Marvel power scaling in a nutshell—there’s always someone 20% stronger 😂
Nothing beats Unobtanium.
I swear, when I first heard that, I was out. I’ve despised every Avatar movie because of what is possibly the stupidest artistic choice in cinematic history.
You spend a billion dollars on a film franchise, and best you can come up with is Unobtanium? Go away.
you were watching Disney’s Pocahontas in space with tall smurfs. have some whimsy.
Valid, LOL.
I thought it was how the WNBA was supplementing paychecks???
I’m pretty sure they meant it as a meta joke. Unobtanium has been used to describe fantsy/sci-fi fictional plot relevant material for many years before either Avatar was made.
Maybe, but that would be as dumb as calling it a MacGuffin, which is basically same thing in suspense thrillers.
“Let’s invade this planet and kill everybody for a MacGuffin!”
It’s not like he worked that hard at the story. The plot is literally Ferngully, and the name was already in use in another animated series. He was clearly more interested in creating a vehicle for his film tech, which he obviously cared more about than that clumsy story.
I don’t know, I mean, look at the naming that some tech companies use IRL. They use some pretty silly names. The idea of a company finding a metal that’s sci-fi grade and calling it Unobtanium as a nod to their love of sci-fi isn’t that crazy.
This seems like the same problem that we have with shuffling music, where a truly random shuffle doesn’t feel random; if you make it less random, it ends up feeling more random. Similarly, making a movie less realistic can make it feel more realistic.
In real life, poor imagination is acceptable. In a billion dollar movie, we expect better than real life.
I was about to say, we live in a world where Big Brother is about to be fully matured and is unironically named Palantir. I really don’t know what else to say, like the point should be clear.
In real life it would have been named after it’s discoverer or the planet on which it was found. Most sci-fi shows at least name their made up materials Nequadah, Trilithium, Spice, Red Matter, Really hot tea, etc
Surprisingly, it’s the most realistic part of the movie. If you know scientists, if they have a concept for a perfect thing that can’t be found, and then they find it for real, they’re calling it unobtanium for sure.
Even in its supposed actual use (and I’m not convinced), it’s a TEMPORARY Placeholder Name, meant to be replaced by a real word. Keeping it in the final draft, and trying to wave it away with a terrible excuse, is poor writing, poor directing, poor production.
It is truly a dumb decision because it’s got absolutely nothing to do with the film. It’s just lazy justification for being there, they could have chosen anything.
I think it’s a room temperature superconductor which, ok I can see why that’s useful, but if you’re in a future where you have interstellar starships flying on a semi regular basis to another star system I think you’ve probably already invented room temperature superconductors. In fact they must have room temperature superconductors because their starships are powered by fusion drive which needs electromagnetic confinement in order to work. So at least the first ship would have to already have that tech just to get out there in the first place.
Wow, we agree 100%, but we got there from completely different directions.
If they have any imagination at all they should call it Wompom, because it’s so useful you can do whatever you like with it.
Per the internet, so grain of salt and all, unobtanium predates Avatar by some time, typically used as a brainstorming device. You know how a physics problem might say “assume a frictionless environment” or something of that nature, in order to focus on a specific point or phenomena? Unobtanium is sort of like that. Picture a bunch of aerospace engineers in the mid-50s, talking about how they’re gonna put a person in space. They’re throwing all their spaghetti against the wall, hoping some of it will stick. One guy stands up and says, according to his calculations, if they can get the mass of the launch vehicle down to X, he’s confident they can do the thing. Unfortunately, material science being what it is at the time, there is nothing that would be light, strong, cheap, and workable enough to fashion such a vehicle, but the math all checks out. These engineers jokingly start referring to the hypothetical material that would satisfy all their needs as “unobtanium”, while they search for practical solutions.
Fast forward 60 years, and Cameron is writing his Pocahontas in Space movie. He needs a name for his MacGuffin, but, being a MacGuffin, it’s entirely irrelevant to the plot outside of the fact that the characters are destined to fight over it. So, he decides to call it unobtanium, since that’s pre-existing shorthand for “rare material that does everything you need it to”, and that’s literally all this material needs to be for the plot.
It’s still silly, sure, but no more or less silly than mechs fighting giant blue people that fuck via ponytail sounding.
Yeah, but it’s like if a movie was trying to be taken seriously, but literally called its macguffin the MacGuffin. It would take you out of it every dramatic scene because they’re just using the plot device by the word for the kind of plot device it is.
