot better stats and feats, just never showed any serious fighting skills.

Would argue that thor may just drop the hammer on him and there is nothing superman would be able to do except squirm underneath it.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman solos. He lifted an entire continent while extremely weakened.

He was fully recovered from the Kryptonite by then.

Originally posted by carver9
It depends...if you look at everything as a whole...he could solo. He has held up a continent, reversed time, moved a moon.

Unfortunately he's also been knocked out by a missile, and had to dodge rockets (Superman 3).

Still Movie Hulk is a non factor here. Supes can fly him into space a light speed.

Take into account Supergirl and GL, team DC stomps here.

Supes solos.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman solos. He lifted an entire continent while extremely weakened. I don't see thor doing anything similar soon. I think people over blow that feat a little bit.

It wan't a continent at the time, maybe a large island at most in size.

I mean still impressive but definitely not continent sized.

Team DC wins tho

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He was fully recovered from the Kryptonite by then.

No, he didn't. The doctors took out a still embedded shard of kryptonite in the hospital and when he was lifting that kryptonite island there were kryptonite shards just inches from his face. A few seconds of sunlight doesn't means he was fully recovered.





That's why it was a shitty movie. He also survived crash-landing from space.


This I can agree with, but superman solos.131

Originally posted by Newjak
I think people over blow that feat a little bit.

It wan't a continent at the time, maybe a large island at most in size.

I mean still impressive but definitely not continent sized.

Team DC wins tho
Didn't lex said it was going to become a continent? Any proof that it was just an island?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He was fully recovered from the Kryptonite by then.



Unfortunately he's also been knocked out by a missile, and had to dodge rockets (Superman 3).

Still Movie Hulk is a non factor here. Supes can fly him into space a light speed.

Take into account Supergirl and GL, team DC stomps here.

The continent was made out of kryptonite and he lifted a continent twice. One time was during the time Lois died by being suffocated by dirt.

I wouldn't consider movie Hulk as a non factor. The guy was beastly.

Originally posted by carver9
The continent was made out of kryptonite and he lifted a continent twice. One time was during the time Lois died by being suffocated by dirt.



Originally posted by abhilegend
No, he didn't. The doctors took out a still embedded shard of kryptonite in the hospital and when he was lifting that kryptonite island there were kryptonite shards just inches from his face. A few seconds of sunlight doesn't means he was fully recovered.





That's why it was a shitty movie. He also survived crash-landing from space.


This I can agree with, but superman solos.131

Oh I thought you were talking about Superman 1. I wasn't counting Superman Returns. Returns is a different continuity to 3 & 4, so if you count the Returns feat you cant count the moon feat.

Oh and for the record it was Returns that was the shitty movie

Originally posted by abhilegend
Any proof that it was just an island? Yes, it was much, much smaller than Australia.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh I thought you were talking about Superman 1. I wasn't counting Superman Returns. Returns is a different continuity to 3 & 4, so if you count the Returns feat you cant count the moon feat.

Oh and for the record it was Returns that was the shitty movie

He lifted a continent twice.

Originally posted by carver9
The continent was made out of kryptonite and he lifted a continent twice. One time was during the time Lois died by being suffocated by dirt.

I wouldn't consider movie Hulk as a non factor. The guy was beastly.
So beastly that he needed to punch a car several times just to break it and got koed by thrown into a building. He didn't even have a HF! I like hulk a lot, but that movie=shit

Originally posted by carver9
He lifted a continent twice. How about I lift your face with my fist? durhulk

Originally posted by Badabing
Yes, it was much, much smaller than Australia.
dur

Originally posted by abhilegend
Didn't lex said it was going to become a continent? Any proof that it was just an island? At some point it would grow that big yes, but even even in his plan he admits it will take time.

Comparison, seeing the yacht next to it, seeing Superman in comparison. Seeing the plane fly away.

It all points to it not being continent sized at all. Cause if it was continent size at the time those things would not have been visible to it when viewing its full size like most of those objects were.

Originally posted by Badabing
How about I lift your face with my fist? durhulk

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh I thought you were talking about Superman 1. I wasn't counting Superman Returns. Returns is a different continuity to 3 & 4, so if you count the Returns feat you cant count the moon feat.

Oh and for the record it was Returns that was the shitty movie
I never posted about a moon feat.
Save for the first two movies, other superman movies=shit.

Originally posted by abhilegend
dur Originally posted by carver9

Originally posted by Newjak
At some point it would grow that big yes, but even even in his plan he admits it will take time.

Comparison, seeing the yacht next to it, seeing Superman in comparison. Seeing the plane fly away.

It all points to it not being continent sized at all. Cause if it was continent size at the time those things would not have been visible to it when viewing its full size like most of those objects were.
Ok, but its still a ridiculous feat.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Ok, but its still a ridiculous feat. Oh I agree it was crazy. It makes him stronger than any of the marvel characters in terms of feats. although I do think Chris reeves Superman did move the moon so its a moot point.

But I just don't like when people call it a continent moving feat when it isn't even close.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Ok, but its still a ridiculous feat.

If he can lift that with his powers being near depleted, I don't think he would have a problem lifting a continent at full strength.

Originally posted by carver9
If he can lift that with him powers being near depleted, I don't think he would have a problem lifting a continent at full strength. There is a huge difference between large island and Continent.

Also you seem to forget he did go get a recharge before he did the feat, and used the Earth's land to shield him from the K-Nite for a large portion of the feat.

Yes he he still had a piece in him but it also wasn't large.

So there isn't really any evidence to support the idea he was near depleted when he did the bulk of the feat. He probably wasn't at full go, but there is a large difference between near depleted and operating at 80-90%. There is also no evidence to support he was operating close to maximum either,

but based on previous examples if he was near depleted around K-Nite then that would mean he was basically human.

So I think he was still operating at a pretty high level and fairly close to maximum imo

Of course if you factor in the Reeves' movies then yeah I would say he was probably not close to 100% but most people view them as different movies and characters.

Originally posted by Newjak
There is a huge difference between large island and Continent.

Also you seem to forget he did go get a recharge before he did the feat, and used the Earth's land to shield him from the K-Nite for a large portion of the feat.

Yes he he still had a piece in him but it also wasn't large.

So there isn't really any evidence to support the idea he was near depleted when he did the bulk of the feat. He probably wasn't at full go, but there is a large difference between near depleted and operating at 80-90%. There is also no evidence to support he was operating close to maximum either,

but based on previous examples if he was near depleted around K-Nite then that would mean he was basically human.

So I think he was still operating at a pretty high level and fairly close to maximum imo

Of course if you factor in the Reeves' movies then yeah I would say he was probably not close to 100% but most people view them as different movies and characters.

You are forgetting. Him landing on that same rock that he lifted depleted him to the point that Lex was able to rock him with a solid punch. The island itself weakened him and weakened him significantly. He also got beat up and knocked near unconscious by 3 other humans. That rock weakened him...he basically pulled it off on pure "will power" and strength.

Then you have to remember, kryptonite was coming out of the side of the Rock...it was near his face during the time he lifted it.

80%...Naah, I would say about 30 to 40%...just enough to get the job done.

Originally posted by carver9
You are forgetting. Him landing on that same rock that he lifted depleted him to the point that Lex was able to rock him with a solid punch. The island itself weakened him and weakened him significantly. He also got beat up and knocked near unconscious by 3 other humans. That rock weakened him...he basically pulled it off on pure "will power" and strength.

Then you have to remember, kryptonite was coming out of the side of the Rock...it was near his face during the time he lifted it.

80%...Naah, I would say about 30 to 40%...just enough to get the job done. He was also got a full recharge from the sun as far as we can tell.

Like I said for the bulk of the feat he had a shield keeping him from the K-Nite. As far as I can remember the k-nite didn't show up till the tail end of the feat. That's when it started poking through as far as I can remember.

30-40% is still within reason to me.

That's still not near depleted. To me near near depleted means like less than 10%.

