Kurse vs Hela

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I don't recall Thor blocking one of Hela's punches can you timestamp it? All I recall was him blocking a slash. And he blocked it at the wrist, meaning it wasn't where the energy of the swing was focused (at least that is how I see the physics behind it)

https://youtu.be/Mv3-G1k8VFY (2:01)

If you are comparing the how Hulk's punches seem "heavier", I guess it can be explained by Hulk's size giving his punches "more mass" while Hela is much smaller and is throwing around a lot less mass (but in "feats" where she applies direct strength like grabbing and crushing, she seems to show practically limitless strength). Imagine Hela being smaller and lighter (but much stronger) and Hulk being more massive and heavier.

OR we can go back to my original argument. Characters have "feats" that contradict each other all the time. Some low some high. We know Hela's upper limits are way up there but that doesn't mean she can have a few low showings here and there.

Edit. IF you would humor me and allow me to justify things via my own "headcanon" (not supported by facts and not an argument I am making), I always saw Hela as having "dynamic strength" due to her amping herself via whatever internal energies she has (kinda like how Surfer does it). But that's just me, of course, purely speculative theory.

Here at the 2 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv3-G1k8VFY

I agree that mass and weight add a lot to punching power (in fact I argued for that in a different thread here), and so Hulk's size will definitely help him there. Still, the strength difference between Hela and Hulk should be so big (assuming she's truly capable of easily crushing Mjolnir in her grip) that her punches should be able to blow right through Thor's defenses.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Here at the 2 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv3-G1k8VFY

I agree that mass and weight add a lot to punching power (in fact I argued for that in a different thread here), and so Hulk's size will definitely help him there. Still, the strength difference between Hela and Hulk should be so big (assuming she's truly capable of easily crushing Mjolnir in her grip) that her punches should be able to blow right through Thor's defenses.

That's the one I timestamped above. (same timestamp, too 2:01) 😛 That's a slash (a clumsy one). Pause it at exactly 2:01 and you'll see the blade. He caught it at the wrist so I'm thinking most of the energy of the swing was focused on the blade and not the wrist (again, that's how I understand the physics behind it, anyway).

Not necessarily. And I feel that the screenwriter's disagree the same way I do. Force of punches have as much to do with technique, mass and speed as much as strength (that is why powerlifters don't necessarily have powerful punches). And we don't know if Hela put her all on that swing and we've seen Thor block Hulk's weapon strikes easily enough (with his own weapon) as well. And just because a character isn't "thrown" as hard, doesn't mean he isn't overpowered. The Hulk vs Thor fight had them flying around from hits but Hulk was barely overpowering Thor that time. Hela was decimating Thor. Just because she didn't toss him hundreds of feet after choking him doesn't mean she didn't demonstrate the huge difference in their strength.

But regardless of trying to "physics the feat", it is fact that Mjolnir was crushed by Hela and no indication of any other factors other than strength was demonstrated. The "feat" stands on its own and we cant try to to use other showings to explain it away as we don't have to. Was it a bit on the high end? Sure. But it's there.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Well, I guess we just have to go with strength untill somebody can ask waititi

If that were to be the case, then Hela's strength would outmach anything we've seen before BY FAR.

And yet, considering she's magical and was Mjolnir's original owner....I find that unlikely.

I think magic's got to do in the equation.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
If that were to be the case, then Hela's strength would outmach anything we've seen before BY FAR.

And yet, considering she's magical and was Mjolnir's original owner....I find that unlikely.

I think magic's got to do in the equation.

Being "the original owner" has not been shown to give one power over Mjolnir's durability. Nor does it allow you to overpower the enchantment (which was placed wayyy after Hela is no longer the owner of Mjolnir) once you are deemed "unworthy" of the hammer (and I'm thinking Hela is unworthy times 10000).

If you wanna go the "magic" route: Check out my totally-speculative-and-should-not-be-taken-seriously-unless-you-want-to explanation (dynamic strength from self-amping, like Silver Surfer does), which would allow everything to make sense.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Being "the original owner" has not been shown to give one power over Mjolnir's durability. Nor does it allow you to overpower the enchantment (which was placed wayyy after Hela is no longer the owner of Mjolnir) once you are deemed "unworthy" of the hammer (and I'm thinking Hela is unworthy times 10000).

