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

Explain?

marvel is really more inclined toward humor in my opinion

DCS Fights are solely around area damage

Marvels are more powerful and have better choreography. DC is pathetic.

FOX wins

Originally posted by carthage
FOX wins Nah, Disney's marvel wins.

Depends on the character. DCEU Doomsday is easily stronger than any avenger.

Foxverse is easily superior to the MCU in power.

Originally posted by playa1258
Depends on the character. DCEU Doomsday is easily stronger than any avenger.

Foxverse is easily superior to the MCU in power. Hulk is stronger than Doomsday. So you believe Fox is more powerful than Disney's marvel ?



Can't wait to see the Thanos doubters eat their words.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Nah, Disney's marvel wins.

Apoc, Silver Surfer, and Phoenix would bend Disney over. You know this to be true.

Thanos has a shot though and so does Strange, MCU wont be weak forever

Originally posted by carthage
Apoc, Silver Surfer, and Phoenix would bend Disney over. You know this to be true. Thor, Odin, Hulk, SW, Malekith, Celestials, Vision alone say otherwise.

Wait until Thanos the character I have championed my entire life. Prepare to eat crow, enemies.

DC has more powerful heroes (usually) but MCU has better fight choreography.

Fox has too much hax for the MCU to overcome.

Originally posted by playa1258
Fox has too much hax for the MCU to overcome. Bs. Celestials, Stones, Malekith, etc.

Xavier mindrapes the MCU.

So where is Fox characters now in regards to Marvel MCU?

Like how is this being broken up?

Originally posted by playa1258
Xavier mindrapes the MCU. You seem kind of stupid.

So Xavier can't mindrape your precious MCU?

Originally posted by playa1258
So Xavier can't mindrape your precious MCU? Of course not you simple minded gump.

Ok then. Just ignore what Xavier has done.

Good to know.

People just intuitively expect Superman to be more fantastically powerful than, say, Thor. Plus the likes of Thor have to be nerfed somewhat for peak humans to be relevant.

Well superman did pull the big boat...

Originally posted by FrothByte
DC has more powerful heroes (usually) but MCU has better fight choreography.

Pretty much this.

Originally posted by playa1258
Ok then. Just ignore what Xavier has done.

Good to know. Ignore the mind stone, the hordes of alien races, Celestials, Ultron, Asgard, etc. and pretend Xavier just mind wipes them all. You're an idiot.

Xavier mindrapes.

Originally posted by playa1258
Xavier mindrapes. Based on what ?

Xavier mindrapes.

Originally posted by playa1258
Xavier mindrapes. Mind stone, robots, Celestials, etc. quit being stupid.

DC might be stronger, but Marvel is more powerful.

Originally posted by TethAdamTheRock
Explain?

marvel is really more inclined toward humor in my opinion

DCS Fights are solely around area damage

In comics? About equal.

In movies? You could argue either way, but WB does seem happier to show a more realistic sense of collateral damage than Disney is. It's to be expected, though.

DC characters are invincible. Flash can mess with time, Supergirl can move about as fast and moves billions of tons, Arrow has better plot armor than Batman..

In the comics it's pretty much equal.

Originally posted by cdtm
DC characters are invincible. Flash can mess with time, Supergirl can move about as fast and moves billions of tons, Arrow has better plot armor than Batman..

Unless Felicity is around. Then he becomes about as useful as... Well, nothing, really.

Originally posted by cdtm
DC characters are invincible. Flash can mess with time, Supergirl can move about as fast and moves billions of tons, Arrow has better plot armor than Batman..




Quit being ridiculous.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Ignore the mind stone, the hordes of alien races, Celestials, Ultron, Asgard, etc. and pretend Xavier just mind wipes them all. You're an idiot.
Of that list only the Celestials are impressive and they're mostly unknown.

Originally posted by wakkawakkawakka
Of that list only the Celestials are impressive and they're mostly unknown. So Vision and Ultron aren't impressive ? There are a lot of other names as well we both know this to be true.

The MCU has introduced more godly type beings like the Celestials and Thanos, but we don't really know that much about their power levels.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were all still weaker than Reeves Superman tbh.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So Vision and Ultron aren't impressive ? There are a lot of other names as well we both know this to be true.
Vision wasn't on the list I quoted and even the final version of Ultron doesn't measure up to the best of what either verse.

DC loves using superlatives when giving superpowers to their heroes. I mean, Supergirl (TV series) lifted a key that weighed a million tons or something. Flash (TV series) can run so fast he now is able to go back in time when he wants to. Green Lantern can create anything he imagines, including a blackhole. Superman just flies around the earth to turn back time.

You won't see the MCU putting out such ridiculous figures and feats like that. Not in their movie/TV universe anyway. It makes it easier to take their powers more seriously.

