Batman vs. Nite Owl

1.Wow. Veidt is faster, stronger, smarter, and more skilled. Your blind if you can't see this.
2.Batarang? Grappling hook? Are you joking? The raygun will do Bruce in. He's got no means of dodging it like Veidt(who has agility comparable to a Jedi).

Keaton's Batman never showed any movement like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rifXX_XhJVs
3.Rorschach is the weakest member of the Watchmen and he's superior. His resourcefulness and enviorment awareness is superior to anything in Keaton Bats' belt.
4.Bullshit. He pwned all those henchmen with ease. Soon as someone who had size on him he seemed to have considerable difficulty and needed a trick to win. Any of the Watchmen would have shitted on that guy.
5.I'll give you the car feat. That was awkward. Not impressed by the sending the guy over the car. Night Owl sent a guy flying into a wall hard in civillain clothing. Where was this force against the black guy in the church?
6.He is not faster and no way is he better in direct combat. He is much better at stealth seeing as how Nite Owl never employed it. All of which is sort of irrelevant seeing as to Dan's goggles. It'll allow him to see in dark much better than Batman. Bruce's best bet is to gas the area first.
7.Did I not just say that above? Batman never dodged a bullet(not that he needed too). Nite Owl is clearly faster. In the alley-way fight scene he does a round-house kick and rapidly turns 180 degrees or something like. Can't explain it, go watch the scene.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
1.Wow. Veidt is faster, stronger, smarter, and more skilled. Your blind if you can't see this.

Wow. You still don't have feats to back up your assertions and are not reading the posts of others. Batman can block a bullet with relative ease, it takes everything Veidt has to do so. So the reaction speed edge goes to Batman, Batman punches threw metal the best any of the Watchman manage is stone and bone. So the striking power edge goes to Batman, Batman can survive a multi-story fall and a plane wreck, the best any of the Watchman survived was a beat down from each other. So the durability edge goes to Batman as well. In fact Veidt has aside from getting kinda shot and falling down a stair case, has no durability feats. As for non-striking strength Batman was able to catch a falling Vicky Vale one handed while hanging from his fingure tips and lift her to safety. This should put his lifting power well into the range of anything we saw from the Watchman. Smarter, at least in the way that Veidt was smart, is going to have little baring on a punch up. As for skill, both were a able to handle fast skilled opponents like they were a joke.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

2.Batarang? Grappling hook? Are you joking? The raygun will do Bruce in. He's got no means of dodging it like Veidt(who has agility comparable to a Jedi).

Well Batman has remote operated/programable batarangs. As for Dan laser, if we can see the beam it is traveling slower then a bullet. So Batman should have no problem avoiding it. Heck even if he can't dodge the beam he can dodge Dans aim.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

Keaton's Batman never showed any movement like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rifXX_XhJVs

All Nite Owl did was throw some punches and kicks. Again because certain suits used in the making of Batman, curtailed the movment of the actor(s) in them it doesn't mean the characters suffer the same fault. Considering that Keaton Batman was able to pull full on tumbling sommersaults. I doubt his movment is impaired to much.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

3.Rorschach is the weakest member of the Watchmen and he's superior. His resourcefulness and enviorment awareness is superior to anything in Keaton Bats' belt.

Batman displayed both situational awarness and resourcefullness. In fact the fight in the cathedral you like to talk about is one such example.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

4.Bullshit. He pwned all those henchmen with ease. Soon as someone who had size on him he seemed to have considerable difficulty and needed a trick to win. Any of the Watchmen would have shitted on that guy.

So he did just walk away from a plane wreck?

So he beat up half a dozen guys with ease, but according to you he can't fight or move. So how did he do it?

For the record you can't simpley ignore the circumstances of the fight and fixate on the last guy he beat up, but lets discuss that guy for a moment the b ig thug that gave Batman grief that is.

What do we know about him. Well he soaked shots from Batman who can punch threw metal, like they were nothing and he over powered Batman who has strength enough to catch a falling grown woman and then lift her one handed. Further he hit hard enough to daze Batman a Batman that can take gunshots, 40ft falls, and plane wrecks.

So to summerize. Based on what feats we have he is at least as strong and tough as the Watchman. So no they wouldn't have "shitted" on him.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

5.I'll give you the car feat. That was awkward. Not impressed by the sending the guy over the car. Night Owl sent a guy flying into a wall hard in civillain clothing. Where was this force against the black guy in the church?

