Thanos w/o IG vs. Thor w/o SB

Originally posted by FrothByte
That was in response to Thanos fighting Hulk, not him fighting Thor. Again, where in the interview did they say that an unarmed Thanos defeated a fully powered Thor?

"Where in the interview did they say than an unarmed Thanos was capable of defeating a fully powered Thor going all out?"

This was the post I responded to. I then provided the quote again and bolded the relevant bits.

First things first, you asked where did they say that an unarmed Thanos was capable of defeating a fully powered Thor going all out.

Now you're asking where did they say that Thanos defeated a fully powered Thor?

You're moving the goalposts and trying to distract us from the issue at hand, which isn't if Thanos did, but if he can (he will).

Second of all, I guess I have to hold your hand and break apart the quote for you. Well here we go.

“He’s not using it,” Russo said.

This means Thanos isn't using the power gem in his domination of Hulk.

“This is to show that Thanos, the Genghis Khan of the Marvel Universe, he’s
unbeatable in 1-on-1 battle.

Pretty clear-cut. Showing Thanos curbing Hulk without the use of a gem is meant to emphasize that in a one on one fight, at least against humanoid opponents presumably (so no Dormammu, Ego, or Surtur), Thanos is unbeatable. Now, you could try to pretend that Thor is so far above Hulk that this quote might not apply to him, but then...

He’s conquered thousands of worlds. He’s a much more polished fighter than the Hulk, and Thor, and Loki.”

We have a direct comparison, indicating that Thanos is the superior fighter to Thor.

No, he doesn't say "Thor at full power would lose to Thanos without the gem", but the context clues along with the movie itself make that conclusion very obvious.

Thor gets beaten seriously....Again!

Neme's got a point. Several actually.
Obviously, not are able to digest it, but until Avengers 4 there is nothing that can be done about it. Let's all just agree to disagree

@ Neme:

And yet Thor throws an axe through him at the end of the film. Which the Russos outright admit would have killed Thanos had it hit him in the head.

Where does that fit into their comments?

They were clearly referring to physical strength and H2H in their comments. And not referring to having Uru weapons and Lightning blasted at him.

Originally posted by NemeBro

But this is all beside the point. Per Thor's acknowledging Rocket's words he lost to Thanos, per Russos Thanos is invincible 1v1, and even by feats Thanos wins. 👆

Per Rockets words:

Thanos already had a power gem at that point though.

Per Russos commentary:

Again they dont show that when Thor impalas him at the end.

Per Thors words:

Thor didnt know Stormbreaker was the newest baddest weapon at the time he was talking to Rocket and the Guardians. His dialogue just makes it clear he needs his Hammer, or a similar one back to have a go at Thanos again.

Per Directors comments and forum rules in general:

Also I dont believe directors get final say on power levels. I remember when people were quoting Whedon from AOU saying No One if More Powerful than Hulk, as evidence Hulk can take Thor.

Then it turned out he said the same thing about Thor in a Thor2 interview.

Which is why we go by a simple rule here: On Screen Feats Only.

Commentary can be made to back up argument but they are not the all and end all like you and Quan are making out.

But we can always get a ruling from Imped to clarify.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Per Rockets words:

Thanos already had a power gem at that point though.

Per Russos commentary:

Again they dont show that when Thor impalas him at the end.

Per Thors words:

Thor didnt know Stormbreaker was the newest baddest weapon at the time he was talking to Rocket and the Guardians. His dialogue just makes it clear he needs his Hammer, or a similar one back to have a go at Thanos again.

Per Directors comments and forum rules in general:

Also I dont believe directors get final say on power levels. I remember when people were quoting Whedon from AOU saying No One if More Powerful than Hulk, as evidence Hulk can take Thor.

Then it turned out he said the same thing about Thor in a Thor2 interview.

Which is why we go by a simple rule here: On Screen Feats Only.

Commentary can be made to back up argument but they are not the all and end all like you and Quan are making out.

But we can always get a ruling from Imped to clarify.

You're talking to a guy that has claimed Superman flying really fast was proof he had Flash/Metro Man type superspeed.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Per Rockets words:

Thanos already had a power gem at that point though.

