Achilles vs. Legolas

Originally posted by Borbarad
Arguing for a character, based on the demonstrably false perception of an action of a character in a movie, would count as fanboyism, though. Or is that plain and simple idiocy.

He just parries two spears and stop arguing it. The arrow that lands in his shield is visibly thinner than the two spears he parries before. So you're wrong. Accept it and move on. [/B]

Gandalf is a godlike being, equipped with abilities well beyond that of mortals. And it's not irrelevant, that he used magic, because he could just have summoned an protective shield, similar to what he used against the Balrog, with the arrow being deflected by it, which would make his reflexes irrelevant. Please stop this nonsense. You're wrong, end of story. [/B]

Do you want to compare Achilles to Gandalf? Seriously? If not, your "argument" still doesn't make sense.

Unlike you, I don't need to make feats up in order to support my argument.

YouTube video

Here. Watch the #1 scene and accept that Achilles is nothing compared to Legolas. Hell. Scenes #2 and #3 also establish, that Legolas is, simple put, superhuman - unlike Achilles.

This is getting annoying. You essentially say this: "Because a godlike entity makes Gimli, Aragorn and Legolas look like pedestrians, Legolas is going to lose against a skilled mortal." Does that translate into a sound argument in your plane of existance, because it certainly doesn't in the realms of us feeble mortals, where logic is still used. [/B]

Saying Achilles isn't superhuman when we see him throw spears, parry spears out of the air while fighting other men, or toy with the best fighters in Troy is completely absurd.

Legolas loses when his throat is cut so he's a mortal to just like Achilles. You trying to get into an adjective war to exaggerate Legolas isn't debating.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Both of them were spears.

And no, it doesn't.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What have I falsely perceived ? be a little more specific.

Him blocking arrows with his swords, which he did never do.

He parries heavier shields while fighting opponents in front of him. He blocks an arrow with his shield. The arrow doesn't find his shield he moves his shield to block the arrow. So we know he's strong enough to easily parry spears and quick enough to easily block an arrow with his shield. Looks like I am winning.

Nope. That just looks as if you have no idea about fighting and physics. I'm not surprised by that fact, since you seem to be one of the kind of people that doesn't have an idea about many things. Just to give you an idea of what happens: He moves the spear sidewards, which doesn't require much strength at all, unless the guy holding a spear pushes it sidewards. Which would be illogical, since you want to trust forward with a spear, which is what the guys on screen do. Strength feat? Not seen.

He parries heavier shields? Seriously. What does the "heavyness" of the shield have to do with his ability to "parry" them? The shield simple clash, most likely without any strength put behind them, because shields aren't offensive weapons and his opponent were focused on nailing him down with their spears. Strength feat? Entirely nonexistant.

And the arrow, of course. He moves the shields on his back and when it's there, an arrow hits it from behind. Chalking that up to Achilles skill rather than coincidence, means you assume he is capable of precognition, because the arrow was most likely not even fired, when he put the shield there. As he clearly does not possess precognition, it is more reasonable to chalk the event up to coincidence. Feat for Achilles? Not present.

In short: You're wrong, you lose. And, just to add some spice: You now clearly exhibit fanboyish behaviour, which you tried to deny previously.

Saying he's a godlike being when we've seen the Witch King easily trounce him and Saruman easily best him with tk which causes bruises and minor cuts is utterly hilarious.

Not realizing, that the Witch King and Saruman are likewise superhuman beings is the only hilarious thing here. Gandalf is a magic user, that can literally destroy any ordinary being with ease - which would, just to clarify that for you, include Achilles.

He still has to summon the shield. The shield isn't automatically in place unless you can prove it. Gandalf a character who needs an entire party to defeat a cave troll isn't what I would deem godlike but then again maybe this impresses you. To each their own I always say.

Are we talking about the same Gandalf, who is also capable of defeating a Balrog on his own? Your lack of grasp on the LotR story makes me wonder, why you try to encoporate characters from that realm in your arguments or make cases against them. Gandalf happens to be a Maiar, which are angelic beings serving the Gods of the LotR world. Comparing them to mere mortals - as you keep doing - is utter nonsense.

And who knows what kind of magic Gandalf summoned. He blinds the trio upon meeting them, even before Legolas does lose an arrow at him, so there might be a shield already in place. The fact remains, that Gandalf doesn't react in the scene, but acts, which renders your argument void. End of story. You're - suprise - wrong again.

I am saying if Gandalf has the reflexes to do so and since we've already seen Achilles show reflexes to block arrows while engaging other men in swordfights then I'd say the evidence strongly leans towards my views. But then again you're the same poster who thinks throwing the word godlike in front of a character is a debating point.