Originally posted by wakkawakkawakka
Vision wasn't on the list I quoted and even the final version of Ultron doesn't measure up to the best of what either verse. So you don't think Vision with the mind stone is impressive ? Ultron's capabilities and he did take an attack from Vision, Thor and Iron Man. That's pretty impressive.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Mind stone, robots, Celestials, etc. quit being stupid. The mind gem and celestials haven't done shit so far.

Originally posted by carthage
Apoc, Silver Surfer, and Phoenix would bend Disney over. You know this to be true.



At current, only fools like Quanchi would argue otherwise...

At current, the characters portrayed by Fox would eat those in the MCU for breakfast...

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
The mind gem and celestials haven't done shit so far.



They are completely featless (well the Celestial did use the Infinity Gem to terraform that planets surface; but thats a feat for the Gem, not the Celestial)...

As is Thanos; at current, the only thing Thanos has shown is the ability to sit in a chair and give orders...

I would think what the Celestials did would be the exact opposite (by definition) of terraforming...

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I would think what the Celestials did would be the exact opposite (by definition) of terraforming...

Maybe so, my memory of that scene is a bit foggy; I honestly cant remember if it was destroying the landscape in that scene or changing it...

But I do remember it being implied that the Gem was being used there...

Well Superman and Doomsday seem to be stronger then the likes of Thor and Hulk but overall Marvel characters are more powerful.

Like Surfer, Phoenix, Apocalypse, Magneto.......etc

Originally posted by Estacado
Well Superman and Doomsday seem to be stronger then the likes of Thor and Hulk but overall Marvel characters are more powerful.

Like Surfer, Phoenix, Apocalypse, Magneto.......etc


I think people are separating the Fox Marvel movie characters like Surfer/Phoenix from the MCU Proper movie characters like like Thor and Hulk.

Although hopefully the MCU Proper will have Silver Surfer and Galactus soon.

Well thread didnt state we cant use Fox...

Cant wait to see Thanos in action hopin he will fight the Avengers without the Gauintlet as well..

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I would think what the Celestials did would be the exact opposite (by definition) of terraforming... He needed to use the power gem to do that.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
He needed to use the power gem to do that.

Well, duh, yeah. Everyone knows that.

My post was on LoM's use of the word "terraform", which usually means converting the surface into a habitable environment.

Well maybe you didn't remember and whatnot...

So that makes it everyone not named Quanchi

Originally posted by Estacado


Cant wait to see Thanos in action hopin he will fight the Avengers without the Gauintlet as well..


Well he has to come get the Mind Stone off Vision.

DC heroes are both far superior in power than Marvel's and DC also has better fight choreography for the most part. The Captain America movies are pretty good choreography-wise, but the actual super-powered fights leave much to be desired.

Originally posted by NemeBro
DC heroes are both far superior in power than Marvel's and DC also has better fight choreography for the most part. The Captain America movies are pretty good choreography-wise, but the actual super-powered fights leave much to be desired.

I'd have to disagree about the fight choreography. DC movies have almost no decent fight scenes. Clark vs. Faora was good as well as Batman's warehouse fight scene but all the others were crappy.

On the other hand, the MCU has Thor vs. IM, Thor vs. Hulk, the Antman fight scenes, AOU fight scenes and a bunch of others. While not exactly at the level of TWS or CW, they are still way better than DC fight scenes.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I'd have to disagree about the fight choreography. DC movies have almost no decent fight scenes. Clark vs. Faora was good as well as Batman's warehouse fight scene but all the others were crappy.

On the other hand, the MCU has Thor vs. IM, Thor vs. Hulk, the Antman fight scenes, AOU fight scenes and a bunch of others. While not exactly at the level of TWS or CW, they are still way better than DC fight scenes. How exactly do you think Thor vs. Hulk is better than Superman vs. any of the Kryptonians in Man of Steel? Or even Thor vs. IM.

Marvel portrays their super-powered characters as too slow and lumbering to be as enjoyable as the actual super-powered slobber-knockers DC has.

Thor vs. Hulk consisted of Hulk punching, Thor catching it, Thor being punched again, then Thor hitting Hulk with a hammer. Then Thor jumped on Hulk's back and clumsily tried to strangle him, then Hulk pulls Thor off of him and slams him on the ground before the fight is interrupted.

Maybe choreography is the wrong word, but I much prefer Superman's legitimately high-powered fight with Zod to Thor and Hulk's standard slug-fest.

I can't comment on AOU or Antman. Haven't seen them.

Faora's fight with Superman was also nice. Batman's scene in the warehouse was cool, too.

Originally posted by NemeBro
How exactly do you think Thor vs. Hulk is better than Superman vs. any of the Kryptonians in Man of Steel? Or even Thor vs. IM.

Marvel portrays their super-powered characters as too slow and lumbering to be as enjoyable as the actual super-powered slobber-knockers DC has.

Thor vs. Hulk consisted of Hulk punching, Thor catching it, Thor being punched again, then Thor hitting Hulk with a hammer. Then Thor jumped on Hulk's back and clumsily tried to strangle him, then Hulk pulls Thor off of him and slams him on the ground before the fight is interrupted.

