Denton Van Zan (Reign of Fire) vs. John McClane

You have the reading comprehension of a 6 month old. I didn't say "Quinn is more durable than McClane". I said "Quinn is more durable than the random bystander you are trying to strawman".

Willing combatant? WTF 😆 He didn't even understand McClane's language. He was trying to communicate with him and got cheapshotted. Stop your lying, trollboy.

The fact that it was a cheapshot and that the guy was a random bystander and not a Quinn or Van Zan level opponent pretty much detracts.......everything from it.

Damage soak doesn't help McClane when he can't even touch his opponent. Van Zan isn't some cheapshotted bystander. He'll dodge McClane's hits and go to town on him. Zan wins /thread

But you do not know that that wasn't some russian gangsta badass.
(Which would raise him ABOVE Quim/Zam levels.) Certainly looked it. Certainly more bad ass than Van Zan who did nothing in all of Reign of Fire to even be mentioned in the same sentence as McClane. (Or even, frankly Richard Simmons)
That Bystander had as many menaingful combat feats as Van Zan in Reign of Fire. He was big, grunted, was too slow off the mark and damaged NOONE IE: As tough as Van Zan...

You've not seen the movie yet and what else McClane endures and dishes out. So you spouting off denotes your lack of thinking, reading comprehension, logic, perspective or anything, really.

You also think that rage crying, downplaying and distorting is substitute for fact. LOLZ

Mcclane could let Van Zan wail away on him for 6 months, and all that would happen would be that Van Zan wastes away to a frustrated teary skeleton before pointlessly jumping into a dragon's mouth to end it all. (And McClane would walk away unscathed.)
Because Van Zan cannot actually punch. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about fighting can see it.
(Anyone who could hear the impact and power or see the speed of that hook can tell except you, who clearly doesn't know anything about fighting, judging by your assessment of this.)

Obvious McClane win.

Good to see that you are crying more still, though.

Mcclane gets 4.5/10 at most. At least until they come out with DH6 and McClane actually wins a H2H fight without cheapshotting.

Was a fair shot. McClane could sense it coming from him and nipped the road rager pre-emptively in the bud.
Show me a boxing judge on earth who would have said that was illegal.... *waits for few million years for Liz to get back here with that* It was a lovely fast, powerful hook that the opponent had no choice but to eat.. and it was fair AND poetic 'cause those that rage and strop get spanked.

Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean you are entitled to misrepresent it and cry about it calling it silly names.

You could say that everything Van Zan did was a cheap.
What about that cheap shot he took at that dragon with that harpoon? What about sexually mounting Quim and punching him whilst on the floor and headbutting him? All 'cheap moves', no matter HOW ineffective they actually were.

Only they lacked any power. If Van Zan had sepnt less energy posing, grunting and trying to sexually assert himself at Quim, he would have maybe been able to punch a guy and cause damage, but nooooooooooooooooo...............

McClane was/is in a different, better league to VZ.
And the gap has now widened since DH5 came out by an insurmountable margin.

Originally posted by Lestov16
It was a cheapshot

Your argument there also hinders on the fact that Quinn was some kind of punk bytch. You never thought that maybe Quinn withstood Zan's hits due to his own durability, especially true since he's the one who does the dragon-killing. Strawmanning and saying Quinn=some bystander is just biased wrongness at the utmost level.

You need to watch the film.

Lestov 2011/12 said Quinn was a 'punk bytch' or something to that effect, I never did, so if anyone is making a strawman, you are. Quinn killing the dragon has nothing to do with his durability, considering he killed it with an explosive arrow. For all intents and purposes, Quinn is basically a normal human male of his weight, height, musculature and age. Could be argued he's slightly above, but no where in McClane's league now. Same goes for Van Zan.

Except lesser evolved, of course.

cheapshot (n): the act of not allowing an obviously hostile opponent a free punch

...apparently

😛

Lestov, for your own sake. Mac wins here. Just concede. There's no shame in admitting Van Zan lose here. McClane is a virtual God

You don't want to mess with McClane. He cheapshots unborn fetuses, and thus he's invincible! 😂

A fetus by definition is unborn.

Anyhow, there are now four McClane's that have better feats than Van Zan. Though Holly would be an ex McClane.

Very true, Robtard, very true.

Originally posted by Lestov16
LOL That's a "large Russian"? Overhyping to the extreme. I thought you meant he knocked out some military member. You think McClane knocking out some random bystander means anything? Please

Originally posted by focus4chumps
good. so its settled. van zan missed his shot and rage quit like a retard, accomplishing not a thing.

