Codename 47 vs Bob Lee Swagger

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
But you see where I am coming from, right? You see where that would cause confusion?

Well, I understand your point. It's just not related to the point we discussed for a page now.

Originally posted by Robtard
In the case of Hitman, he is shown shooting from a great distance and then it is said it was "over 4km". That doesn't count in RJ land.

In regards to Swagger's counter-intel, he takes a picture of plate and then it is said he's using counter-intel. This counts though.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I already explained this scene in vivid detail, it's not my fault you dont get it or are ignoring it.

So, is 47 shown shooting someone from over 4km of distance?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I state my opinions and back them up sometimes with facts, links and vids.

Here's a question. Lets say a hero in a movie surfs occasionally, he is average in skill. You see him surfing, you see him doing it as a hobby, and, as a surfer, you say "Well, he is OK, nothing special."

Then, later in the movie, someone says "Dude can do this and this on a board." This and this being certain moves that you, as a surfer, know to be VERY advanced moves, something only the elite surfers do. Are you going to go with it, or are you going to question it?

If in the movie, he is said to have done it, I have to take that as fact when used in a Vs. debate. The fact is, it's a movie, they can put whatever they want into it.

You want to talk about unrealistic surfing capabilities? Then fine, Point Break is a prime example, there's pretty much no way that he could have learnt all that that fast, but I'm not going to say, "no, the penguin from Surf's Up could definitely beat him in a competition, because he could not have learnt that fast".

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I already explained this scene in vivid detail, it's not my fault you dont get it or are ignoring it.

Yes, it's a double-standard and rather easy to see.

Your rule of "if it's in the movie it counts", only applies if it benefits your argument.

Originally posted by Robtard
Like that hi-tech fictional door-bomb 47 used? Try again, you're double-standard is showing.

From page 6:

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Actually I make a living in the hotel business. As far as this forum goes, I go by what I SEE the movie character do, I dont assume anymore.

Not that you'll ever admit your double-standard.

Originally posted by Bardock42
So, is 47 shown shooting someone from over 4km of distance?

Originally posted by Robtard
From page 6:

Not that you'll ever admit your double-standard.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
He is shown shooting some Russian from a distance that I guaged to be about a mile. Youtube it and see for yourself.

How far did they say it was?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
If in the movie, he is said to have done it, I have to take that as fact when used in a Vs. debate. The fact is, it's a movie, they can put whatever they want into it.

You want to talk about unrealistic surfing capabilities? Then fine, Point Break is a prime example, there's pretty much no way that he could have learnt all that that fast, but I'm not going to say, "no, the penguin from Surf's Up could definitely beat him in a competition, because he could not have learnt that fast".

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yes, and the assuming part is assuming that the rifle is capable of making a 4 km shot.

Actually, the assuming part would be your assumption of the distance, despite it being said "over 4km".

He also never really gets any blood on his impeccable suit, was raised as an assassin in a programme where they train them from birth, and to top it all doesn't even have a name. But of course, taking artistic licence with the power of a firearm is completely unacceptable.

Originally posted by Robtard
Actually, the assuming part would be your assumption of the distance, despite it being said "over 4km".

Originally posted by Bardock42
How far did they say it was?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
well I can see where he shoots from, it's nowhere near 4 km.

You assume, despite it being said "4km".

Do you think the script was written as the guy saying it being a liar?

Funny how you don't apply this to Swagger, he does some fairly outrageous things, yet "it's in the movie, so it counts" stands for him, only him.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
the federal agent says that the Russians TOLD him it was from four kilometers out. Never does 47 acknowledge it as 4 km, and never is he told by his superiors it is a 4 km shot.

"You know that shot you just did, 47? That was from over 4km, give yourself a pat on the back".

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
"You know that shot you just did, 47? That was from over 4km, give yourself a pat on the back".

Originally posted by Robtard
You assume, despite it being said "4km".

Do you think the script was written as the guy saying it being a liar?

Funny how you don't apply this to Swagger, he does some fairly outrageous things, yet "it's in the movie, so it counts" stands for him, only him.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
When was that said? got a youtube link?

Brilliant. That is priceless, thanks RJ, I think you've just made my day.