Unobtanium is a real world term for something partly defined by not really existing. You can make up a stupid but plausible name and people won’t mind (Marsium, Pandorium, etc) or you can go with something wildly implausible like making up an alien word for it (bonus points if you then give it phonetic decay into english) and nobody cares or even thinks it’s cool. But this snapped people out of it a bit because nobody would call a material they’re actively mining unobtanium, worst case they’d give it nicknames.
And it also just fell right into this spot where the setting felt carefully constructed though fantastical, but the plot felt like an afterthought, and here’s a piece of the setting that clearly only exists for the plot and it’s loudly announcing that fact with its really stupid name.
I agree with you in all of the particulars of your argument, but am ultimately unphased by the use of the term. Cameron stopped one step short of calling it MacGuffinite, and I can understand why that would annoy some people. However, within the context of Avatar, it just doesn’t bother me.
If I wanted to conjure an in-universe reason for it, I can do so without straining my credulity too much. Aerospace engineers in the 50s develop a term for a hypothetical wonder material that they can’t get their hands on: unobtanium. Fast forward hundreds of years, and a material is discovered on Pandora which possesses qualities which were previously only thought of as theoretically possible. Perhaps jokingly, perhaps sincerely, the new wonder material is called unobtanium, referencing the fact it is no longer hypothetical, but it’s still damn hard to get a hold of.
Now, I recognize that 1) none of that is explained in the movie, so it’s just head canon, and 2) as you say, calling a material you are actively mining ‘unobtanium’ is stupid. However, I don’t think it’s any more or less stupid than your suggested alternative courses of action given the context of the plot.
If unobtanium had ANY relevance to the story beyond “this is the source of conflict”, I’d wish for more juice there. But Cameron is nothing if not a functional screenwriter. No matter how much lipstick you put on the pig, the sole purpose of the scene is to telegraph the third act conflict (and allegorize the Iraq War, to some extent, but he does more with that elsewhere). The screenplay spends only bare minimum amount of time covering that detail before speeding along to more relevant thematic matters.
So, I agree that it’s a dumb contrivance that is clunky. However, it’s just so irrelevant that I don’t care. Call it whatever you want to, the name, like the material itself, is completely inconsequential. Frankly, I’m actually warming to the idea of calling it MacGuffinite. Put a line in that it was named after the first marine to die on Pandora or some such bs. Have your cake and eat it too, a plausible in-universe name, and a tell to not think about it so much.
I listened to a steampunk opera years ago where the thing they were all fighting over was called an MCG. It took reading the writers notes afterwards for me to realise it was literally a MCGuffin, I did not feel smart that day.
I get that writers use placeholder names for all sorts of things, but as you said yourself, it’s meant to be replaced later. That giant budget, and nobody could think of a better name than Unobtanium?
It was either a terrible oversight, or it was chosen purposefully. Either one indicates an objectively poor artistic choice.
Well, I’ll start by disagreeing with the premise that an “objectively poor” artistic choice exists, at least in this context. There are choices that work for you and choices that don’t, but neither are objective. The name unobtanium was chosen because it represents a hypothetical substance that is everything that Cameron needed it to be to tell his story in a single word. He’s practically telling the audience, “look, guys, don’t think about it that hard, I’m speeding through the set-up because I know everyone is here to look at pretty shit in 3d”.
In another story, one where the specific properties of unobtanium were in any way relevant (beyond being valuable), that sort of handwavey shorthand might perturb me. However, as it stands within the context of the film, it’s fine. It’s functional screenwriting, and that, to me, is a hallmark of Cameron’s style.
Also, I’m not suggesting unobtanium was a placeholder for Cameron. I’m saying that it doesn’t necessarily strain my credulity to believe that, if scientists are pre-conditioned to refer to a hypothetical wonder material as unobtanium, and then they actually discover a wonder material, they might continue referring to it as such. Or, if not scientists, at least corporate ghouls like Ribisi who probably can’t pronounce the “official” name, if one exists.
Using shorthand because you’re bored with your own exposition dump, and want to speed it along, seems like a strong sign of a poor screenplay.
EVERYBODY knows it was a terrible name, even those offering weak-ass rationalizations. NONE of you sound like you’ve even convinced yourselves.