What difference does it make if Nite Owl was in civilian clothes or not. Niether suit(Batman or Nite Owl's) provide a strength boost that I am aware of. In fact their is a good chance the suits weigh more then street clothes. So the ability to hit with equal force while supporting more weight. Makes Batman's in costume feats better then Dan's out of costume feats. Not enough to make a significant difference, but worth mentioning as an aside. Further Nite Owl's ability to send people flying has been brought up as a testement to his strength, so why not the same for Batman.

As for the thug in the cathederal, who seems to have become the object of your OCD. Batman can punch threw metal and send people tumbling over cars. When he hit the thug in question it had little effect. Ergo the thug was tough as nails. Here is an expirement for you. Take a hammer, a peice of ice from your freezer and a coin from your pocket/wallet. Now hit the ice with the hammer. What happened? Well if the ice didn't slide away. It shattered. Now hit the coin. What happened? Not much. Is this because the you or the hammer lost strength between the 2 swings? Of course not, it simpley means that the coin is tougher then the ice.

It's also impotent to note that as I said before(and you tried to dismiss out of hand) Batman was not at 100% in that fight.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

6.He is not faster and no way is he better in direct combat. He is much better at stealth seeing as how Nite Owl never employed it. All of which is sort of irrelevant seeing as to Dan's goggles. It'll allow him to see in dark much better than Batman. Bruce's best bet is to gas the area first.

This was actually a commentary on what makes Keaton Batman better then Baleman. However as I said both Batman and Nite Owl were able to take large groups in a direct confrontation. Meaning at least in that area they are fairly equal.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

7.Did I not just say that above? Batman never dodged a bullet(not that he needed too). Nite Owl is clearly faster. In the alley-way fight scene he does a round-house kick and rapidly turns 180 degrees or something like. Can't explain it, go watch the scene.

Batman deflected Jack's bullet with his wrist guard after said bullet had been fired. In his first confrontation with Napier, in the Axis Chemical Plant. So he is clearly faster then Nite Owl.

I think the problem here is that while I am basing my assesment on feats, you seem to want to rely on whose choreography you think is better. As a way to decide the victor.

If you like Watchman better, thats fine. It doesn't however mean we can just ignore Batmans superior feats.

"Shat", not "Shitted."

YouTube video

One of the most badass and well acted lines ever in any movie:

"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you; you're locked in here with me!"

First time I saw that, it gave me the goosbumps..so ****in' badass. For that reason alone: Night Owl wins. Why? Cause Rorschach thinks high enough of Night Owl to pal around with him and hang with him against the bad guys.

batman will win because in the dark night he fights off dogs but nite owl got beaten by ozzymandas

Originally posted by emoboy13
batman will win because in the dark night he fights off dogs but nite owl got beaten by ozzymandas

The best logic I've ever seen on the internet, ever. facepalm

1.Please bare with me, I'm aware this fight isn't about Veidt. But we are discussing Batman compared to all of the Watchmen aren't we?.

Veidt launched the Comedian in his own house everywhere like he was a ragdoll. The Comedian is the most formiddable combatant next to Veidt in the Watchmen. Veidt also slammed Blake's head through a marble table. Did you not see the end fight? Veidt kicked Walter everywhere as well.

Your right, for all we know, durability has to go to Batman. His body armor displayed resistance to punches from Joker, gunshots, falls, etc. I have no doubt Nite Owl's armor can do the same but.......none of the Watchmen were really shot with the exception of Veidt so we have no proof. However, Veidt's glove stopped the bullet. How do you think Dan's armor would hold up?
2.I'm fully aware of Bruce's remote batarang from the sequel. Still, it takes roughly 2-3 seconds for him to program it. In that time Nit Owl could easily laser him, disarm, or simply melee attack him.

Doubt his movement is impaired much? You said yourself, the choreography isn't comparable. Granted, against criminals and thugs, he gets the job done. But the thread isn't The Warriors vs Batman. Catwoman displayed far more agileness. Why? No visible suit to hinder her. As you can see in that video. Dan had both the armor and the movement.
3.Of course he did, he's Batman. Just saying, the man who attacked Rorschach in prison was of comparable size to the black guy. Rorschach pwned him.......no fight happened. Weakest member of the Watchmen IMO.
4.I'm sure he wasn't 100%, after all he sure didn't look it. Note: Batman punched through the car in the second film. So saying that the guy absorbed shots from a guy capable of punching through metal is shaky.
5.Nite Owl being in civillain clothing was just my way of describing which fight I was speaking of, not a pro for him. Strength boost? I just can't see Keaton's Wayne punching through a car's bottom like that. It very well might amplify him.
6.Like I said, he gets the job done. Dan looked superior in technique though.
7.He reacts faster. He's in no way faster in combat. The alley-fight scene shows this quite blatantly. Sorry, but I can't find a video for it yet.

