Imhotep vs Voldemort · Movie Versus Forum

juggerman Senior Member

Originally posted by Lestov16
So does Vold.

I agree but it seems like you're just discounting Imhotep. He could easily TK Vold's wand and snap it at "Go".

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Originally posted by juggerman
AV kills. Full power Imhotep can't die. AV fails.

Let's bring this back on topic:

The killing curse has never worked against anyone with defense, let alone someone who cannot be killed. To say it kills Emotep is a no limit fallacy.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by juggerman
The magic did not come from the mortals tho. They called upon an immortal being to fullfill their needs. They placed curse on Imhotep by following a ritual to their god.
You're just mad cuz you're losing
He wasn't. Mortals use it? Mortals created it? How is it not mortal?
He was dominated in a world of magic users? That doesn't sound good at all..

They used magic to create him and used magic to depower him. Key word is magic.

Voldemort wins.

Mortals created the curse yet that is ignored. Your logic is hypocritical and Voldemort clearly wins.

😂

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

They used magic greater in scale and power than Voldemort's featless AK. Ergo, AK cannot overcome it.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
They used magic greater in scale and power than Voldemort's featless AK. Ergo, AK cannot overcome it.

Imhotep never resisted any magic. Specific magic kills him.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Featless magic cannot kill an immortal.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Featless magic cannot kill an immortal.

When has it failed to kill ? Wen has Imhotep resisted magic ?

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Any time someone had a shred of defense. The only thing AK has ever killed is unprotected humans. Emotep is immortal, there's no reason to assume, and yes you are assuming, the spell can effect him.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Any time someone had a shred of defense. The only thing AK has ever killed is unprotected humans. Emotep is immortal, there's no reason to assume, and yes you are assuming, the spell can effect him.

Ak has always killed so the answer is clear. Only invincible against mortal weaponry aka not magic as the films clearly show.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

AK has never killed anything above a defenseless human. The answer is clear but it's not the answer you want. Emotep's immortality comes from the Egyptian death god, time to rewatch the movie, mayhaps?

In short:
1. Featless spell.
2. Immortal target.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
AK has [b]never killed anything above a defenseless human. The answer is clear but it's not the answer you want. Emotep's immortality comes from the Egyptian death god, time to rewatch the movie, mayhaps?
In short:
1. Featless spell.
2. Immortal target. [/B]

Not a durability spell so quit misrepresenting it. It came from a curse used by humans. Magic clearly works against him used by mortals anyways as proven by the films, speck.

1. Killed so full of feats.
2. Not resistant to magic as proven in both films.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

It doesn't have to be. The spell has not shown the power to kill an immortal, even a weak one. If you want it to work, you need to prove it will, with a feat. Just being magic is not enough to say it can kill Emotep.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
It doesn't have to be. The spell has not shown the power to kill an immortal, even a weak one. If you want it to work, you need to prove it will, with a feat. Just being magic is not enough to say it can kill Emotep.

You didn't watch the movies. No, you are saying it won't work so burden is on you.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Originally posted by quanchi112
You didn't watch the movies. No, you are saying it won't work so burden is on you.

That's not how debate works, you're claiming it will, and it's not on me to prove a negative. You need to support your claim that the spell will work against an immortal. A task you cannot complete because no such feat for the spell exists.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
That's not how debate works, you're claiming it will, and it's not on me to prove a negative. You need to support your claim that the spell will work against an immortal. A task you cannot complete because no such feat for the spell exists.

I am claiming the spell works because we've seen it work. Point proven. You saying the spell won't work so the burden is on you. Magic has never failed against Imhotep so it isn't looking good.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Originally posted by quanchi112
I am claiming the spell works because we've seen it work. Point proven. You saying the spell won't work so the burden is on you. Magic has never failed against Imhotep so it isn't looking good.

We've never seen it work on anyone with even a shred of protection, it kills people, Emotep's immortal. It doesn't work.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
We've [b]never seen it work on anyone with even a shred of protection, it kills people, Emotep's immortal. It doesn't work. [/B]

Not a durability attack so quit acting like strength of body matters here. It doesn't.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

1. Prove that.
2. Irrelevant to this because Emotep's immortality is magical.

quanchi112 Disney

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
1. Prove that.
2. Irrelevant to this because Emotep's immortality is magical.

1. Bodies aren't harmed as proven if you actually saw the movies.
2. Only against non magical attacks.

ScreamPaste Carpe Noctem

Originally posted by quanchi112
1. Bodies aren't harmed as proven if you actually saw the movies.
2. Only against non magical attacks.

1. That's funny since Dumbles was sent quite a ways.
2. Prove it.