Jurassic Park Raptors vs Batman

Started by KuRuPT Thanosi5 pages
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
The point is, you have to use movie evidence to weigh the decision coupled with knowledge of their capabilities. You can't just ignore the multitude of times in similar environments they are outmaneuvered or evaded by people inferior in every way to a gadget-toting Batman, just because you think it falls under PIS.

Yet it clearly is though.. as illustrated. Now I'm suppose to believe a T-Rex is a poor killer because it couldn't kill the kids when it had them dead to rights? Come on Stealth, PIS is PIS and it happens and is not allowed on this forum all the time. It's like me claiming Michael myers is a poor killer because he couldn't kill a 120 pound woman in Jamie Lee Curits... Even though he had no issue killing people more than twice her size on numerous occasions.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Concession accepted.

Still upset about the other thread I see haha

The one you sheepishly never replied in? mmm

Sauron wins, gg.

Anyway, you didn't make a real point other than "PIS exists in movies". K.

Batman still grapples his way to safety and fights them on his own terms.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Who is the most skilled person the raptors managed to kill?

They killed somebody who knew them better than anybody and was a trained hunter of all kids of animals. It stalked and out thought him and he got killed. Not to mention the dozens of mercenary hunters they killed who all had weapons. Yet, some of you are holding against them not being about to kill unarmed kids who were PIVOTAL characters in the movies that nothing was going to kill.

I don't give a shit about the kid (although that scene was cheesy as hell) but they only beat the mercs because the tall grassy environment gave them an advantage to ambush, and the Hunter was nowhere near as intelligent or skilled as Bruce. The raptors don't get such an environmental advantage here.

Originally posted by NemeBro
The one you sheepishly never replied in? mmm

Sauron wins, gg.

Anyway, you didn't make a real point other than "PIS exists in movies". K.

Batman still grapples his way to safety and fights them on his own terms.

There was nothing further to say on the matter. I had been dicussion it with Stealth and Ares LONG before you even showed up. I had said the same things to them as I did you and there was not much more to say on the matter. Odd you think you won because I stopped typing in the thread. Odd is kinda the word...more like silly or stupid since threads eventually die.. doesn't mean there is a winner or loser. For this thread...

yes I pointed out PIS in the movies because you wrere using a PIS example as proof.. That isn't proof of anything. Thus I had to correct your evidence, or should I say, lack there of. I'm not saying Batman can't win, in fact, I said he could if he fought really smart and went up hgih from the get go. If he can't or doesn't.. he's done. I think that is a far assesment.

Originally posted by Lestov16
I don't give a shit about the kid (although that scene was cheesy as hell) but they only beat the mercs because the tall grassy environment gave them an advantage to ambush, and the Hunter was nowhere near as intelligent or skilled as Bruce. The raptors don't get such an environmental advantage here.

He may not be as good as batman in some areas no doubt.. but he's certainly better than Batman at hunting big game with basic weaponary.. and knowing the raptors better than Batman would. Point is, you ask and I said who they were. Which again, was to illustrate that them not killing kids was part of the plot not some lack of killing ability on their part.

So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now?

Originally posted by Lestov16
I don't give a shit about the kid.

👆

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now?
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
if he fought really smart and went up hgih from the get go. If he can't or doesn't.. he's done. I think that is a far assesment.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
So what argument do you have for the raptors winning now?

I already stated my conclusion on how the fight would go that Lestov quoted. I've also said the advantages the Raptors have over batman which you saw and responded to. Those are the reasons the Raptors would win.

But you were wrong in one respect; Muldoon, at least in the films, is ignorant of Raptor hunting behavior. He was caught in the same ambush that Alan Grant, a dino expert, related to that bug-eyed kid at the beginning of the film.

Second, the instances of raptors behaving differently indoors and being easier to fool/deal with are valid evidence. You would assume that we can't take any of those failings as evidence and must write them off as PIS. I stated in my conclusion that Batman loses pretty much if and only if he fights the raptors in a tight area like a container. This is because he's stronger, faster, and much much smarter than anyone else we've seen evading and defeating raptors in similar situations. He also has the advantage of his grappling hook, batarangs, etc.

So the PIS statement remains invalid, and the evidence of Muldoon was flat out wrong.

What other arguments do you have, if any? Or do you agree with me?

It's not invalid.. We're told through character dialogu how good Muldoon was.. that isn't just dismissed because he was killed. That isn't how it works at all. In fact, we're told that he's knows them better than anybody. Him dying doesn't change that, in fact, it was used to show just how the good the raptors are. For the sake of this argument you've choosen to forgot the clear presentation of the scene and go the opposite dirrection. Them killing them was used to show their excellance.. not the opposite.

Again, saying is killed and thus wasn't very good is really bad logical reasoning. Was Michael Myers weak and a terrible killer because he couldn't kill Jamie Lee Curtis? even though he could kill people 3 x her size who had weapons? Of course not, she wasn't meant to die. Just like the kids weren't meant to die. The raptors not killing them was PIS and you nkow that very well Stealth. Is the T Rex bad at killing things 2 cause it couldn't kill 2 small kids right in front of him? Was Apollo Creed not one of the best boxers of all time in the Rocky verse because he lost to Balboa? Going by your logic.. all the character dialogue about him was false since Rocky beat him.. Doesn't work that way and you know very well that it doesn't.

