Support NeoGAF

[Cyan]

And the only reason I have this attitude is because you people laughed and mocked

You should have more respect. We're one of the most well-known, professional groups of mockers and laughers.

 

[Affeinvasion]

Stark fought Thor in this movie and just about held his own (Thank you, Whedon, fuck Thor stans), but knowing that such supremely powerful beings as Thor exist, along with others who could be even more powerful, wouldn't he want to be working on the cutting-edge tech? I can't imagine Stark not wanting better weapons and armor being developed.

Stark is arrogant, he does design weapons (Iron Man), but he's the only one he trusts to use them.

 

[Zzoram]

Actually, on the subject of Loki's motivations:

Spoiler

He still resents Thor for overshadowing him. He knows Thor loves Earth so he wants to take it away from Thor. Also, Thanos found Loki adrift after he fell off the Bifrost and sent Loki to Earth to retrieve the Cosmic Cube. That Earth happened to be the place where Loki could piss Thor off the most only helped to motivate Loki.

 

[Puddles]

And Thor was about to kick Stark's ass before Cap showed up. Since everything Stark did, didn't hurt Thor.

Agree to disagree. That battle was the definition of a draw.

 

[Zzoram]

Um, Iron Man definitely did not stand toe-to-toe with Thor.

Spoiler

By the end of that fight the Iron Man armor was almost destroyed but Thor was still totally fine. Note that went Thor headbutt Iron Man, it dented the helmet. Iron Man may be able to hold his own, but in a sustained fight Thor would outlast him for sure.

 

[duckroll]

It's not a place. Reffer to my previous post. The S&S polls are a pooling of the industry's most respected pros and critics. They're the ultimate authority when it comes to what's what in film. They are the voice of the film community. As in, when There Will Be Blood was voted the best movie of the last decade, that became the film community's opinion, get it? Because that's what the S&S polls are... a gathering of the greatest to vote on the greatest works.

And the only reason I have this attitude is because you people laughed and mocked when I mentioned their deliberations. Which is very pretentious, isn't it? To completely disregard the industry's collection of professionals as fools who have no idea what they're saying. When we're just kids in a gaming forum. I wasn't even saying I agreed with them... I just mentioned what the polls' results were.

No, I think most people here know "what" Sight and Sound is. What you fail to understand is that we're not interested in discussing polls because that is meaningless in a personal discussion about opinions. You keep talking about how they are the "voice of the film community" and "the ultimate authority" and so on, but you fail to see why you are mocked when you bring that up. The actual opinion and what it is based on is important, not a generalized consensus with no specifics.

Here's my question, can you actually name specific individuals who you know for a fact voted that TDK and Bourne Ultimatum as the top action movies in the past decade? Individuals who we can all agree are truly masters of their field and know what they are talking about? Can you also then present their personal arguments on why that is the case? What did they like about the action pieces, and what are the positives of the way they were shot the way they were? Because those points would be worthy of discussion. A poll that just lists a bunch of movies is not. Context is king.

When you talk down to people and bring up stuff you cannot expand on or explain without falling back to "oh it's a FACT that they are the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, don't you KNOW? You're all a bunch of KIDS!" it is insulting to the conversation and pointless. You are not contributing to what people want to discuss, but instead trying to be all high and mighty about it without knowing why there is an outrage.

 

[Affeinvasion]

Agree to disagree. That battle was the definition of a draw.

Thor would have eventually crushed Tony in his armor, but Thor wouldn't do that anyway, so your point stands. Thor could easily, easily kill Iron Man though.

 

[noah111]

God damn this thread jump four pages every time I glance away for a sec. Jesus people.

 

[Puddles]

Um, Iron Man definitely did not stand toe-to-toe with Thor.

Spoiler

By the end of that fight the Iron Man armor was almost destroyed but Thor was still totally fine. Note that went Thor headbutt Iron Man, it dented the helmet. Iron Man may be able to hold his own, but in a sustained fight Thor would outlast him for sure.

LOL, no.

Spoiler

The wrists were slightly dented. There wasn't any major damage aside from that. And Iron Man hadn't even used any of his weapons.

Please, no more Thor stans.

Thor would have eventually crushed Tony in his armor, but Thor wouldn't do that anyway, so your point stands. Thor could easily, easily kill Iron Man though.

This is not comic-verse.