Maybe choreography is the wrong word, but I much prefer Superman's legitimately high-powered fight with Zod to Thor and Hulk's standard slug-fest.

I can't comment on AOU or Antman. Haven't seen them.

Superman vs. Faora - and to an extent Superman vs. Faora/Namek - were good. I'll grant you that. But Superman vs. Zod? That entire fight consisted of them flying around and punching each other. You really consider that better choreography than Thor vs. Ironman? At least in that fight they got a bit more creative. Same with Thor vs. Hulk. Like I said, those weren't the best fights either but they're better than 2 guys just flying around and punching each other.

Then there's Cap vs. Ultron, Hulk vs. Hulkbuster, The opening sequence of AOU... tell me, what other fight sequences can you pull from DC that can compete with these? You mentioned MOS but are there other fight scenes from DC movies you'd like to bring to the table? You could always bring up Watchmen ofcourse, but then that would get trumped by WS or CW.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Superman vs. Faora - and to an extent Superman vs. Faora/Namek - were good. I'll grant you that. But Superman vs. Zod? That entire fight consisted of them flying around and punching each other. You really consider that better choreography than Thor vs. Ironman? At least in that fight they got a bit more creative. Same with Thor vs. Hulk. Like I said, those weren't the best fights either but they're better than 2 guys just flying around and punching each other.

Then there's Cap vs. Ultron, Hulk vs. Hulkbuster, The opening sequence of AOU... tell me, what other fight sequences can you pull from DC that can compete with these? You mentioned MOS but are there other fight scenes from DC movies you'd like to bring to the table? You could always bring up Watchmen ofcourse, but then that would get trumped by WS or CW.
I have to disagree with Thor vs Ironman being that much better. Considering how powerful the characters are supposed to be I was a bit underwhelmed by how tame the encounter was. Maybe its different taste but I think I prefer the over the top Metropolis fight between Zod and Superman.

Hulk vs Hulkbuster is cool but it kind of worked against itself towards the end of the fight. Then again I'm not sure a real comparison could be given as the DCEU only has two movies. With that said if the Batman vs Joker chase in TDK counts I'd put that in.

Originally posted by wakkawakkawakka
I have to disagree with Thor vs Ironman being that much better. Considering how powerful the characters are supposed to be I was a bit underwhelmed by how tame the encounter was. Maybe its different taste but I think I prefer the over the top Metropolis fight between Zod and Superman.

Hulk vs Hulkbuster is cool but it kind of worked against itself towards the end of the fight. Then again I'm not sure a real comparison could be given as the DCEU only has two movies. With that said if the Batman vs Joker chase in TDK counts I'd put that in.

You're confusing power levels with fight choreography. From what it sounds like, it seems you have an issue with MCU's power levels. That's fine, I have an issue with it too. A lot of the stronger characters get nerfed and don't really display their true power.

But what I'm arguing is fight choreography. Thor vs. Ironman had better choreography than Zod vs. Superman simply because Zod vs. Superman didn't really do much other than punch and fly.

The funny thing about Marvel is that their characters tend to fluctuate in power levels based on the needs of the story (and to allow the other characters to shine). The highs are pretty high but the lows can make you scratch your head (kinda like Iron Man's armor being torn like paper by them Extremis goons when it survived a DIRECT hit from a tank's main gun).

DC characters' power levels tend to be shown at a more consistent level (IMO). Thus the overall perception of their power levels tend to be set at their peak while the perceptions of marvel power levels tend to be subjective to the viewer and w/c showings you remember better.

After Any h2h encounter from CW and WS. Excluding CW altogether because it raised bars, MOS Clark vs faora was bliss. Batfleck warehouse choreography was off chains too. Id put those two below ws and cw and above both avengers movies.

Blade 1 blood rave though....phew wee.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
(kinda like Iron Man's armor being torn like paper by them Extremis goons when it survived a DIRECT hit from a tank's main gun).

IM3 sucked, but if Black's extremis mutates are anywhere near power-wise to comic versions, then they pack much more of a punch than something as primitive as a tank.

Mallen has raped Tony who was wearing his post-Pentagon, pre-Extremis suit...

And other Extremis mutate was able to fight Doc Samson...

Originally posted by Juk3n
After Any h2h encounter from CW and WS. Excluding CW altogether because it raised bars, MOS Clark vs faora was bliss. Batfleck warehouse choreography was off chains too. Id put those two below ws and cw and above both avengers movies.

Blade 1 blood rave though....phew wee.

Problem is batman's warehouse scene is only ONE fight scene and Superman vs. Kryptonians is only 1 fight scene. That's definitely not enouogh to conclude that DC has better fight choreography. We can't just ignore the fight sequences from Superman Returns, The TDK trilogy, Green Lanter, etc.

Originally posted by FrothByte
The TDK trilogy

The horror.

Worst fight scenes ever. Especially in Begins.