But the main point is that just because he wasn't at 100% for that island lifting feat does not equate to him being able to easily lift a continent if he was.

Originally posted by carver9
He lifted a continent twice.

Twice in Bryan Singers continuity.

Once in the Superman 1-4 continuity.

But the latter also includes a moon shifting feat.

Originally posted by ares834
Supes solos. Not at all. The guy struggled with trucks and was hurt by manholes tossed at him. Thor is on another level in terms of formidability.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Not at all. The guy struggled with trucks and was hurt by manholes tossed at him. Thor is on another level in terms of formidability.

What? Trouble with Trucks? When? We haven't seen any strength feats from Movie Thor so Im not sure where you're getting this other level stuff from.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
What? Trouble with Trucks? When? We haven't seen any strength feats from Movie Thor so Im not sure where you're getting this other level stuff from.

He shattered a large portion of the Jotunheim landscape and broke the Bifrost Bridge.

Originally posted by Newjak
At some point it would grow that big yes, but even even in his plan he admits it will take time.

Comparison, seeing the yacht next to it, seeing Superman in comparison. Seeing the plane fly away.

It all points to it not being continent sized at all. Cause if it was continent size at the time those things would not have been visible to it when viewing its full size like most of those objects were.

Good point.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
He shattered a large portion of the Jotunheim landscape and broke the Bifrost Bridge.

Striking feats. Not really on par with the power to move the moon and reverse time.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Striking feats. Not really on par with the power to move the moon and reverse time.

Striking feats are pretty valid, at times more valid than pushing or moving something outside of combat related context. Superman reversing time was due to very special circumstances, and unless Thor, I don't know, kills Lois or something, I don't see Superman turning back time in a forum fight.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
He shattered a large portion of the Jotunheim landscape and broke the Bifrost Bridge.

We have no clue how difficult it is to destroy the Brifrost Bridge. Its unquantifiable. As for destroying the landscape it is impressive, but it did apear to be made only of ice. Superman's island lifting feat is far more impressive.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
He shattered a large portion of the Jotunheim landscape and broke the Bifrost Bridge.
When he charged mjolnir with lightning and struck the ground, right? What strength was required for destroying the bifrost bridge? Meh compared to the things superman did.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Not at all. The guy struggled with trucks and was hurt by manholes tossed at him. Thor is on another level in terms of formidability.
Lulz.

Originally posted by abhilegend
When he charged mjolnir with lightning and struck the ground, right? What strength was required for destroying the bifrost bridge? Meh compared to the things superman did. All he did was strike the Bifrost over and over, also considering Bifrost had the power to rip an entire planet apart, it could be viewed as a really good feat.

Of course like someone said totally quantifiable.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Striking feats are pretty valid, at times more valid than pushing or moving something outside of combat related context. Superman reversing time was due to very special circumstances, and unless Thor, I don't know, kills Lois or something, I don't see Superman turning back time in a forum fight.

Its not the reversing time itself which Im contemplating as a tactic, but more the sheer power he demonstrated there.

What's stopping him flying Straight into Thor at that kind of speed and hitting him with the strength to move the moon??

And if the only significant feats Movie Thor has are with Mjolnir, then whats stopping Supes from completely avoiding Mjolnir strikes anyway?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Its not the reversing time itself which Im contemplating as a tactic, but more the sheer power he demonstrated there.

What's stopping him flying Straight into Thor at that kind of speed and hitting him with the strength to move the moon??

And if the only significant feats Movie Thor has are with Mjolnir, then whats stopping Supes from completely avoiding Mjolnir strikes anyway?

The fact he never did anything like those in the movies and didn't fight like that at all? I'd rather not presume and project what I think might happen or is possible with powers over what we actually saw. Thor could just toss Mjolnir at Superman and command that it lay inert over his chest, effectively pinning him. I doubt that would ever happen in the midst of a fight. Thor was able to endure blasts from Gungnir, the same weapon which easily disintegrated Laufey and is powered by the same source as Mjolnir and the Destroyer. I could argue that based off of that, Superman's heat vision is rendered absolutely useless.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The fact he never did anything like those in the movies and didn't fight like that at all? I'd rather not presume and project what I think might happen or is possible with powers over what we actually saw. Thor could just toss Mjolnir at Superman and command that it lay inert over his chest, effectively pinning him. I doubt that would ever happen in the midst of a fight. Thor was able to endure blasts from Gungnir, the same weapon which easily disintegrated Laufey and is powered by the same source as Mjolnir and the Destroyer. I could argue that based off of that, Superman's heat vision is rendered absolutely useless.

The funny thing about it is that he was able to hear gatling gun fire from space and fly down in time to block the bullets.... to say that movie thor can hit someone with speed like that without showing anything other than peak speed is conjecture at best imo.

When did he ever command mjolnir to do anything like that in the movie? He did that to Loki because he was already laying down...

I really would like to know how any of that would render superman's heat vision "absolutely useless". Because it disintegrated a frost giant? Also, the destroyer was getting worked by the warriors three... of course thor was able to defeat it. I'm not saying that they aren't powerful, just that they have not been shown anywhere near island lifting, moon pushing, gatling gun shrugging, ftl levels...

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz. It's true.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
What? Trouble with Trucks? When? We haven't seen any strength feats from Movie Thor so Im not sure where you're getting this other level stuff from. In superman two he struggled either with a truck or a bus keeping it's momentum from harming others and causing more damage.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Striking feats. Not really on par with the power to move the moon and reverse time. Uhm, he reversed time after he failed to be fast enough to save Lois and through momentum. This isn't something he is capable of in terms of combat against Thor.

Originally posted by Sirius77
The funny thing about it is that he was able to hear gatling gun fire from space and fly down in time to block the bullets.... to say that movie thor can hit someone with speed like that without showing anything other than peak speed is conjecture at best imo.

When did he ever command mjolnir to do anything like that in the movie? He did that to Loki because he was already laying down...

I really would like to know how any of that would render superman's heat vision "absolutely useless". Because it disintegrated a frost giant? Also, the destroyer was getting worked by the warriors three... of course thor was able to defeat it. I'm not saying that they aren't powerful, just that they have not been shown anywhere near island lifting, moon pushing, gatling gun shrugging, ftl levels...

Gungnir disintegrated Laufey, who was portrayed as being Odin's peer. Thor took the same kind of blast and was still kicking. Based on that flimsly line of argument, I could argue that Thor could just take heat vision and be fine. There's a reason why I won't though:

It'd be stupid.

The Destroyer wasn't "worked" by the Warrior's Three. It was impervious to physical harm displayed in the film. It could be moved and stabbed, but it did no damage to it. It was only beaten by Mjolnir forcing its own disintegration beam back into its visor. Not really the low feat people think it is to be destroyed by its own power.

The problem is that Superman doesn't have many combat feats in the movies, outside of dealing with Sentry...er, Nuclear Man and Zod and cohorts. You could definitely apply his non combat feats, infinitely more impressive than those inside of it, and propose a method for why Superman would win, if not solo. But based on how he fought in the films, I don't see him crushing his foes with anything resembling ease. *shrug*

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The fact he never did anything like those in the movies and didn't fight like that at all? I'd rather not presume and project what I think might happen or is possible with powers over what we actually saw. Thor could just toss Mjolnir at Superman and command that it lay inert over his chest, effectively pinning him. I doubt that would ever happen in the midst of a fight. Thor was able to endure blasts from Gungnir, the same weapon which easily disintegrated Laufey and is powered by the same source as Mjolnir and the Destroyer. I could argue that based off of that, Superman's heat vision is rendered absolutely useless.

Well I never said anything about using Heat Vision as Mjolnir has shown it can absorb/deflect energy bolts anyway.

Thor showed some nice durability feats, I agree with that.

With combat feats are you suggesting that we have to see him do a specific move in a fight to prove that he can? For example is him moving at super speed not evidence that he can punch at super speed? That's kind of baseless tbh.