That he didn't use.

Per Russos commentary:

Again they dont show that when Thor impalas him at the end.

Russo's comment concerning Thanos being > Hulk, Loki, and Thor is specifically referring to the point in time of the opening scene. Other characters getting an upgrade like Thor did and equaling or surpassing him was always on the table, which is obviously what happened. Thor at the end of Infinity War would beat a base Thanos handily.

Per Thors words:

Thor didnt know Stormbreaker was the newest baddest weapon at the time he was talking to Rocket and the Guardians. His dialogue just makes it clear he needs his Hammer, or a similar one back to have a go at Thanos again.

I'm not seeing the relevance. Thor begrudgingly admits that Thanos has already fought him and, obviously, defeated him when pressed by Rocket, just that he's never done so twice, referring to their upcoming rematch when he gets his hammer.

That he wasn't aware of the magnitude of the buff he'd get from Stormbreaker isn't really relevant to that.

Per Directors comments and forum rules in general:

Also I dont believe directors get final say on power levels. I remember when people were quoting Whedon from AOU saying No One if More Powerful than Hulk, as evidence Hulk can take Thor.

Then it turned out he said the same thing about Thor in a Thor2 interview.

In which case we go by feats or relative showings, or in this case we assume that Whedon regards them as peers (which they are). The Russo statement has no contradictory one to my knowledge, and even by their respective showings Thor simply doesn't have one on par with effortlessly tooling the Hulk. He doesn't my friend.

Which is why we go by a simple rule here: On Screen Feats Only.

Commentary can be made to back up argument but they are not the all and end all like you and Quan are making out.

So on-screen feats only, except when you're using statements to back up an argument? Yikes, if you can't even stay consistent in the span of literally two sentences why should anyone take your ruling on debate conduct seriously?

Furthermore, dear lord you people really can't read can you?

In my initial post that went into any detail on the fight, Russo's statement did not form the crux of my analysis, and was merely put at the end to emphasize what is already pretty obvious in the film: that Thanos even without a gem is beyond Hulk or Thor in a fight. My next post notes that the interview merely corroborates the evidence within the films.

The only people stuck on debating the interview alone are Frothbyte and, apparently, you.

But we can always get a ruling from Imped to clarify.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
@ Neme:

And yet Thor throws an axe through him at the end of the film. Which the Russos outright admit would have killed Thanos had it hit him in the head.

Where does that fit into their comments?

They were clearly referring to physical strength and H2H in their comments. And not referring to having Uru weapons and Lightning blasted at him.

No, now you're inventing context that doesn't exist and just suits your preferred outcome more.

But let's pretend for a second that they were: how does this help Thor? Thor is a brawler, even after unlocking his lightning powers. He made use of some AOE and projectile attacks in Ragnarok for dealing with fodder, but IIRC with Hela he was sticking to hand to hand (I could be wrong on this point because when I checked I couldn't find much footage of their final fight).

Originally posted by NemeBro
As stated, it fits into "This hadn't happened in the universe up to the scene the Russo's were specifically talking about and as such isn't evidence against it".

No, now you're inventing context that doesn't exist and just suits your preferred outcome more. Or where I am arguing for a preferred outcome.

But let's pretend for a second that they were: how does this help Thor? Thor is a brawler, even after unlocking his lightning powers. He made use of some AOE and projectile attacks in Ragnarok for dealing with fodder, but IIRC with Hela he was sticking to hand to hand (I could be wrong on this point because when I checked I couldn't find much footage of their final fight).

I must have missed the part where I stated Thor > Base Thanos prior to Stormbreaker.

My argument here began with Hela =/> Base Thanos. To which the Troll quoted Feige and Russos calling Thanos the baddest villain ever, as some kind of proof against that.

Originally posted by NemeBro

The only people stuck on debating the interview alone are Frothbyte and, apparently, you.

I was merely challenging your logic here. No need to freak out about it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I must have missed the part where I stated Thor > Base Thanos prior to Stormbreaker.

My argument here began with Hela =/> Base Thanos. To which the Troll quoted Feige and Russos calling Thanos the baddest villain ever, as some kind of proof against that.