 

[antonz]

So what do you guys see this movie topping out box office wise at? Im thinking 800 million+ is a realistic chance

 

[Rengoku]

God damn this thread jump four pages every time I glance away for a sec. Jesus people.

 

[Boombloxer]

Um, Iron Man definitely did not stand toe-to-toe with Thor.

Spoiler

By the end of that fight the Iron Man armor was almost destroyed but Thor was still totally fine. Note that went Thor headbutt Iron Man, it dented the helmet. Iron Man may be able to hold his own, but in a sustained fight Thor would outlast him for sure.

This isn't debatable. Thor getting serious is usually the end of the fight.

This is not comic-verse.

We know. Thor would win the fight by knocking Iron Man down once, and placing his hammer on his chest.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

LOL, no.

Spoiler

The wrists were slightly dented. There wasn't any major damage aside from that. And Iron Man hadn't even used any of his weapons.

Please, no more Thor stans.

Uhhhh,

Spoiler

pretty sure the helmet WAS dented and it was meant to be that way from storyboards to in progress renders on from what I can remember

.

This has nothing to do with "stans," just what actually happened. Quit assuming people are simply Thor fanboys.

 

[duckroll]

LOL, no.

Spoiler

The wrists were slightly dented. There wasn't any major damage aside from that. And Iron Man hadn't even used any of his weapons.

Please, no more Thor stans.

Well what do you think would have happened if they just kept going at it for another day? Thor has all the time in the world.

 

[crimsonspider89]

Those weapons would of done jack shit against Thor. Thor was taking punches from the Hulk and swinging back. And Tony's armor was dented the fuck up after that fight.

 

[Affeinvasion]

LOL, no.

Spoiler

The wrists were slightly dented. There wasn't any major damage aside from that. And Iron Man hadn't even used any of his weapons.

Please, no more Thor stans.




This is not comic-verse.

Just going by movie-verse: Thor could literally fight Iron Man to a draw then until he died of starvation, thirst, old-age. He's a nigh-immortal demi-god. Note what an under-control Hulk does to the bad guys. Then note that Thor's fight with him was while he was in an uncontrollable rage. He kinda makes Thor bleed a little bit, and he just smiles because now it means he actually has a challenge which he revels in.

 

[Puddles]

Well what do you think would have happened if they just kept going at it for another day?

A full day of fighting? In the movieverse?

Iron Man by TKO.

Thankfully Whedon isn't burdened by the staggering limitations of fanwank.

 

[Angry Puppy]

Just saw the movie. It was almost perfect for that type of movie. I understood the action and actually knew what was going on and every bit of choreography. None of that shaky cam action or nonsensical transformers shit. The comedy was a good fit too.

And the only reason I have this attitude is because you people laughed and mocked when I mentioned their deliberations. Which is very pretentious, isn't it? To completely disregard the industry's collection of professionals as fools who have no idea what they're saying. When we're just kids in a gaming forum. I wasn't even saying I agreed with them... I just mentioned what the polls' results were.

You admit to being condescending, then call everyone else pretentious...

Should we just throw away our opinions and agree with your precious S&S?

 

[Dresden]

A full day of fighting? In the movieverse?

Iron Man by TKO.

Thankfully Whedon isn't burdened by the staggering limitations of fanwank.

It's not even fanwank. In the movie Iron Man's armor is getting fucked up after just a few minutes of combat with Thor, with the latter not even breaking a sweat. Give him an hour and Stark is fucking gone.

 

[Boombloxer]

A full day of fighting? In the movieverse?

Iron Man by TKO.

Thankfully Whedon isn't burdened by the staggering limitations of fanwank.

Um, this is not fan-wank.

I'm not even a Thor fan, Iron Man would be a literal tin can by the time Thor finished.

 

[coldfoot]

A full day of fighting? In the movieverse?
Iron Man by TKO.

You are clueless...Let's see Iron Man transport himself to a different realm in a flash...
He's a regular guy with a suit of armor that's destructible, Thor is a God.

 

[Puddles]

I mean, I could point out how Loki gave Thor a serious challenge while Iron Man demolished him, and Hulk turned him into a rag-doll. But I'd be approaching comicvine.com levels of time-wasting if I went there.

Don't make the mistake of thinking I want to discuss this shit seriously.

