I want the men around me to be fat, healthy-looking men who sleep at night. That Cassius over there has a lean and hungry look. He thinks too much. Men like him are dangerous.
Speaking of men with larger weights; the hollywood classic trope of larger, unhealthy, unattractive (but often "funny") guys with smashing hot wives. Also, the wives are always size 0-1 even after giving birth to 2-3 children.... Sigh. When's the first movie coming out where there's the opposite? Maybe those movies exist, but they must be one to a thousand? I'm thinking someone like Melissa McCarthy together with Zac Efron playing a couple. It would never happen, never ever, yet you often see guys like Kevin James or similar with very attractive women.
What do you think happens when you try to kill an elephant with a sword?
Would you lose a fight against a squirrel?
Is it a vorpal squirrel?
The only place I ever saw dragons receiving the kind of respect they deserve was on the RPG Rolemaster. If you were up against a dragon you'd probably be reaching for a blank character sheet and the rulebooks... The only way to fight them there were with siege weapons and you'd have a lot of dead people anyway.
Actually, there is a movie "Reign of Fire" where dragons are true dragons and really hard to deal with. Granted, setting is futuristic (post-apocalyptic) with firearms, but it does not help much.
Actually, there is a movie "Reign of Fire" where dragons are true dragons and really hard to deal with. Granted, setting is futuristic (post-apocalyptic) with firearms, but it does not help much.
To be honest, that movie is a fine example of another poor trope, namely Military Are Useless. I mean sure, I'm willing to buy that dragons are able to outmaneuver a helicopter, incinerate a Humvee or even APC. Maybe even take a full auto from .50 cal as well... But then these very same dragons are being shot to death with a harpoon, i.e. their physiology is actually quite realistic.
Actually, there is a movie "Reign of Fire" where dragons are true dragons and really hard to deal with. Granted, setting is futuristic (post-apocalyptic) with firearms, but it does not help much.
To be honest, that movie is a fine example of another poor trope, namely Military Are Useless. I mean sure, I'm willing to buy that dragons are able to outmaneuver a helicopter, incinerate a Humvee or even APC. Maybe even take a full auto from .50 cal as well... But then these very same dragons are being shot to death with a harpoon, i.e. their physiology is actually quite realistic.
I will just assume that every dragon movie secretly operates by Dra†Koi rules, just that the protagonists are too dumb to understand they need to have sex with the dragon.
@Kurona: Have you seen Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them? Ostensibly the main character is a wizard whose name I don't remember, but the fat "sidekick," named Jake, is actually the most endearing and lovable character in the movie. His weight is never mentioned.
Jake doesn't even have a role in the plot, but he's the best part of the movie.
I think that Etta Candy, in the last Wonder Woman movie, fits that positive-fat-person thing too
Not sure how to call this trope, but I think can name at least one scene, where one oponent is big, strong, uses some "brute" weapon like mace, and other is small and fast and nimble (good chances are that person will be a woman). When they fight Big Guy is cartoonishly small and takes ages to make one swing, while Swift One easily outmanoeuvres him, jumps, roll, that all kind of stupid things. First of all, that approach ignores the fact that how strong you are usually means that you are able to swing normal-size weapon faster than others, not that you want bigger weapon you can swing slower. So you'll be able to attack faster, and your attacks will hit more harder, since they will have bigger speed. Secondly, Big Guy will have advantage at reach and you can't underestimate it - unless you are creating fiction, of course. If you can hit your oponents before they are close enough to hit you, they are in very difficult position. And it's always played like it's supposed to be surprise: oh noes, that Big Guy surely will decimate Swift One! Come on. It's so obvious that Martin even turned it upside down in his books.
Ugh, The Hobbit had some offenders of the impractical weapons variety. You'd think having lost a hand because you're so slow would encourage you to, you know, ditch the stupidly heavy mace.
Not sure how to call this trope, but I think can name at least one scene, where one oponent is big, strong, uses some "brute" weapon like mace, and other is small and fast and nimble (good chances are that person will be a woman). When they fight Big Guy is cartoonishly small and takes ages to make one swing, while Swift One easily outmanoeuvres him, jumps, roll, that all kind of stupid things. First of all, that approach ignores the fact that how strong you are usually means that you are able to swing normal-size weapon faster than others, not that you want bigger weapon you can swing slower. So you'll be able to attack faster, and your attacks will hit more harder, since they will have bigger speed. Secondly, Big Guy will have advantage at reach and you can't underestimate it - unless you are creating fiction, of course. If you can hit your oponents before they are close enough to hit you, they are in very difficult position. And it's always played like it's supposed to be surprise: oh noes, that Big Guy surely will decimate Swift One! Come on. It's so obvious that Martin even turned it upside down in his books.
