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

So it is the daddy of Sci-Fi superpowers, the Monoliths from 2001: A Space Oddessey.

This fight seems sort of unfair from the very moment you say the words Monoliths, partly because the Monoliths are both where you see and also not, they part exist in reality when they choose to and don't at the same time. Some sort of 'technological singularity' that we are not meant to be able to understand fully.

I suppose, the only way to make this fight fair would be set them against absolutely everything else in Sci-Fi, and this would be valid because the Monoliths don't particularly care much for humans, or any Earth dwelling lifeform/creation for the matter. And to be honest, they don't seem to particularly care for anything at all in regard to life and creation apart from that which is their own, they only thing they do seem to care about are the lifeforms they created on Europa which is specifically indigenous to Space Oddessey.

And they will obviously defend them to the extreme no matter what comes along.


So, drawing an entire armarda of Hollywoods Sci-Fi heroes, villians, anti-heroes and any other device or creation... this is the big one.


(PS. I don't think it would be a good idea to just say "the Universe would blow up"... let's just assume that the Monoliths and their competitors would like to keep the Universe intact).

Someone carves them up with a lightsaber.


/thread

Bruce Willis enters TMA-2 with said lightsabre, becomes one with everything, and kicks 1:4:9 ass as part of the infinite as starchild/McClane.

IE: wins....by cleverly defying convention and not drilling a bomb into the core of Europa.

(Or Q from star trek sends an storm of diamond comets into the monoliths, destroying them)

In 2010: The Year We Make Contact a scientist explains NASA tried atomics on the one buried on the lunar surface.

No penetration or even a scratch. Perfect atomic structure, sort of a quantum crystalline structure.

These things did transform Jupiter into a miniature star to heat the surface of Europa and create a new life form.

The only reason they interviened in human evolution was so that they could create the Star Child to worn humanity to stay away from Europa, which is kinda ridiculous but Arthur C. Clarke did write the book and he knew plenty of phsyicists and astronomers and even Carl Sagan, an astrobiologist!!

Aye but one was severely damaged in 2065 by a diamond comet.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Aye but one was severely damaged in 2065 by a diamond comet.

Not by the film's depiction.

By the film's depiction one turned into a million via such fission forces as Jupiter exploding.

As well as in the book, in which Jupiter's teranova ejects diamond shards larger than Mount Everest. Such *damage* will cause them to multiply.

There are few movie characters who can immulate the astronomical forces of novae.

Furthermore, the Monoliths were different sizes. The only reason Star Child could shut one down in 3001 was because he had an innate connection as well as a working knowledge of it's inner structure. Such access and knowledge to a Monolith's 'brain' would be incomprehensible even to the likes of Doctor Manhattan.

While the Q could comprehend such knowledge, despite the feasibility of ascertaining such, their species is exclusive to the show and novels, and has not been featured in film to my knowledge.

Oh so they made 2065 as a movie?

In 2010 IIRC they swarmed in Jupiter and added to it's mass which collapsed it, and it turned into a star. (alluding to the theory that Jupiter and Saturn were failed stars) The movie made it look like the monoliths just multiplied and multiplied. There was no mention of diamond shards whatsover being involved in the process, nor was it shown to be happening.


Movies only? I thought this was a challenge laid down to "all of scifi"..
Q for example could command such power.

Maybe Enterprise or Narauder could come in with Red Matter, and create a singularity that absords the novae.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Oh so they made 2065 as a movie?

Says who??



They as in one...the heat and pressure provided it with the ability to mutiply and create more mass, essentially transforming the chemical properties of Jupiter's core. If you read "failed star" from Arthur C. Clarke's writings then it was purely metaphorical.



If that were the case, it would have to be put into another forum, as this is the movie versus forum.



What novae? Is there a series of stellar explosions going on? How does that effect the Monoliths that are evolving various lifeforms across the cosmos? At best collapsing a planet sends the Monoliths forward in time. For the red matter to work the Enterprise would have to drill a hole into a planet's core, which it cannot do. Even with a ship that can, the Monolith will destroy it before it does.

Star Trek and Star Wars fleets and starships would also be unable to compete with the Monoliths, save the Doomsday Machine...again, exclusive to the series. A monolith could destroy that as easily as the Enterprise did anyway. As with the Rebel Fleet against the Death Star.