If you wanna go the "magic" route: Check out my totally-speculative-and-should-not-be-taken-seriously-unless-you-want-to explanation (dynamic strength from self-amping, like Silver Surfer does), which would allow everything to make sense.

Would you agree on Asgardians being magical beings, more specially, the Asgardian royals (Odin, Freya, Thor, etc)?

And, would you agree Uru (Mjolnir) being susceptible to enchantments/magic?

Originally posted by Nibedicus
That's the one I timestamped above. (same timestamp, too 2:01) 😛 That's a slash (a clumsy one). Pause it at exactly 2:01 and you'll see the blade. He caught it at the wrist so I'm thinking most of the energy of the swing was focused on the blade and not the wrist (again, that's how I understand the physics behind it, anyway).

Not necessarily. And I feel that the screenwriter's disagree the same way I do. Force of punches have as much to do with technique, mass and speed as much as strength (that is why powerlifters don't necessarily have powerful punches). And we don't know if Hela put her all on that swing and we've seen Thor block Hulk's weapon strikes easily enough (with his own weapon) as well. And just because a character isn't "thrown" as hard, doesn't mean he isn't overpowered. The Hulk vs Thor fight had them flying around from hits but Hulk was barely overpowering Thor that time. Hela was decimating Thor. Just because she didn't toss him hundreds of feet after choking him doesn't mean she didn't demonstrate the huge difference in their strength.

But regardless of trying to "physics the feat", it is fact that Mjolnir was crushed by Hela and no indication of any other factors other than strength was demonstrated. The "feat" stands on its own and we cant try to to use other showings to explain it away as we don't have to. Was it a bit on the high end? Sure. But it's there.

Out of curiosity, how do you think a fight between Hela and Thanos (pure h2h) would go? Would you think that she can easily overpower him then? Because Thanos has no strength feat that I know of that can equal the Mjolnir feat.

I think Hela would whip his ass

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Would you agree on Asgardians being magical beings, more specially, the Asgardian royals (Odin, Freya, Thor, etc)?

And, would you agree Uru (Mjolnir) being susceptible to enchantments/magic?

The MCU Asgardians were explained to have "superscience akin to magic" and not actual magic-magic (unlike Dr. Strange for example). There was even a time Jane Foster explained Asgardian science-magic via earth science. It's stupid but that's how the MCU did it.

As for their abilities. Other than Odin (and to a much lesser extent Heimdall who was able to limited-summon a rainbow bridge), the other Asgardians seem to have a specific powerset, Thor had "lightning" powers, Hela had stabby powers, the Enchantress had enchant-y powers, Loki had illusions (although he's not Asgardian), etc. We can't really say they can cast any kind of unique magical spell or anything based on what we've seen.

Just about as susceptible as all other items, I would wager. Albiet a lot more durable.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Out of curiosity, how do you think a fight between Hela and Thanos (pure h2h) would go? Would you think that she can easily overpower him then? Because Thanos has no strength feat that I know of that can equal the Mjolnir feat.

It was actually theorized some internetz pplz that much of the reason why Thanos went on the gem hunt so late is that many of the "greater older powers" that could stand against him (Hela, Odin, The Ancient One, even Asgard who would stand against his forces) were gone. This actually makes a lot of sense.

As for a fight between the two, with "feats" as they are, one-on-one no gauntlet, Thanos does not have the non-gauntlet "feats" that would put him above Hela, no. I will, however, reserve my opinion on who wins til AFTER endgame or til we actually see Thanos fighting without the gauntlet to get a better picture.

It was stated that Frigga taught Loki his magic. Also the science = magic was just used because the writers didn't think the general audience would buy magic in that setting. ever since Thor 1, they stopped calling it science and started using words like magic and spells.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
I think Hela would whip his ass

So you conceded to that she does have magic.

Originally posted by Silent Master
It was stated that Frigga taught Loki his magic. Also the science = magic was just used because the writers didn't think the general audience would buy magic in that setting. ever since Thor 1, they stopped calling it science and started using words like magic and spells.

I get that, I do. The line seems very strange and hard to delineate from since even at Thor 2 we have Jane explaining away Asgardian "science" via Earth terms. Perhaps Asgardians have both? But why is everything except a few things seemingly super-science based? For example: the castle force field, the rainbow bridge, the forging of Mjolnir, etc seem to be more rooted in super-science (or space magic?) than they are magic.

