Originally posted by FrothByte
There is no KMC rule that says you, H1, gets to decide what writer's intent is.
Originally posted by Smurph
The only consistent aspect of h1's interpretations of the rules or "writer intent" is that they conveniently always require proof from everybody but him. Everything else shifts but that's the constant.
Writer's intent is valid and acceptable, provided it doesn't contradict onscreen showings.
^ Nothing about Writers Intent there.
Ergo, youre making up your own rules, As Per Usual.
You also need to look up the meaning of CONTRADICT. Because youre the only one who claims Cooglers statement Outright Contradicts the on screen feats of Namor. What others are suggesting is we cant go by directors comments alone.
Either way, Namor has sufficient on screen feats to smash BPs face in.
Originally posted by Darth ThorIt says movie feats only. That means interviews don't count.
^ Nothing about Writers Intent there.Ergo, youre making up your own rules, As Per Usual.
You also need to look up the meaning of CONTRADICT. Because youre the only one who claims Cooglers statement Outright Contradicts the on screen feats of Namor. What others are suggesting is we cant go by directors comments alone.
Either way, Namor has sufficient on screen feats to smash BPs face in.
Well Namor showed 50-100 ton strength.
If you accept that Thor and Hulk is around that level then it doesn't contradict.
Originally posted by h1a8
It says movie feats only. That means interviews don't count.
Exactly so you concede youve been nothing but a Big TROLL all these years with Writers Intent.
Writers Intent which youve consistently made up yourself. But when a legit statement comes from the Writer, you IGNORE it, and whine about the Rules.
Ive simply called out your BS.
Originally posted by h1a8
Well Namor showed 50-100 ton strength.
If you accept that Thor and Hulk is around that level then it doesn't contradict.
Except Thor and Hulk have their own On Screen Feats DUMMY.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Exactly so you concede youve been nothing but a Big TROLL all these years with Writers Intent.Writers Intent which youve consistently made up yourself. But when a legit statement comes from the Writer, you IGNORE it, and whine about the Rules.
Ive simply called out your BS.
Except Thor and Hulk have their own On Screen Feats DUMMY.
Writer's intent using what is shown onscreen, not interviews. Big difference.
Contradictions can't exist in a debate. There is no law of the excluded middle.
P1: Namor showed 50-100 ton strength maximum
P2: Namor is as strong as Thor and Hulk
C: Thor and Hulk have 50-100 ton strength
This is a deductive argument. Therefore, the conclusion is only false if one of the premises is false.
P1 is not false
Therefore if the conclusion is false then P2 is false.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Again youre making up your own rules on writers intent. Nothing about writers intent is mentioned in the rules. So why not just concede youve been talking shit all these years?No real limits are shown to Namors strength in Wakanda Forever, so your conclusion sucks ass.
Namor did show limits. He used all of his might several times and produced effects that were less than 100 tons of force.
Also a character does not get limits higher than on screen evidence shows.
So if a character, with near full effort, lifted 50 tons in a movie then we can't give them a higher limit in a forum fight.
Originally posted by h1a8
1)Writer's intent through [b]MOVIE FEATS ONLY.
What's so hard to understand?2)Namor did show limits. He used all of his might several times and produced effects that were less than 100 tons of force.
3)Also a character does not get limits higher than on screen evidence shows.
4)So if a character, with near full effort, lifted 50 tons in a movie then we can't give them a higher limit in a forum fight. [/B]
1) Again you dont get to make up your own rules Troll. Thats what youre having major difficulties understanding.
2) Nope. Youre making things up again. He was only shown to use all his might when de-powered.
3) So concede youve been trolling all these years with Writers Intent.
4) There was no near full effort except after depowerment.
H1, on writer's intent:
Originally posted by h1a8
In Superman 4, A human woman was breathing and talking in space.
Does that mean that it was air in space?
Basically, writers get shit wrong in movies all the time. Therefore we should go by intent.
Clearly the intent was that the outcome would have been the same on the surface or in orbit.Note: Trying to use exact physics to lowball (not highball) feats can result in nearly all feats being rendered non feats (or lowballed). So let's stick to writer's intent shall we.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
1) Again you dont get to make up your own rules Troll. Thats what youre having major difficulties understanding.2) Nope. Youre making things up again. He was only shown to use all his might when de-powered.
3) So concede youve been trolling all these years with Writers Intent.
4) There was no near full effort except after depowerment.
1. I quoted the rules MOVIE FEATS ONLY. What's si hard to understand?
2. Writer's intent can be used if it doesn't contradict MOVIE FEATS.
3. He used full (or near full) effort multiple times BEFORE the end of the movie.
Originally posted by h1a8
1. I quoted the rules MOVIE FEATS ONLY. What's si hard to understand?2. Writer's intent can be used if it doesn't contradict MOVIE FEATS.
3. He used full (or near full) effort multiple times BEFORE the end of the movie.
1. There was no mention of Writer's intent there DUMMY
2. You don't get make up your own rules. IF there was a ruling, it would clearly only relate to Director's Statements, and not Writer's Intent, which is subjective as hell so dumb AF to use.
3. Says you, and you only. PROVE IT OR QUIT TROLLING.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
1. There was no mention of Writer's intent there DUMMY2. You don't get make up your own rules. IF there was a ruling, it would clearly only relate to Director's Statements, and not Writer's Intent, which is subjective as hell so dumb AF to use.
3. Says you, and you only. PROVE IT OR QUIT TROLLING.
The statement MOVIE FEATS ONLY implies that nothing else can be used. You know the English language of the word, "ONLY" right? Why are you acting slow?
3. He shown great effort in slinging the Wakanda ship. He had to spin the helicopter multiple times to generate enough speed to throw it with enough force. This shows less than 100 ton strength. He once or twice yelled in might when he punched (and said punch appeared to be less than 50 tons in force).
Originally posted by h1a8
The statement MOVIE FEATS ONLY implies that nothing else can be used. You know the English language of the word, "ONLY" right? Why are you acting slow?
Exactly. So concede now that you've been talking s*** all these year's regarding "writers intention".
I am waiting.
Originally posted by h1a8
3. He shown great effort in slinging the Wakanda ship. He had to spin the helicopter multiple times to generate enough speed to throw it with enough force. This shows less than 100 ton strength. He once or twice yelled in might when he punched (and said punch appeared to be less than 50 tons in force).
This is your own very subjective analysis and doesn't prove anything.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Exactly. So concede now that you've been talking s*** all these year's regarding "writers intention".I am waiting.
This is your own very subjective analysis and doesn't prove anything.
Writer's intent can be portrayed IN THE MOVIE FEAT. That is what I use, not interviews. In other words, argue intent from the actual scene, not from outside interviews.
There is no mention of Namor not using his full (or almost full) might in those instances where he is blood lusted.