Originally posted by abhilegend
Hahaha. GTFO. Out of continuity doesn't makes it non canon? You are getting weirder with your Thor obsession.When Fraction explicitly says this is not Thor of today?
Yup.
No, he said it doesn't affect current continuity and you don't have to know about Thor's long history etc. to enjoy these stories. That doesn't make them non-canon. BIG difference.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Yet Young Thor didn't have it when he met Apocalypse.Why not? Its non canon by writer/editor and now it contradicts actual canon stories.
When the writer actually calls it non canon? Yes, I am.
Who the **** cares? He said his trilogy is non canon. End of story.
And I've never seen somebody so desperate for feats. Its actually sad.
😂
So what if he didn't have it when he met Apocalypse? The Fraction Trilogy came out years earlier and at that point in canon, Thor had Mjolnir since he was a teenager.
No he didn't.
No it isn't.
Thor taking a beating from a Cosmic level being isn't exactly rare or unheard of so it's not really that crucial. I'd say you are far more desperate in trying to negate feats for Thor. And I'm sure pretty much everyone, including the NSA, would agree.
Originally posted by abhilegend
So, his ice monster was even more durable than his own body?😂
He can. But he wasn't actually using his power to do that when mystique stabbed Thor.
Perhaps, yes. Or maybe Thor just struck him harder. It doesn't really matter which was tougher.
But you arguing that the ice monster that Thor was taking on or the spear he was stabbed with was as durable as the snow men Mystique created is retarded.
Except Mystique was using his ice powers.
Originally posted by Epicurus
I pointed this out to him in the Phoenix/Surtur thread:He's also going back on his word that interviews are inadmissible by citing that IGN interview, lol :
Yup.
Using a canon story that contradicts continuity as evidence that a story is non-canon because it contradicts continuity.
😂
Also, there are similarities such as the use of the Blood Colossus from the Trilogy and in the Thor comics:
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusHe specifically said it was out of continuity. You have to be blind to think he was trying to say it was out of continuity and still canon.
Yup.No, he said it doesn't affect current continuity and you don't have to know about Thor's long history etc. to enjoy these stories. That doesn't make them non-canon. BIG difference.
So what if he didn't have it when he met Apocalypse? The Fraction Trilogy came out years earlier and at that point in canon, Thor had Mjolnir since he was a teenager.So?
No he didn't.Compelling arguments as usual.No it isn't.
Thor taking a beating from a Cosmic level being isn't exactly rare or unheard of so it's not really that crucial. I'd say you are far more desperate in trying to negate feats for Thor. And I'm sure pretty much everyone, including the NSA, would agree.😂
This is like talking to a wall.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Perhaps, yes. Or maybe Thor just struck him harder. It doesn't really matter which was tougher.But you arguing that the ice monster that Thor was taking on or the spear he was stabbed with was as durable as the snow men Mystique created is retarded.
Except Mystique was using his ice powers.
Except she only picked up a shard and impaled him. She picked up the gem later and started using ice powers and whatnot.
Originally posted by abhilegend
He specifically said it was out of continuity. You have to be blind to think he was trying to say it was out of continuity and still canon.So?
Compelling arguments as usual.
😂
This is like talking to a wall.
Snyder said LTBB was semi-canon and did not affect continuity and yet you had no problem with that. I'd give your opinion a lot more consideration if it wasn't so clearly driven by such nonsense reasons.
So? Are you some kind of retard? Scratch that: Are you really that much of a retard? Current young Thor contradicts Fraction's trilogy because the trilogy was basing Thor having Mjolnir on decades of established canon.
Yes, because you so often convince people to side with you. 😬
Then gtfo of my thread which has like many others gone to shit because you can't help your hate boner.
Originally posted by abhilegend
No if and buts. What was it?Except she only picked up a shard and impaled him. She picked up the gem later and started using ice powers and whatnot.
What? I don't know for certain. No one does. This is your problem, you form an opinion and assume it is fact while ignoring anything contradictory.
Maybe the Ice dragon wasn't more durable then Iceman and Thor simply struck Bobby harder. It doesn't really matter now as you clearly acknowledge (Through your silence) that Iceman can make some constructs far more durable then others.
So now she stabbed with a shard she picked up? How does that make sense unless you think she can turn invisible?