What about when someone has a weapon with reach and decides to go into close combat...
@Artona I'm not sure if this is down to the classic Hollywood love of an 'underdog', or the popular ninja-moves trope, but... yeah, this has been done to death. Although I'd be lying if I said I didn't like the idea that smaller guys can still win through superior skill, it has reached the point where it's been so overused that it's pretty much expected now, and isn't a "surprise underdog victory" anymore.
I can tolerate it if the big guy is untrained and the small guy/girl is a trained fighter (studying Japanese/Chinese katas in a safe and controlled environment where nobody has ever risked actual harm in a real fight does not make one a trained fighter ;p ) but not when the big guy is supposed to have some degree of competence *cough* Brienne of Tarth and Arya Stark *cough*.
Also, tbh, from my experience, when brute force meets skill and finesse, I'm afraid in reality, skill and finesse rarely wins. There's a reason boxing tournaments separate people into different weight categories. There's also a reason why martial artists rarely use fancy jumping/spinning kicks in an actual competition.
eta: and yep.... big swings using the whole arm, stepping into range before you even begin to draw your arm back, despite the fact that every HEMA manual tells you to do the opposite.
Hehheh, yeah. Witch-King of Angmar in LOTR movie. I remember this dude was like 60th lvl or something in Middle Earth Roleplaying/Rolemaster, strength clear off the charts probably. Bam, one hit to the face and he's pushing up the daisies. He swung probably a 50lb 6 or 8 foot flail like it was cotton candy, and in comes Eowyn with her notched, no bonuses, wore out broad sword. Prophecy of not, I-mean-dang. Ok, yeah, took maybe a minor flesh wound to the ankle (if he HAD flesh), by a tiny hobbit with a short carvin knife but still. Heh, swiftness indeed.
Ok, yeah, took maybe a minor flesh wound to the ankle (if he HAD flesh), by a tiny hobbit with a short carvin knife but still. Heh, swiftness indeed.
Well, the carving knife was an elven blade specially created to kill the Witch King of Angmar. It had probably something like +1, +3 vs. Undead, +4 vs. Ringwraiths, +6 vs. Witch Kings.
Besides, it has been known since the Battle of Troy that wounds to the Achilles Heel are absolutely lethal to Level 60 fighters.
1) The original Witch King was not a level 60 anything. Tolkien did not base him on Rolemaster.
2) Stories have to have something interesting and unexpected happen. Otherwise, they aren't stories, they are just stuff that happens. Ergo, the underdog wins, the invincible is brought low. That has been the nature of stories since at least the ancient Greeks, it wasn't a Holywood invention. The trouble is, because of modern media we have probably seen so many stories that the weak beating the strong has ceased to be unexpected.
To be fair, @Zaghoul, it's Tolkien's fault. Nazguls are terribly incompetent in books.
@Squire - I don't mind underdogs winning, but they are supposed to be "underdogs". Smaller guys but highly trained aren't underdogs for me. In Empire Strikes Back is lovely little scene where Luke redirects some kind of steam into Vader's face and gains advantage for a moment. This is the way I'd like to see underdogs winning - by using environment and quick thinking.
Also, tbh, from my experience, when brute force meets skill and finesse, I'm afraid in reality, skill and finesse rarely wins. There's a reason boxing tournaments separate people into different weight categories.
Aye. It's worth mentoning that even in the same category reach of advantage can decide outcome of the match (with notable exception of Haye vs Wałujew, for an instant). Tyson vs Douglas was example of that.
A young judean shepherd who dabbles in music and knows how to use a sling, or The champion of the Philistines, a giant wielding a two-handed sword and javelins?
A young judean shepherd who dabbles in music and knows how to use a sling, or The champion of the Philistines, a giant wielding a two-handed sword and javelins?
@SethDavis yes but remember, helmets do nothing in films, have you forgotten? They're only there for appearance purposes, they don't provide any protection.
Although thinking about it, size isn't always the deciding factor (otherwise there'd be no point - just measure up and declare the winner). Sometimes skill can mitigate a size disadvantage, to a degree. Taking fencing as an example (simply because it's something I know quite well), being really tall and having super-long arms definitely gives you an advantage because you can hit a person when they can't hit you... but sometimes such fencers rely solely on this advantage and have no other attacks/defences, so if a person is able to engage your blade and get inside your reach, suddenly you've lost your advantage and don't know how to defend against this. I've won boughts against people taller than me simply by being a more experienced fencer. I also seem to remember the Ukrainian gold medalist from 2012 beating semi-finalists who were taller than she was, and left-handed (which also gives you an advantage in fencing!). So being big isn't always enough, you do need to have skill as well.