I’m not saying it’s a brilliant name. Im arguing it is an inconsequential detail that does not matter in the context of the story, and it should be treated as such. You called it “possibly the stupidest artistic choice in cinematic history”. I guess I just find that to be at least as ridiculous as “unobtanium”, if not moreso.
It’s not an inconsequential detail, it is literally the reason the movie is taking place, and they can’t be bothered to question such a lame name.
Obviously, Cameron declared this to be the final name, and nobody else was brave enough to say, “Hey, Boss, are you really married to that name? Because we could workshop it a bit, if you want.”
And then there’s Chineseium, brittle crap that breaks when you look at it.
Adamantium is made with vibranium and steel.
You also have Uru, which is an entirely different thing from a magical realm, kinda like Marvel’s mithril.Their hardness, toughness, strength and magical conductivity are different, making Adamantium better for attacking, Vibranium better for defending, and Uru better for enchanting.
Gay
Shouldn’t this be reversed? Vibranium was first, then Adamantium and it was stronger. But it’s heavier and doesn’t have the same properties.
Uru is the strongest, but it’s a rare cosmic material.
I just made Urur, which is 20% stronger than Uru
Urest
Well I just made anti Urest which counters it!
They also gave mutants a rare cosmic material that they can get by folding space or something.
Don’t forget carbonadium! It’s the USSR version of adamantium: a little less strong but a lot more malleable.
Uru isn’t the strongest on its own, but it takes well to enchantments.
when I was reading comics admantium was stronger than vibranium but vibranium had this unique quality with resonance and was used in a lot of sonic type devices. caps shield was made from an alloy of both that much like the experiment that created him only worked once and they have never been able to repeat it. The shield was considered much stronger than admantium and the vibranium is what allowed for its ability to bounce around. It was considered indestructible.
IIRC Cap’s shield is actually proto-adamantium. They were never able to recreate the formula, and base adamantium is the closest they could get.
yeah im not sure if that is before or after my time but 100% when I was reading it was considered and alloy with vibranium although maybe the admantium part was some admantium precursor given the timeline of when admantium came on the field but im sure it was considered an alloy of both.
You and I must have been reading comics around the same time in the previous century! I recall the exact same thing, right down to the details.
Meanwhile…
Uru is a metal ore from the first moon in existence, and has existed since the beginning of the universe, being said to be rubble from the rock of creation and the strongest substance in all the realms.
but was easily defeated by various beings. HELA, scarlet witch,etc.
So, it’s composed of hydrogen and helium?
To be fair, a lot of elements existed before the first stars exploded, it was just overwhelmingly hydrogen and helium.
and the strongest substance in all the realms.
Until it isn’t.
You fool! I have only been fighting at half hardness!
Damn even the metallurgists have to watch out for power creep
Ah, thank you. I was looking for the expression “power creep” to describe this phenomenon. In Japan, we usually call it “power inflation,” and I couldn’t remember how to say it in English!
I mean, they’ve been having to do that since the chalcolithic.
Damn Catholics get into everything, don’t they?
That is how our cars manage to convert gasoline into energy.
So it’s strongest than the actual rock of creation? Also funny that it was there since the beginning but it’s in a moon. A moon that existed before the planet the moon is a moon of? That’s not a moon lol.
The moon was made up of rubble from the rock of creation. It doesn’t say it existed before it’s planet.
Is it planet?
I mean moons can be captured. So it’s technically possible, just really unlikely.
Stan Lee after the meeting:
Hey, at least its better than the placeholder; Unobtainium.
Hey I’ve heard that we can’t obtain that anywhere. It’s pretty rare.
What’s it used for? We don’t know! Just that it’s rare and thus valuable!
Didn’t vibranium come first? 🤔
Either: Daredevil #13 (Feb 1966) or Fantastic Four #53 (Aug 1966) (depending on which vibranium we’re talking about, yes, there were TWO of them…)
vs.
Avengers #66 (July 1969) (Ultron’s body)
2 vibraniums? please do elaborate! I don’t have the patience to read all the comics but I’m a sucker for this kind of lore details.
So a metal called “vibranium” was first introduced in Daredevil as an ‘anti-metal’ that melted all other metals.
The second vibranium, from Wakanda, is the one everyone knows about. I think they just recycled the name from Daredevil.
Yeah, not to yuck anyone’s yum, but this has been one of the reasons why I always thought fiction in general, but in particular superhero stories, anime etc., wasn’t that interesting.