I got to go. I'll review your "feats" sentence when I get back.

Originally posted by Nightstick
Batman deflected Jack's bullet with his wrist guard after said bullet had been fired. So he is clearly faster then Nite Owl.

I think the problem here is that while I am basing my assesment on feats, you seem to want to rely on whose choreography you think is better.

Batman deflected a bullet. When has he ever used that speed or reaction in combat? Never. Veidt caught a bullet. He also dodged several bullets. We can attest to his super speed.

Superior choreography? You say both can take on large groups of people in h2h. I'm simply saying I'll take the guy who seemed more skilled.

Feats? Only ones you keep bringing up are the "punching through metal" and the "deflecting a bullet". Both are inconsistent.

In Batman Returns, I vividly remember one big henchmen from the circus soaking two punches from Batman. Now if someone could actually punch through metal wouldn't they floor that individual. Inconsistency.

The deflecting of a bullet only occured one time in the series. No other time did he display reaction or speed to near of that feat. No time did he move incredibly fast in comb at like Nite Owl. That's why I stated in one of my posts above it could be a skill(similar to Preston's bullet dodging or Jedi deflecting blaster fire). They aren't fast enough to do it by themselves. They learned a skill in Gun Kata/Force Pre-Cog that lets them do it.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
1.Please bare with me, I'm aware this fight isn't about Veidt. But we are discussing Batman compared to all of the Watchmen aren't we?.

Veidt launched the Comedian in his own house everywhere like he was a ragdoll. The Comedian is the most formiddable combatant next to Veidt in the Watchmen. Veidt also slammed Blake's head through a marble table. Did you not see the end fight? Veidt kicked Walter everywhere as well.

That's great, Batman punched threw metal, lifted people one handed, carried on casual conversation with people hoiseted above his head, and hit people with enough force to launch them over cars.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

Your right, for all we know, durability has to go to Batman. His body armor displayed resistance to punches from Joker, gunshots, falls, etc. I have no doubt Nite Owl's armor can do the same but.......none of the Watchmen were really shot with the exception of Veidt so we have no proof. However, Veidt's glove stopped the bullet. How do you think Dan's armor would hold up?

Even if we afford Nite Owl. Ozymandias level durability, even he doesn't have feats to compare to Batman. Who can take multliple gun shots, plane crashes, and multi-story falls. Ozy took a single round and fell down a flight of stairs and it seriously screwed him up.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

2.I'm fully aware of Bruce's remote batarang from the sequel. Still, it takes roughly 2-3 seconds for him to program it. In that time Nit Owl could easily laser him, disarm, or simply melee attack him.

At the range we see, Dan's laser used Bruce could nail him with a regular batarang, or grappling gun. Even if Nite Owl starts taking shots with his laser, Batman can dodge it easy enough as it travels considerable slower then a bullet.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

Doubt his movement is impaired much? You said yourself, the choreography isn't comparable. Granted, against criminals and thugs, he gets the job done. But the thread isn't The Warriors vs Batman. Catwoman displayed far more agileness. Why? No visible suit to hinder her. As you can see in that video. Dan had both the armor and the
movement.

The choreography not being comparable* has nothing to do with the mobility of the characters, with the actors yes, but not the characters. A distinction, you don't seem to get. In the Batman movies he(Batman) was able to kick, sommersault, jump etc. In fact I don't recal any move from your video that we didn't see from Batman at some point. Mind you I haven't done a point for point comparison, but the general point stands. Further as discussed above. Dan's armor is featless and even if we hand him Adrians feats, its still sub-par.

* I actually didn't say the choreography wasn't comparable. What I said was that you prefered the fights in Watchman to those in Batman and there for attributed more skill(and oddly reaction speed) to the characters there in(Watchman characters that is).

Originally posted by Darth Martin

3.Of course he did, he's Batman. Just saying, the man who attacked Rorschach in prison was of comparable size to the black guy. Rorschach pwned him.......no fight happened. Weakest member of the Watchmen IMO.

Well the objective mind would then conclude that the guy Rorschach pwned was a bum compared to the one Batman fought. No need to read any more into it then that

Originally posted by Darth Martin

4.I'm sure he wasn't 100%, after all he sure didn't look it. Note: Batman punched through the car in the second film. So saying that the guy absorbed shots from a guy capable of punching through metal is shaky.

You could try and claim Batman. Got way tougher between Batman and Batman Returns, but that'd be kinda shaky.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

5.Nite Owl being in civillain clothing was just my way of describing which fight I was speaking of, not a pro for him. Strength boost? I just can't see Keaton's Wayne punching through a car's bottom like that. It very well might amplify him.