Trouble is, in Hollywood, this is always represented as the big guy doing big "raaagh!" attacks while the small agile guy (or girl) uses ninja moves, flips and cartwheels to avoid these attacks and floors the big guy with dainty spinning kicks, when in reality, a tough guy would laugh at those attacks... lol, I'm actually reminded of that scene in the film Never Back Down, when a capoeria guy takes on a boxer, and does all the fancy breakdance flips etc only to get laid out with one punch.
@SethDavis yes but remember, helmets do nothing in films, have you forgotten? They're only there for appearance purposes, they don't provide any protection.
Although thinking about it, size isn't always the deciding factor (otherwise there'd be no point - just measure up and declare the winner). Sometimes skill can mitigate a size disadvantage, to a degree. Taking fencing as an example (simply because it's something I know quite well), being really tall and having super-long arms definitely gives you an advantage because you can hit a person when they can't hit you... but sometimes such fencers rely solely on this advantage and have no other attacks/defences, so if a person is able to engage your blade and get inside your reach, suddenly you've lost your advantage and don't know how to defend against this. I've won boughts against people taller than me simply by being a more experienced fencer. I also seem to remember the Ukrainian gold medalist from 2012 beating semi-finalists who were taller than she was, and left-handed (which also gives you an advantage in fencing!). So being big isn't always enough, you do need to have skill as well.
Trouble is, in Hollywood, this is always represented as the big guy doing big "raaagh!" attacks while the small agile guy (or girl) uses ninja moves, flips and cartwheels to avoid these attacks and floors the big guy with dainty spinning kicks, when in reality, a tough guy would laugh at those attacks... lol, I'm actually reminded of that scene in the film Never Back Down, when a capoeria guy takes on a boxer, and does all the fancy breakdance flips etc only to get laid out with one punch.
What? Black Widow wouldn't be able to take on Remlo in real life? Sacrilege!
Actually, I'm rather surprised how Marvel has handled Black Widow so far. The Winter Soldier basically kicked her ass and she didn't really take on Ultron because she knew she was outclassed. She's pretty much a ninja but knows her limitations. Still a little over the top but at least marginally believable.
It should be noted regarding fencing, its a sport designed to reward speed, precision and skill, not so much strength. Reach is a big advantage for certain, but it isn't foolproof.
Kinda ironic to blame a specific loss of Tyson on reach deficit, since he was pretty short. I expect he had very few bouts where he didn't have a reach disadvantage. I've not watched many of his fights, but I've heard Tyson was actually a solid all around fighter while young, as in defensively responsible.
Imho, size is generally not a real advantage, reach is. Taller people need to be pretty huge (or be incredibly wirey) to lift as much weight as a shorter guy. This is part of why Tyson could hit so hard, muscles are optimized better for shorter people. Weight is an advantage in wrestling, especially if it lowers center of gravity, but skill is still huge.
Trope that annoys me: how easily people get knocked out/stunned via strikes to the head. Because the writers can't write better, a single blow not even to a vulnerable area knocks a guy out so the plot can move on. Especially egregious when a fairly frail character knocks out a large opponent. Thus this does mix in elements of 'big guys are just big targets'!
Also, how TV/Movies act like being knocked unconcious is only a minor inconvenience, nobody gets concussed despite being bludgened senseless. Heck, they usually aren't even bruised or swollen.
@DreadKhan - yeah, Mike wasn't the same after Cus died. But it was just an example - and nontheless, Douglas made good use of that reach, did he not?
Also, how TV/Movies act like being knocked unconcious is only a minor inconvenience, nobody gets concussed despite being bludgened senseless. Heck, they usually aren't even bruised or swollen.
It makes sense in a way - it's easy to get knocked out, so it's not big deal. I guess.
Its not that easy to get knocked out really, its rare even in sports like football that feature serious concussion risk, or hockey where people take slapshots to the head occasionally.
Kinda ironic to blame a specific loss of Tyson on reach deficit, since he was pretty short. I expect he had very few bouts where he didn't have a reach disadvantage. I've not watched many of his fights, but I've heard Tyson was actually a solid all around fighter while young, as in defensively responsible.
As far as I'm concerned, the Tyson loss against Douglas was more about his psychological meltdown. Tyson was actually responsible defense wise at the start of his career, he just went nuts away from Cus d'Amato.