Like, wow, you thought of some arbitrary description for how the villain is by far the strongest. Except for that other villain in the next episode, of course, who’s even strongester. Oh, and did I mention that our hero is a total weenie, but somehow also stronger than these guys? Crazy, isn’t it?
I know, you’re supposed to indulge these stories and not question them too much, but pattern-recognizing brain says no. 🫠
Not a big dragon ball z fan, I take it.
It’s not so much a problem plaguing fiction in general, but fiction that runs a long time.
If it’s a contained story with defined end that comes relatively soon enough, the stakes can be relatively fixed, arcs can run through to a logical conclusion, etc.
If you have unending, soap-opera like story, then you hit problems. Characters can never actually be fully realized, they have to have their development paused. Any romantic ‘will they/won’t they’ gets ludicrously drawn out. You usually get tougher plot armor because fans are really attached, or a revolving door of characters that you don’t get attached too, or people inevitably managing to be alive after having died. You have power creep where insurmountable challenges get overcome through progress and then something has to reset the new capabilities to table stakes.
Hmm, that is an interesting point, because I do also prefer roguelike videogames to RPGs. They compress the whole character development down into a much shorter timeframe.
And while it’s still a factor that it’s just your stats growing vs. your enemies’ stats growing, you do have a pretty clear goal to reach.You also most definitely have no plot armor either, as a single death is the end of that story. And the randomization of the levels certainly adds to that, too, as I can’t get the feeling that I should be able to manage anything the game throws at me.
My favorite roguelike [email protected] has these historic quotes on items and spells. And the Swiftness spell has verbatim this text as its quote:
…which is the best gameplay advice for that game, for any situation. 🫠
not to yuck anyone’s yum
You’re clearly trying to do this.
I’m not trying to yuck anyone’s yum but I absolutely hate that turn of phrase and think less of someone who uses it ^(not really but it is super millennial cringe coded)^
Some stories use hyperbole for dramatic effect, so clearly this is a flaw in the fundamental concept of all narrative fiction. What a dumb take.
I am literally just describing how I feel. It’s not a take. You don’t have to like it.
That’s a copout and also just plain false, call them feelings or takes makes no difference here. That’s not how discourse works.
Yeah, not to yuck anyone’s yum, but this has been one of the reasons why I always thought fiction in general, but in particular superhero stories, anime etc., wasn’t that interesting.
That’s an awfully broad brush. A lot of the better science fiction (and there is an awful lot of really good SF) speculates on what would happen if a particular technology existed. You could say the same for super hero stuff, though that’s often closer to fantasy. Yes, there are lots of examples of sloppy writing, and super hero franchises that go on for decades tend to have at least moments of ridiculous ability creep, but it’s inane to say that things like More Than Human by Theodore Sturgeon, Blood Music by Greg Bear, or To Sleep In A Sea Of Stars by Christopher Paolini aren’t really good fictional stories about people with special abilities.
I think the real problem is trying to keep a story going too long, and the need to escalate everything constantly serves to ultimately undermine how that progress feels.
The stories tend to be repetitive, end up where a villain gets a new MacGuffin and the hero has to get some new capability to overcome only for the next villan to have an even bigger MacGuffin, rinse and repeat with each time being portrayed as some impossibly large leap over the last. To keep characters going they time jump, they get cloned, they come back from the dead, they cross over from some alternate universe.
Basically, most genres of fiction have a risk of overstaying their welcome if you try to make it go on a long time.
Still feels like an awfully broad brush when you say “most genres of fiction.” Remember that super hero franchises end up having lots of different writers with different skill levels, and they’re mostly made for kids. It’s not an inherent problem with fiction - it doesn’t have to be that way - but with super hero franchises it does often happen.
I say it’s generally a problem of long narratives, but some genres like comedy can get a pass since they don’t have to rely on growth and progression.
To the extent a story needs to develop, running a long time is likely to doom something.
Running a few books or a handful of seasons can work, but if a story has to evolve over decades…
Wouldn’t Marvel cross the line from Science Fiction into Science Fantasy? Ignoring the metal debate for a minute, we’ve got litteral gods, a sapient tree, a rock man, a guy who shoots lasers from his face, and a thousand other absolutely nuts things.