 

[crimsonspider89]

Uhhhh.... Loki threw that fight against IM. And Hulk fought staffless Loki. That Staff was Loki's main weapon and Thor was holding back against Loki. As he does always. You know brothers.

 

[duckroll]

A full day of fighting? In the movieverse?

Iron Man by TKO.

Thankfully Whedon isn't burdened by the staggering limitations of fanwank.

What sort of TKO is this? The technical kind where Thor gets bored and goes off to take a piss while Tony stands there in a broken suit shouting "HE STEPPED AWAY! THAT'S IT GENTLEMEN! I WON! WOO HOO!" right before a Hammer flies into his face?

 

[Cyan]

You are clueless...Let's see Iron Man transport himself to a different realm in a flash...
He's a regular guy with a suit of armor that's destructible, Thor is a God.

Big man in a suit of armor. Take that away, what is he?

 

[Puddles]

What sort of TKO is this? The technical kind where Thor gets bored and goes off to take a piss while Tony stands there in a broken suit shouting "HE STEPPED AWAY! THAT'S IT GENTLEMEN! I WON! WOO HOO!" right before a Hammer flies into his face?

I'm just going with what was clearly represented on-screen.

People need to stop nerding out. It's okay if they nerfed Thor a bit in order to make a better movie. Seriously. It's okay.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

I'm just going with what was clearly represented on-screen.

You said IM's armor wasn't dented in places it clearly was. That's all I'm refuting. Nerding out? Please.

 

[Boombloxer]

I mean, I could point out how Loki gave Thor a serious challenge while Iron Man demolished him, and Hulk turned him into a rag-doll. But I'd be approaching comicvine.com levels of time-wasting if I went there.

Don't make the mistake of thinking I want to discuss this shit seriously.

Loki with specter beat up everyone. Loki sans specter? LOL

Thor vs Hulk is a real fight. Thor vs Iron Man? Not so much.
You must not remember that Thor generally holds back against humans. Him crushing your gauntlets is basically saying give up before I get serious. He shrugged off the headbutt.

 

[duckroll]

I'm just going with what was clearly represented on-screen.

People need to stop nerding out. It's okay if they nerfed Thor a bit in order to make a better movie. Seriously. It's okay.

I'm not even sure what "nerding out" means. What was clearly represented on-screen was that Thor was ready to fuck the shit out of Stark, they didn't really know each other, and the fight had to stop. Cap was saving Tony's ass, he didn't even give a fuck about Thor at that point.

 

[Jacob]

It's not a place. Reffer to my previous post. The S&S polls are a pooling of the industry's most respected pros and critics. They're the ultimate authority when it comes to what's what in film. They are the voice of the film community. As in, when There Will Be Blood was voted the best movie of the last decade, that became the film community's opinion, get it? Because that's what the S&S polls are... a gathering of the greatest to vote on the greatest works.

Serious question: how does the fact that the S&S voters are well-respected make them the "ultimate authority" on film to the point where those who disagree with them should be mocked and denigrated? I'm not understanding how you came to that conclusion.

 

[PhoncipleBone]

Am I the only one digging Cap telling Stark to get his suit and they go a few rounds? Because Cap would fuck him up in the end if he really wanted to.

I'm not even sure what "nerding out" means. What was clearly represented on-screen was that Thor was ready to fuck the shit out of Stark, they didn't really know each other, and the fight had to stop. Cap was saving Tony's ass, he didn't even give a fuck about Thor at that point.

Thor was kicking Tony's ass. Even Tony's face was like "WTF?" when Thor was fucking his armor up.

 

[Replicant]

I don't deny this (except the interesting characters bit the only interesting ones imo are Stark and Banner), but my point is for me to put Avengers on a high-tier it would've also had to have some emotional heaviness to it. Otherwise you don't feel anything. I didn't feel anything with Avengers.

This is your mistake. You're assuming everyone is the same as you. You're assuming that your opinion matters more than others. I don't think that to put Avengers on high-tier, it needs to have some emotional heaviness to it. To me that sounds pretentious and bullshit. I like high-brow stuff but I don't need every thing to be high-brow to be good and on my high-tier. Just because you didn't feel anything with Avengers, doesn't make the Avengers less good. It just means you don't like it. But others do and the consider it high-tier.

Why does the action matter if there are no real stakes? If Loki wins I don't care. But I want Batman to beat Ras in BB because they spent half the movie building up development and giving you a reason to be on Batman's side.