Tyson is actually a solid exemple to demonstrate the potential realism of this trope. Tyson was small, but was using this at his advantage against less talented foes. With a high guard and lots of bobbing and weaving, he was actually really hard to hit. This is how he managed to win his first world title. However, even in his youth, he struggled against tall and lanky technician who fought conservatively behind their jabs : these were the type of guys who gave him hell.
This is also why I think Tyson would have lost against Lennox Lewis even if he didn't had his mental breakdown : Lewis, a huge 6' 5" 240+lbs technician, was all wrong for him. Thus, being small can be used at your advantage if you got really good skills, but is nonetheless a significant disadvantage.
Edit : Sorry, boxing references get my inner boxing geek flowing.
Note that its not all about size and mass. When I taught self defense about 7 years ago, I didn't look much different than I do now. It was all lean muscle. It is very amusing to have someone with more obvious muscle mass than you punch you and then yell while holding their hand. Personally I don't think strength would top skill unless it was a large discrepancy. A very skilled fighter in reasonable fighting shape CAN topple stronger but less skilled opponents. FWIW I'd rather fight a bigger person that is slightly stronger than me, than a smaller opponent who is comparably strong with me.
1) The original Witch King was not a level 60 anything. Tolkien did not base him on Rolemaster.
2) Stories have to have something interesting and unexpected happen. Otherwise, they aren't stories, they are just stuff that happens. Ergo, the underdog wins, the invincible is brought low. That has been the nature of stories since at least the ancient Greeks, it wasn't a Holywood invention. The trouble is, because of modern media we have probably seen so many stories that the weak beating the strong has ceased to be unexpected.
1) Nawww, ya think? 2) It would be interesting to turn it around and have evil prevail and the weak lose, just for a change. Enough of that in RL though, so folks like an upbeat, feel good, everybody and anybody can win, if ya only try kinda story (and it sells).
Comments
When's the first movie coming out where there's the opposite? Maybe those movies exist, but they must be one to a thousand? I'm thinking someone like Melissa McCarthy together with Zac Efron playing a couple. It would never happen, never ever, yet you often see guys like Kevin James or similar with very attractive women.
To be honest, that movie is a fine example of another poor trope, namely Military Are Useless.
I mean sure, I'm willing to buy that dragons are able to outmaneuver a helicopter, incinerate a Humvee or even APC. Maybe even take a full auto from .50 cal as well... But then these very same dragons are being shot to death with a harpoon, i.e. their physiology is actually quite realistic.
Not sure how to call this trope, but I think can name at least one scene, where one oponent is big, strong, uses some "brute" weapon like mace, and other is small and fast and nimble (good chances are that person will be a woman). When they fight Big Guy is cartoonishly small and takes ages to make one swing, while Swift One easily outmanoeuvres him, jumps, roll, that all kind of stupid things.
First of all, that approach ignores the fact that how strong you are usually means that you are able to swing normal-size weapon faster than others, not that you want bigger weapon you can swing slower. So you'll be able to attack faster, and your attacks will hit more harder, since they will have bigger speed. Secondly, Big Guy will have advantage at reach and you can't underestimate it - unless you are creating fiction, of course. If you can hit your oponents before they are close enough to hit you, they are in very difficult position.
And it's always played like it's supposed to be surprise: oh noes, that Big Guy surely will decimate Swift One! Come on. It's so obvious that Martin even turned it upside down in his books.
I can tolerate it if the big guy is untrained and the small guy/girl is a trained fighter (studying Japanese/Chinese katas in a safe and controlled environment where nobody has ever risked actual harm in a real fight does not make one a trained fighter ;p ) but not when the big guy is supposed to have some degree of competence *cough* Brienne of Tarth and Arya Stark *cough*.
Also, tbh, from my experience, when brute force meets skill and finesse, I'm afraid in reality, skill and finesse rarely wins. There's a reason boxing tournaments separate people into different weight categories. There's also a reason why martial artists rarely use fancy jumping/spinning kicks in an actual competition.
eta: and yep.... big swings using the whole arm, stepping into range before you even begin to draw your arm back, despite the fact that every HEMA manual tells you to do the opposite.
Prophecy of not, I-mean-dang.
Ok, yeah, took maybe a minor flesh wound to the ankle (if he HAD flesh), by a tiny hobbit with a short carvin knife but still.
Heh, swiftness indeed.
Besides, it has been known since the Battle of Troy that wounds to the Achilles Heel are absolutely lethal to Level 60 fighters.
2) Stories have to have something interesting and unexpected happen. Otherwise, they aren't stories, they are just stuff that happens. Ergo, the underdog wins, the invincible is brought low. That has been the nature of stories since at least the ancient Greeks, it wasn't a Holywood invention. The trouble is, because of modern media we have probably seen so many stories that the weak beating the strong has ceased to be unexpected.