I mean does Superman in Superman Returns not hit as hard or as fast as Spiderman, because we've seen more from Spiderman in combat situations? Of course not, because Supes has shown feats to show he's a million times stronger and a hundred times faster than spidey.

But fine If we are talking combat specific then we see Superman with the speed to stop a nuclear missile, dodge rockets and catch a bullet, we've seen him run at super speed. So Superman has shown combat speed far beyond what we have seen from Thor.

As for the blast from Gungnir Thor endured, it did send him flying back. Im afraid Movie Thor needs considerably better feats to compete with Movie Supes.

The problem with Thor is that besides a couple of instances it's hard to gauge his power level, since most of his feats are against asgardian artifacts. Which we don't know how they compare to other things to see how powerful they are.

His best feats we can gauge are the landscape destruction scene, and the bifrost feat.

Originally posted by quanchi112
In superman two he struggled either with a truck or a bus keeping it's momentum from harming others and causing more damage.

Uhm, he reversed time after he failed to be fast enough to save Lois and through momentum. This isn't something he is capable of in terms of combat against Thor.
The same way thor and gladiator struggled to land a plane. He didn't want to harm any people inside the bus. Lulz at the attempt to lowballing though. Why can't he do time-reversal again if he wants?

Originally posted by abhilegend
The same way thor and gladiator struggled to land a plane. He didn't want to harm any people inside the bus. Lulz at the attempt to lowballing though. Why can't he do time-reversal again if he wants? No, he wasn't trying to lift it going down at tremendous speeds he struggled to slow down it's momentum. It wasn't even going that fast to begin with. It's out of character for Superman to do so. Why do you ask me to explain the obvious. It's like you don't comprehend what's in character for a character and what's out of character. He did not ever in the middle of a fight go back in time to defeat someone. He only did so after he wasn't fast enough to prevent Lois' death.

The fact I had to break this down for you is amusing.

Originally posted by quanchi112
No, he wasn't trying to lift it going down at tremendous speeds he struggled to slow down it's momentum. It wasn't even going that fast to begin with. It's out of character for Superman to do so. Why do you ask me to explain the obvious. It's like you don't comprehend what's in character for a character and what's out of character. He did not ever in the middle of a fight go back in time to defeat someone. He only did so after he wasn't fast enough to prevent Lois' death.

The fact I had to break this down for you is amusing.
Lulz, what do you expect from 1978 technique? Good to know that thor and gladiator combined aren't strong enough to lift a plane.
Again reading comprehension ftw. I asked why he isn't capable of time-reversal like you claimed. Your opinion is taken and discarded. Superman solos.

Movie superman? really? which of the movies are canon to movie superman by the way?

Originally posted by gogogadgetgo
Movie superman? really? which of the movies are canon to movie superman by the way?
First two movies and returns. It would be "unfair" to allow "super-melt-mjolnir-vision", don't you think?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz, what do you expect from 1978 technique? Good to know that thor and gladiator combined aren't strong enough to lift a plane.
Again reading comprehension ftw. I asked why he isn't capable of time-reversal like you claimed. Your opinion is taken and discarded. Superman solos. Good to know you can't tell the difference between that instance and the Superman movie feat.

I never said he wasn't allowed I simply said it's out of character. This isn't cbr, guy.

Do you have to type lulz in 80 percent of your responses ? It shows a lack of wit and creativity on your end.

Superman can't best Thor or even best a single k-nian when three attacked him straight up. Lulz.

Superman was a real pansy while Thor was a battle hardened monster but I think the power gap might be too much. Based on combat, I can honestly see Thor beating him, but I think he was intended to be on an entirely different level of power, at least at his high points.

Giving DC the win. I know nothing about Supergirl though, going to assume she's on Hal's level.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Good to know you can't tell the difference between that instance and the Superman movie feat.

I never said he wasn't allowed I simply said it's out of character. This isn't cbr, guy.

Do you have to type lulz in 80 percent of your responses ? It shows a lack of wit and creativity on your end.

Superman can't best Thor or even best a single k-nian when three attacked him straight up. Lulz.
Lulz at this coming from YOU.Originally posted by quanchi112
In superman two he struggled either with a truck or a bus keeping it's momentum from harming others and causing more damage.

Uhm, he reversed time after he failed to be fast enough to save Lois and through momentum. This isn't something he is capable of in terms of combat against Thor.
That was not what you said.
"Lulz">"thanos wins". 'nuff said.
*Yawn*
Superman solos.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman solos. He lifted an entire continent while extremely weakened. I don't see thor doing anything similar soon.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz at this coming from YOU.
That was not what you said.
"Lulz">"thanos wins". 'nuff said.
*Yawn*
Superman solos. Lulz at your response.

We argue based on what's in character and since Superman isn't in character to travel back in time in the middle of a fight to defeat an opponent it's not a viable tactic.

Thor breaks Superman easier than the guy at the diner.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Lulz at your response.

We argue based on what's in character and since Superman isn't in character to travel back in time in the middle of a fight to defeat an opponent it's not a viable tactic.

Thor breaks Superman easier than the guy at the diner.
yawning
Lulz. Superman solos.

Originally posted by abhilegend
yawning
Lulz. Superman solos. Based on what ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
Based on what ?
So, on the old route again? Based upon logic and facts.

Originally posted by quanchi112
No, he wasn't trying to lift it going down at tremendous speeds he struggled to slow down it's momentum. It wasn't even going that fast to begin with.

Are you honestly arguing Movie Superman isnt strong enough to stop a flying bus?? If so then I personally wnt even bother taking up this argument with you.

Just remember Baby Superman lifted a car. Adult Superman lifted entire continents, and even moved the moon in one continuity.

In the Bus scene Supes was only struggling to stop any innocents getting injured.

This should be a stomp in favour of DC. Superman wasn't as watered down as the rest of the characters here.

Thor was good, but nothing that impressive happened in the movie. Hulk was basically Thing level, his best feat was surviving a nuclear explosion (Ang Lee's Hulk) but even that was pretty minor league. IronMan would drink them all under the table though AND he'd bed Supergirl!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Are you honestly arguing Movie Superman isnt strong enough to stop a flying bus?? If so then I personally wnt even bother taking up this argument with you.

Just remember Baby Superman lifted a car. Adult Superman lifted entire continents, and even moved the moon in one continuity.

In the Bus scene Supes was only struggling to stop any innocents getting injured.
Did you forgot whose post was that?

Originally posted by janus77
IronMan would drink them all under the table though AND he'd bed Supergirl!

Oh yeah!

Gotta go with this.. Tony for the win.

hmmm wasnt hulk weakened prior to his fight with abom

Originally posted by abhilegend
So, on the old route again? Based upon logic and facts. That isn't answering the question you are being vague because you can't make a case.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Are you honestly arguing Movie Superman isnt strong enough to stop a flying bus?? If so then I personally wnt even bother taking up this argument with you.

Just remember Baby Superman lifted a car. Adult Superman lifted entire continents, and even moved the moon in one continuity.

In the Bus scene Supes was only struggling to stop any innocents getting injured. I didn't say that but based upon his combat feats he obviously needed to exert himself in order to do so.

I think Superman can definitely easily lift a car but a bus with lots of people it in carrying momentum isn't the same thing as a car either.

Wasn't Superman amped when he lifted the continent ?

So, anyone actually watch Supergirl? Can someone post some feats?

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Gungnir disintegrated Laufey, who was portrayed as being Odin's peer. Thor took the same kind of blast and was still kicking. Based on that flimsly line of argument, I could argue that Thor could just take heat vision and be fine. There's a reason why I won't though:

It'd be stupid.

The Destroyer wasn't "worked" by the Warrior's Three. It was impervious to physical harm displayed in the film. It could be moved and stabbed, but it did no damage to it. It was only beaten by Mjolnir forcing its own disintegration beam back into its visor. Not really the low feat people think it is to be destroyed by its own power.