Originally posted by NemeBro
How exactly do you think Thor vs. Hulk is better than Superman vs. any of the Kryptonians in Man of Steel? Or even Thor vs. IM.

Marvel portrays their super-powered characters as too slow and lumbering to be as enjoyable as the actual super-powered slobber-knockers DC has.

Thor vs. Hulk consisted of Hulk punching, Thor catching it, Thor being punched again, then Thor hitting Hulk with a hammer. Then Thor jumped on Hulk's back and clumsily tried to strangle him, then Hulk pulls Thor off of him and slams him on the ground before the fight is interrupted.

Maybe choreography is the wrong word, but I much prefer Superman's legitimately high-powered fight with Zod to Thor and Hulk's standard slug-fest.

I can't comment on AOU or Antman. Haven't seen them. This. Thor v IM, Antman, or any of the fights in Marvel so far have nothing on Superman vs Zod.

The best fights to this day though are Maguire Spiderman movies, Superman vs Zod, and Hulk vs Abom. That gives Fox, MCU, and DC their own respective wins. Spiderman 2.1 Train Fight reigns supreme though.

There's also the DD fight choreography which is the best show choreography I've ever seen. With the exception of Abom and DDs fights, Marvels fights have been beyond weak, and dwarfed by DC.

People are confusing collateral damage and good fight choreography .

Choreography is hard to judge when it comes to super powers and super powered fights. Supes vs Faora actually did have great phases in the fight because the fight was grounded. Supes vs Zod have us our first completely in-flight fight and they did good with what they had, with it being packed with epic moments. I'd rate that waaay above Thor grappling with Hulk for a bit.

Rating choreography with its normal definition (Daredevil, every Kung-fu movie ever made) doesn't work with super hero movies IMO. You have to judge them differently.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
IM3 sucked, but if Black's extremis mutates are anywhere near power-wise to comic versions, then they pack much more of a punch than something as primitive as a tank.

Mallen has raped Tony who was wearing his post-Pentagon, pre-Extremis suit...

And other Extremis mutate was able to fight Doc Samson...

Well, that's the thing tho. No one in the movies was anywhere near power-wise to the comic versions.

I mean, remember the safe that Faora threw Kal into w/c Kal dented a bit? Well, a tank's main gun would punch a hole thru that vault door (if I got the penetration values right) like it was tinfoil (well, "tinfoil" is a bit of hyperbole on my part, but you get my meaning). The fact that it only scorched IM's faceplate was kinda WTF worthy.

Essentially, following that logic, Extremis goons can tear thru bank vault doors with their bare hands easily.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Choreography is hard to judge when it comes to super powers and super powered fights. Supes vs Faora actually did have great phases in the fight because the fight was grounded. Supes vs Zod have us our first completely in-flight fight and they did good with what they had, with it being packed with epic moments. I'd rate that waaay above Thor grappling with Hulk for a bit.

Rating choreography with its normal definition (Daredevil, every Kung-fu movie ever made) doesn't work with super hero movies IMO. You have to judge them differently.

Getting 2 superpowered dudes to fly around and smash each other repeatedly isn't good choreography. There's no imagination in it. No intricacy. No technique. No complexity.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Getting 2 superpowered dudes to fly around and smash each other repeatedly isn't good choreography. There's no imagination in it. No intricacy. No technique. No complexity.

Plus: so... much... cgi... xD

Originally posted by FrothByte
Getting 2 superpowered dudes to fly around and smash each other repeatedly isn't good choreography. There's no imagination in it. No intricacy. No technique. No complexity.

I thought that was kind of the point. That much raw power wielded by people that weren't experienced with it, and the damage that caused.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I thought that was kind of the point. That much raw power wielded by people that weren't experienced with it, and the damage that caused.





But ignoring that small fact, it's clear Kal is a mass murderer.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Getting 2 superpowered dudes to fly around and smash each other repeatedly isn't good choreography. There's no imagination in it. No intricacy. No technique. No complexity. As opposed to Thor dodging a punch, catching a punch, and getting in a hammer hit on Hulk? Or Ultron and Loki getting trashed in every scene? We got stuff like this:

http://alfa.gifs-planet.com/new3/1498.gif
http://static5.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_medium/11117/111178184/5178975-6570183543-super.gif
http://i.imgur.com/RS8BvUj.gif
http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-11-2015/O0kOZL.gif

A fight that was pulled straight out of DBZ. This was pulled right out of my childhood fantasies and given life. Its the kind of fight people have been wanting to see Supes in for decades, and we got it. It absolutely dwarfs anything in Marvel so far. Did they tackle eachother through one too many skyscrapers? Yeah, but its like thats all anyone remembers.

I think Spider-Man vs Doc Ock deserves a mention.

Turns out I was right, people are confusing collateral damage/scale with good choreography.

Using their logic, BvS had better fight choreography than the Raid.

I think "good" in terms of fight choreography kinda gets subjective to the individual.

Some like the sense of scale and power that was shown in the MoS fights.