Holy mother of God.
First: As Gandalf is already visible using magic, before one of the trio makes a move, it is very well possible, that he summoned a shield or started to manipulate Legolas arrow, before it was even shot. Your argument about reflexes is thereby gone. Accept it and move on.

Secondly: We have already proven that Achilles doesn't deflect arrows. Handing in the previously defeated point once more, constitutes as argument ad nauseam, which is another logical fallacy. That aside, it makes you look like an utter moron.

Thirdly: The straw man at the end also serves you well. If you're aspiring the position as worst debater ever, that is. It doesn't help your argument and neither does it help to attack mine. In fact - provided your lack of knowledge in the field and your severe allergy against logic, you might want to stop posting before embarassing yourself further.

Saying Achilles isn't superhuman when we see him throw spears, parry spears out of the air while fighting other men, or toy with the best fighters in Troy is completely absurd.

No. It's completely reasonable, as you keep missinterpreting the movie. He throws spears? Damn. He must be godlike. 🙄 He parries spears out of the air? Holy shit. Where? I just see him parrying spears in the hands of soldiers he fights, which even I can do? Hardly superhuman. He toys with the best fighters in Troy. Great. Are those superhuman? I strongly doubt it.

Legolas loses when his throat is cut so he's a mortal to just like Achilles. You trying to get into an adjective war to exaggerate Legolas isn't debating.

Right. However. Demonstrating that Legolas is capable of combat related feats that Achilles will never be capable of shows his superiority over the greek hero. Hence, he will simple kill Achilles, who, as a human being, doesn't have anything to put him in a position to defeat the elf. He will end up as a human pincushion on or the other way around. End of story.

Achilles is not a regular human.

It was alluded to that he was the same as his mythological counterpart.

Originally posted by Borbarad
Him blocking arrows with his swords, which he did never do.

Nope. That just looks as if you have no idea about fighting and physics. I'm not surprised by that fact, since you seem to be one of the kind of people that doesn't have an idea about many things. Just to give you an idea of what happens: He moves the spear sidewards, which doesn't require much strength at all, unless the guy holding a spear pushes it sidewards. Which would be illogical, since you want to trust forward with a spear, which is what the guys on screen do. Strength feat? Not seen. [/B]

He parries heavier shields? Seriously. What does the "heavyness" of the shield have to do with his ability to "parry" them? The shield simple clash, most likely without any strength put behind them, because shields aren't offensive weapons and his opponent were focused on nailing him down with their spears. Strength feat? Entirely nonexistant. [/B]

And the arrow, of course. He moves the shields on his back and when it's there, an arrow hits it from behind. Chalking that up to Achilles skill rather than coincidence, means you assume he is capable of precognition, because the arrow was most likely not even fired, when he put the shield there. As he clearly does not possess precognition, it is more reasonable to chalk the event up to coincidence. Feat for Achilles? Not present. [/B]

In short: You're wrong, you lose. And, just to add some spice: You now clearly exhibit fanboyish behaviour, which you tried to deny previously.

Not realizing, that the Witch King and Saruman are likewise superhuman beings is the only hilarious thing here. Gandalf is a magic user, that can literally destroy any ordinary being with ease - which would, just to clarify that for you, include Achilles. [/B]

Saruman is stabbed to death by Wormtongue. How superhuman of him. The Witch King along with the other Nazgul are handily defeated by Aragorn wildly swinging a torch and a sword. Be honest have you seen the movies at all ? I mean a woman and a hobbit manage to kill the Witch King yet you're saying he's SUPERZHUUMANZ.

Are we talking about the same Gandalf, who is also capable of defeating a Balrog on his own? Your lack of grasp on the LotR story makes me wonder, why you try to encoporate characters from that realm in your arguments or make cases against them. Gandalf happens to be a Maiar, which are angelic beings serving the Gods of the LotR world. Comparing them to mere mortals - as you keep doing - is utter nonsense. [/B]

And who knows what kind of magic Gandalf summoned. He blinds the trio upon meeting them, even before Legolas does lose an arrow at him, so there might be a shield already in place. The fact remains, that Gandalf doesn't react in the scene, but acts, which renders your argument void. End of story. You're - suprise - wrong again.