The problem is that Superman doesn't have many combat feats in the movies, outside of dealing with Sentry...er, Nuclear Man and Zod and cohorts. You could definitely apply his non combat feats, infinitely more impressive than those inside of it, and propose a method for why Superman would win, if not solo. But based on how he fought in the films, I don't see him crushing his foes with anything resembling ease. *shrug*

By that same "flimsy argument", I could also ask what Laufey or movie odin have done for you to hold them in such high regard. They're Odin and Laufey, cool, but what have they actually done? It isn't enough to say "Well they're based off of the comic book versions, so..." Do you see my point? Also, when did thor take a full blast from gungrir without blocking with mjolnir?

What I think is stupid is implying that mjolnir can do things that it didn't do on film. Like chase someone around and fall on their chest....

If it was able to be given a fight by the warriors three, who couldn't be any more than high street level each at best, then I really see no reason as to why people think that it's as uber as the real one. Again, the movie versions are not the comic book versions. It isn't a low feat, it just simply is what it is.

Because fighting three kryptonians at once, and then some random guy made specifically by his arch nemesis to kill him aren't good enough combat feats? Let me ask you this Jake, do you think that movie thor, hulk, or ironman have good enough combat feats to take on Zod and co? How about the nuclear man? Movie supes' combat feats are well above anyone's here, as are his non-combat feats. To say otherwise would be ignoring the plots of most of the movies imo.

Originally posted by Sirius77
By that same "flimsy argument", I could also ask what Laufey or movie odin have done for you to hold them in such high regard. They're Odin and Laufey, cool, but what have they actually done? It isn't enough to say "Well they're based off of the comic book versions, so..." Do you see my point? Also, when did thor take a full blast from gungrir without blocking with mjolnir?

What I think is stupid is implying that mjolnir can do things that it didn't do on film. Like chase someone around and fall on their chest....

If it was able to be given a fight by the warriors three, who couldn't be any more than high street level each at best, then I really see no reason as to why people think that it's as uber as the real one. Again, the movie versions are not the comic book versions. It isn't a low feat, it just simply is what it is.

Because fighting three kryptonians at once, and then some random guy made specifically by his arch nemesis to kill him aren't good enough combat feats? Let me ask you this Jake, do you think that movie thor, hulk, or ironman have good enough combat feats to take on Zod and co? How about the nuclear man? Movie supes' combat feats are well above anyone's here, as are his non-combat feats. To say otherwise would be ignoring the plots of most of the movies imo.

Implied to be vastly more powerful than either Thor or Loki? Considering what Thor did to Jotunheim without apparent difficulty, it's safe to assume that Laufey and Odin alike are > Thor. When Loki was confronted by Thor, Loki shot Thor at point blank range. Same blast killed Laufey and reduced him to ashes. Whether that was due to Thor's armor, his durability, or a combination of the two, it's clear that he was able to take Gungnir blasts up close and personal without dying.

The Destroyer Armor wasn't "given" a fight from the Warrior's Three. Sif's sword had ZERO effect. She stabbed it, but due to the composition of the armor, it was able to merely shift its body around. It's apparently made of a flexible sort of metal and any physical damage done to it could stagger it or knock it down, but not deal any damage to it whatsoever. The only way it was damaged was by Thor causing it's disintegration beam to back up into its open visor, essentially imploding it with its own energies. So, yeah, it's a huge misconception to believe that the armor was weak or given a run for its money by the Warriors Three. It lost to Thor rather quickly, but only due to the backlash from its own power. It's not = to its comic book version, and no one is stating that, either.

I see nothing from Zod and cohorts to make me think they'd be so far beyond Thor or Hulk's means to fight based on what they did. If you apply sliding ABC scale logic to Zod and co by projecting what Superman has done out of combat and supposing that therefore Zod is in the range of Superman's class of moving islands and whatnot, okay, but really, Zod, Non, Ursa, they didn't wow me with their feats.

Which is what I'm getting at all this time.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
So, anyone actually watch Supergirl? Can someone post some feats?

I haven't watched it since before half this forum was born, so no, sorry.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Implied to be vastly more powerful than either Thor or Loki? Considering what Thor did to Jotunheim without apparent difficulty, it's safe to assume that Laufey and Odin alike are > Thor. When Loki was confronted by Thor, Loki shot Thor at point blank range. Same blast killed Laufey and reduced him to ashes. Whether that was due to Thor's armor, his durability, or a combination of the two, it's clear that he was able to take Gungnir blasts up close and personal without dying.

The Destroyer Armor wasn't "given" a fight from the Warrior's Three. Sif's sword had ZERO effect. She stabbed it, but due to the composition of the armor, it was able to merely shift its body around. It's apparently made of a flexible sort of metal and any physical damage done to it could stagger it or knock it down, but not deal any damage to it whatsoever. The only way it was damaged was by Thor causing it's disintegration beam to back up into its open visor, essentially imploding it with its own energies. So, yeah, it's a huge misconception to believe that the armor was weak or given a run for its money by the Warriors Three. It lost to Thor rather quickly, but only due to the backlash from its own power. It's not = to its comic book version, and no one is stating that, either.

I see nothing from Zod and cohorts to make me think they'd be so far beyond Thor or Hulk's means to fight based on what they did. If you apply sliding ABC scale logic to Zod and co by projecting what Superman has done out of combat and supposing that therefore Zod is in the range of Superman's class of moving islands and whatnot, okay, but really, Zod, Non, Ursa, they didn't wow me with their feats.

Which is what I'm getting at all this time.

I get that they were implied to be higher up than thor or his forces, but what truly struck me was that all of the movie asgardians were very neutered in comparison to their comic book versions, while movie superman appeared to be more pre-crisis eske, especially the reeves version. I saw literally nothing that would remotely put thor or anyone else on the list even close to movie superman's level.

ABC logic is only invalid when there is no valid evidence to to back the feats being attributed. However, this is not the case. Could Zod, Ursa, and Non push a moon, turn back time, etc? Probably.... they exhibited abilities that superman did not in the beginning, and seemingly mastered their powers with a couple of extra abilities (telekinesis, ambiguous combustion abilities, etc...), most of which even superman didn't have until later. So yeah, there is more evidence for than against the implication that they could do everything that movie superman could do and more. However, that argument isn't necessarily... because they were able to defeat a being that did all of those things on panel, and quite frankly that's all that the story line calls for us to know. Movie Supe's abilities were tested against quantifiable physical laws, and the movie kryptonians' abilities were tested upon Clark. This is ironically one of the few times in which abc logic (or at least something similar) has any validity whatsoever.

However, we cannot say this about Loki, Odin, Laufey, or thor, because all of their power levels were implied. There were few times that they were tested against a physial part of the world that was testable, or remotely common knowledge to the viewers, it was as if the writers were saying "We're writing the avengers, we don't have time for this. Read a comic, they're powerful okay..."Thor trashed the landscape of a frozen wasteland. This much is quantifiable, it takes a lot of power to do that... and superman lifted an island while in the process of dying, and it takes considerably more power to do that. We know that thor was at his best, while superman was arguably at his worst. Superman pushed a moon, and thor broke the bifrost. We know that the moon is a large celestial body held in place by the Earth's gravitational forces, which weighs around a couple quintillion metric tons (I think...), and we know that the bifrost bridge is a .... well we really don't know anything but the fact that thor carved up a landscape with mjolnir and struggled with that , but thats really it. So with all of this said, movie thor is not even comparable to movie superman when you actually look at the things of which they are both capable. Also, no version of movie hulk has shown anything that would lead me to believe that he would last in a fight with movie superman.

I guess we can just agree to disagree though man.

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/11/6/89d5c026-1949-443c-8f78-20e26b2aae37.jpg

Wow, this thread is quite enlightening.

It really shows the Marvel fanboys for who they really are. In Comic Book Versions, fair enough, its not unreasonable to take either side for something like Superman vs Thor, but the movie versions? Really? And its also important to note that the feats for Superman have been brought to their attention, but somehow they still maintain Thor would win?