Others will like the fast and methodical fights scenes in WS and CW.

Some would like the visceral, brutal and bloody. Others, impactful, emotional and gripping.

It's all preference.

Blade probable had THE best scenes but people always forget he started this shit

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I think "good" in terms of fight choreography kinda gets subjective to the individual.

Some like the sense of scale and power that was shown in the MoS fights.

Others will like the fast and methodical fights scenes in WS and CW.

Some would like the visceral, brutal and bloody. Others, impactful, emotional and gripping.

It's all preference.

In that case they are confusing good and enjoyable.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In that case they are confusing good and enjoyable.

Well, unless a clear criteria for "good" was pre-established prior to discussion (industry-used/industry-standard criteria such as complexity, fluidity, difficulty, etc), then I don't see how they are "confusing" anything. "Good" has many meanings, after all.

So you're saying we have to start treating everyone like they're idiots and spell every last thing out in words that even a retarded 2nd grader couldn't misunderstand?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Well, that's the thing tho. No one in the movies was anywhere near power-wise to the comic versions.

I mean, remember the safe that Faora threw Kal into w/c Kal dented a bit? Well, a tank's main gun would punch a hole thru that vault door (if I got the penetration values right) like it was tinfoil (well, "tinfoil" is a bit of hyperbole on my part, but you get my meaning). The fact that it only scorched IM's faceplate was kinda WTF worthy.

Essentially, following that logic, Extremis goons can tear thru bank vault doors with their bare hands easily.

Sigh. True.

IM3 extremis villains were low-lv human torches, basically...

Originally posted by Silent Master
So you're saying we have to start treating everyone like they're idiots and spell every last thing out in words that even a retarded 2nd grader couldn't misunderstand?

No, I'm saying that the term "good" is, by itself, a subjective term. Ppl are allowed to interpret it how they wish and unless you specify "industry standard" you cannot judge their opinions and preferences as wrong or right.

Now, if you want to go ahead and mention "in an industry sense" or as "seen by experts". Then we can actually move this to a more objective discussion rather than one where we argue simple semantics.

Good is only subjective if you're rating something on how much you enjoy it and not its actually quality.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Good is only subjective if you're rating something on how much you enjoy it and not its actually quality.

Enjoyment-factor is actually one major criteria that would define the "quality" when discussing entertainment mediums.

And ppl are allowed to focus on the criteria w/c they value the most.

Perhaps what you're probably saying is "overall quality as defined by experts"?

I get it, you think that everything is subjective and that quality doesn't exist, IOW with your line of logic a stick figure is just as good as the Mona Lisa

Originally posted by Silent Master
I get it, you think that everything is subjective and that quality doesn't exist, IOW with your line of logic a stick figure is just as good as the Mona Lisa

Um. Wow. That went nuts all of a sudden. What 's with the insistence of a dichotomy here? And why the passive-aggressive strawmanning? Who said anything about "everything" being subjective and when did I say quality doesn't exist? We're only talking about this topic specifically and the ppl posting here.

Read the OP. He didn't specify what exactly "better" means. And, in fact, his question implies that he wasn't even asking for "fight scene quality" (as it pertains to how experts see it) but how the fight scenes and effects probably made certain characters "seem" more powerful.

Ironically, tho, last I heard, some "stick figures" are actually being sold as high-level "art" these days. A couple of lines drawn in an orange background sold for over 100million USD. Funny how that worked out.

Funny thing is, I've met and worked with quite a few experts in my life. Top ppl of their respective fields. Outside things that are unquestionably provable mathematically, many of them (other than the immature and extremely intellectually arrogant) defer to the fact that their opinions are just that.

You're talking about how people feel about it, not it's actually quality.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're talking about how people feel about it, not it's actually quality.

We just kinda went full circle here. Already addressed this.

Yes, by basically admitting that you're talking about people's feelings about x and not how well x was made.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I think "good" in terms of fight choreography kinda gets subjective to the individual.

Some like the sense of scale and power that was shown in the MoS fights.

Others will like the fast and methodical fights scenes in WS and CW.

Some would like the visceral, brutal and bloody. Others, impactful, emotional and gripping.

It's all preference.

Nah, I think good choreography is good choreography regardless of how you put it. What I think confuses people is the difference between good choreography and a good action scene. An action scene can be good even without good choreography. It can rely on great spectacle, destruction, good shooting angles and camera work, slow motion, intensity, etc. etc.

Good choreography however is much more specific. It's the way the combatant's movements are orchestrated. The more intricate, complex or inventive the movements are and the better they work seamlessly usually means better choreography. Doesn't need to have fancy kungfu moves. Achilles vs. Hector had superb choreography yet not one of them threw a high kick.

Indiana Jones shooting the sword guy is an example of a great action scene that had almost zero choreography.

Did someone mention nightcrawlers xmen 2 scene

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, by basically admitting that you're talking about people's feelings about x and not how well x was made.

Strawman.

So people still don't get Art is subjective.