A bunch of aliens are going to kill/enslave the entire human race and you don't see the real stakes? And you compare it with Batman beating Ras, who just want to bomb a city because it got lots of criminal? Yeah, you got your priority twisted there.

The only reason I'm on Avengers side is because Loki is absolute stereotypical boring villain with diabolical TAKE OVER THE WOOOORLD ambition and Downey is a funny guy. The charismatic nature of the Avengers is about the only thing holding that 'comradare' together.

Honestly the film would've been better if it was just Stark and Banner with fleshed out character stuff. They're the only people with chemistry and both of them becoming friends through their love of science/technology was cool. Put those 2 guys in a movie because they're the only ones worth watching.

Thor is not even a character I have no clue what he wants, why he does what he does, why he cares etc. and I've seen the Thor movie. You can't tell me he wants to break a sweat for for Natalie Portman the woman whom he had no chemistry or actual relationship with at all except 2 pretty people liking each other because they're 2 pretty people. Scarlett is nothing, the bow and arrow guy is nothing, Cap America has no reason to play nice with these people but he just does because he has nothing better to do. These characters are not interesting in the slightest. I liked Cap in the first half of his movie but I did not see that same valiant hero with a heart of gold in this one. Cap is just sort of thrown in there as the de facto leader but his new costume is goofy (old one looked awesome) and it's not believable to me that he can command authority over Stark's ego or a thunder god Thor.

Almost every scene in this movie I felt like I've seen before in some form or another just in the superhero genre alone (besides stuff like Hulk). I think you guys are raising your opinions too much based on eye candy and the fact that it wasn't a disaster as people were expecting. I'm telling you now I'm going to make a prediction: Dark Knight Rises will come out and nobody will be able to look back on Avengers the same way again (I'm no Nolan fanboy btw I shitted on Inception when people called that movie better than Matrix). You'll remember what it means to have a superhero movie that manages to balance both action and emotion and why it makes a movie so much better when you can do both (this is the reason Terminator 2 is god-tier of action films).

LOL. I think at this point you're just complaining because you're bitter that it seems people like it better than TDK. I find it amusing how Nolan Batman/other films fans seem to have this inferiority complex where they need to come to a movie thread that is completely unrelated to his film and mention how awesome his films are. While I like some of his films, there are others that I despise as well. And he's an AWFUL action director and when it comes to writing female characters. And I always laugh at people who proclaim "So and so film will RULE everything else". Like you guys have a mirror that see the future or something. I'd never, not even for my most excited upcoming movies say something like that because I have no clue whether or not it'd be successful. There are too many variables for a film to be successful or failure.

 

[LuCkymoON]

^Second after-credit scene is awesome

Can't wait for the bluray, it'll definitely have better extras than TDKR... ( :[ )

Has anyone mentioned a particular Black Widow scene where

Spoiler

she's trapped lying down on her stomach and we get a lingering butt shot?

That was pure genius...

It's almost like Whedon has ryona fetish with the way the Black Widow was getting beat up.

 

[MrPliskin]

Finished my second viewing not long ago...and all I want is a new Hulk film. Badly.

 

[Puddles]

I'm not even sure what "nerding out" means. What was clearly represented on-screen was that Thor was ready to fuck the shit out of Stark, they didn't really know each other, and the fight had to stop. Cap was saving Tony's ass, he didn't even give a fuck about Thor at that point.

Duckroll, serious advice: go back to your film theory. Remember your understanding of the language of film.

The Thor/Iron-Man duel, in movie language, was meant to portray them as semi-equals. I could list you dozens and dozens of equivalent scenes in other films.

If Whedon wanted to show Thor as a clear cut above Iron Man, he would have done so. He did not.

Note: This is just the movie-verse. The precious comic-verse is unaltered.

 

[Boombloxer]

This is your mistake. You're assuming everyone is the same as you. You're assuming that your opinion matters more than others. I don't think that to put Avengers on high-tier, it needs to have some emotional heaviness to it. To me that sounds pretentious and bullshit. I like high-brow stuff but I don't need every thing to be high-brow to be good and on my high-tier. Just because you didn't feel anything with Avengers, doesn't make the Avengers less good. It just means you don't like it. But others do and the consider it high-tier.