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Snyder said LTBB was semi-canon and did not affect continuity and yet you had no problem with that. I'd give your opinion a lot more consideration if it wasn't so clearly driven by such nonsense reasons.So? Are you some kind of retard? Scratch that: Are you really that much of a retard? Current young Thor contradicts Fraction's trilogy because the trilogy was basing Thor having Mjolnir on decades of established canon.
Yes, because you so often convince people to side with you. 😬
Then gtfo of my thread which has like many others gone to shit because you can't help your hate boner.
Heh, resorting to namecalling now that when you've been exposed of your lies? What, you're not going to report me now? Such a pitiful trick. Fraction's trilogy is non canon. You can cry all you want, its not going to change.
Who the **** cares about siding people?
Who died and made you a mod?
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
What? I don't know for certain. No one does. This is your problem, you form an opinion and assume it is fact while ignoring anything contradictory.Maybe the Ice dragon wasn't more durable then Iceman and Thor simply struck Bobby harder. It doesn't really matter now as you clearly acknowledge (Through your silence) that Iceman can make some constructs far more durable then others.
So now she stabbed with a shard she picked up? How does that make sense unless you think she can turn invisible?
Your point would be? The ice which penetrated Thor from behind (heh) wasn't particularly durable as Thor shattered it into one blow.
She attacked him from behind genius. Such simple things are so beyond you, its laughable.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Now did he? I've never seen it. Can you provide the link? As it is, I don't believe anything you say now.Heh, resorting to namecalling now that when you've been exposed of your lies? What, you're not going to report me now? Such a pitiful trick. Fraction's trilogy is non canon. You can cry all you want, its not going to change.
Who the **** cares about siding people?
Who died and made you a mod?
He did. I'll post them later tomorrow.
I haven't lied about anything. You've yet to prove anything. But I'm glad you admit how retarded it is to use current Young Thor as evidence because he doesn't have Mjolnir.
You apparently do:
Originally posted by abhilegend
We've discussed it before galan and I'm not the only one who thought Orion was amped.http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=14076304#post14076304
Bada one day.
Originally posted by abhilegend
That's your problem, not mine.Your point would be? The ice which penetrated Thor from behind (heh) wasn't particularly durable as Thor shattered it into one blow.
She attacked him from behind genius. Such simple things are so beyond you, its laughable.
So you're basically admitting you don't give a f*ck if a comic is ambiguous and push a point as fact anyways? Well, I guess it isn't a shock.
What are you talking about? The ice that cut Thor wasn't even chipped when we see him holding it so I'm not sure why you'd say it's not particularly durable?
Or are you referring to Thor breaking Iceman's body? We already established as canon that Iceman can make some constructs more durable.
Also, are you saying that something isn't particularly durable because it was shattered by a charged Mjolnir blow from a pissed off Thor? 😐
Yes, she did and we see no one behind him.
You think she THREW it across that distance now?
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusOk.
He did. I'll post them later tomorrow.
I haven't lied about anything.That's a lie to begin with.
You've yet to prove anything. But I'm glad you admit how retarded it is to use current Young Thor as evidence because he doesn't have Mjolnir.I proved it was non canon to begin with. No need to cry bro.
You apparently do:
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=14699644#14699644
Bada one day.[/QUOTE] I didn't ask for anybody to side with me. Like you always do.
So you're basically admitting you don't give a f*ck if a comic is ambiguous and push a point as fact anyways? Well, I guess it isn't a shock.Nope. Try again.
What are you talking about? The ice that cut Thor wasn't even chipped when we see him holding it so I'm not sure why you'd say it's not particularly durable?Wut? What kind of circular logic is that?
Or are you referring to Thor breaking Iceman's body? We already established as canon that Iceman can make some constructs more durable.But he made his body's parts more durable than he was just a second before when thor shattered him?
😂
Also, are you saying that something isn't particularly durable because it was shattered by a charged Mjolnir blow from a pissed off Thor? 😐Not top tier durable.
Yes, she did and we see no one behind him.She wasn't in the panel. You must've never seen WWE.
You think she THREW it across that distance now?No, she stabbed him. But the mental gymnastics you're doing over it are pretty amusing to say in the least.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Ok.That's a lie to begin with. I proved it was non canon to begin with. No need to cry bro.
I didn't ask for anybody to side with me. Like you always do.
Untrue.
