Batman is slow and doesn't use his agility or fighting abilities properly, as shown in the movies. He isn't even close to his comics incarnation as far as that goes, especially when the Director or Writer or whomever stated that he wanted the movies to be more realistic. But Matt has shown better stuff. Greater hand-to-hand and fought multiple foes while severely injured (Batman hasn't); I'd even argue that Fisk could take out Bane based on Bane and Batman's fight. Matt Murdock is totally wrecking Batman here. And the comments for Batman are just amazing; no one has really put up a decent argument for him.
Alright man, you want to see an argument, well here's one:
1. The first statement I underlined is straight up untrue. In Batman Begins he defeats 12 men (most of which have weapons) in 21 seconds. Christopher Nolan states that the criminals he beats up see him as nothing more than a blur.
2. Are you saying that him not being seriously injured when beating multiple guys is a downside? That is just another feat for him. Oh, plus this is untrue as well. In Batman Begins: Ra's cuts his side with a sword, then a large burning piece of wood falls directly on him (which he then pushes off of himself), then he suffers from extreme smoke inhalation, and then he goes out and beats up 4 ninjas and Ra's while still injured. I'll say his pain tolerance and stamina are just fine.
3. Kingpin really is not that comparable to Bane. Bane effortlessly snapped a man's neck, he was stated as moving as fast as young Bruce (blur speed), he felt no pain, and he crushed concrete with his punches. And guess what? Batman beat him in there rematch. The only real impressive thing Fisk did is flip that large metal table.
So how was that for an argument? Decent I hope :).
Log in to comment