I also read somewhere that Hulk should not be dismissed against Superman - really?

If you want to know who NOT to take seriously - this thread will give you a few hints.

I mean for crying out loud, even Carver9 is saying Superman wins without difficulty!

It's too late but if Quasar was subbed in for Ironman, this would be a lot more interesting.

Originally posted by Placidity
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/11/6/89d5c026-1949-443c-8f78-20e26b2aae37.jpg

Wow, this thread is quite enlightening.

It really shows the Marvel fanboys for who they really are. In Comic Book Versions, fair enough, its not unreasonable to take either side for something like Superman vs Thor, but the movie versions? Really? And its also important to note that the feats for Superman have been brought to their attention, but somehow they still maintain Thor would win?

I also read somewhere that Hulk should not be dismissed against Superman - really?

If you want to know who NOT to take seriously - this thread will give you a few hints.

I mean for crying out loud, even Carver9 is saying Superman wins without difficulty!
Don't you get it, its THOR!!! He smashed a bridge and shattered some frozen ground!!! Thats totally liek lifting an island while dying and reversing time by moving earth in opposite direction!!

Originally posted by Stoic
It's too late but if Quasar was subbed in for Ironman, this would be a lot more interesting.
Quasar was in a movie?

Originally posted by quanchi112


I think Superman can definitely easily lift a car but a bus with lots of people it in carrying momentum isn't the same thing as a car either.

Wasn't Superman amped when he lifted the continent ?

No BABY Kal-El could lift a car.

In Superman 4 Superman not only carries the Statue of Liberty but also moves the moon.

In Superman 3 he straightens the leaning tower of pisa.

In Superman 1 he's lifting up a huge amount of Earth from underground to stop an earthquake.

So yeah I can see where you might think he would struggle to lift a bus with lots of people and momentum.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Implied to be vastly more powerful than either Thor or Loki? Considering what Thor did to Jotunheim without apparent difficulty, it's safe to assume that Laufey and Odin alike are > Thor. When Loki was confronted by Thor, Loki shot Thor at point blank range. Same blast killed Laufey and reduced him to ashes. Whether that was due to Thor's armor, his durability, or a combination of the two, it's clear that he was able to take Gungnir blasts up close and personal without dying.


I personally didn't see any evidence in that movie of Laufey being particularly powerful. And its not like Thor just shrugged off that attack. Though Im betting movie Superman would of.



Originally posted by JakeTheBank
I see nothing from Zod and cohorts to make me think they'd be so far beyond Thor or Hulk's means to fight based on what they did.

Yes but tbh we saw nothing from Hulk or Thor to beleive they could contend with Superman in strength or speed. Hulk looks like he has an upgrade in the Avengers movie, but for now im afraid he has little (especially going by the Letterier movie)

Originally posted by Placidity
http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/11/6/89d5c026-1949-443c-8f78-20e26b2aae37.jpg

Wow, this thread is quite enlightening.

It really shows the Marvel fanboys for who they really are. In Comic Book Versions, fair enough, its not unreasonable to take either side for something like Superman vs Thor, but the movie versions? Really? And its also important to note that the feats for Superman have been brought to their attention, but somehow they still maintain Thor would win?

I also read somewhere that Hulk should not be dismissed against Superman - really?

If you want to know who NOT to take seriously - this thread will give you a few hints.

I mean for crying out loud, even Carver9 is saying Superman wins without difficulty!

Aside from Quan, who's saying Thor would win?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No BABY Kal-El could lift a car.

In Superman 4 Superman not only carries the Statue of Liberty but also moves the moon.

In Superman 3 he straightens the leaning tower of pisa.

In Superman 1 he's lifting up a huge amount of Earth from underground to stop an earthquake.

So yeah I can see where you might think he would struggle to lift a bus with lots of people and momentum. Yes, I understand in a liftathon not under the duress of his attacks he can lift a lot more than he can punch with.

I didn't say he might struggle I said he did struggle. Thor is far more skilled and formidable for Superman to stand a chance imo.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I personally didn't see any evidence in that movie of Laufey being particularly powerful. And its not like Thor just shrugged off that attack. Though Im betting movie Superman would of.





Yes but tbh we saw nothing from Hulk or Thor to beleive they could contend with Superman in strength or speed. Hulk looks like he has an upgrade in the Avengers movie, but for now im afraid he has little (especially going by the Letterier movie) Most of the asgardian's power were implied through out movie so it's hard to gauge just at what tier they operated on.

Still most people are right Superman in the Reeves' movies was on another level.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
So, anyone actually watch Supergirl? Can someone post some feats?

Can't say that I remember it all, but aside from flying, she didnt really do much I think.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, I understand in a liftathon not under the duress of his attacks he can lift a lot more than he can punch with.

I didn't say he might struggle I said he did struggle. Thor is far more skilled and formidable for Superman to stand a chance imo.
Lulz.
Based on what?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz.
Based on what? Are you going to debate this time or just keep the lulz coming ?

Based on the relative ease in which Thor defeated Loki, the Destroyer, and all his foes. The guy was a beast powerless while Superman isn't skilled at all minus his powers. He got worked by a local diner bully.

Originally posted by quanchi112


Based on the relative ease in which Thor defeated Loki, the Destroyer, and all his foes.

And what feats did any of these guys have to put them in Superman's league.

Its like me saying Movie Spiderman destroys Movie Superman because he defeated Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus and Sandman.

Point We need feats to know what level we're operating first before we decide beating "so and so" is impressive.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
And what feats did any of these guys have to put them in Superman's league.

Its like me saying Movie Spiderman destroys Movie Superman because he defeated Green Goblin, Dr. Octopus and Sandman.

Point We need feats to know what level we're operating first before we decide beating "so and so" is impressive. Watch the movie the ease in which the Destroyer was so far beyond any threats save Thor and how much stronger regular asgardians were than humans.


Destroying cars and getting knocked into them didn't really damage asgardians that much. A manhole cover tossed at Superman obviously affected him it didn't break against his skin.

Thor defeated his enemies with relative ease while Superman struggled against opponents without impressive feats either.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Watch the movie the ease in which the Destroyer was so far beyond any threats save Thor and how much stronger regular asgardians were than humans.


Destroying cars and getting knocked into them didn't really damage asgardians that much. A manhole cover tossed at Superman obviously affected him it didn't break against his skin.

Thor defeated his enemies with relative ease while Superman struggled against opponents without impressive feats either. I think you need to stop with the manhole cover Superman obviously has feats that change plus what is the context? Did other Kprtonians hit him with the manhole cover? Cause then it's not a low feat.


Besides Superman's feats from 1-4 pretty much make him better than anything Thor showed.

Thor's best showing that we can kind of quantify and understand is that landscape srushing attack he used.

Everything else doesn't matter.

The movie didn't focus on how much stronger the Asgardians are compared to humans, or in a way we can say they are in the same tier as Superman is based on feats. They really didn't have anything like that.

The destroyer suffers from the same thing. Implied power does not equate to real power. You can only go by feats.

The Destroyer was quite pathetic in the movie, the whole fight between it and Thor (and the warriors three) was barely causing any damage to the street it was taking place on.

Superman was poisoned with kryptonite and still lifted an island into space, he lifted an oceanliner too, before that.

There's no conceivable reason for arguing this. MOVIES versions are limited to what feats they demonstrate IN THE MOVIES. Superman has had far more showings and he generally is shown at levels of power not too far removed from the comics. Thor has yet to show anything above IronMan stuff... including hammering a 'silver knight' who couldn't even contend with a tornado.

Maybe Thor has some impressive feats in the '80s Hulk movie, but then he looked like Fabio so maybe not .

Originally posted by quanchi112
Are you going to debate this time or just keep the lulz coming ?