Just look at the evenly split reaction on X-Men Apocalypse with views (even from so called experts) ranging from it being outstanding to it basically being trash.

Art is completely subjective. You have to attach criteria and specific measurements of those criteria for it to even begin to be Objective.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Turns out I was right, people are confusing collateral damage/scale with good choreography.

Using their logic, BvS had better fight choreography than the Raid.

Choreography doesn't just mean "good martial arts". It's a really vague term, especially when you bring in movies.

Superman v Zod wasn't about kung fu, it was about demi-gods fighting and people not being able to do a thing about it but run away. The choreography suited that goal just fine (and we did get the occasional parry/block too), and in that context, is "good" imo.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
So people still don't get Art is subjective.


Just look at the evenly split reaction on X-Men Apocalypse with views (even from so called experts) ranging from it being outstanding to it basically being trash.

Art is completely subjective. You have to attach criteria and specific measurements of those criteria for it to even begin to be Objective.

How one feels about art is subjective, I agree.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Nah, I think good choreography is good choreography regardless of how you put it. What I think confuses people is the difference between good choreography and a good action scene. An action scene can be good even without good choreography. It can rely on great spectacle, destruction, good shooting angles and camera work, slow motion, intensity, etc. etc.

Good choreography however is much more specific. It's the way the combatant's movements are orchestrated. The more intricate, complex or inventive the movements are and the better they work seamlessly usually means better choreography. Doesn't need to have fancy kungfu moves. Achilles vs. Hector had superb choreography yet not one of them threw a high kick.

Indiana Jones shooting the sword guy is an example of a great action scene that had almost zero choreography.

Choreography, by definition, is the arrangement of actions/movements (used to generally mean dance but is also used in other forms of art) to create a performance.

I am not arguing against the point that complexity/difficulty/etc being a solid metric for determining what makes a movie's choreography "good". I'm arguing that ppl will have different interpretations on w/c metric best describes what makes a scene's choreography as "good". Beyond its complexity, its difficulty and its timing, many use a performance choreography's ability to communicate the correct emotion/reaction and how strongly it brings out said emotion/reaction in its audience. And above all that, "good" choreography still has to look good and entertain. Extremely complex and difficult choreography can still fall flat to its audience.

However, once we establish an agreed upon metric (w/c is what proper critics do), we can reduce the subjectivity of the discussion and actually discuss these things in a more objective manner.

The problem with this thread is that each side is kind of arguing against each other not realizing that either side are trying to prove completely different things.

See, this is the false dichotomy that Silent Master seems to be stuck with. He is confusing me saying that "good" being subjective also means that I am saying that "good" choreography is ENTIRELY and can only be subjective. Literally confusing, "kinda gets" as "can only be".

My point is that saying something's quality can't be judged because it's art and art is subjective is just an excuse used by people that are too lazy to think.

A painting being called art doesn't mean it's quality as a painting can't be objectively measured.

Originally posted by Silent Master
My point is that saying something's quality can't be judged because it's art and art is subjective is just an excuse used by people that are too lazy to think.

A painting being called art doesn't mean it's quality as a painting can't be objectively measured.

And I never argued against this point. Just that there are many approaches and metrics to how art is judged. And many ppl prioritize certain metrics over others. Many different interpretations of "good".

And that in order to argue this thread with full objectivity, an agreed upon metric needs to be established between debating parties.

this is actually being talked about

Originally posted by Nibedicus
And I never argued against this point. Just that there are many approaches and metrics to how art is judged. And many ppl prioritize certain metrics over others. Many different interpretations of "good".

And that in order to argue this thread with full objectivity, an agreed upon metric needs to be established between debating parties.


Precisely.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Bs. Celestials, Stones, Malekith, etc.

So what feats do the Celestials have? Before you say it, I am not asking for feats they did whilst they had one of the infinity gems.

According to a paper clipping in BvS, Superman is strong enough to shift tectonic plates.

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_500.png

That's just nutty.

Originally posted by abhilegend
According to a paper clipping in BvS, Superman is strong enough to shift tectonic plates.

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_500.png

That's just nutty.


Nice find. Reeves Superman did that as well.

DC doesn't cap their characters like Marvel I mean come on dragging planets through space with a chain or galaxy busting sneeze.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Nice find. Reeves Superman did that as well.

I don't think entire Avengers roster put together can do that.

Originally posted by golem370
DC doesn't cap their characters like Marvel I mean come on dragging planets through space with a chain or galaxy busting sneeze.

Yeah, of all the comic-movies recently, would have to say Fox comes closest to portraying their characters at comic-level power. MoS next. Marvel just goes the lazy route for continuity purposes I'm thinking (big effects cost big money and it's hard to expand into TV and the like if they did that).

How strong you have to be to shift a tectonic plate Nabisco?



Can Thor or Hulk do that?

Originally posted by abhilegend
How strong you have to be to shift a tectonic plate Nabisco?



Can Thor or Hulk do that?