I was merely challenging your logic here. No need to freak out about it.

Because this thread is literally pre-Stormbreaker Thor vs. Thanos, which is what everyone here, as far as I can tell, has been discussing. What relevance does Hela have here?

And the posts of yours I quoted? Those were your first posts in this thread.

Where do you think you are?

Originally posted by NemeBro

So on-screen feats only, except when you're using statements to back up an argument? Yikes, if you can't even stay consistent in the span of literally two sentences why should anyone take your ruling on debate conduct seriously?

Theres no contradiction there when you actually think about it.

Directors commentary cant be used on it own. Can be used to back up On Screen Feats.

So Russos saying Thanos > Thor does not mean much on its own without an On Screen Feat.

My point was the On Screen feat (at the end) possibly contradicts that notion. But your point is Russos comments only applied to that beginning portion of the film and is backed up by dialogue and Thanos beating Hulk. Cool 👆

Originally posted by NemeBro
Are uh, are you in the right thread friend?

You know I actually am in the wrong thread Lol

Okay after actually having read through this thread I understand it better.

Firstly:

Originally posted by quanchi112
Thor called a rematch with Thanos suicide without the axe. What does that tell you? What message was he trying to convey? This is from a braggart to boot.

He said without a new hammer. He didnt know about the axe then.

So that actually implies Thor thinks he has a chance if he gets Mjolnir back. It also implies that Mjolnir Thor > Ragnarok Thor which I always suspected.

Second:

I agree Russos make it pretty clear Thanos was > Thor at the beginning of the film even without the Power Stone.

Thirdly:

Originally posted by steverules_2
Quin jet had Hulk down as 'strongest avenger.'

Originally posted by quanchi112

On screen Thor did not budge Thanos. At least hulk did that. Period.

Stop the nonsense. Lets not troll here. You have a good argument with the Russos commentary. And its pretty rare for you to start with a strong argument so dont ruin it with shit like this.

Fourth:

Originally posted by NemeBro
I'd give Thor the edge but given that the fight between SSJ Thor and Hulk lasted long enough for a single punch yeah. It enabled him to batter Hulk around with punches the way Hulk can him, and combined with his superior speed and skill he should be able to take Hulk down, though it would take a while due to Hulk's endurance.

No they were not left looking like peers at the close of that fight at all.

Thor took a proper pounding from Hulk (right before the lightning), then he punched Hulk with Lightning Twice. Both times he almost KODd Hulk. Then with Grandmaster forfeiting the fight it was clearly implied One more hit would KO Hulk.

Even in strength, Hulk was actually almost KOd by Thors first physical hit in that fight which applies a greater strength parity than some would like to believe.

So Thor could definitely put up a closer fight one on one against Thanos than Hulk did. And by quite margin atm.

And again this is without any kind of Hammer, even Mjolnir, which Thor makes a point to seek out as his only chance against Thanos. He was initially looking to simply get Mjolnir back to get the job done. Stormbreaker was a massive Bonus.

Finally:

the first fight Thor refers to could just be the one we saw where he uselessly hits Thanos. But that is neither here or there.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
@ Neme:

And yet Thor throws an axe through him at the end of the film. Which the Russos outright admit would have killed Thanos had it hit him in the head.

Where does that fit into their comments?

They were clearly referring to physical strength and H2H in their comments. And not referring to having Uru weapons and Lightning blasted at him.

Seems you are still butthurt for Thanos shaming Thor 😂

Your fanaticism is respected.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
@ Neme:

And yet Thor throws an axe through him at the end of the film. Which the Russos outright admit would have killed Thanos had it hit him in the head.

Where does that fit into their comments?

They were clearly referring to physical strength and H2H in their comments. And not referring to having Uru weapons and Lightning blasted at him.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Okay after actually having read through this thread I understand it better.

Firstly:

He said without a new hammer. He didnt know about the axe then.

So that actually implies Thor thinks he has a chance if he gets Mjolnir back. It also implies that Mjolnir Thor > Ragnarok Thor which I always suspected.

Your fanboy mind creates nonsense when the directors are clear. You are a massive fanboy.

