OT: All things Marvel/MCU (Spoilers)

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Have you done the online versions? You have access to a lot of material and the pricepoint is good.

I can't afford to buy anything at all, really. And I kind of liked having the actual comic books too much. I struggle with this with novels and other BOOK books as well. I don't mind reading them on my iPad, but I like owning books too much. I have a voraciously pig-like appetite for them.

 

[pit]

I can't afford to buy anything at all, really. And I kind of liked having the actual comic books too much. I struggle with this with novels and other BOOK books as well. I don't mind reading them on my iPad, but I like owning books too much. I have a voraciously pig-like appetite for them.

Oh, I'm right there with you and I haven't subscribed for a similar reason (but my friend has and loves it). He's less of a physical media guy though - he's ditched it all whereas I'm more of your ilk and like having the tangible thing.

 

[Rebels57]

Have you read the one where the Hulk hosts Carnage?

I have not but I did start Immortal Hulk which is also badass

 

[ajgoal]

I can't afford to buy anything at all, really. And I kind of liked having the actual comic books too much. I struggle with this with novels and other BOOK books as well. I don't mind reading them on my iPad, but I like owning books too much. I have a voraciously pig-like appetite for them.

So you're a Tkatchuk when it comes to books?

 

[CapnZin]

I have not but I did start Immortal Hulk which is also badass

I’m not familiar with the carnage symbiotic. Is it like venom in that it’s only as strong as it’s host?

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

So you're a Tkatchuk when it comes to books?

Eww, ****'s sake. I mean ... let's say I am a bad glutton, but not in any way like those whale bastards.

 

[Rebels57]

I’m not familiar with the carnage symbiotic. Is it like venom in that it’s only as strong as it’s host?

Sort of..the Carnage symbiote is as strong as it's bond with the host..so the more evil and/or powerful and willing the host, the more powerful the symbiote is. The main Carnage host, Cletus Kasady, is a pyschotic serial killer..hence a very powerful terrifying symbiote. Far more powerful than Venom.

 

[CapnZin]

Sort of..the Carnage symbiote is as strong as it's bond with the host..so the more evil and/or powerful and willing the host, the more powerful the symbiote is. The main Carnage host, Cletus Kasady, is a pyschotic serial killer..hence a very powerful terrifying symbiote. Far more powerful than Venom.

I know the Cletus Kasady arc, however, I don’t know much about the carnage Spider-Man arc and stuff like that.

Ahhh, it’s the bond! For venom is it the host or the bond with the host?

 

[Lord Defect]

Guess who can enter this thread now? That’s right, this guy.
Endgame was by far better than infinity war.
one of the things I can’t wrap my head around though is mjolnir. No one unworthy is supposed to be able to lift it, but thanks lifts up Cap while he’s holding mjolnir, and later swats it away while it’s thrown at him.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Guess who can enter this thread now? That’s right, this guy.
Endgame was by far better than infinity war.
one of the things I can’t wrap my head around though is mjolnir. No one unworthy is supposed to be able to lift it, but thanks lifts up Cap while he’s holding mjolnir, and later swats it away while it’s thrown at him.

That's because Thanos was worthy because he was right about having to wipe out half of the population.

#ThanosWasTheGoodGuy
#WeNeedANewPlague

 

[Rebels57]

Guess who can enter this thread now? That’s right, this guy.
Endgame was by far better than infinity war.
one of the things I can’t wrap my head around though is mjolnir. No one unworthy is supposed to be able to lift it, but thanks lifts up Cap while he’s holding mjolnir, and later swats it away while it’s thrown at him.

Thanos never picked it up and wielded it directly himself though.

We learned in Ragnarok that Mjolnir isn't some unstoppable indestructable object when Hela basically crushed it with her bare hand.

Being able to pick it up and wield it yourself is a different story though.

 

[Lord Defect]

Thanos never picked it up and wielded it directly himself though.

We learned in Ragnarok that Mjolnir isn't some unstoppable indestructable object when Hela basically crushed it with her bare hand.

Being able to pick it up and wield it yourself is a different story though.

Doesn’t Thor put mjolnir on Loki’s chest at one point to keep him pinned down? Couldn’t he have just turned his body and let it fall if that were true?

 

[Rebels57]

Doesn’t Thor put mjolnir on Loki’s chest at one point to keep him pinned down? Couldn’t he have just turned his body and let it fall if that were true?

Thanos is about a billion times more physically powerful than Loki so it's possible that Mjolnir would certainly effect Loki differently than Thanos lol

 

[Lord Defect]

Thanos is about a billion times more physically powerful than Loki so it's possible that Mjolnir would certainly effect Loki differently than Thanos lol

But if your not “wielding” the hammer, wouldn’t it just be the approximate weight of a hammer?
Mjolnir can be placed on wooden tables and not crush it.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

But if your not “wielding” the hammer, wouldn’t it just be the approximate weight of a hammer?
Mjolnir can be placed on wooden tables and not crush it.

Your one defect right now is that you are overthinking this, applying realism to fantasy. Let 'er go, bud.

 

[Flyotes]

Nah, keep it going. Need the Marvel fix.

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Nah, keep it going. Need the Marvel fix.

You mean keep failing at the suspension of disbelief?

 

[Flyotes]

You mean keep failing at the suspension of disbelief?

I just enjoy the convo and thoughts that generates.

There is a concept in aesthetics relating to the reality of a work of art (in this case, film, narrative, etc). It's called automatism.

Doing it a disservice, the basic idea is that a work of art has this property-- and how it is attended to influences the work itself (and how good or bad it is).