These things are too versatile.

Originally posted by Dolos
Says who??


I thought that it was a case of "says you!" because of the way your last answer was...you seemed to be talking about events that were not in 2010.. so thought that it was possible for a sec or two that some cheeky rapscallions had made 2065 and not told me.


Of course I mean't it as metaphor. Thought i made that perfectly clear. Oh and you're sourcing pro "mono"lith arguments from the books, yet simultaneously decrying anything from non-film medium that would oppose them. Hmmmmmm.


Very well, in that case: Anthony that weird "controls reality" kid from 'Twilight Zone: The movie' simply wishes them out of existence. /End thread




You mentioned novae.
Oh they were shown in either movie, were they? No. They weren't.
Hence here they don't (by your own logic) exist therefore they are none of our concern.



And what are the screenfeats for the Monoliths resisting Star Trek Grade weapons..? In which film were they shown repelling a death star beam? Our out warping a federation vessel at warp 10? Or penetrating the shields..? Which Clarke movie showed a monolith NOT being repelled/pushed aside by a starship's deflector dish? Or standing up to a high focus energy channeling from said dish?



Waffles are versatile. Monoliths relying only on movie feats aren't, really. They are machines. The Stargate one was impressive, there is no reason to suggest that each monolith has identical abilities. Hence the 'versatile' tag may inappropriate.

Bruce Almighty FTW.

BAM THREAD DEAD!

Clarke didn't make the films, Sadako of Girth.

Stanley Kubrick and Peter Hyams made the films.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
(Or Q from star trek sends an storm of diamond comets into the monoliths, destroying them)

Q was never in a Star Trek movie...or else the "omnipotent" power in his powerset would allow him to win.


There is "god" from many different movies, however. Bruce Almighty God? He can just think the monoliths out of multidimensional existence.

Jurassic park, Westworld, Coma, Congo, The Lost World.
Can you see the commonality..?

How about with Interview with a vampire, The Queen of the damned, The Vampire LeStat..?

(Besides the fact that you neglected to mention everyone else on the credits of both films that MADE the films,) It's obvious that Kubrick directed 2001, and sure: Hyams directed
2010....but theres this bloke called Arthur C Clarke whom wrote the novels without none of it would have made it to the big screen. Hence the use of the umbrella term to describe both movies.
Common sense, that seems to elude the pedant in you. )

Originally posted by dadudemon
Q was never in a Star Trek movie...or else the "omnipotent" power in his powerset would allow him to win.


There is "god" from many different movies, however. Bruce Almighty God? He can just think the monoliths out of multidimensional existence.

Q is everywhere.
Whether or not he chose to manifest in human form on those movies is of course 'another matter'..

As can that Anthony kid.
(Absolute control over reality.) And he can use it for destructive ends, whereas Bruce doesn't, really and doesnt have his powers as a natural part of him.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
As can that Anthony kid.
(Absolute control over reality.) And he can use it for destructive ends, whereas Bruce doesn't, really and doesnt have his powers as a natural part of him.
No no...the real god from Bruce Almighty. The Freeman god.

Oh right. Ok then.

Perhaps you can refresh me: At what point did Freeman's God go all old testament on people's asses..?

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Oh right. Ok then.

Perhaps you can refresh me: At what point did Freeman's God go all old testament on people's asses..?

When he made Evan Almighty Moses and knew all...even when Bruce tried to trick him. Oh...and the comment about "made you" to Bruce. He's the watered down, universally appealing (as to not offend), YHWH. Since he warps reality on a whim and can even alter the laws of physics in this universe (superdimensional compartmental filing cabnets!), he just thinks away the monoliths.

Oh ok, thanks: So no offensive destructive capabilities persay, then.

Still the Anthony style wishing away works well enough I guess.

Guys, shut up.





Lightsabers!

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Oh ok, thanks: So no offensive destructive capabilities persay, then.

Still the Anthony style wishing away works well enough I guess.

If causing them to disappear from existence is not an offensive ability to you, then, yes, I agree: no offensive abilities, at all.

Certainly in this context of the attacked using said ability in defensive manner.

Smashing their face in with a brick or shooting or burning them would be an offensive manuveur though, as that is active, not passive.