[/B]

Holy mother of God.
First: As Gandalf is already visible using magic, before one of the trio makes a move, it is very well possible, that he summoned a shield or started to manipulate Legolas arrow, before it was even shot. Your argument about reflexes is thereby gone. Accept it and move on.
[/B]

Secondly: We have already proven that Achilles doesn't deflect arrows. Handing in the previously defeated point once more, constitutes as argument ad nauseam, which is another logical fallacy. That aside, it makes you look like an utter moron. [/B]

Thirdly: The straw man at the end also serves you well. If you're aspiring the position as worst debater ever, that is. It doesn't help your argument and neither does it help to attack mine. In fact - provided your lack of knowledge in the field and your severe allergy against logic, you might want to stop posting before embarassing yourself further.

No. It's completely reasonable, as you keep missinterpreting the movie. He throws spears? Damn. He must be godlike. 🙄 He parries spears out of the air? Holy shit. Where? I just see him parrying spears in the hands of soldiers he fights, which even I can do? Hardly superhuman. He toys with the best fighters in Troy. Great. Are those superhuman? I strongly doubt it.
[/B]

Right. However. Demonstrating that Legolas is capable of combat related feats that Achilles will never be capable of shows his superiority over the greek hero. Hence, he will simple kill Achilles, who, as a human being, doesn't have anything to put him in a position to defeat the elf. He will end up as a human pincushion on or the other way around. End of story. [/B]

Can Gimli defeat Achilles now ?

Originally posted by Mindset
Achilles is not a regular human.

It was alluded to that he was the same as his mythological counterpart.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Not the one he blocked with his shield.

He didn't block it. It hit his shield. It was luck.

Originally posted by Nephthys
He didn't block it. It hit his shield. It was luck.

I can see him putting the shield there for the purpose of blocking any arrows, but not necessarily that arrow at that exact moment. Good timing on his part.

Originally posted by quanchi112
😂 He moved the shield to do so. Achilles wasn't lucky with anything he did. He was precise and the best warrior out of the movie. You know he did so on purpose.

He put it on his back. He doesn't even acknowledge the arrow. If he was trying to block it why not just raise his shield? Since the shield is in his left hand and the arrow comes from his left it would have been much easier and more efficient to just raise his shield a few feet. Plus, from the angle it would have been impossible for him to see it anyway.

No need to take up Quanchi's debating tactic of downplaying, Achilles moved the shield to his back to block the arrow. He's a bad-ass fighter with superb battle-awareness; he's not winning her though.

I think Lucien is right in this. He put it there to block arrows, but not that arrow. Simply good timing.

Originally posted by Nephthys
He put it on his back. He doesn't even acknowledge the arrow. If he was trying to block it why not just raise his shield? Since the shield is in his left hand and the arrow comes from his left it would have been much easier and more efficient to just raise his shield a few feet. Plus, from the angle it would have been impossible for him to see it anyway.

Originally posted by Robtard
No need to take up Quanchi's debating tactic of downplaying, Achilles moved the shield to his back to block the arrow. He's a bad-ass fighter with superb battle-awareness; he's not winning her though.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I think Lucien is right in this. He put it there to block arrows, but not that arrow. Simply good timing.

Is it possible? Yes. But how the fight looks, it seems he's just a bad-ass fighter with superb battle-awareness.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Oh so now you want to be my apprentice.

Funny. Achilles still loses to the elf despite said arrow-feat.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I already acknowledged it's more impressive with spears than arrows. I already pointed out he blocked an arrow easily with his shield.

And you have been told, that you're wrong here again, since the spears aren't thrown at thim.

No, that's false. We see the force of a spear thrust multiple times in the movie and elite strength is required to casually knock it away a mere microsecond before it impales you. You stopping to insulting because you're losing a debate is an insecurity you must learn to keep in check. Defense mechanism or not it's not appreciated.

Would you please stop trying to argue fundamental laws of physics, just to construct feats for your character of choice? If I throw or otherwisely move an object at your direction, you can easily alter it's direction, by applying a force to its side. Common sense should tell you that and I find it hard to believe, that I have to explain that to you. This is exactly what Achilles does to the spears and any human would be capable of replicating this show of "elite strength". 🙄

I said he parries heavier spears. Spears are heavier than arrows. What's hard to understand here ? It requires more strength to alter an object of greater weight with the force it's coming in then say something that weighs a lot less like say an arrow.

The point is, that the spears are not thrown at them. And your lack of knowledge in the physics department becomes even more apparent here. The key factor here is not weight but speed. Obviously, an arrow shot at you has more speed than a spear thrown at you and is, therefore, harder to deflect. In case, you still don't understand the concept: It's harder to dodge a bullet shot from a gun, than dodging a spear thrown at you, despite the bullet does weigh far less than the spear. Reason? Speed.

Chalking it up to skill is plainly obvious. The guy is on another level and to be incredibly skilled with these reflexes doesn't mean you have to have precog just great battlefield awareness due to his experience. The entire movie shoves it down our throats how great of a warrior he is. You failing to get it shows a comprehension problem I am glad I don't share.