A bunch of aliens are going to kill/enslave the entire human race and you don't see the real stakes? And you compare it with Batman beating Ras, who just want to bomb a city because it got lots of criminal? Yeah, you got your priority twisted there.



I think at this point you're just complaining because you're bitter that it seems people like it better than TDK. I find it amusing how Nolan Batman/other films fans seem to have this inferiority complex where they need to come to a movie that is completely unrelated to his film and mention how awesome his films are. While I like some of his films, there are others that I despise as well. And he's an AWFUL action director. And I always laugh at people who proclaim "So and so film will RULE everything else". Like you guys have a mirror that see the future or something. I'd never, not even for my most excited upcoming movies say something like that because I have no clue whether or not it'd be successful. There are too many variables for a film to be successful or failure.

I've noticed that with some threads, but I love Nolan's films, and the Avengers = TDK for me. Different styles, but each delivered what I wanted.

One or the other doesn't make a ton of sense, both got your money.

If Whedon wanted to show Thor as a clear cut above Iron Man, he would have done so. He did not.

I think you should watch that scene again. Stark has crushed gauntlets, dented helmet and Thor wasn't even breaking a sweat.

 

[Dresden]

Duckroll, serious advice: go back to your film theory. Remember your understanding of the language of film.

The Thor/Iron-Man duel, in movie language, was meant to portray them as semi-equals. I could list you dozens and dozens of equivalent scenes in other films.

If Whedon wanted to show Thor as a clear cut above Iron Man, he would have done so. He did not.

Note: This is just the movie-verse. The precious comic-verse is unaltered.

The language of getting fucked up says Tony was getting fucked up.

 

[coldfoot]

1. Make outrageous false statement
2. Call anyone who's trying to correct you nerds
3. Profit?

 

[3phemeral]

Serious question: how does the fact that the S&S voters are well-respected make them the "ultimate authority" on film to the point where those who disagree with them should be mocked and denigrated? I'm not understanding how you came to that conclusion.

Because when S&S makes up their minds, film students change theirs to reflect it.

something something something

 

[noah111]

LOL, no.

Spoiler

The wrists were slightly dented. There wasn't any major damage aside from that. And Iron Man hadn't even used any of his weapons.

Please, no more Thor stans.

This is not comic-verse.

Thor isn't his rage-endulging self.

He is the protector of Earth, and thus humans. He wouldn't actually try to murder Stark, but make no doubt that he could. If you think otherwise, you just don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Oxigen_Waste]

What the fuck does "Hollywood gloss" mean anyway...other than nothing?

It basically means to portray something in a fake and overly flattering light. In this case... action sequences... Think Taxi Driver vs Lucky Number Slevin, for example.

A great modern example is Drive. That film has no gloss whatsoever. None of that nasty fakeness.

I feel like if one were to say "the gaming community thinks __________ of this game" based on the reviews of IGN, GameSpot, Destructoid, and GameTrailers, I might just throw up and not play games again.

They might be the figureheads for gaming opinions/criticism, but to consider a Metacritic score as the ultimate underline for what the gaming community thinks of a game is kind of....off, to me.

I assume the same kind of sentiment can be applied to what you were implying by "film community"

The equivalent wouldn't be IGN Gamespot or Destructoid's opinions. It'd be Miyamoto, Kojima, and all the big developers' opinions. The professionals themselves. The film community aren't the viewers, by the way.

Huh? I watch old action movies. Beside the typical rolling, the cameras are not shakey at all. T2 wasn't shakey at all and is praised for its great action sequences.

The Expendables doesn't do the shaking camera and was designed to be like the 90s/80s action movies as stated by Stallone.

Is this man even trying? It's not about how shaky it is! It's about tension and atmosphere!

I love how you mention T2. T2 wasn't praised for action... T1 was praised for action! T2 was considered a worthy sequel, but T1 has always been the one with all the love. Only the public preffers T2.

No, I think most people here know "what" Sight and Sound is. What you fail to understand is that we're not interested in discussing polls because that is meaningless in a personal discussion about opinions. You keep talking about how they are the "voice of the film community" and "the ultimate authority" and so on, but you fail to see why you are mocked when you bring that up. The actual opinion and what it is based on is important, not a generalized consensus with no specifics.

