Ares vs. Wolverine

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
^F*cking Carver understands it.

I am dissapoint.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Haha how? Galactus said that no Skyfather should so easily shrug off his attack. How in the hell is that worse than Galactus saying that no Skyfather should survive his blast? Do you not fully understand the meaning and difference between the two statements?

lol at you getting uptight about me saying it's worse though. Jesus Christ.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
I don't give a shit if you think it's ridiculous. That being said, from everything I've seen, Galactus meant that although an average Skyfather would withstand the attack, he wouldn't be completely unphased by it.

Because Galactus is an arrogant at times? Pak wrote being flabbergasted. His Galactus being full of shit would hardly surprise me.

I've seen everyone from the Wasp -albeit he was starving- to Hulk to Thor surviving his eye beams. A Skyfather tanking it without any visible damage is hardly crazy.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying here (shocker). I'm not saying that Galactus was going to kill them. I'm saying that apparently Galactus went from thinking they were going to die, to knowing that a skyfather could 'shrug' off his blast, going by your meaning.
Which is ridiculous, but you don't care if I think it's ridiculous (even though you're arguing with me...).

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
No they're not cannon

Also, Pak is better than Bendis?

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Not odd at all. Ares was being used as a narrative tool.

I think we only see a glimpse of his lower body once throughout the entire issue.

I don't think we ever saw Balder's lower body. It doesn't mean it's not their.

This argument is silly. You need to prove that his lower body was obliterated. The artist focusing primarily on Ares' head because he spent most of the issue talking isn't enough evidence.

Now I'm out.

1) Ares' initial appearance is shown with his legs

2) Ares gets blasted by Galactus...his lower extremities seems to get brunt of blast

3) We see Ares lift himself the way a guy without legs would off the ground

4) Ares appearances after blast do not show lower body at all

that's not insignificant evidence

Originally posted by carver9
What I am getting from galactus statement is...

a skyfather shouldn't die from the blast but they also shouldn't be able to tank it in the fasion that zeus tanked it.

Now if he would have said "why are you still standing OR living after my attack" THEN you would have an argument.

My argument is that Zeus wasn't 'a little' amped just because of the statement.

Let me ask you something, just because I'm curious about this... But do you think that a skyfather should be able to shrug off Galactus' blast?

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb

Let me ask you something, just because I'm curious about this... before I agree or disagree to your assessment of the meaning.
But do you think that a skyfather should be able to shrug off Galactus' blast?

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
That is not my argument...

My argument is that Zeus wasn't 'a little' amped just because of the statement.

Let me ask you something, just because I'm curious about this... But do you think that a skyfather should be able to shrug off Galactus' blast?

I agree with some of your statement as well... he was amped and him tanking that blast proves this but what I am saying is that galactus wasn't trying to say that his blast would out right kill a skyfather, what he is saying is that zeus or any other skyfather shoud have been damaged from the attack instead of tanking it and I agree with that as well.

I guess I misunderstood you, I thought you were trying to say that the blast would kill any skyfather.

Originally posted by Starscream M
My proof, respectfully submitted:

1) Ares' initial appearance is shown with his legs

2) Ares gets blasted by Galactus...his lower extremities seems to get brunt of blast

3) We see Ares lift himself the way a guy without legs would off the ground

4) Ares appearances after blast do not show lower body at all

that's not insignificant evidence

Starscream, when I say this, please do not take this the wrong way but "this is a crazy a** argument".

If galactus did any type of damage to zeus"it would have been shown" just like any comic shows when a character is damage. It was stated on panel that he tanked it... tanked means 'no harm at all'. He wasn't damaged and if he was, the proof would be on you.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
that was a hungry galactus , he was summoned right before he started feeding , chaos war happens after thanos imperative

Originally posted by carver9
I agree with some of your statement as well... he was amped and him tanking that blast proves this but what I am saying is that galactus wasn't trying to say that his blast would out right kill a skyfather, what he is saying is that zeus or any other skyfather shoud have been damaged from the attack instead of tanking it and I agree with that as well.

I guess I misunderstood you, I thought you were trying to say that the blast would kill any skyfather.