ScienceFantasy.Superpowers from radioactive waste (daredevil) or a radioactive spider sounds sciencey, tho
Oh, for sure marvel as a whole is fantasy. You could argue that some franchises are, or were, SF. Like if you take the original Iron Man: genius inventor develops a metal suit with weapons and thrusters. Eventually he’s basically fighting magic, but the original story wasn’t like that.
But I did say earlier in the thread that super hero stories are generally fantasy, but that you could apply the same idea of postulating what would happen if someone had a particular ability instead of if a particular technology existed.
isn’t that just a problem of looking for bad authors?
“Holy Generalizations Batman! That guy just yucked our yums! Doesn’t he know fictional worlds allow writers unprecedented freedom to explore the human condition!?”
“No time for that now Robin! The Joker just broke out of Arkham again, and he’s practicing unlicensed dentistry!”
This is basically the plot of all of Dragonball Z
It was certainly one of the examples on my mind when writing that, yeah. 😅
I think, it was One Piece where I first noticed this, because I actually tried to watch that regularly on TV as a kid, but Dragonball perfected it with the whole “Power level over 9000” meme…
Think another example of ludicrous power escalation was when in Loki they just had a drawer of assorted infinity stones. Yes, played for laughs but the problem of escalation suggested is real.
That’s fair lol. One Piece is I think one of the best tests of if someone actually likes shonen. It’s got a plot, it’s got characters that are likable, and character growth isn’t just getting stronger, but yeah it’s also deeply in the genre and contains lots of the shonen plot loop: meet new op villain who wants to do bad things, get rekt, explore/train/character development/make friends, fight again, learn more about the villain and protagonist, protagonist ekes out a victory, story advances towards new villain…
I like good shonen, but it’s definitely a genre with clear formulaic plots for the most part, and it’s the story that happens between and beyond those plots, the execution of the loop, and character design and power interactions and such that make it good or bad. I personally think that Dragonball sucks because it’s very “and then, and then, and then…” without much of a plan or a story outside the loop, as compared to One Piece being the story of Luffy trying to build a crew, sail to the end of the world, become king of pirates, and take on the government.
Formulaic genres are ultimately all about execution, message, and just the general comfort of the fact that a lot of these genres tend to allow themselves to be media junk food. A whodunnit is unlikely to surprise you in plot, you know the first suspect didn’t do it, you’re trying to figure out why and who’s being set up to actually have done it. This is why BBC Sherlock sucks in retrospect but so many people loved it at the time.
Haven’t gotten around to One Piece (that episode count is… daunting), but I think I really know it’s done as soon as they have a ‘tournament arc’. Give up all pretense and just have them fight for the sake of fighting.
And then there’s bleach, where, oh look, he has a somewhat cool sword, oh it has a cooler form, oh there’s an even cooler form, oh now he has mask powers, but limited, oh wait, we were lying that wasn’t his real cool sword form… Ugh…
A super-powered character could have boring stories like that. What matters is the writers coming up with interesting questions that make readers think. Having super-powered characters simply opens the door to different questions.
It’s why Superman has endured. Interesting stories
Most of the fiction I’ve been exposed to (which is a lot, I enjoy it very much and always have) isn’t like that. They don’t just describe someone as strong or evil, they describe actions and events and emotions from a specific perspective and let you come to your own conclusions.
I guess if you like stuff made for kids, teens, and young adults, you’ll run into that problem a lot more, but it’s not actually an overall problem with fiction as far as I’ve noticed. I’ve never really liked young adult fiction though, because it’s lacking in depth, much like you describe (some exceptions do apply of course).
I mean there are definitely good works of fiction intended for younger readers. Off the top of my head there’s the edge chronicles, skullduggery pleasant, mortal engines, a series of unfortunate events. All things I read when I was younger and from what I remember they never did any of the “this person is eeeeevil” things, I guess skullduggery pleasant had some things verging on that but it was usually eldritch horror type unknown evil than straight up “bad because I say so”. And all of those series had depth.
I think you might have missed my last line there. :)
I’m not terribly familiar with those specific works, but there certainly are some that are actually worth the time investment. I just personally find most of it that I’ve tried not to be, for me and maybe OP up there, because they lack depth (being intended for younger audiences). I read through young adult stuff in elementary school and moved on to whopper 1,000+ page books around 5th grade (read sphere and the third pandemic that year), so admittedly I don’t have a lot of experience with more modern YA stuff, tho what I have explored has sometimes been far superior to what was available when I was young. And the shows made for younger people are also sometimes real gems, like adventure time.