Dunno Abhilyin :P

The math and science behind that is beyond me. We don't see how he did it and what he exactly did to move the plates. And we don't get to see the plates. All we got, after all, is a headline. So, basically, no way for me to quantify it at all.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Dunno Abhilyin :P

The math and science behind that is beyond me. We don't see how he did it and what he exactly did to move the plates. And we don't get to see the plates. All we got, after all, is a headline. So, basically, no way for me to quantify it at all.
You need to see how to shift a tectonic plate to see how it is shifted?

Even the smallest tectonic plate is close to quadrillion tons in range or thereabouts.

Originally posted by abhilegend
You need to see how to shift a tectonic plate to see how it is shifted?

Even the smallest tectonic plate is close to quadrillion tons in range or thereabouts.

Like I said, I don't know how any of that works, so you're asking the wrong person.

Yeah, you're wrong Nabisco.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yeah, you're wrong Nabisco.

Well I guess that puts MOS Krytonians well ahead of Supergirl. Before Supergirl seemed ahead with her million ton lifting feat.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yeah, of all the comic-movies recently, would have to say Fox comes closest to portraying their characters at comic-level power. MoS next. Marvel just goes the lazy route for continuity purposes I'm thinking (big effects cost big money and it's hard to expand into TV and the like if they did that).


Fox only went there in the last 1 or 2 movies. Before that they were way too scared to do things like giving Magneto his shields. They thought it'd be too "unrealistic".

I was always like if you're too scared to do that then at least give him adamantium armour instead which they've already shown he can manipulate. But no need now, they've finally gotten the balls to give him his full power set (including control over the Earth).

Anyway Marvel tends to give them all their variety of powers (mostly), they just scale it down from the comic book versions. I don't think it's about cost, I think they've just always been more concerned with character portrayals first and foremost, and making good movies.

If only DC cared about making good movies.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yeah, of all the comic-movies recently, would have to say Fox comes closest to portraying their characters at comic-level power. MoS next. Marvel just goes the lazy route for continuity purposes I'm thinking (big effects cost big money and it's hard to expand into TV and the like if they did that).

I don't know about the MCU being lazy. It might be that, but I think it has more to do with proper story telling and choreography. It's hard to get everyone into fight sequences when Thor, Vision and Wanda are so far above guys like Cap, Hawkeye and Black Widow. So I can see why they degrade the upper tier's powerset and give the lower guys a boost. I don't like it, but I can agree with it.

But why can't we have both good fight choreography and powerful superhero fights? I think Marvel has choreography down but they tend to scale back their characters a little too much IMO.

Originally posted by abhilegend
According to a paper clipping in BvS, Superman is strong enough to shift tectonic plates.

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_500.png

That's just nutty. Holy crap. Is that valid? Can we use that as a feat here?

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Holy crap. Is that valid? Can we use that as a feat here?
Yes, it's as valid as it can get.

That tectonic plate literally makes Hulk's leviathan feat look like an ant lifting a leaf. GG

NO ONE in MCU is stronger than DCEU Superman

http://dceu-positivity.tumblr.com/post/144919408040/medias-coverage-of-superman-feats-in-18-months

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_1280.png

States how Superman moved a tectonic plate to prevent an Earthquake. Just to let you know, those things are heavy af.

Just a rough estimation, but an average tectonic plate weighs 40.7x1021 kg. That's 44,864,070,000,000,000,000 TONS

MCU just sucks powerwise

EDIT: damn IT

At least Marvel makes good movies.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yeah, of all the comic-movies recently, would have to say Fox comes closest to portraying their characters at comic-level power. MoS next. Marvel just goes the lazy route for continuity purposes I'm thinking (big effects cost big money and it's hard to expand into TV and the like if they did that).
This is what happens when 90% of ''Earth Mightiest Heroes'' are a bunch of squishy ordinary people on roids or some tech gimmick

MCU Avengers are currently the weakest live action superhero team.

Originally posted by TH3_V01D
This is what happens when 90% of ''Earth Mightiest Heroes'' are a bunch of squishy ordinary people on roidsor some tech gimmick

BvS is what happens when a studio makes a shitty movie.

Originally posted by Arachnid1
Choreography is hard to judge when it comes to super powers and super powered fights. Supes vs Faora actually did have great phases in the fight because the fight was grounded. Supes vs Zod have us our first completely in-flight fight and they did good with what they had, with it being packed with epic moments. I'd rate that waaay above Thor grappling with Hulk for a bit.
Watch OUT!!!!

Here are TWO ''Gods'' fighting:

http://static9.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11124/111246273/5115443-11fsvb.gif

http://static2.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11115/111151571/5118009-0592253951-tumbl.gif

Look that power, that choreography, that speed

I wonder how many decapitations Wonder Woman can make on Thor before Slowdison finished doing that slow hammer swing.

Comparing Thor's fights with Loki with Hulk's fight with Loki.

^ Thor was majorly holding back against Loki as confirmed in The Dark World.