Your reasoning was that your argument had more weight because someone else agreed with it.
You didn't.
The only reason you don't do it more often is because almost no one ever agrees with you.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope. Try again.Wut? What kind of circular logic is that?
But he made his body's parts more durable than he was just a second before when thor shattered him?
😂
Not top tier durable.
She wasn't in the panel. You must've never seen WWE.
No, she stabbed him. But the mental gymnastics you're doing over it are pretty amusing to say in the least.
That sentence didn't make any sense. What body parts were more durable? I'm saying that Iceman might instinctively be more durable then his other constructs and Thor struck harder. Or he may not. No one knows for sure. Either way, that does not change my point.
This discussion has run it's course.
Mjolnir cannot shatter top tier level durability? Only a few months ago we had a discussion of Thor shattering secondary Adamantium Ultrons. Does your memory reset every few weeks?
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusNope.
Untrue.
Your reasoning was that your argument had more weight because someone else agreed with it.Untrue on all accounts. I don't do this for anyone to agree with me. I say my opinion and let other people decide it for themselves. Whether they agree or disagree has no concerns for me.You didn't.
The only reason you don't do it more often is because almost no one ever agrees with you.
That sentence didn't make any sense. What body parts were more durable? I'm saying that Iceman might instinctively be more durable then his other constructs and Thor struck harder. Or he may not. No one knows for sure. Either way, that does not change my point.It totally does. You're suggesting that the shard that pierced Thor was somehow super duper durable JUST BECAUSE IT PIERCED THOR.
This discussion has run it's course.Oh yeah, it has.
Mjolnir cannot shatter top tier level durability? Only a few months ago we had a discussion of Thor shattering secondary Adamantium Ultrons. Does your memory reset every few weeks?That would be like comparing OWAW Superman to every time Superman gets pissed. And this was under a different writer.
😉
Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Originally posted by Branlor SwiftYet you're discussing the "irrelevant" character in the thread with me as opposed to the actual character in the thread. My mind is made up on both of them. But sure, let's discuss King Thor instead. Because that makes sense.
You brought up Galactus repeatedly before I even mentioned his name. Deflect your intentions on me all you want, but we both know what your intentions are. But sure, it is irrelevant to your stance. Let's discuss more on the intricacies of King Thor while acknowledging that we're ignoring Young Thor.
And yes, my posts would be as in depth and full of sex even if you wanted to drop King Thor instead, so yeah. Look at my underhandedness wanting Young Thor to be perceived as higher. I'm a real sicko.
But if Galactus is my underlying goal here, then I might as well point out that since the Gorr fight, Thor had a long period off of doing anything while having a reinvigorated Asgard and apparently visited Earth many times. Which would have been the perfect time to replenish all his power in an Odinsleep. Oh wait, I forgot that he is putting that off for reasons that make zero sense at all.I know your stance won't change. What I'm trying to figure out is why. It's cemented in assuming a fact, without there actually being facts. It bewilders me. And it's the exact same as Young Thor being weaker than Regular Thor because Regular Thor absorbed sunlight apparently as he got older (?). Both of my issues with these stem from the same thing.
I'm trying to get down to why these are accepted as facts exactly. So far, no reasons really.And yes, Gorr being lowballed is due to that, and will continue to be due to that. That will never be resolved considering the Thor fans and the Thor haters believe the same "fact". The Galactus feat will change perception, but before then it's still the same. And I've been asking the same t
Okay, I finally ended up reading all of this, and we're going to have to agree to disagree. Mostly because I don't want to reply and the discussion is not going to reach a resolution.
Hopefully they'll clarify King Thor's state in the next issue. In regards to Young Thor, this is probably the closest straight up comparison he's had to adult Thor by someone else aside from their fight with Gorr:
You may disagree, but to me at least, it clearly implies a difference between the two.
Also, I don't give a shit about walls of texts. With you alone, I've spent like dozens of pages discussing the most trivial of shit. I just get really bored easily nowadays.
Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Doesn't imply much tbh though. 😬Especially when all that Thor's done in front of him is destroy some Berserkers. Though it does show his dynamic strength.
If you say so. Personally, their respective encounters with Gorr makes it clear to me how the two compare. For example, Young Thor being too spent to even move after the final fight with Gorr while Avenger Thor climbs up from the center of a planet (Although he got pissed and took his eye at the end there).