Thor vs. Hulk

Started by Zack Fair141 pages

Yes but Hulk >>>> Logan. Only reason he stood up to the Hulk was because of marvel pleasing Wolvie and Hulk fans.

Poor Thor gets the short end of the stick.

Originally posted by Starscream M
but there are many things that simply cannot be consistent due to how few times they've been shown

ie. the effect of sundip on superman
thor's godblast power
etc

Thor's used the godblast around 4 times now.

Movies are still based on how a certain fight's outcome would be based on the perception of the creators/writers of the comicbook. Why would they make a movie that drifts much too far from the actual canon? I'm sure they understand the outrage that would follow if they did this.

The 2 part animated movie was co-produced by Stan Lee and he was prolly asked who would win and with the results of how the movie went, I'm sure he pretty much gave his answer.

Bottom line, you fanbois don't write the stuff, you just read/watch it. If they say a fight would go a certain way, then it goes a certain way regardless of how they presented it. As it stand now, Savage Hulk > non-odin powered Thor til otherwise demonstrated.

Originally posted by Zack Fair
Yes but Hulk >>>> Logan. Only reason he stood up to the Hulk was because of marvel pleasing Wolvie and Hulk fans.

Poor Thor gets the short end of the stick.

totally agree. Not saying Hulk kills wolverine, but a fight with hulk and wolverine is basically trying not to get totally @#$%^& up, while hurting or annoying the Hulk. If wolvie was smart he would just try to run.

the fact is, people who like to say movies is all about whoever popular wins just don't like the outcome. If hulk lost to thor, then they would be singing a different tune.

people who actually make the marvel/dc movies put a lot of effort/love/care into the product...far more than most comics get. these guys know that movies are few and far in between so they actually try their best to get all the characters right...they consult creators, writers of old and recent arcs, and many others to get the characters correct. they don't just pump up a character because they're popular...contrary to KMC opinion.

Originally posted by Starscream M
the fact is, people who like to say movies is all about whoever popular wins just don't like the outcome. If hulk lost to thor, then they would be singing a different tune.

No, not really.

Originally posted by Starscream M
the fact is, people who like to say movies is all about whoever popular wins just don't like the outcome. If hulk lost to thor, then they would be singing a different tune.

people who actually make the marvel/dc movies put a lot of effort/love/care into the product...far more than most comics get. these guys know that movies are few and far in between so they actually try their best to get all the characters right...they consult creators, writers of old and recent arcs, and many others to get the characters correct. they don't just pump up a character because they're popular...contrary to KMC opinion.

that's completely untrue. movies are about making money. they're more profit driven, so they make the movie that they think will be most lucrative.

that's why the x-men movies are mostly about logan, to appeal to the larger fanbase. half the time, movies don't give a damn about staying true to the characters. we're only lucky that sometimes, making money and staying true happen to overlap.

Yes...because we all know the directors of X3 loved X-men so much that they made Juggy a mutie.

Originally posted by Starscream M
the fact is, people who like to say movies is all about whoever popular wins just don't like the outcome. If hulk lost to thor, then they would be singing a different tune.

Why? we've already got Thor kicking his ass in the comics.

Originally posted by Zack Fair
Yes...because we all know the directors of X3 loved X-men so much that they made Juggy a mutie.

😂 😂 😂 😆 😆 😆 so true

That because wolvie is made famous on silver screen by hugh jackman and hulk by what is his name.... and marvel see these and capitalize on this . If money involved than the outcome will be depend on the popularity contest.

Dude, publishing comics is about making money, too. Your same arguement would apply to how comics are made if things worked the way you say they do.

Originally posted by Raoul
that's completely untrue. movies are about making money. they're more profit driven, so they make the movie that they think will be most lucrative.

that's why the x-men movies are mostly about logan, to appeal to the larger fanbase. half the time, movies don't give a damn about staying true to the characters. we're only lucky that sometimes, making money and staying true happen to overlap.

how could you say movies are more profit driven than comics?

movies are not any more profit-driven than comics...that is to say, comics are just as profit-driven as movies

hence you get 5 Wolverine solo titles and 0 titles of any other characters

see, comics are just as much about appealing fans. Both comics and movies are made to generate profit for its company. Hence they make movies and comics about popular characters.

But generating profit doesn't mean pumping up characters. Wolverine is popular not because he can fly and destroy planets. That's not his appeal. So just because there are more movies about Wolverine, it doesn't mean that the movies are inaccurately portraying Logan as more powerful than he should be, because his fans love him for who he is (a gritty character who never gives up), not because he is Superman.

Originally posted by Starscream M
movies are not any more profit-driven than comics...that is to say, comics are just as profit-driven as movies

hence you get 5 Wolverine solo titles and 0 titles of any other titles

see, comics are just as much about appealing fans. Both comics and movies are made to generate profit for its company. Hence they make movies and comics about popular characters.

But generating profit doesn't mean pumping up characters. Wolverine is popular not because he can fly and destroy planets. That's not his appeal. So just because there are more movies about Wolverine, it doesn't mean that the movies are inaccurately portraying Logan as more powerful than he should be, because his fans love him for who he is (a gritty character who never gives up), not because he is Superman.

Except Comic movies are made to make money from comic readers, and from people who don't know anything about the characters.

Originally posted by D_Dude1210
Dude, publishing comics is about making money, too. Your same arguement would apply to how comics are made if things worked the way you say they do.

Comics make out roughly 11% of Marvel's income.

How can any sane person claim that movies are more accurate than the comics?. Take a look at the Dr strange animated movie. It was unbelievably inaccurate. They couldnt even get his origin correctly.

Originally posted by Zack Fair
Yes...because we all know the directors of X3 loved X-men so much that they made Juggy a mutie.
um did you not read the part where I said I was talking about only animated movies?

I think real life movies are shit.

Originally posted by Starscream M
movies are not any more profit-driven than comics...that is to say, comics are just as profit-driven as movies

hence you get 5 Wolverine solo titles and 0 titles of any other titles

see, comics are just as much about appealing fans. Both comics and movies are made to generate profit for its company. Hence they make movies and comics about popular characters.

But generating profit doesn't mean pumping up characters. Wolverine is popular not because he can fly and destroy planets. That's not his appeal. So just because there are more movies about Wolverine, it doesn't mean that the movies are inaccurately portraying Logan as more powerful than he should be, because his fans love him for who he is (a gritty character who never gives up), not because he is Superman.

...are you kidding? seriously?

comics are made to appeal to comic fans. movies are made to appeal to the general public. there is a HUGE difference.

Originally posted by Naija boy
How can any sane person claim that movies are more accurate than the comics?. Take a look at the Dr strange animated movie. It was unbelievably inaccurate. They couldnt even get his origin correctly.
so you point to an example of a movie that's incorrect to say that movies shouldn't be used

how many instances have there been of characters being portrayed completely incorrect in comics...does that discredit us from using comics as well?

Originally posted by Raoul
...are you kidding? seriously?

comics are made to appeal to comic fans. movies are made to appeal to the general public. there is a HUGE difference.

QFT