I agree Russos make it pretty clear Thanos was > Thor at the beginning of the film even without the Power Stone.

[/B]

Stop the nonsense. Lets not troll here. You have a good argument with the Russos commentary. And its pretty rare for you to start with a strong argument so dont ruin it with shit like this.
[/B]

No they were not left looking like peers at the close of that fight at all.

Thor took a proper pounding from Hulk (right before the lightning), then he punched Hulk with Lightning Twice. Both times he almost KODd Hulk. Then with Grandmaster forfeiting the fight it was clearly implied One more hit would KO Hulk.
[/B]

Even in strength, Hulk was actually almost KOd by Thors first physical hit in that fight which applies a greater strength parity than some would like to believe.
[/B]

So Thor could definitely put up a closer fight one on one against Thanos than Hulk did. And by quite margin atm.

And again this is without any kind of Hammer, even Mjolnir, which Thor makes a point to seek out as his only chance against Thanos. He was initially looking to simply get Mjolnir back to get the job done. Stormbreaker was a massive Bonus.

Finally:

the first fight Thor refers to could just be the one we saw where he uselessly hits Thanos. But that is neither here or there. [/B]

Thor says he can create a weapon powerful enough to kill Thanos not recreate his old hammer. You keep pretending he said that he did not.

Thor admits he does not stand a chance the directors corroborate his dialogue. Just stop this is an embarrassing display of nonsense.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It implies Thor needs a new weapon the Thanos killing kind. He explains this prior when he first tells rocket of nidavellir. At no point has his original hammer killed anyone of Thanos caliber.

He looks at his spoon and says "I don't need a spoon, I need a Hammer"

Of course it's going to be a new hammer given his old one was destroyed. Duh.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Your fanboy mind creates nonsense when the directors are clear. You are a massive fanboy.

There is no denying that.

Funny since I never even stated Thor with Mjolnir beats Thanos.

Just that Thor seemed to think he definitely has no chance without Mjolnir, or a similar weapon.

He has no idea at that point that he was going to get the strongest weapon made for Asgard.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I always have great arguments you not so much.

No you have started with one good argument today, then quickly proceeded to more trolling.

I will decide if you are trolling or if you are coming up with anything worth paying attention to.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You have no basic understanding of how the momentum of a fight to change at the drop of a dime. That does not mean in those moments they are not peers. Thor had the momentum but Hulk recovered and was ready for more. He did not ko the Hulk he rocked him. If you ko you win Thor never won. He just rocked the Hulk but he had time to recover. Thanos beat the hulk into submission showing they are not peers. Thor showed he had the edge but the fight never completed and at the end of their first fight hulk had the edge when their fight was interrupted in avengers 1.

No you are just refusing to admit that there was no parity once the Lightning came down.

Everyone could see that. There were not many people still arguing Hulk and Thor as equals after Ragnorak. Because it was clear and obvious Hulk was in out of his depth which is why GM had to aid Hulk and essentially forefeit the fair 1 v 1.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Thanos was not even fazed by Thor so it does not look convincing more like wishful thinking.

Troll point, and you are not even being consistent. One minute claiming Thor and Hulk are equals, the next minute claiming Thor can't even faze Thanos.

Even Iron Man was capable of fazing him, so don't be retarded.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Thor says he can create a weapon powerful enough to kill Thanos not recreate his old hammer. You keep pretending he said that he did not.

You keep pretending he never mentioned the word Hammer. Or the place he went to get his new weapon wasn't the same place Mjolnir was built.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Thor admits he does not stand a chance the directors corroborate his dialogue. Just stop this is an embarrassing display of nonsense.

No, He admits he does not stand a chance WITHOUT A WEPAON against a Thanos with AT LEAST 2 INFINITY STONES.

Try watching the film more often so you know where we are up to at each point of the film we are discussing.

In any case I don't believe Thor could take Thanos without Stormbreaker. Just that he had the best chance and the equivalency to Hulk is no longer valid.

Just out of curiosity, are people thinking that Thanos could simply tank Thor's lightning?

Didn't get already?

Originally posted by HulkIsHulk
Didn't get already?

Was that supposed to make sense?