No. Everything I'm saying isn't about what 'should' have happened, or who 'should' have won.

Originally posted by Starscream M
My proof, respectfully submitted:

1) Ares' initial appearance is shown with his legs

2) Ares gets blasted by Galactus...his lower extremities seems to get brunt of blast

3) We see Ares lift himself the way a guy without legs would off the ground

4) Ares appearances after blast do not show lower body at all

that's not insignificant evidence

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
Yes, I know. Irrelevant
No, I don't think he was trying to say that he would 'kill' them with a blast either. However, I do think he thought it would hurt them enough to set up the big kill. But him going from 'kill you' to 'I knew you could shrug it off, I just didn't think it would be so easy' is ****ing nuts, and that's being implied here.

No. Everything I'm saying isn't about what 'should' have happened, or who 'should' have won.

Yeah, I agree with that... and I do not believe that it was a small amp that zeus received either and that one scene is what makes me believe this. Everything you said is how I was picturing it.

Hit him with a blast, injure him to the point where he can't fight back, and finish him off.

Wolverine.

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
You think that's a good sign on your behalf?

mhmm In hindsight maybe not, but not too worry, his fickle.

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
Because what I said was better for the skyfathers if you want to get literal about it (because people don't accidently write the wrong word ever, like when you write "Cannon" later in your post).
Shrugging off>surviving. Do you dissagree?

lol at you getting uptight about me saying it's worse though. Jesus Christ.

We’re already at the point of being literal. I do not see how Galactus’ previous statement is better.

I don’t see why I would.

Okay: lol.

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
K, it's not ridiculous, it makes perfect sense.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying here (shocker). I'm not saying that Galactus was going to kill them. I'm saying that apparently Galactus went from thinking they were going to die, to knowing that a skyfather could 'shrug' off his blast, going by your meaning.
Which is ridiculous, but you don't care if I think it's ridiculous (even though you're arguing with me...).

What other meaning makes sense if you take into account Pak’s “paraphrasing”? This scene was obviously intended to make Zeus look impressive.

Galactus being full of shit doesn’t surprise me as much as Galactus shitting his pants because a single attack (Which doesn’t exactly have a history of being all powerful) doesn’t fell a Skyfather. I’ve gotten the strong vibe that you think Pak’s a shitty writer. If so, what’s your problem accepting this scene?

I’ve already gone over this crap with you a dozen times. Just because I reply, it doesn’t mean I give a shit. It just means I’m wasting time, or I’m bored.

Originally posted by Sr J-Bieb
Concession accepted.

Also, Pak is better than Bendis?

Haha GTFO. You might not like it but Pak’s a writer, he penned this book. You don’t debate that type of clarification just because you don’t agree with what he wrote. That’s ridiculous. At least if his statement matches what is actually in the book.

Yes.

To summarize:
Galactus thought he could kill the Gods. Turns out Galactus rethought his position in the food chain by his next appearance, pointing out that a mere Skyfather shouldn’t so easily shrug off his attack (Hooray for Pak's writing) Pak comes in and clarifies that Zeus was a little stronger than an average Skyfather. The end.

You don’t like it? Too bad. What happened, happened. You debating about it, isn’t going to change much (I’ve learned that much in recent years) I’m done.

Ares 7/10. Obviously, it should be far more. FAR. MORE.

Nah. Wolverine can take him.

Ares has skill just look at his son phobos(who was trained by him)

phobos vs gorgan

A katana.

lame.

How typical.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
A katana.

lame.

How typical.

Ares has skill because someone else showed a higher level of skill in play than he ever has?😕

This is like the "thanos is uber skilled cause he trained Gamora" crap.
You've never heard of a student surpassing a master?
Hell, most people who only train fighters are nowhere near the skill level of the fighters they train. 😬

Originally posted by jinzin
Ares has skill because someone else showed a higher level of skill in play than he ever has?😕

This is like the "thanos is uber skilled cause he trained Gamora" crap.
You've never heard of a student surpassing a master?
Hell, most people who only train fighters are nowhere near the skill level of the fighters they train. 😬

show me?