@Squire - I don't mind underdogs winning, but they are supposed to be "underdogs". Smaller guys but highly trained aren't underdogs for me.
In Empire Strikes Back is lovely little scene where Luke redirects some kind of steam into Vader's face and gains advantage for a moment. This is the way I'd like to see underdogs winning - by using environment and quick thinking.
Aye. It's worth mentoning that even in the same category reach of advantage can decide outcome of the match (with notable exception of Haye vs Wałujew, for an instant). Tyson vs Douglas was example of that.
The champion of the Philistines, a giant wielding a two-handed sword and javelins?
Although thinking about it, size isn't always the deciding factor (otherwise there'd be no point - just measure up and declare the winner). Sometimes skill can mitigate a size disadvantage, to a degree. Taking fencing as an example (simply because it's something I know quite well), being really tall and having super-long arms definitely gives you an advantage because you can hit a person when they can't hit you... but sometimes such fencers rely solely on this advantage and have no other attacks/defences, so if a person is able to engage your blade and get inside your reach, suddenly you've lost your advantage and don't know how to defend against this. I've won boughts against people taller than me simply by being a more experienced fencer. I also seem to remember the Ukrainian gold medalist from 2012 beating semi-finalists who were taller than she was, and left-handed (which also gives you an advantage in fencing!). So being big isn't always enough, you do need to have skill as well.
Trouble is, in Hollywood, this is always represented as the big guy doing big "raaagh!" attacks while the small agile guy (or girl) uses ninja moves, flips and cartwheels to avoid these attacks and floors the big guy with dainty spinning kicks, when in reality, a tough guy would laugh at those attacks... lol, I'm actually reminded of that scene in the film Never Back Down, when a capoeria guy takes on a boxer, and does all the fancy breakdance flips etc only to get laid out with one punch.
Actually, I'm rather surprised how Marvel has handled Black Widow so far. The Winter Soldier basically kicked her ass and she didn't really take on Ultron because she knew she was outclassed. She's pretty much a ninja but knows her limitations. Still a little over the top but at least marginally believable.
Kinda ironic to blame a specific loss of Tyson on reach deficit, since he was pretty short. I expect he had very few bouts where he didn't have a reach disadvantage. I've not watched many of his fights, but I've heard Tyson was actually a solid all around fighter while young, as in defensively responsible.
Imho, size is generally not a real advantage, reach is. Taller people need to be pretty huge (or be incredibly wirey) to lift as much weight as a shorter guy. This is part of why Tyson could hit so hard, muscles are optimized better for shorter people. Weight is an advantage in wrestling, especially if it lowers center of gravity, but skill is still huge.
Trope that annoys me: how easily people get knocked out/stunned via strikes to the head. Because the writers can't write better, a single blow not even to a vulnerable area knocks a guy out so the plot can move on. Especially egregious when a fairly frail character knocks out a large opponent. Thus this does mix in elements of 'big guys are just big targets'!
Also, how TV/Movies act like being knocked unconcious is only a minor inconvenience, nobody gets concussed despite being bludgened senseless. Heck, they usually aren't even bruised or swollen.
It makes sense in a way - it's easy to get knocked out, so it's not big deal. I guess.
Tyson is actually a solid exemple to demonstrate the potential realism of this trope. Tyson was small, but was using this at his advantage against less talented foes. With a high guard and lots of bobbing and weaving, he was actually really hard to hit. This is how he managed to win his first world title. However, even in his youth, he struggled against tall and lanky technician who fought conservatively behind their jabs : these were the type of guys who gave him hell.
This is also why I think Tyson would have lost against Lennox Lewis even if he didn't had his mental breakdown : Lewis, a huge 6' 5" 240+lbs technician, was all wrong for him. Thus, being small can be used at your advantage if you got really good skills, but is nonetheless a significant disadvantage.
Edit : Sorry, boxing references get my inner boxing geek flowing.
Tyson could also hit hard, so that defense wasn't his only tool. If he could get in close enough he could do damage.
Personally I don't think strength would top skill unless it was a large discrepancy. A very skilled fighter in reasonable fighting shape CAN topple stronger but less skilled opponents. FWIW I'd rather fight a bigger person that is slightly stronger than me, than a smaller opponent who is comparably strong with me.
2) It would be interesting to turn it around and have evil prevail and the weak lose, just for a change. Enough of that in RL though, so folks like an upbeat, feel good, everybody and anybody can win, if ya only try kinda story (and it sells).