Denton Van Zan Vs. the Wood-chipper from Fargo

Originally posted by focus4chumps
that he had an escape route and was on a structure that might at least SCRATCH the dragon?

So you think the dragon wouldn't have flame-grilled him (and the entire building) had he tried to flee? Or just eat him, as RoF dragons have been shown earlier eating people falling in mid-air. His chance of escape was virtually non-existent.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
that he was carrying an axe which he knew would not even tickle it's nose?

Considering his only other weapon failed and he needed to carry light to make it to the top of the building, yeah, him having an axe isn't a big mystery. Did you want him to bring an RPG and 8 Abrams Tanks? Especially in a post-apocalyptic wasteland where resources are scarce?

Originally posted by focus4chumps
that it was nothing more than rage quit suicide

Yes, but because he had minimal-no chance of escape from the dragon. He rage quit because the odds against him escaping (even if possible) were too great for him to chance. THE SAME DOES NOT APPLY HERE. This is what I mean about you guys ignoring the context of the scene entirely. Just because he rage-quit in that situation doesn't mean he'll do so in ANY situation, like you're trying to suggest here.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
omg this 😂

according to quanchi's law, woodchipper wins.

/thread

So now we're getting somewhere. We are establishing that this is a Quanchi Butthurt thread.

Originally posted by Lestov16

So now we're getting somewhere. We are establishing that this is a Quanchi Butthurt thread.

nice try, but we have just established that quanchi is forced to concede for the woodchipper.

piss tears 🙂

Originally posted by Lestov16
So now we're getting somewhere. We are establishing that this is a Quanchi Butthurt thread.

Are you saying that quan's trolling is causing people to be butthurt?

Of course. I never said Quan wasn't trolling. He clearly is, but to take it out on him with this silly thread is indeed butthurt. Just pwn Quan in the threads he's losing. Don't create bait threads like this, because then you're just stooping below his level.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Of course. I never said Quan wasn't trolling. He clearly is, but to take it out on him with this silly thread is indeed butthurt. Just pwn Quan in the threads he's losing. Don't create bait threads like this, because then you're just stooping below his level.

its not a bait thread liz. clean the sand from your vagina. its a humor thread about a fictional character. ironically however, it also turns out that the woodchipper wins.

oh but you 2 were just trolling all along, right?

The woodchipper doesn't win. You just want to say that to bait Quanchi more. It makes you look petty and quite pathetic, really.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Of course. I never said Quan wasn't trolling. He clearly is, but to take it out on him with this silly thread is indeed butthurt. Just pwn Quan in the threads he's losing. Don't create bait threads like this, because then you're just stooping below his level.

Actually, quan has also started bait threads, so at worst it's stooping to his level....however I don't think the thread was aimed at quan, rather his rather poor attempts to argue in Zan's favor in other threads caused people to realize just how bad of a action hero Zan really was and thus this thread was born.

The fact that it would bother quan was probably just a bonus.

I understand that Zan was an absolute idiot and made a bunch of bad calls, but to call him both stupid and suicidal enough to jump into a woodchipper is a bit too much of an insult.

from "master tactician" to:

Originally posted by Lestov16
Zan was an absolute idiot and made a bunch of bad calls

👆

Originally posted by Lestov16
I understand that Zan was an absolute idiot and made a bunch of bad calls, but to call him both stupid and suicidal enough to jump into a woodchipper is a bit too much of an insult.

As opposed to arguing that he was some kind of bada$$ hero and leader that was the sole/main reason for humanities survival...isn't that rather insulting to those people that actually watched the movie?

I understand your point, and I'm not saying you can't call Van Zan out on the stupid bullshit he's done, but there has to be a line. You can't go off the reservation with it, claiming he's so stupid he'll commit suicide in a woodchipper, because that's also insulting to people who actually watched the movie.

That is a valid point.

the issue was his steady cocktail of rage and suicidal tendencies, not his stupidity (which he did have in abundance, regardless).

lestov, im glad you finally accepted some of the truth about van zan. but you still don't see the big picture. let me try to illuminate you:

-van zan got 200+ people killed hunting female dragons, and then more on screen in a hunting mission with helecopters and flying human bait. all this time he knows that they can only be extinct if the male is killed...but...he hunts them anyway.

-by roaming in the open he risks being followed. and where does he go? to mooch off of survivors and bully them, for shelter, food, fuel, etc....while pointlessly hunting female dragons.

-it was not a defensive mission when they attacked the female on screen. they were hunting it. why? rhetorical question. beyond batshit insanity, there is no answer to "why".

after all this lestov, how can you argue to me that pointlessly playing "slay the dragon", while putting other survivors in perril is anything but irrational and suicidal?

Irrational? Yes. Retarded? Absolutely. Reckless? Definitely. Suicidal? No.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Irrational? Yes. Retarded? Absolutely. Reckless? Definitely. Suicidal? [b]No. [/B]

lets not rhetorically marginalize "suicidal" as "crying and cutting wrist while listening to morrissey".

van zan clearly had a death wish.

But that death wish was clearly directed at dragons. And only dragons. Even if he did direct all that rage at the woodchipper, with all Van Zan's retarded shit, he's never shown so much stupidity that he can't discern an on/off switch.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Irrational? Yes. Retarded? Absolutely. Reckless? Definitely. Suicidal? [b]No. [/B]

I don't understand how you you agree he was irrational, retarded and reckless (kudos, btw), but don't see jumping off a tower towards an oncoming wall-o-certain-death as anything but suicide.

Do you honestly think Van Zan thought he had a chance of surviving after his rear foot left the tower?

Do you think Van Zan had an 50% or above chance of surviving after the dragon tanked the arrow? Because he really didn't.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Do you think Van Zan had an 50% or above chance of surviving after the dragon tanked the arrow? Because he [b]really didn't. [/B]

I couldn't say what percentage he had should he have opted for the ladder in the 7-8 seconds he had while the dragon recovered and turned back around, but I know it's higher than the functionally absolute zero percent chance of jumping off a tower into a dragon's path/mouth.

So I answered your question. Care go go back and answer mine?