Not to mention Loki never had his Sceptor against Hulk.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Well, that's the thing tho. No one in the movies was anywhere near power-wise to the comic versions.

I mean, remember the safe that Faora threw Kal into w/c Kal dented a bit? Well, a tank's main gun would punch a hole thru that vault door (if I got the penetration values right) like it was tinfoil (well, "tinfoil" is a bit of hyperbole on my part, but you get my meaning). The fact that it only scorched IM's faceplate was kinda WTF worthy.

Essentially, following that logic, Extremis goons can tear thru bank vault doors with their bare hands easily.
The extremis guys had heat plus strength on their side. I would say Cap crushing the armor was way worse. Especially since IM3 armors had the context of being rapidly produced by Tony in a deranged state unlike his previous armors, and it was shown they heavily varied between themselves n toughness. Going by your logic Cap ad Bucky could hit harder than tank shells as well

Originally posted by Sin I AM
Blade probable had THE best scenes but people always forget he started this shit
Oh hell yeah.
yJt2N7LSptg
Best street suprhuman opening fight ever

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Um. Wow. That went nuts all of a sudden. What 's with the insistence of a dichotomy here? And why the passive-aggressive strawmanning? Who said anything about "everything" being subjective and when did I say quality doesn't exist? We're only talking about this topic specifically and the ppl posting here.

Silent is simpy trying to get under your skin liek he does to everyone

Originally posted by abhilegend
According to a paper clipping in BvS, Superman is strong enough to shift tectonic plates.

http://66.media.tumblr.com/9ba8787cf5be1b1ddfe4efa46f5af0d4/tumblr_inline_o7r0163m111qladw3_500.png

That's just nutty.

and not part of the coversation

Anyway

Netflix

MCU

DCCWU

DCWBU

Fox

With Superman/Wonderwoman/Zod/Faora/Nam Ek/Doomsday, Snyder cracked the whole code for DBZ styled action, and directed the best high tier superhero battle scenes found in a comicbook movie.

Now he cracked the code to bring Arkham Batman on live screen, brutal, violent and visceral street level action.

I love it.

https://s32.postimg.org/l2sqpp251/IHu77_QV.jpg

This shot from the movie leaves me in awe, looks like a painting.

Apocalypse, Phoenix, Magneto, Xavier, Silver Surfer from the FOXverse are all well above the DCEU in terms of raw power

Originally posted by carthage
Apocalypse, Phoenix, Magneto, Xavier, Silver Surfer from the FOXverse are all well above the DCEU in terms of raw power
Yep, way too much hax on Fox side, I was talking about DBZ styled action anyway.

Pretty funny how MCU Avengers is gonna ended up being pretty much the weakest cinematic superhero team around.

After Infinity War, everything is gonna be a downgrade for marvel side, Fox and DC can continuing the power creep and crazy dbz action choreography with new characters like Shazam, Anti Monitor, Sansa Phoenix, Shi Ar Empire and Gladiator.

I never gonna get tired of repeating how bad Marvel Studios screwed up with their powerhouses and villains.

IMO DC generally on a higher level.

Originally posted by TH3_V01D
Yep, way too much hax on Fox side, I was talking about DBZ styled action anyway.

Pretty funny how MCU Avengers is gonna ended up being pretty much the weakest cinematic superhero team around.

After Infinity War, everything is gonna be a downgrade for marvel side, Fox and DC can continuing the power creep and crazy dbz action choreography with new characters like Shazam, Anti Monitor, Sansa Phoenix, Shi Ar Empire and Gladiator.

I never gonna get tired of repeating how bad Marvel Studios screwed up with their powerhouses and villains. Completely false. Marvel has the baddest superhero universe and team out there. You being upset over this tells me you're an emotionally weak and insecure person.

Originally posted by TH3_V01D
Yep, way too much hax on Fox side, I was talking about DBZ styled action anyway.

Pretty funny how MCU Avengers is gonna ended up being pretty much the weakest cinematic superhero team around.

After Infinity War, everything is gonna be a downgrade for marvel side, Fox and DC can continuing the power creep and crazy dbz action choreography with new characters like Shazam, Anti Monitor, Sansa Phoenix, Shi Ar Empire and Gladiator.

I never gonna get tired of repeating how bad Marvel Studios screwed up with their powerhouses and villains.

As much as I agree that the MCU continuously gimps their powerhouses and that that irritates me to no end, I have to admit that it's specifically due to this downgrade which allows the MCU to have such engaging fight scenes between different characters.

See how unsatisfactory the fight between Batman vs. Superman was. Too big a power gap, very hard to make an interesting fight out of. And because of how powerful a lot of the X-men are, you end up with so many inconsistencies (like why Xavier doesn't stop people in their tracks during a fight, or how Apoc can move his eyes fast enough to keep track of QS)

Like I said before, DC might have stronger heroes, but Marvel's have better damage output.

The man with the blue fluorescent penis wins.