Ozymandias (Movie Version) Vs Sunny (Into The Badlands)

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
You know, I kind of wondered why I was recalling such a strong recollection between Yang and Arthur, and now I remember why. Legend of the Sword basically ripped off one of the shots from The Warrior's Way in one of their fight scenes.

Seriously, check this out lol:

Ha ha, YES. Now that you point it out, it's very similar, and very indicative of his speed and skill. And do you remember the hallway fight? At 1:15 he dodges a bullet point blank and at 1:51 he cuts through a bullet as it's leaving the barrel.

YouTube video

Have to say, if I was Sunny I might want to skip this fight. As for Ozy, well 😆

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
@ Carthage

That's something I find hilarious. How people can try to compare inmates and street thugs from Watchmen to people that we know have years of actual combat training (Clippers). Badlands fodder > Watchmen fodder.

But Nite Owl could beat a lot of fodder clippers in h2h. Nite owl was fodder to Ozy.

Originally posted by h1a8
But Nite Owl could beat a lot of fodder clippers in h2h. Nite owl was fodder to Ozy.

Prove it.

Originally posted by h1a8
But Nite Owl could beat a lot of fodder clippers in h2h. Nite owl was fodder to Ozy.

Based on what? Beating thugs and inmates that have no established or shown training and skill? Because we are explicitly shown and told what the Clippers are. We are shown how they train, live, operate etc. We know that they are all meant to be highly trained close-range warriors. We know that you have to spend years as a Colt before even standing a chance of becoming a Clipper. The fodder Nite Owl beat has zero such credentials.

Originally posted by Dreampanther
Ha ha, YES. Now that you point it out, it's very similar, and very indicative of his speed and skill. And do you remember the hallway fight? At 1:15 he dodges a bullet point blank and at 1:51 he cuts through a bullet as it's leaving the barrel.

YouTube video

Have to say, if I was Sunny I might want to skip this fight. As for Ozy, well 😆

Pity the overall quality of the movie was not all that great IMO (let's be real, the fighting is by far the most entertaining part of the film). But yes, he's a beast, and a step up from the guys in this thread.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Based on what? Beating thugs and inmates that have no established or shown training and skill? Because we are explicitly shown and told what the Clippers are. We are shown how they train, live, operate etc. We know that they are all meant to be highly trained close-range warriors. We know that you have to spend years as a Colt before even standing a chance of becoming a Clipper. The fodder Nite Owl beat has zero such credentials.

Isn't it interesting how H1's new standard doesn't follow either writer's intent or visual feats. do you think that is because both would prove that the Clippers are far more skilled than the fodder in the Watchmen universe?

Ozy's only chance is to beg Sunny not to beat him up badly

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Based on what? Beating thugs and inmates that have no established or shown training and skill? Because we are explicitly shown and told what the Clippers are. We are shown how they train, live, operate etc. We know that they are all meant to be highly trained close-range warriors. We know that you have to spend years as a Colt before even standing a chance of becoming a Clipper. The fodder Nite Owl beat has zero such credentials.

Until then Nite Owl>>>>>>>>any fodder clipper.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Isn't it interesting how H1's new standard doesn't follow either writer's intent or visual feats. do you think that is because both would prove that the Clippers are far more skilled than the fodder in the Watchmen universe?

Writer’s intent is not discernible when it comes to fighting skills of characters from different fiction.

Visually, those fodder clippers were way less skilled than Rorschach or Nite Owl. But visually, fighting skill is subjective (unless viewed by an actual expert).

Originally posted by h1a8
Writer’s intent is not discernible when it comes to fighting skills of characters from different fiction.

Yes, it is.

Originally posted by h1a8
Visually, those fodder clippers were way less skilled than Rorschach or Nite Owl. But visually, fighting skill is subjective (unless viewed by an actual expert).

That isn't true, at all.