Based on the relative ease in which Thor defeated Loki, the Destroyer, and all his foes. The guy was a beast powerless while Superman isn't skilled at all minus his powers. He got worked by a local diner bully.
Nope, you wouldn't survive my debating with you.badawe
So, lulz.
What did loki, destroyer and cannon fodder frost giants do that was so impressive? Who needs skill when you can just bash faces in at superspeed? This isn't powerless superman vs thor. Lulz at you quan.

Originally posted by Newjak
I think you need to stop with the manhole cover Superman obviously has feats that change plus what is the context? Did other Kprtonians hit him with the manhole cover? Cause then it's not a low feat.


Besides Superman's feats from 1-4 pretty much make him better than anything Thor showed.

Thor's best showing that we can kind of quantify and understand is that landscape srushing attack he used.

Everything else doesn't matter.

The movie didn't focus on how much stronger the Asgardians are compared to humans, or in a way we can say they are in the same tier as Superman is based on feats. They really didn't have anything like that.

The destroyer suffers from the same thing. Implied power does not equate to real power. You can only go by feats. You aren't getting the point he should be durable enough for the manhole cover to break off against him since since he isn't things such as this can obviously affect him.

Feats are feats but Thor's hammer and his strength are obviously enough to injure/defeat Superman based off the movies.

To you it might not matter but not to me.

No, I never only go by feats. Ever.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You aren't getting the point he should be durable enough for the manhole cover to break off against him since since he isn't things such as this can obviously affect him.

Feats are feats but Thor's hammer and his strength are obviously enough to injure/defeat Superman based off the movies.

To you it might not matter but not to me.

No, I never only go by feats. Ever.
He didn't even blink at a point blank gun shot and the bullet flattened. That manhole was able to hurt superman because it was thrown by a kryptonian.
Again lulz.

Originally posted by abhilegend
He didn't even blink at a point blank gun shot and the bullet flattened. That manhole was able to hurt superman because it was thrown by a kryptonian.
Again lulz. Yes, a bullet didn't phase his eye but a manhole cover which was thrown far slower than a bullet hurt him. You can't dismiss certain feats and only use others.

Thor is far more skilled than Superman and ios powerful enough to hurt/destroy him.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, a bullet didn't phase his eye but a manhole cover which was thrown far slower than a bullet hurt him. You can't dismiss certain feats and only use others.

Thor is far more skilled than Superman and ios powerful enough to hurt/destroy him.
Thrown by someone equal to him in strength. Happens in the comics all the time.
Lulz.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Thrown by someone equal to him in strength. Happens in the comics all the time.
Lulz. What feats did the three renegades have ?

Are you saying Superman won't be hurt by Thor's hammer.

Originally posted by quanchi112


Are you saying Superman won't be hurt by Thor's hammer.

Theres nothing to suggest he would be harmed by it. And even if it can hurt him, he can easily evade it with his speed.

Originally posted by Newjak
I think you need to stop with the manhole cover Superman obviously has feats that change plus what is the context? Did other Kprtonians hit him with the manhole cover? Cause then it's not a low feat.




Yep it was thrown at him by a Krytonian at a point when he was already recovering from a fight with another Krytonian.

So yeah just a little bit of context missed out there.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What feats did the three renegades have ?

Are you saying Superman won't be hurt by Thor's hammer.
They battled and defeated superman who has the feats, do you argue that captain marvel is a peer of superman on feats?
No, it wouldn't. Other than zoners, there isn't an instance in other canon movies where he was hurt by anything besides kryptonite.

Originally posted by abhilegend
They battled and defeated superman who has the feats, do you argue that captain marvel is a peer of superman on feats?
No, it wouldn't. Other than zoners, there isn't an instance in other canon movies where he was hurt by anything besides kryptonite.

thats because in movie 1 and returns, his villain is...gasp! lex luthor!

actually if you take the movies individually, In superman 2, superman or the kryptonian criminals didn't do anything impressive that i recall.

movies 1 and returns on the other hand have him at stupidly powerful levels.

if we go by movies

1 - Superman solos
2 - Thor could probably take superman, not too sure, been a while since i watched superman 2, come to think of it, i have a copy lying around somewhere, might as well go watch some superman 2 for the lols.
3 - Superman solos

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Theres nothing to suggest he would be harmed by it. And even if it can hurt him, he can easily evade it with his speed.



Yep it was thrown at him by a Krytonian at a point when he was already recovering from a fight with another Krytonian.

So yeah just a little bit of context missed out there. He didn't easily evade a manhole or attacks from 3 slow knians who never used superspeed. In fact they were much slower in combat than Thor was on screen. Be objective.

It wasn't thrown faster than a bullet I suggest you rewatch the scene. Originally posted by abhilegend
They battled and defeated superman who has the feats, do you argue that captain marvel is a peer of superman on feats?
No, it wouldn't. Other than zoners, there isn't an instance in other canon movies where he was hurt by anything besides kryptonite. Yes, but they didn't use superspeed one time. The manhole was thrown far slower than a bullet. The k-nians on screen fought with slower reaction time than Thor displayed.

Zoners didn't throw the manhole anywhere near as fast as a bullet. What other supernatural beings did Superman go up against which failed to hurt him ?

Originally posted by quanchi112
He didn't easily evade a manhole or attacks from 3 slow knians who never used superspeed. In fact they were much slower in combat than Thor was on screen. Be objective.

It wasn't thrown faster than a bullet I suggest you rewatch the scene. Yes, but they didn't use superspeed one time. The manhole was thrown far slower than a bullet. The k-nians on screen fought with slower reaction time than Thor displayed.

Zoners didn't throw the manhole anywhere near as fast as a bullet. What other supernatural beings did Superman go up against which failed to hurt him ?
Like I said this type of stuff always happens in comics. Characters swing and throw objects that hurt other characters who should shrug them off in normal condition. You as always lowball whoever you don't like. That manhole isn't a low feat even if you scream till you're blue in face. Well for starters, he survived heat of re-entry and crashing from space without a scratch while totally exhausted. What did thor survive to compare?

.

I think it's pretty unfair to use the 4 or 5 Superman movies against one Thor movie. Its similar to saying the first Superman movie vs comic book Thor. It'll be fair once Thor has 4 movies out but for now it should be just one of Superman movies and GL and SG vs one of IM's and TIH and Thor.

In Thor, another feat that should be mentioned is when he gained his powers back after being killed by the Destroyer, Mjolnir is flying at lightning speed. The movie shows that Thor has complete control over Mjolnir (someone in these 5 pages said Mjolnir was never shown at that speed).

If we're using Iron Man 2, towards the end of the movie, he uses the laser beam to end the fight against the HAMMER drones. That's a feat that could knockout SuperGirl, Green Lantern, and possibly Superman (bet you guys will love that). Obviously he would get destroyed by Supes but just saying.

Green Lantern is no slouch either, but if we're using the movie version Hal is still a beginner with the ring.

Out of GL and SG vs IM and Hulk, I'd say Marvel Wins.

Originally posted by quanchi112
He didn't easily evade a manhole or attacks from 3 slow knians who never used superspeed. In fact they were much slower in combat than Thor was on screen. Be objective.

Your basically attacking the special effects of a 30 year old movie. They couldn't make every scene fought at super speed in those days.

But he's already shown in Superman 1 that he's faster than a speeding bullet as well as being bullet proof.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It wasn't thrown faster than a bullet I suggest you rewatch the scene.

Actually he was taken by surprise after a big tussle with Non. So I suggest you rewatch. I dnt need to. Iv watched that movie more times than you can imagine.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, but they didn't use superspeed one time. The manhole was thrown far slower than a bullet. The k-nians on screen fought with slower reaction time than Thor displayed.

Your points are all Mute, because Supes already showed in Superman 1 that he's faster than a speeding bullet. He showed in Returns that even his eye crushes a bullet. Thor has nothing on him in speed or strength.

Originally posted by Americas Shadow
I think it's pretty unfair to use the 4 or 5 Superman movies against one Thor movie.

Not really considering Thor's a modern day movie full of CGI special effects to show off his powers.

Just compare to Superman Returns if you like (even though I hate that movie).