Here's my question, can you actually name specific individuals who you know for a fact voted that TDK and Bourne Ultimatum as the top action movies in the past decade? Individuals who we can all agree are truly masters of their field and know what they are talking about? Can you also then present their personal arguments on why that is the case? What did they like about the action pieces, and what are the positives of the way they were shot the way they were? Because those points would be worthy of discussion. A poll that just lists a bunch of movies is not. Context is king.

When you talk down to people and bring up stuff you cannot expand on or explain without falling back to "oh it's a FACT that they are the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, don't you KNOW? You're all a bunch of KIDS!" it is insulting to the conversation and pointless. You are not contributing to what people want to discuss, but instead trying to be all high and mighty about it without knowing why there is an outrage.

I can name the specific individuals, yes. They list the poll participants.

Also, I know you're not interested in discussing polls, I'm not either... I just mentioned, within a discussion on TDK having good action or not, that it was named one of the 2 best action films by S&S. And the response I got to that was "this idiot's sayin TDK and Ultimatum are the best action films of the last decade omglolwtflmao + gif". That's as condescending as it gets, right there. Not only did people assume that was my opinion just because I mentioned it (and it isn't), they proceeded to mock me for quoting something that makes perfect sense. And now it's become a semanthics battle...

You want to know why I personally preffer TDK's action to Avengers? Because of the palpable tension and aura of imminent danger. There's my opinion.

Serious question: how does the fact that the S&S voters are well-respected make them the "ultimate authority" on film to the point where those who disagree with them should be mocked and denigrated? I'm not understanding how you came to that conclusion.

They're the most important directors/producers and critics alive, they live and breathe movies and have the most basis for forming an opinion which is closest to being objective. ie, they're the people that made names like Citizen Kane and Battleship Potemkin known today.

It's not that those who disagree should be mocked, it's that I was mocked for quoting them. Hell, I disagree with them constantly.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

If Whedon wanted to show Thor as a clear cut above Iron Man, he would have done so. He did not.

I fail to understand how anyone can come to this conclusion. Did Weta not do a good enough job on this sequence for you or something?

 

[Dresden]

I think you should watch that scene again. Stark has crushed gauntlets, dented helmet and Thor wasn't even breaking a sweat.

It's so simple. I mean, the headbutt scene alone does the job. Stark is way outclassed.

 

[Puddles]

I fail to understand how anyone can come to this conclusion. Did Weta not do a good enough job on this sequence for you or something?

Hmm. My answer could go two ways here. Are you the guy who works for Weta?

 

[MrPliskin]

Duckroll, serious advice: go back to your film theory. Remember your understanding of the language of film.

The Thor/Iron-Man duel, in movie language, was meant to portray them as semi-equals. I could list you dozens and dozens of equivalent scenes in other films.

If Whedon wanted to show Thor as a clear cut above Iron Man, he would have done so. He did not.

Note: This is just the movie-verse. The precious comic-verse is unaltered.

So...Thor crushing Starks armor with his bare hands doesn't show him as a clear cut above Iron Man? Or him going toe to toe with the Hulk, a creature that literally turned the tide of the battle in the film? That didn't show that Thor was above most of the cast, as far as prowess goes?

Maybe we watched different movies.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

Hmm. My answer could go two ways here. Are you the guy who works for Weta?

Wouldn't matter either way, since Weta was using ILM's models.

 

[Trey]

Great fucking movie.

 

[Oxigen_Waste]

god fucking damnit, it's 7AM... i seriously need to get some sleep now.

 

[Nesotenso]

So...Thor crushing Starks armor with his bare hands doesn't show him as a clear cut above Iron Man? Or him going toe to toe with the Hulk, a creature that literally turned the tide of the battle in the film? That didn't show that Thor was above most of the cast, as far as prowess goes?

Maybe we watched different movies.

I was just about to post but you essentially said what I was about to say.

 

[Puddles]

So...Thor crushing Starks armor with his bare hands doesn't show him as a clear cut above Iron Man? Or him going toe to toe with the Hulk, a creature that literally turned the tide of the battle in the film? That didn't show that Thor was above most of the cast, as far as prowess goes?

Maybe we watched different movies.

He dented the armor. Tony's gauntlets still functioned after that. And Thor took some considerable hits himself.

X or Y vs Hulk is irrelevant here.

The language of film clearly meant to show that Thor and Iron Man were roughly equal. If you disagree... I don't know what to say... take a film class?

Anyway, it was a great film overall.