Avengers movie Durability rate

Originally posted by Mindset
The rock was barely breaking apart, it was still the size of an island when he pushed it out of orbit. As a general rule it would have to, you know, be a general rule, i.e. show that for the majority of instances the laws of physics are adhered to...which is obviously not the case. For example, as a general rule, it's best not to listen to you because you don't know what you're talking about.

If you want to think I'm rile up that's ok, you're still wrong.

I love the idiocy presented here where you expect someone to run down an entire list of every movies to establish greater fidelity to physics than comics, I would expect it would simply be obvious to anyone who has extensive experience with both, that a moving visual medium 'as a rule' has to have greater fidelity than static images because of the circular reason in place that a moving picture IS more high-fidelity than a static one, and thus even subconsciously is expected to follow through more so on that front. That, was the thing that was obvious.

I bolded the most important part to me though,

He hit the ground at a slower speed than Hulk did.

to demonstrate the irony.

I expected you'd say this, and it was explained prior to you saying so why this is incorrect.

Originally posted by CosmicComet

Fact: Thor hit the ground at the same speed, actually faster, than Hulk did. Why? Because Thor added his own propulsion from leg strength, on top of the speed of the fall still being in-tact.

But on the other end, Thor hit dirt, whereas Hulk hit a ceiling. So it balances out.

This is what happens when you say something based on your intuition, vs actually being knowledgeable of the subject at hand.

Its ok though, no one ever expects you to be knowledgeable.

Originally posted by Mindset
We see it breaking like regular rock, we don't see it being super strong.

What do you want me to say?

Originally posted by CosmicComet
I love the idiocy presented here where you expect someone to run down an entire list of every movies to establish greater fidelity to physics than comics, I would expect it would simply be obvious to anyone who has extensive experience with both, that a moving visual medium 'as a rule' has to have greater fidelity than static images because of the circular reason in place that a moving picture IS more high-fidelity than a static one, and thus even subconsciously is expected to follow through more so on that front. That, was the thing that was obvious.

I bolded the most important part to me though,

To demonstrate the irony.

I expected you'd say this, and it was explained prior to you saying so why this is incorrect.

This is what happens when you say something based on your intuition, vs actually being knowledgeable of the subject at hand.

Its ok though, no one ever expects you to be knowledgeable.

That quote of yours doesn't make any kind of sense. For one, Thor did not jump downwards towards the ground, he flew out of the container at an upwards angle, or sideways (don't really remember), then hit the ground. Second, Hulk hitting the top of a concrete building that is about 30 feet from the ground would not make any significant difference in the force of impact than if he had just hit the ground w/o any interference.

You're wrong, accept it, embrace it, and let it wash over you.

newjak, just rewatched the hulk-thor battle...did not see hulk bleeding from the nose, although the quality wasn't the greatest

Originally posted by Newjak
Tell me what you think would happen.

just to confirm, thor jumped sideways out of the container, not downwards

Originally posted by Newjak
To be fair the Island was made of K-Nite so it may have been able to not break apart while if you watch the the little rock shield Superman used was breaking apart.

So it could have been more realistic then you're giving it credit for.

I think we all just need to take a step back, calm down, and realize I'm always right.

Originally posted by Starscream M
dood, i get your point about jumping out doesnt help

but do you think the writers intended that...or did they write to the general public's expectations of what would happen...I think the latter, that they intended to depict thor slowed his fall by jumping (despite it being physically wrong...but lord knows comics are not known for adhering to physics)

edit: also I think he flew rather than dove....becuz if he dove, he couldnt have smashed through that container.

It's my interpetation of the movies, that Thor cannot fly without spinning the hammer. So, I don't think he was flying as much as he was using his leg strength to get him out.

I could be wrong.

He doesn't need to spin Mjolnir to fly. He can just point and allow it to take him where he needs to go. I do imagine that spinning it likely gives him more speed.

Originally posted by nimbus006
It's my interpetation of the movies, that Thor cannot fly without spinning the hammer. So, I don't think he was flying as much as he was using his leg strength to get him out.

I could be wrong.

Btw, I jumped before my plane hit the ground and I was fine.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
He doesn't need to spin Mjolnir to fly. He can just point and allow it to take him where he needs to go. I do imagine that spinning it likely gives him more speed.

Originally posted by Starscream M
Proof?

YouTube video

0:28 second mark.

ok, you're right, no need to spin (perhaps he does that for distance or speed)...but he does still need mjolnir though.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
YouTube video

0:28 second mark.

Nice find.

Although my point was helping your argument 😛

It still appears to me that he dove out the cage as opposed to flew.

Originally posted by lilshogun
Thor is more badly wounded when Loki stabs him than after his fight with Hulk.

I've learned in this thread that Mindset is always right.

The Thor stabbing was odd. In tbat the guy get smashed by hulk with no signs of damage then basically a pocket knife goes right into him. Gotta love movies

Hulk was holding back.