LOL You don't know what you're saying..
Van Zan couldn't crush velvet.

Its you have who the dealing with things to do..

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
LOL You don't know what you're saying..
Van Zan couldn't crush velvet.

Its you have who the dealing with things to do..

Five films.

Van Zan gets righteously smited and extra saline being sprayed from your ducts will change nothing.
He has no feats and couldn't punch his way out of a paper bag, power wise, he hits REAL slow, announces to his opponent that it's coming by grunting (over compensating for his little-girl slaps) and has zero defense ability or instinct shown... he can do nothing to McClane, who can withstand 1000 times what Van Zan can ever dream of giving out. He is unkillableness personified.

Only a total butthurt lunatic troll would have seen Reign of Fire, and all five DH movies and come to a different conclusion.

But hey you've not seen DH5, so maybe thats why you adopt this foolish stance...

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Five films.

Van Zan gets righteously smited and extra saline being sprayed from your ducts will change nothing.
He has no feats and couldn't punch his way out of a paper bag, power wise, he hits REAL slow, announces to his opponent that it's coming by grunting (over compensating for his little-girl slaps) and has zero defense ability or instinct shown... he can do nothing to McClane, who can withstand 1000 times what Van Zan can ever dream of giving out. He is unkillableness personified.

Only a total butthurt lunatic troll would have seen Reign of Fire, and all five DH movies and come to a different conclusion.

But hey you've not seen DH5, so maybe thats why you adopt this foolish stance...

You didn't even see it opening weekend and were probably sitting at home meaning you didn't really care. You are just a poser.

A) You really need to look up what "destroyed" means.
(I think you'll find that by all definitions McClane destroyed her.)

B) She was much much tougher, faster and more manly than Van Zan in her attacks. She'd have literally destroyed Van Zan

C) She tanked being rammed by an SUV like it was nothing

D) If she was KO'd the way she was in that fight, the shot that McClane administered in the beginning chase in DH5 would have torn her head off.

E) She proved that grunting, posing and telegraphing shots is not the way to fight.

So 'Alpha male' punches equals wussy, slappy ineffective no-damage punches, according to you then..?

I dont follow the crowd... Im just not that subject to commercial pressure.
At least I've seen it though.. therefore im not the one trapping off out of butthurt/ignorance..

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
A) You really need to look up what "destroyed" means.
(I think you'll find that by all definitions McClane destroyed her.)

B) She was much much tougher, faster and more manly than Van Zan in her attacks. She'd have literally destroyed Van Zan

C) She tanked being rammed by an SUV like it was nothing

D) If she was KO'd the way she was in that fight, the shot that McClane administered in the beginning chase in DH5 would have torn her head off.

E) She proved that grunting, posing and telegraphing shots is not the way to fight.

So 'Alpha male' punches equals wussy, slappy ineffective no-damage punches, according to you then..?

I dont follow the crowd... Im just not that subject to commercial pressure.
At least I've seen it though.. therefore im not the one trapping off out of butthurt/ignorance..

B. Prove it. She was tougher than McClane due to him needing the opening to get the w.

C. Depends on how it hit her. She was lucky.

D. Speculation and fanboyism aren't legit points. McClane fought her and was ethered. She turned her back and then he won.

E. Zan laughed off attacks unlike 95 percent of McClane fights.

He hit an even bigger alpha male whereas McClane can't even defeat an alpha female without her turning her back.

Zan wins.

A) She ambushed him too. So no worries there: It was a fight after all.

B) Cause she actually could fight, unlike Van Zan, and if it had not been someone with McDamage soak, shes could have really hurt them...She'd have KILLED Van Zan.. There. Proved.

C) Square on. Watch the scene. She tanked it, T800 style..

D) Well thats every argument you've ever made here withdrawn then, right...? Ethered? lol Her KO'd her, and she failed to KO him...

E) But look who was 'fighting' him.. Look at and listen to that McClane shot in DH 5, and indeed in the rest of the movies. Hear the massive impact?
Good. Now look at and listen to those weak little slowass slaps going on in Reign of Fire.. NO comparison. Van Zan is weak as chips.

Incorrect. You keep using 'Alpha' in wrong context...IE you use it to describe Mary Van Zan, post-apocalyptic deliverer of really slow little girlslaps.

McClane is about as alpha as it gets.

Lihn is faster, hits harder, more skilled at H2H and tougher than Van Zan by film feats. She's more "alpha male" than Van Zan, who's really nothing more than a throwaway secondary hero/chump.