See this statement is the crux of what is wrong with your argument. It is based, not on feats, but rather how feel about the combatents. What you can and can't see them doing. Instead of being based on what they can do per feats.

You like Watchman more fine. To each his own, but on this board on screen feats trump, what we can or can't see a character doing.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

6.Like I said, he gets the job done. Dan looked superior in technique though.

Based on your experience. Which is the problem with judging technique. A Karateka punches different from a boxer. Each seeing the other punch with no knowledge of the other form would in all likly hood think the others "technique" sucked.

Which is why assertaining their fighting prowess, based on there abilitly to defeat opponents is a bit fairer, then who we feel "looked superior".

Originally posted by Darth Martin

7.He reacts faster. He's in no way faster in combat. The alley-fight scene shows this quite blatantly. Sorry, but I can't find a video for it yet.

If that were true then all Batman would have to do is sit their and react, until Nite Owl made a mistake, but its not the case. Jokers swordsman in the alley in Batman. You know the one that jumped an 8ft fence and displayed more agility then any one in Watchman. The one who weilded two swords faster then anybody in Watchman, save for Ozy(and Manhatten of course) moved. Yeah that swordsman. Batman blocked everything said swordman could throw at him and pwned him easy.

Originally posted by Darth Martin

I got to go. I'll review your "feats" sentence when I get back.

Okay. Sorry about taking so long to get back to you.

I like Watchmen more than Keaton's Batman films because it is a flat out better film. So what? I can assure that isn't persuading my opinion on this thread in the slightest.

I'm NOT suggesting we give Dan any of Veidt's attributes or abilities as they are clearly on different levels. Veidt is far and away the most superior Watchmen. He pwned both Rorschach and Nite Owl, as well as The Comedian, dodged bullets, caught a bullet, is the smartest man on earth(not counting Manhattan), was shown to leap comparably to the agility of that of a Jedi, and hit people with enough force to break marble and launch people several yards away. I'm AM suggesting you don't bring Batman into Veidt's level.

Obviously, there's nothing I can say that will take back your view on the bullet deflecting and car punching feats. And I can't show you the speed feat of Nite Owl's I keep referring to because I can't get a video clip of it.

Your suggesting that swordman would give any of the Watchmen trouble?

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Batman deflected a bullet. When has he ever used that speed or reaction in combat? Never. Veidt caught a bullet. He also dodged several bullets. We can attest to his super speed.

Veidt never dodged a bullet after it was fired. He dodged the aim of the shooter. Aim dodging and bullet timing are different things. Veidt in the assassin scene kept moving ahead of the movers aim. Each time the man shot veidt was already some where else. Not to mention the he hired then gun man himself and may have instructed him to shoot to mis. The bullet catch itself is higly questionable. In an of itself as we don't actualy see the catch. He could have taken the shot to the chest and simpley palmed the bullet while laying on his belly. Batman besides straight up bullet timing. That is reacting after the bullet has left the barrel. Also aim dodged in the alley fight and once again pwned Joker's "ninja" swordman. Who was darned fast. So if when you said "we can attest to his superior speed". You meant Batman then you'd be right.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Superior choreography? You say both can take on large groups of people in h2h. I'm simply saying I'll take the guy who seemed more skilled.
[/B]

Went over this above. "Seemed more skilled" is a bit subjective for a feats based discussion. What we do know from feats is that both are capable of going threw crowds of people in a fight.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
Feats? Only ones you keep bringing up are the "punching through metal" and the "deflecting a bullet". Both are inconsistent.
[/B]

Incosistent with what. Youre opinion of what Batman should and shouldn't be able to do?

More over the only "feats" you have for Nite Owl are. He broke bones in a fight and you prefered his method of fighting.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
In Batman Returns, I vividly remember one big henchmen from the circus soaking two punches from Batman. Now if someone could actually punch through metal wouldn't they floor that individual. Inconsistency.
[/B]

This again, its the same argument you tried with Jokers big thug in the cathedral fight and once again. It speaks for the thugs damage soak not against Batman hitting power.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
The deflecting of a bullet only occured one time in the series. No other time did he display reaction or speed to near of that feat. No time did he move incredibly fast in comb at like Nite Owl.
[/B]

He moved/reacted faster then Nite Owl against Jokers swordman and has an aim dodge feat in the same fight. So as much as you'd like it to be inconsistent as much as it doesn't mesh with how you feel about Batman. Its a feat and you can't hand wave it away.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
That's why I stated in one of my posts above it could be a skill(similar to Preston's bullet dodging or Jedi deflecting blaster fire). They aren't fast enough to do it by themselves. They learned a skill in Gun Kata/Force Pre-Cog that lets them do it. [/B]

Your still not getting it. BATMAN REACTED AFTER THE BULLET LEFT THE GUN. This is different then the clerics who moved before the gun was fired. Do you not understand the difference?