How does he react on an arrow not even shot when he makes his move? Answer and stop attempting to dodge the point. Either Achilles does possess precognition (and you have prove for that), or he is just lucky in that particular scene.

Saruman is stabbed to death by Wormtongue. How superhuman of him. The Witch King along with the other Nazgul are handily defeated by Aragorn wildly swinging a torch and a sword. Be honest have you seen the movies at all ? I mean a woman and a hobbit manage to kill the Witch King yet you're saying he's SUPERZHUUMANZ.

Wow. Failing to miss Gandalf destroying Sarumans staff and casting him out of the order must have been hard work. The Witch King is killed by a weapon specifically designed to kill him. Another detail you missed. The Nazghul are defeated by Aragorn? Seriously? I just saw them driven off by fire, because they were spirits bound to their clothes, which means one could "disembody" them, but not "kill" them. Nevermind.

Yes, after a whole day's worth of fighting and a storm charged sword blast. That's a book thing nowhere in the movie is this ever gone into or even remotely covered. There's a difference, friend. Keep the adjectives coming.

Oh. It's a book thing? Hardly.
Gandalf drops down a rather large way and survives? How? By being a normal human? I don't think so. He lived for millenia, which he outright proclaims. Ordinary human? In his confrontation with the Balrog, he says that he wields the power of the sun and serves the Secret Fire, the latter being the power of Illuvater himself. He also mentions that he was called Olorin in the West. Not to mention his "resurrection". More than enough allusions to his rank and his origin. That you fail to see them is not my problem.

Show Gandalf ever having a shield in place prior to. He reacts just like he burns the sword. His reflexes make Legolas look rather unimpressive.

YouTube video

He is using magic several seconds before Legolas shoots at him. Just as I said.

Wrong he reacts accordingly after their attacks showing his reflexes are greater than theirs. If he reacted prior to Aragorn's sword would have burned prior to their combined attack.

He is already blinding them, when Aragorn turns around, which means that he is using magic at them already, before one of the trio makes a move at him. So, as usual, you're wrong.

He doesn't need to parry them he can easily block them. He also has shown to easily do so while not even looking at the archer so with only half his focus on the archer he does so. Doesn't look good for a guy whom Gandalf made look incredibly pedestrian.

Right. He will easily block Legolas arrows. The video I've previously posted shows Orcs being thrown backwards when hit by an arrow of the elf, showing the force put behind them. Achilles supposed skill in deflecting arrows is still nonexistant and so he will likely catch one, if Legolas aims properly. Also there still is the fact, that Gandalf uses magic at Legolas, before Legolas shoots and ignoring that doesn't get you anywhere. You have no argument.

Says the guy who ignores the movies, throws adjectives around constantly like saying Maiar is an actual debating point, ignores Gandalf's defeats, ignores Witch King's loss to Aragorn, ignores Achilles feats, I'd say it's a compliment.

Since I'm the person who does toss in evidence that constantly proves your interpretation of the movies wrong, you shouldn't really accuse me of ignoring the movies. Especially, since you constantly fail to grasp the context for all those scenes you're talking about.

Achilles has shown he can definitely take on a skilled archer and not only that but do so while cutting through fodder along the way. One opponent against Achilles has never failed well and Legolas only fares well against foes Gimli slays easily as well.

Oh. He did?
I've never seen him taking on an archer with even compareable skill to Legolas. The one time where he does, he ends up with several arrows sticking in his body. Looks bad for your claims to Achilles "battle awareness" and "reflexes", huh? And giant freaking Oliphants are easy to slay? Trolls? Really? Pass what you're smoking.

Can Gimli defeat Achilles now ?

Can you serve anything but red herrings?

Originally posted by Robtard
Funny. Achilles still loses to the elf despite said arrow-feat.

Originally posted by quanchi112
He doesn't lose as he has his shield which can easily block arrows.

Block the first arrow(singular), yes; the 2-3 that follow a heartbeat later find soft spots, Achilles' eyes, thighs, hand, shoulder or bicep.

Originally posted by quanchi112
He doesn't lose as he has his shield which can easily block arrows.

I wonder, how he would manage to cover his entire body with that shield. With his Gandalf level magic? 🙄

Originally posted by Robtard
Block the first arrow(singular), yes; the 2-3 that follow a heartbeat later find soft spots, Achilles' eyes, thighs, hand, shoulder or bicep.

Originally posted by Borbarad

I wonder, how he would manage to cover his entire body with that shield. With his Gandalf level magic? 🙄