Here's a massive spoiler: none of the characters and objects actually exist.
So if the villain says it's being used to haul stars between galaxies,guess what, he doesn't actually say this. It's the writer.
So the writer's intention is to show Superman breaking chains that haul stars between galaxies. To show he's strong and can rise above when the situation dictates it.
Can Thor and Thanos break it based on their showings? Which ones?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85Not true. Writers intent is that the characters ARE real to spark the imagination of the readers. You have to be able to separate writers intent from the so-called storyline. Juggernaut is unstoppable, been stopped.. Adamantium is indestructable, been destroyed. Blob is unmovable, been moved. Etc.
Here's a massive spoiler: none of the characters and objects actually exist.So if the villain says it's being used to haul stars between galaxies,guess what, he doesn't actually say this. It's the writer.
So the writer's intention is to show Superman breaking chains that haul stars between galaxies. To show he's strong and can rise above when the situation dictates it.
Can Thor and Thanos break it based on their showings? Which ones?
Originally posted by DarkSaint85I mean that's a fair statement if it is applied evenly to all characters involved.
Here's a massive spoiler: none of the characters and objects actually exist.So if the villain says it's being used to haul stars between galaxies,guess what, he doesn't actually say this. It's the writer.
So the writer's intention is to show Superman breaking chains that haul stars between galaxies. To show he's strong and can rise above when the situation dictates it.
Can Thor and Thanos break it based on their showings? Which ones?
I don't feel that happens.
I mean just Hercules and Thor arm wrestling was said to have almost sent the planet off access but I've also seen people here try to dismiss it as just Hercules weaving a tall tale.
After all that's one of the problems with comics in general and trying to compare feats. Different writers will have different intentions but no understanding of how the feats would work but people on different sides of the argument don't apply the suspension of disbelief to the same levels.
Originally posted by Newjak
I mean that's a fair statement if it is applied evenly to all characters involved.I don't feel that happens.
I mean just Hercules and Thor arm wrestling was said to have almost sent the planet off access but I've also seen people here try to dismiss it as just Hercules weaving a tall tale.
After all that's one of the problems with comics in general and trying to compare feats. Different writers will have different intentions but no understanding of how the feats would work but people on different sides of the argument don't apply the suspension of disbelief to the same levels.
So if Johnny Storm (as an example) claims something, then we have to take it with a pinch of salt. We assume the writer knows the character somewhat, which is that he's a known braggart.
Hercules is....kinda the same. He does like a tall tale ,and has even been called out on it in comics lol.
If Batman says that he has assessed someone, and thinks XYZ (or Reed, or Stark), and they've got their comic whizbangdoohickies backing them up - that's a gold standard. Maybe less so with Stark, because again, bragging. Maybe we should use TChalla, lol.
But agreed on the consistency of application.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85Yes but this creates dynamic where the less we know of a character the less scrutiny they would automatically receive.
Agreed -and that's where our knowledge of the characters comes into play.So if Johnny Storm (as an example) claims something, then we have to take it with a pinch of salt. We assume the writer knows the character somewhat, which is that he's a known braggart.
Hercules is....kinda the same. He does like a tall tale ,and has even been called out on it in comics lol.
If Batman says that he has assessed someone, and thinks XYZ (or Reed, or Stark), and they've got their comic whizbangdoohickies backing them up - that's a gold standard. Maybe less so with Stark, because again, bragging. Maybe we should use TChalla, lol.
But agreed on the consistency of application.
I also think a breakdown of feats needs to be equalized. I also understand a lot this corresponds from us having favorites and wanting our favorites to win.
Originally posted by h1a8
The chains can be broken because they were.
😮Your logic is faulty. You are trying to argue that adamantium can't be broken since it can't be forged.
Well here's a couple of things that throw a wrench in that logic :
Exhibit A
1. Diamonds can't be forged (once they are hardened) but they can be broken.Exhibit B
2. Assume adamantium can't be forged and therefore it can't be broken. But wait, it has been broken.
😮
So what does that tell you?How does that negate the fact that mass was being pulled and the chains supplied the tension force.
I can put gas in a container and pull the container with a string. The string is still experiencing the tension force required to pull the gas forward.Lastly, you are still trying to argue against writer's intent.
Where has primary adamantium been broken?
Originally posted by TheHulkster
Where has primary adamantium been broken?
If it hasn't then why bring up adamantium to support these characters? If no character has actually broken it then wouldn't talking about adamantium be irrelevant here?
With that said, we don't use no limit fallacies. Many things in comics are stated to be unbreakable (including Caps shield) and they were broken. How do you know that something is truly unbreakable or unforgable? Has anyone in marvel ever thought of using inverted black hole (which has limitless force) to forge adamantium? Or was the statement made from all known means?
Originally posted by h1a8
If it hasn't then why bring up adamantium to support these characters? If no character has actually broken it then wouldn't talking about adamantium be irrelevant here?
Maybe you should ask he who brought it up?
Originally posted by abhilegend
No, it's not. And more impressive is that the chains hauled stars across the galaxy. Even adamantium isn't that tough.
Originally posted by DamborgsonI mean technically Dam was talking in the context of wanting to see Thor break adamantium and Rage was responding to it.
Breaking chains is Thor's thing.But to be sure, I'd need to see him snap adamantium first at least.
Abhi was the one trying to say that even adamatium couldn't perform what the chains superman broke would perform.
And it sounds like the Adamantium discussion kind of cascaded from there.
Originally posted by NewjakThere is a so called feat of Thor snapping adamantium coils or something. Dam was hinting to that feat in a slick way.
I mean technically Dam was talking in the context of wanting to see Thor break adamantium and Rage was responding to it.Abhi was the one trying to say that even adamatium couldn't perform what the chains superman broke would perform.
And it sounds like the Adamantium discussion kind of cascaded from there.
Originally posted by JBL
Not true. Writers intent is that the characters ARE real to spark the imagination of the readers. You have to be able to separate writers intent from the so-called storyline. Juggernaut is unstoppable, been stopped.. Adamantium is indestructable, been destroyed. Blob is unmovable, been moved. Etc.
Dark have posted about inconsistencies in books before but fail to do so in this one (and we know why). Dark is inconsistent and tends to pick and choose on what to and what not to accept. Replace Superman with Hulk and he would've dissected the heck out of this showing.