Just becasue people have magic doesn't mean they can't also use tech. BTW, even in magic setting like D&D and Harry Potter, people make magic items or forge magic weapons.

Or in simple terms. Technomagic is a thing.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I don't recall black hole grenades being part of Kurse's standard equipment.

As for this fight, Hela wins round 1 decisively. She also wins round 2 but mostly due to attrition. Kurse will ragdoll her a bit and give her a beating but I just don't see how he can seriously hurt her. Hela can heal from her injuries where I don't think Kurse can, so eventually she'll simply outlast him.

Why are they not? They were on him in his showings.

Originally posted by Silent Master
It was stated that Frigga taught Loki his magic. Also the science = magic was just used because the writers didn't think the general audience would buy magic in that setting. ever since Thor 1, they stopped calling it science and started using words like magic and spells.

They've also more freely used the term "gods" to refer to themselves.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Just becasue people have magic doesn't mean they can't also use tech. BTW, even in magic setting like D&D and Harry Potter, people make magic items or forge magic weapons.

Or in simple terms. Technomagic is a thing.

The problem I have is that we simply cannot disregard the original exposition in Thor 1. It is canon and not has not been directly retconned AFAIK. Indirectly, there is perhaps a "creep" towards a more magic-y direction. But the Thor 1 explanation stands and we need to justify it from that angle regardless of how stupid it looks.

But I do agree, just because they have magic-y science tech doesn't mean they can't practice magic the same way Earth humans do. But I feel the reverse of your above scenario is more the case (that the vast array of their abilities are superscience based and a few can practice magic like in Earth humans) until we get a more latter explanation as in Thor 1.

It doesn't need to be retconned. because looking at the definition of science. magic qualifies.

Originally posted by Silent Master
It doesn't need to be retconned. because looking at the definition of science. magic qualifies.

Elaborate. Not getting what you mean here.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
The MCU Asgardians were explained to have "superscience akin to magic" and not actual magic-magic (unlike Dr. Strange for example). There was even a time Jane Foster explained Asgardian science-magic via earth science. It's stupid but that's how the MCU did it.

As for their abilities. Other than Odin (and to a much lesser extent Heimdall who was able to limited-summon a rainbow bridge), the other Asgardians seem to have a specific powerset, Thor had "lightning" powers, Hela had stabby powers, the Enchantress had enchant-y powers, Loki had illusions (although he's not Asgardian), etc. We can't really say they can cast any kind of unique magical spell or anything based on what we've seen.

Just about as susceptible as all other items, I would wager. Albiet a lot more durable.

Okay, it's all a matter of terms. As it's been pointed before (and not only by the MCU), magic is but science that we don't comprenhend.

And yet, the term magic is still valid.

So call it as you will, magic or advance-unknown science.

The question remains the same. Does Thor/Odin/Hela/Loki/Asgardian royals have magical abilities?

And, is Mjolnir prone to such? At least, do you believe that?

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Okay, it's all a matter of terms. As it's been pointed before (and not only by the MCU), magic is but science that we don't comprenhend.

And yet, the term magic is still valid.

So call it as you will, magic or advance-unknown science.

The question remains the same. Does Thor/Odin/Hela/Loki/Asgardian royals have magical abilities?

And, is Mjolnir prone to such? At least, do you believe that?

Well, yeah, science-magic, magic-science it's just a matter of definition. I think as it is, the Asgardian "tech/magic" is so beyond our own comprehension it may as well be magic.

So for the sake of this argument only, let's say it IS magic.

As to your first question: They certainly have qualities/abilities that can be perceived as magical, sure. But to avoid a no-limits fallacy, we need to only limit what they can on what they've been EXPLICITLY shown to be capable of doing. Odin is implied to be vastly more powerful than Thor/Hela/etc in his prime but I'm not about to pull esoteric abilities for Odin out of thin air.

As for Mjolnir being prone to such. Well that would depend on what you mean by "prone". Do you mean that certain levels of magic (provided that Magic is powerful enough) would affect it? I can agree to that. Do you mean that Mjolnir has a special vulnerability to magic? That, I can't agree to. Since why would they make a weapon that is vulnerable to magic when the vast majority of the enemies that Thor would face would be considered "magical"?

We've seen Mjolnir affected by Odin's magic. But his magic and power is just well above Mjolnir (or Hela or Thor for that matter) that it should have no relevance in this argment.