^^ What H1 said right there is some of the biggest horseshit ever. Of course you can discern fighting skill between different universes using Writer's Intent. If a bunch of people are portrayed as random thugs and inmates, and display no notable training or skill, and the others are shown to go through intense training, basically live like post-apocalyptic samurai, and visually have better combat feats, then they are clearly portrayed as superior. But of course H1 will completely ignore this and say the opposite, because he will spew any crap under the sun in his attempts to skew an argument in his favour. Pretty hilarious how he will insist his interpretation of Writer's intent is stone-cold fact, even when screen evidence contradicts him. But here, when it is clear as day, he tries to label it "Not discernible". Not to mention it's highly hypocritical, considering some of his LoS arguments in the past involving Nolan Bane, when he insisted LoS training would make Bane a superior fighter in skill and speed (despite how he visually looked) than a bunch of MCU characters (i.e. using his interpretation of Writer's intent with fighting skill to make a comparison between universes).

Also, lol at that guy throwing out claims about Nite Owl beating groups of Clippers, then provides zero proof when asked, and then essentially demands a negative to said unproven claim. Typical H1 nonsense.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Based on what? Beating thugs and inmates that have no established or shown training and skill? Because we are explicitly shown and told what the Clippers are. We are shown how they train, live, operate etc. We know that they are all meant to be highly trained close-range warriors. We know that you have to spend years as a Colt before even standing a chance of becoming a Clipper. The fodder Nite Owl beat has zero such credentials.

So that argument holds no water.

Show me a fodder clipper beating multiple thugs without getting touched.
Till then, they don't have the feats to justify that they can do that.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, it is.

That isn't true, at all.

No it isn't. It's impossible to know if a writer thinks ANY particular character fights better than another from a totally different fictional universe.

Originally posted by Silent Master

That isn't true, at all.

Originally posted by h1a8
No it isn't. It's impossible to know if a writer thinks ANY particular character fights better than another from a totally different fictional universe.

You are purposely misunderstanding my point. We are not comparing how one writer would view characters from another universe. We are comparing writer A's intent for character A with writer B's intent for character B.

It's like you don't even know how comparisons work.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You are purposely misunderstanding my point. We are not comparing how one writer would view characters from another universe. We are comparing writer A's intent for character A with writer B's intent for character B.

It's like you don't even know how comparisons work.

Yup. He knows exactly what we are talking about. He is being intentionally obtuse because he knows that the Clippers were portrayed as a highly trained fighting force, whereas the thugs and inmates in Watchmen were portrayed as nothing but thugs and inmates. I own the extended cut of that film. There is absolutely nothing in it to suggest any of the thugs Nite Owl beat had any comparable training to what Clippers go through.

But I suspect he will just continue to harp on about his interpretation of our point for the next 5 to 10 pages, without addressing the actual argument.

For someone who claims to be highly intelligent and a teacher, he seems to be incapable of understanding even the most basic concepts.

At this point, I am convinced it is intentional trolling. Because it happens far too often. Instead of actually addressing the relevant part of people's posts, he will pick a random thing to go off about over and over, stalling a thread for multiple pages in the process in some instances (recent examples being the Bucky elbow strike and the old woman from Luke Cage). He basically annoys/frustrates the other person into giving up, because they can't be bothered wasting any more time responding to him. It's why most people barely make the effort anymore.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You are purposely misunderstanding my point. We are not comparing how one writer would view characters from another universe. We are comparing writer A's intent for character A with writer B's intent for character B.

It's like you don't even know how comparisons work.

That's what the discussion is about. You just can't come in and change things.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Yup. He knows exactly what we are talking about. He is being intentionally obtuse because he knows that the Clippers were portrayed as a highly trained fighting force, whereas the thugs and inmates in Watchmen were portrayed as nothing but thugs and inmates. I own the extended cut of that film. There is absolutely nothing in it to suggest any of the thugs Nite Owl beat had any comparable training to what Clippers go through.

But I suspect he will just continue to harp on about his interpretation of our point for the next 5 to 10 pages, without addressing the actual argument.