For instance, if in Star Wars, if it broke the 4th wall and Luke Skywalker started talking to the audience Woody Allen style, that doesn't fit with the overall reality generated within that film, and the laws therein, that passively (usually) form in our minds. Breaking these laws cause us to step back out of the experience of the work, which is a knock on the work. Or, if say, the Benny Hill theme played during a lightsaber fight. Just WRONG. But, in a Woody Allen film, breaking the 4th wall is normal, and not seen as a violation of some order.

Conversations about the properties of a magical item like Thor's Hammer within the laws of that universe (the automatism) -- that could go either way in terms of a ruling (who is right)-- is where these conversations become interesting. The debates about the unclear automatisms.

It's actually amusing that the hammer can be lifted by an elevator.

Oof, sorry, a bit off topic..

In regards to disbelief-- uh yeah you kind of suspend belief for the beliefs of that universe (automatism).

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

I just enjoy the convo and thoughts that generates.

There is a concept in aesthetics relating to the reality of a work of art (in this case, film, narrative, etc). It's called automatism.

Doing it a disservice, the basic idea is that a work of art has this property-- and how it is attended to influences the work itself (and how good or bad it is).

For instance, if in Star Wars, if it broke the 4th wall and Luke Skywalker started talking to the audience Woody Allen style, that doesn't fit with the overall reality generated within that film, and the laws therein, that passively (usually) form in our minds. Breaking these laws cause us to step back out of the experience of the work, which is a knock on the work. Or, if say, the Benny Hill theme played during a lightsaber fight. Just WRONG. But, in a Woody Allen film, breaking the 4th wall is normal, and not seen as a violation of some order.

Conversations about the properties of a magical item like Thor's Hammer within the laws of that universe (the automatism) -- that could go either way in terms of a ruling (who is right)-- is where these conversations become interesting. The debates about the unclear automatisms.

It's actually amusing that the hammer can be lifted by an elevator.

Oof, sorry, a bit off topic..

In regards to disbelief-- uh yeah you kind of suspend belief for the beliefs of that universe (automatism).

Yes, I am aware lol. It is also related to the "truth" that Aristotle spoke of, where a fictional world has a truth that may or may not share the reality of the real world, but a story has to be consistently true to the truth of that fictional world (this is Aristotle extrapolated, but still the gist of what he was getting at).

I like these sort of nerd discussions too (although I have a hard time getting excited by Marvel). All I was getting at before was that with these Marvel movies, it's probably more profitable to try to bury those thoughts if you want to avoid being disappointed. These creative teams do a tremendous job with the visuals, for the most part, but there are plenty of consistency hiccups throughout.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Thanos never picked it up and wielded it directly himself though.

We learned in Ragnarok that Mjolnir isn't some unstoppable indestructable object when Hela basically crushed it with her bare hand.

Being able to pick it up and wield it yourself is a different story though.

That's even skewed though because Hela also wielded Mjolnir at one point

 

[Lord Defect]

That's even skewed though because Hela also wielded Mjolnir at one point

Damn so mjolnir is a hand me down?

 

[Lord Defect]

If present Thor and time travel Thor are equal distances from mjolnir and both call for mjolnir at the same time, what happens? Does mjolnir hang in the air in an invisible game of tug of war? Does it go to present Thor since it’s present mjolnir? Does it go to who it deems more worthy?

Oh! Here’s one. Doesn’t future Thor create a time branch for taking present Thor’s mjolnir?

 

[BrindamoursNose]

If present Thor and time travel Thor are equal distances from mjolnir and both call for mjolnir at the same time, what happens? Does mjolnir hang in the air in an invisible game of tug of war? Does it go to present Thor since it’s present mjolnir? Does it go to who it deems more worthy?

Oh! Here’s one. Doesn’t future Thor create a time branch for taking present Thor’s mjolnir?

1) Doesn't work that way. Even though Fat Thor had Mjolnir for a little while in End Game, it felt instantaneous to Thor 2-Thor. So basically if Thor 2-Thor called for it, it'd come to him.

2) Nah. Cap brought it back to Asgard (at the end of End Game) to the time Thor took it in End Game.

 

[Lord Defect]

1) Doesn't work that way. Even though Fat Thor had Mjolnir for a little while in End Game, it felt instantaneous to Thor 2-Thor. So basically if Thor 2-Thor called for it, it'd come to him.

2) Nah. Cap brought it back to Asgard (at the end of End Game) to the time Thor took it in End Game.

1. I’m assuming present Thor was not calling for mjolnir at the time so it went to future Thor. I’m wondering if both were calling.
2. I saw but missed that. Thanks.

 

[Superman33]

That's because Thanos was worthy because he was right about having to wipe out half of the population.

#ThanosWasTheGoodGuy
#WeNeedANewPlague

One of my favorite parts about *some* Marvel Villains is that their motivations aren't entirely wrong. Killmonger was right and they basically did what he wanted to do. Thanos is right in that he is basically dealing with over population and a lack of resources. Even though Ultron sucked, his whole "humans are doomed because they are totally going to destroy each other" logic is sound. I think Vulture's reasoning for his actions were that off either.

Doesn’t Thor put mjolnir on Loki’s chest at one point to keep him pinned down? Couldn’t he have just turned his body and let it fall if that were true?

They use the "putting mjolnir on things" gag a few times. I'm going with it only applies to living things, so putting it on a table is fine. Anything living can't move though, basically acts as an immovable weight. It is shown a few times throughout the comics that others could wield it, but without looking it up, I don't know if Thanos is one.