Yeah looks like I did miss that bit. Still going to recommend stuff though :P. I was definitely reading stuff not intended for kids while I was still in school though so I might have a skewed perspective.
“These characters are cartoonishly evil, maybe I should stop reading comics?”
Holy crap I was about to use the same yuck someone’s yum phrase to make the same point. Keep up the good work hive mind.
Edit: To clarify, in response to the shit storm of replies you got, I meant specifically that’s my issue with Marvel movies, and I assume that’s more what you meant, not all fiction ever.
Eh, I was kind of punting towards all of fiction there. With something like Scrubs (if we count that towards fiction), it doesn’t bother me, because the situations are realistic and then as many others said, it’s about the stories that unfold in that scenario.
But even copaganda or trash TV will play up each new case, e.g.: “Jeremias has not touched grass in 17 years. Will our team succeed in changing that?” and “The police has been on the hunt for this serial killer for 5 years. After 378 victims, will Shirley Holmes finally catch him?”.
I guess, yeah, it is also a matter of bad writers, though. It is far too easy to come to a point where you need drama and to then just make up big numbers with no credibility.
There’s a lot of that out there. I’ve definitely become jaded to the point where I will rarely adopt a new show unless I know it’s a limited or finished series, and one that didn’t just keep renewing until they couldn’t make money one upping themselves.
Yeah, I think you just might just hate formulaic genres. Let me guess, you also don’t like hero’s journey stories.
How do you feel about LeGuinn’s writing?
Definitely possible. I remember being genuinely appalled when our teacher casually told us that most stories can be divided into three acts (Setup, Confrontation, Resolution).
Rationally, I’ve understood that it’s almost like a law of nature. You kind of have to tell stories this way.
But on an irrational level, I’m thinking, great, they’ve spoiled the end of most stories. If they all end with a resolution, why even bother listening to them?…that is somewhat of a hyperbole, but there are further subdivisions that make this even more obvious. Like hero’s journey that you named, where you can tell that they’re going to survive at least until the final conflict, and even then there’s a pretty good chance for a happy end, because people like those. If my brain latches onto one person being the hero, it feels like I know the remaining story arc already.
And I have to admit that I don’t read much, so this is the first time I’m hearing of Le Guin.
But it’s not just the writing either way. I do also always feel like I might as well read about the real world before I read about fictional worlds. I don’t need to know about aliens and dragons, when ants exist and are so much cooler.I kinda get it, I found myself frustrated as a student learning about story structure because it felt like it spoiled all stories too. But rather than the framing of these things as laws of nature I think it’s better to see it as more like known formulas for making a story compelling. The three act story is so common because it’s relatively snappy while containing all the things necessary to make a story work. Like, there is avant-garde storytelling (especially in theater and film) that completely says “fuck you” to story structure, but at its best it’s not something most people will enjoy. It tends to revel in the fact that it’s unsatisfying or confusing, it looks at the structure of its media and asks what if I did something different. And it really teaches you the reason for convention.
But yeah LeGuinn’s big thing is using what if scenarios to shine light on society. The main books people recommend are The Left Hand of Darkness which is about a man from earth serving as the initial ambassador of a union of planets to an ice world where everyone is both male and female, which is used to explore gender relations in the real world, and The Dispossessed which serves as more of an imagining of the problems and struggles of a free thinker who grows up in an anarchist society as he visits a far more geologically fortunate world engaged in a cold war style conflict.
I bring her up because her fiction isn’t subtle about its exploration of real world ideas and themes. Ultimately I don’t think anyone should have to like fiction, but I do think it’s valuable to understand why people like it and the intellectual value we can get out of some of it
Iirc, isn’t one made with the other? I genuinely don’t know which.
No, you’re thinking of Captain America’s shield (in the comics) which is made of an alloy of both adamantium and vibranium that they’ve never been able to replicate. AFAIK Adamantium is stronger but more brittle, whereas Vibranium has the extra wacky properties, like absorbing “all” incoming kinetic energy (except when it doesn’t.)
Yeah i thought adamantium is the alloy that’s made from vibranium metal, but that’s mostly my head canon. I have no real information.
“sometimes” last century??? Perhaps “Some time”? Who wrote this, AI?
Sadly, that kind of error is more likely from a human under 30. Literacy is a dying art.