Supes is still out of Thor's league in strength and speed.

Originally posted by Americas Shadow
I think it's pretty unfair to use the 4 or 5 Superman movies against one Thor movie. Its similar to saying the first Superman movie vs comic book Thor. It'll be fair once Thor has 4 movies out but for now it should be just one of Superman movies and GL and SG vs one of IM's and TIH and Thor.

In Thor, another feat that should be mentioned is when he gained his powers back after being killed by the Destroyer, Mjolnir is flying at lightning speed. The movie shows that Thor has complete control over Mjolnir (someone in these 5 pages said Mjolnir was never shown at that speed).

If we're using Iron Man 2, towards the end of the movie, he uses the laser beam to end the fight against the HAMMER drones. That's a feat that could knockout SuperGirl, Green Lantern, and possibly Superman (bet you guys will love that). Obviously he would get destroyed by Supes but just saying.

Green Lantern is no slouch either, but if we're using the movie version Hal is still a beginner with the ring.

Out of GL and SG vs IM and Hulk, I'd say Marvel Wins.
Where did you learn that mjolnir was flying at lightspeed? It was so fast that they saw it coming, the doctor moved jane away with some delay and they still got away a safe distance before it landed in thor's hands. Wow, what a speed! Tony said he can't use it twice, so it's moot anyways. Nope, gl would stomp hulk and iron man, his auto-shields were tough enough to protect him from sun's proximity while he was unconscious and strong ennugh to punch parallax in the sun against his will. He also crashed into meteor too IIRC.

This is so one sided it's not worth debating.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Where did you learn that mjolnir was flying at lightspeed? It was so fast that they saw it coming, the doctor moved jane away with some delay and they still got away a safe distance before it landed in thor's hands. Wow, what a speed! Tony said he can't use it twice, so it's moot anyways. Nope, gl would stomp hulk and iron man, his auto-shields were tough enough to protect him from sun's proximity while he was unconscious and strong ennugh to punch parallax in the sun against his will. He also crashed into meteor too IIRC.

How is it moot? He has one in each arm and the last 10 seconds give or take. Thats one person each arm then enough time for a third.

Originally posted by Americas Shadow
How is it moot? He has one in each arm and the last 10 seconds give or take. Thats one person each arm then enough time for a third.
He used them both and said that he can't use it twice. Anyway it isn't going to do anything to superman, hal might survive it. Those robots were getting destroyed by a single repulsor beam and colliding to pillars.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Like I said this type of stuff always happens in comics. Characters swing and throw objects that hurt other characters who should shrug them off in normal condition. You as always lowball whoever you don't like. That manhole isn't a low feat even if you scream till you're blue in face. Well for starters, he survived heat of re-entry and crashing from space without a scratch while totally exhausted. What did thor survive to compare? I am citing evidence you tried using he goes back in time as a legitimate tactic.

Superman was amped when he survived and I never said Thor was more durable than Superman more skilled and a better fighter. Lulz.

If we are using the version of Superman that moved a moon.. then there is no contest. Thor has no feats to suggest he is that powerful.

If we're using Superman Returns it's a more fair fight, but that isn't what's being debated.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I am citing evidence you tried using he goes back in time as a legitimate tactic.

Superman was amped when he survived and I never said Thor was more durable than Superman more skilled and a better fighter. Lulz.
Lulz. I'm done explaining it to you.
Amped? He lifted a kryptonite island while having a kryptonite shard inside his wound and blacked out from exhaustion. Lulz at desperation here.

Originally posted by gogogadgetgo
thats because in movie 1 and returns, his villain is...gasp! lex luthor!

actually if you take the movies individually, In superman 2, superman or the kryptonian criminals didn't do anything impressive that i recall.

movies 1 and returns on the other hand have him at stupidly powerful levels.

if we go by movies

1 - Superman solos
2 - Thor could probably take superman, not too sure, been a while since i watched superman 2, come to think of it, i have a copy lying around somewhere, might as well go watch some superman 2 for the lols.
3 - Superman solos

You know they're all in continuity with one another right? It's the same character.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Your basically attacking the special effects of a 30 year old movie. They couldn't make every scene fought at super speed in those days.This is just rich now you are blaming the special effects. We saw Superman go back in time he went so fast so when they wanted to portray him as fast they did.
I never said he wasn't.


I don't need to rewatch the movie.


Superman is faster but not more formidable or more impressive while in combat.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This is just rich now you are blaming the special effects. We saw Superman go back in time he went so fast so when they wanted to portray him as fast they did.
I never said he wasn't.


I don't need to rewatch the movie.


Superman is faster but not more formidable or more impressive while in combat.
Blah, blah, blah and more blah.yawning

Superman stomps./thread

Originally posted by abhilegend
Blah, blah, blah and more blah.yawning

Superman stomps./thread So then you concede again. Thor is too skilled and powerful to lose to Superman with how Superman and Thor fight in character on screen.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So then you concede again. Thor is too skilled and powerful to lose to Superman with how Superman and Thor fight in character on screen.
Lulz.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This is just rich now you are blaming the special effects. We saw Superman go back in time he went so fast so when they wanted to portray him as fast they did.
I never said he wasn't.


I don't need to rewatch the movie.


Superman is faster but not more formidable or more impressive while in combat.

Whether you like it or not you're lowballing feats from a 30 year old movie without CGI and with the very limited special effects of that time.

There was no matrix slow motion style at that time.

Yes they showed him travelling ftl and the end of the first movie. But you're lowballing by saying we did not see combat speed. Do you know how hard that would have been in those days??

And to show that level of speed in every scene would have been very expensive. If you want to lowball the speed thing, pick a scene from Superman Returns which is a modern movie in which the budget wasn't an issue (because Bryan Singer didn't give a crud).

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz. That isn't a retort.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Whether you like it or not you're lowballing feats from a 30 year old movie without CGI and with the very limited special effects of that time.

There was no matrix slow motion style at that time.

Yes they showed him travelling ftl and the end of the first movie. But you're lowballing by saying we did not see combat speed. Do you know how hard that would have been in those days??

And to show that level of speed in every scene would have been very expensive. If you want to lowball the speed thing, pick a scene from Superman Returns which is a modern movie in which the budget wasn't an issue (because Bryan Singer didn't give a crud). Whether you like it or not even back then he went so fast on screen he went back in time but that doesn't count as an example of super speed, right ?

I am simply being objective and not going by what if's. Superman fighting in character isn't as skilled or would react fast enough to best movie Thor. That's just my opinion don't let difference scare you. We just don't agree.

Originally posted by quanchi112
That isn't a retort.

Whether you like it or not even back then he went so fast on screen he went back in time but that doesn't count as an example of super speed, right ?

I am simply being objective and not going by what if's. Superman fighting in character isn't as skilled or would react fast enough to best movie Thor. That's just my opinion don't let difference scare you. We just don't agree. It isn't what if, he traveled FTL. That's no a what if.

Thor while good never really showed any speed feats in his film that come close to that.

You wanna see a good example of Superman using speed look at Returns we he had to save all those people when the flood was coming.

Originally posted by quanchi112
That isn't a retort.

Whether you like it or not even back then he went so fast on screen he went back in time but that doesn't count as an example of super speed, right ?

I am simply being objective and not going by what if's. Superman fighting in character isn't as skilled or would react fast enough to best movie Thor. That's just my opinion don't let difference scare you. We just don't agree.
Yeah, it is. Lulz is better than anything. Who care about your opinion anyway, I certainly don't.ermm

Originally posted by Newjak
It isn't what if, he traveled FTL. That's no a what if.

Thor while good never really showed any speed feats in his film that come close to that.

You wanna see a good example of Superman using speed look at Returns we he had to save all those people when the flood was coming. Yes, he did so not while in battle so it's out of character for him to do so in battle.

Thor showed himself to battle much faster against super powered opponents and with greater skill than Superman.