Originally posted by Darth Martin
And I can't show you the speed feat of Nite Owl's I keep referring to because I can't get a video clip of it.

I'll get back to you on the rest of it latter, but I have recently picked up a copy of Watchman, but not gotten a chance to re-watch it all the way threw. So if you could direct me to a scene I can review it. Thanks in advance.

The scene when Dan and Laurie are ambushed in the alley intercutting with Manhattan's interview.

Dan kicks a guy into a wall and rapidly spins.

Originally posted by Nightstick
Veidt never dodged a bullet after it was fired. He dodged the aim of the shooter. Aim dodging and bullet timing are different things. Veidt in the assassin scene kept moving ahead of the movers aim. Each time the man shot veidt was already some where else. Not to mention the he hired then gun man himself and may have instructed him to shoot to mis. The bullet catch itself is higly questionable. In an of itself as we don't actualy see the catch. He could have taken the shot to the chest and simpley palmed the bullet while laying on his belly. Batman besides straight up bullet timing. That is reacting after the bullet has left the barrel. Also aim dodged in the alley fight and once again pwned Joker's "ninja" swordman. Who was darned fast. So if when you said "we can attest to his superior speed". You meant Batman then you'd be right.

1. No, he dodged a bullet, after it was fired. Did you see the part where the bullet was coming at Veidt's face and he moved out of the way?...it was in very slow-mo, so it was impossible to miss.

2. You can't take away a feat that was ridiculously clear in the film. Veidt caught a damn bullet with just a glove on. You can't pretend anything else happened. That's absurd.

And if you say Veidt dodging or catching the bullets are questionable couldn't I say the same about Batman's deflection?

Originally posted by Darth Martin
And if you say Veidt dodging or catching the bullets are questionable couldn't I say the same about Batman's deflection?

Indeed. He's opened up the "slippery slope" by doing that.

Originally posted by dadudemon
1. No, he dodged a bullet, after it was fired. Did you see the part where the bullet was coming at Veidt's face and he moved out of the way?...it was in very slow-mo, so it was impossible to miss.

Which scene. Their are to that recal where Ozy got shot at. The first was with the assassin, then the one with Silk Spectre. In the one wit the assassin. If you watch close or frame by frame(or close their to). You'll see that he always moves before the shooter fires. In the scene with Laurie. We don't see the catch so he may have taken the shot to the chest and palmed the round. Further he and Spectre were already in motion. Before the round was fired.

Originally posted by dadudemon

2. You can't take away a feat that was ridiculously clear in the film. Veidt caught a damn bullet with just a glove on. You can't pretend anything else happened. That's absurd.

First off the glove appeared to be armored like the rest of his suit and we didn't see the catch.

Originally posted by dadudemon
1. No, he dodged a bullet, after it was fired. Did you see the part where the bullet was coming at Veidt's face and he moved out of the way?...it was in very slow-mo, so it was impossible to miss.

He never dodged a bullet. He was also not moving at superspeed during that scene. The whole scene including Ozy was shown in slow motion, that does not imply superspeed.

First shot, he hit a woman's leg.

Second shot, shoots the guy next to Ozy in the chest.

Third shot, shoots the guy in front (he was using as cover) of Ozy in the head.

Forth shot, Ozy is fully exposed, but he shoots above his head, Ozy doesn't make any effort to dodge.

Fifth Shot, Ozy is going for the gun, he ducks, the shot goes off, then he wacks the guy with the pole.

The scene you describe as "the part where the bullet was coming at Veidt's face and he moved out of the way" never happened.

You also keep ignoring the fact that the hitman wasn't actually trying to kill him.

Originally posted by Darth Martin
And if you say Veidt dodging or catching the bullets are questionable couldn't I say the same about Batman's deflection?

You could, but it'd be silly. In both cases we can watch what happened. In Veidt case he moved ahead of a shooter, moving before the bullets were fired or we didn't clearly see an impact leaving conclusions, up to the viewer. In Batman's case we see him standing, we see Joker fire, then we see Batman move. Deflecting the bullet after it was fired. No gun-kataness, aim dodging, no conjecture.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Indeed. He's opened up the "slippery slope" by doing that.

Nope. The feats speak for themselves. Their are questions. Concerning Ozy's. While Batman's is pretty clear.