I think Superman will use superspeed to save people's lives just not to punch someone in the face.Originally posted by abhilegend
Yeah, it is. Lulz is better than anything. Who care about your opinion anyway, I certainly don't.ermm Your responses say otherwise. Anyway you conceded the debate to me so move on.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, he did so not while in battle so it's out of character for him to do so in battle.

Thor showed himself to battle much faster against super powered opponents and with greater skill than Superman.

I think Superman will use superspeed to save people's lives just not to punch someone in the face. Your responses say otherwise. Anyway you conceded the debate to me so move on.
Lulz. Back to "you conceded". Pitiful.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz. Back to "you conceded". Pitiful. I made my points you put up emoticons and lulz as your responses. That's a concession.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I made my points you put up emoticons and lulz as your responses. That's a concession.
Your responses at this point are too pathetic to reply. Just like I said, pitiful.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Your responses at this point are too pathetic to reply. Just like I said, pitiful. But you did reply without anything even resembling an argument. You seem to think mocking is an adequate response to a debate it isn't.

Originally posted by quanchi112
But you did reply without anything even resembling an argument. You seem to think mocking is an adequate response to a debate it isn't. Originally posted by abhilegend
Your responses at this point are too pathetic to reply. Just like I said, pitiful.

Originally posted by abhilegend
If my opinion truly doesn't matter quit responding or form an argument.

Everyone should stop wasting their time. No offense, but Quan's trolling all of you. Just put him on ignore. Anyway, there is no contest, movie Superman takes this easily and his team watches.

Originally posted by quanchi112
If my opinion truly doesn't matter quit responding or form an argument.
What's there to debate? Superman is stronger, faster, more durable etc than all of team 2 combined. He solos.

Originally posted by Sirius77
Everyone should stop wasting their time. No offense, but Quan's trolling all of you. Just put him on ignore. Anyway, there is no contest, movie Superman takes this easily and his team watches.
You think that someone in this thread doesn't know what quan's doing here?

Originally posted by abhilegend
What's there to debate? Superman is stronger, faster, more durable etc than all of team 2 combined. He solos. Superman is less skilled and will be put down by how Thor fights in character. This isn't powerset debating. I think Thor wins you are free to disagree.

Originally posted by Sirius77
Everyone should stop wasting their time. No offense, but Quan's trolling all of you. Just put him on ignore. Anyway, there is no contest, movie Superman takes this easily and his team watches.

Which is why MANY here have blocked him.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Superman is less skilled and will be put down by how Thor fights in character. This isn't powerset debating. I think Thor wins you are free to disagree.
Lulz. Who cares about what you think?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Lulz. Who cares about what you think? You continue to show you care. I can't speak for anyone else but I can speak for you based upon the amount of responses to my posts.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Which is why MANY here have blocked him.
Who hasn't put him on ignore except me?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Who hasn't put him on ignore except me? Merlyn.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You continue to show you care. I can't speak for anyone else but I can speak for you based upon the amount of responses to my posts.
Again, I do it for laughs. You know being in a hospitol and all that. I must say you're an efficient comedian.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Merlyn.
Poor guy.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Who hasn't put him on ignore except me?

The Mod squad, definitely. Carver (Quans girl), that's all I have.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Again, I do it for laughs. You know being in a hospitol and all that. I must say you're an efficient comedian. Comedy is one of my talents but my specialty is debating. Too bad you didn't take my up on the battlezone challenge but fear does that to people.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Comedy is one of my talents but my specialty is debating. Too bad you didn't take my up on the battlezone challenge but fear does that to people.
You are a debator and somebody fears from you, don't be silly. You're drunk again, aren't you?

Originally posted by abhilegend
You are a debator and somebody fears from you, don't be silly. You're drunk again, aren't you? It's debater not debatOr first off. Secondly, I think it's the pain from from injury clouding your judgment.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It's debater not debatOr first off. Secondly, I think it's the pain from from injury clouding your judgment.
Huh, I'm not you quan? If it was, I'd call you a debator which I didn't, so you're wrong again.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Yes, he did so not while in battle so it's out of character for him to do so in battle.

Thor showed himself to battle much faster against super powered opponents and with greater skill than Superman.

I think Superman will use superspeed to save people's lives just not to punch someone in the face. Your responses say otherwise. Anyway you conceded the debate to me so move on.

Its got nothing to do with fighting in character, its to do with special effects and movie budget in that time. Thats it. They didnt have the special effects to in those day to show 2 Kryptonians fighting at superspeed.

Now your going to say "but they showed him fly ftl", but:

1) It would have been expensive to do that effect constantly and
2) Its a completely different effect to having 2 people fight each other at superspeed.


End of.

If you cant accept this simple fact then Il assume you're just trolling.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Huh, I'm not you quan? If it was, I'd call you a debator which I didn't, so you're wrong again. I don't think highly of someone who doesn't even know how to spell debater. Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Its got nothing to do with fighting in character, its to do with special effects and movie budget in that time. Thats it. They didnt have the special effects to in those day to show 2 Kryptonians fighting at superspeed.

Now your going to say "but they showed him fly ftl", but:

1) It would have been expensive to do that effect constantly and
2) Its a completely different effect to having 2 people fight each other at superspeed.


End of.

If you cant accept this simple fact then Il assume you're just trolling. Be objective they showed super speed just not when the k-nians fought.

Irrelevant.

You can't just assume they'd add it in they didn't. We argue based on facts not speculation. Superman uses superspeed to save lives not to combat villains.

Originally posted by Sirius77
You know they're all in continuity with one another right? It's the same character.

yes i know and my point was if i saw superman 2 and didnt see superman 1 and returns and then i watched me some thor movie. base on only these two movies that i watched, i'd give thor the win over superman.

now if i watched superman 1 and thor only, i'd say, thor gets wtf stomped. same thing if i only saw superman returns and thor, thor gets wtf stomped.

but since all three are in continuity, thor gets wtf stomped and superman goes to solo team marvel.

^
Okay, I see what you're saying. That makes sense.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I don't think highly of someone who doesn't even know how to spell debater. Be objective they showed super speed just not when the k-nians fought.

Irrelevant.

You can't just assume they'd add it in they didn't. We argue based on facts not speculation. Superman uses superspeed to save lives not to combat villains.

You are far from objective. If you dnt understand a simple concept that high combat speed was difficult to show in a 30 year old movie, then theres nothing more for us to discuss.

And FYI you're the one speculating. You're accusation that Superman decides never to use speed when fighting villains, but only to save lives, is the most baseless piece of speculation anyone could come up with.

And it doesn't even make sense. Because he's only fought super villains TO Save Lives.

Besides Im sure Superman was chasing nuclear man all over the planet and to the moon while fighting him, so you're wrong anyway. Thats the most you're gna get in terms of combat speed from 30 year old movies.

Iv explained this to you many times now, so you can either accept the simple fact or keep trolling. Im certainly not going to waste any more time on a troll.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You are far from objective. If you dnt understand a simple concept that high combat speed was difficult to show in a 30 year old movie, then theres nothing more for us to discuss.

And FYI you're the one speculating. You're accusation that Superman decides never to use speed when fighting villains, but only to save lives, is the most baseless piece of speculation anyone could come up with.

And it doesn't even make sense. Because he's only fought super villains TO Save Lives.

Besides Im sure Superman was chasing nuclear man all over the planet and to the moon while fighting him, so you're wrong anyway. Thats the most you're gna get in terms of combat speed from 30 year old movies.

Iv explained this to you many times now, so you can either accept the simple fact or keep trolling. Im certainly not going to waste any more time on a troll. That's immaterial it didn't happen yet his best superspeed feat occurred in the movie. If you can't see you're speculating then I can't help you.

When does Superman use superspeed when fighting a super villain ? Give me examples. If you can't then you must concede the point.

Show me a clip of him fighting at superspeed. Asking you to back your claim isn't trolling it's debating try it sometime.

I think I'm the only one who has seen Supergirl. On TV. I just don't remember it. :/