It's not valid evidence since again, it was against the kids they struggled. Who again, weren't going ot be KILLED BY ANYTHING.. Period. That isn't evidence. That is CIS or PIS or just simply key characters to the plot who aren't going to die. Them struggling to kill unarmed kids yet killling a trained killer or trained mercs prove my point not the opposite.

What on earth makes the PIS argument invalid again? Are you saying there is no PIS or CIS in movies? What is your stance here exactly. If you say there is, then tell me why the raptors not killing the kids doesn't fall into that category.

The facts are these.. unless batman goes up high he has NO chance. Period. If you want to make an argument for him still winning.. please do so. If not, I agree that if he goes up high he can and prob would win. However, it seems you might be under theimpression that he can stay low and still win... we can debate that further since I don't see it that way. The Raptors have most of the physical advantages in this fight and there is no getting around that fact

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
It's not invalid.. We're told through character dialogu how good Muldoon was.. that isn't just dismissed because he was killed. That isn't how it works at all. In fact, we're told that he's knows them better than anybody.

Correction: He knows them better than the foreign workers he employs, eccentric "who gives a ****" John Hammond, and the egg heads who just work in gene manipulation or operating a theme park. He's the only animal expert on the island, and he was explicitly not a dino expert. Grant is, which is why he knew how they thought and survived them so well.

Muldoon is just a game warden. That's even his title.

Him dying doesn't change that, in fact, it was used to show just how the good the raptors are. For the sake of this argument you've choosen to forgot the clear presentation of the scene and go the opposite dirrection. Them killing them was used to show their excellance.. not the opposite.

No, unlike you, I correctly remember the context of his death, his position, and so on. In fact, when the movie came out, he was my favorite character. He's much better in the book, IMO, drunk or no.

The point remains that Grant, a dino expert, knew their attack patterns. Muldoon, a non-dinosaur expert, a game warden of African animals from Kenya reserves, wasn't, and he died for it.

The environment and his ignorance favored them. The feat has zero relevance here.

Again, saying is killed and thus wasn't very good is really bad logical reasoning.

What does this have to do with anything? No one is saying this.

Was Michael Myers weak and a terrible killer because he couldn't kill Jamie Lee Curtis? even though he could kill people 3 x her size who had weapons? Of course not, she wasn't meant to die. Just like the kids weren't meant to die. The raptors not killing them was PIS and you nkow that very well Stealth. Is the T Rex bad at killing things 2 cause it couldn't kill 2 small kids right in front of him? Was Apollo Creed not one of the best boxers of all time in the Rocky verse because he lost to Balboa? Going by your logic.. all the character dialogue about him was false since Rocky beat him.. Doesn't work that way and you know very well that it doesn't.

Their deaths are irrelevant. The fact that they outmaneuvered or escaped the raptors is relevant, except when it's extremely contrived or someone else aided them.

The assertion I made was this: that the raptors have been fooled, evaded, or defeated by people much less capable than Batman.

You have not refuted this with anything, except false information about Muldoon and whining about PIS while abusing the term and stretching it to cover any plot-situation which doesn't favor your stance.

The facts are these.. unless batman goes up high he has NO chance. Period. If you want to make an argument for him still winning.. please do so. If not, I agree that if he goes up high he can and prob would win. However, it seems you might be under theimpression that he can stay low and still win... we can debate that further since I don't see it that way. The Raptors have most of the physical advantages in this fight and there is no getting around that fact

1. Batman's going to go up high. Because he's not a moron.

2. I never said he can "stay low and win". I said he would lose only if he was confined, because that would obliterate his chances for evasion. People evade the raptors in indoors settings constantly throughout the movies, and again, these people are far inferior to Batman in every way.

3. What other arguments do you have that aren't already crushed?

I think Batman wins now.

Ok let's try this again... You haven't crushed my argument at all... I tried to make this point crystal clear but I'll try again... IS YOUR STANCE:

That batman would still win if he doesn't go up high? Simple is that your stance? If so, we'll debate this subject further.

Me admitting that Batman woudl most likely win if he goes up high.. isn't you crushing my argument. I've said so from the start. How can you crush somethign I've agreed to. Now.. NOW if you're saying batman still wins down low.. then by all means.. I disagree and we'll discuss further.

Now onto your other arguments I need to "crush" The point is, Maldoon was said to know them better than anybody. There was NO dialogue about him only knowing them better than the workers there.. janitors... IT guys... none of that was said. Do you have some deleted scenes I don't? If so, please post it. If not, that wasn't what was said.

Next, I have most certainly refuted your assertion... and did so easily. The kids evaded them because THEY WERE SUPPOSE TO LIVE. What on God's Green Earth is so hard to understand about this. Your reasoning is this... yeah.. they were suppose to live BUT BUT.. they still were evaded by kids with less physcial attributes than Batman. That is about as piss poor an arguement as I've seen you make. You can't agree they were meant to live.. and then with a straight face go.. but looked they evaded them so they are weak killers. I know you are better at following logical progression of arguments than this Stealth. Them evading them WAS the PIS and thus not admissable. What did you want Mothra to come save the kids from being killed... How about Iron man show up right then and save the kids from them? Of coruse now, how would you have somebody live against another trying to kill them... have them EVADE THEM. This doesn't prove what you're asserting. The evading was the PIS. Thus not in evidence.

I'm going to ask this again...

Is Michael Myers a weak killer because he couldn't kill a 120 pound woman who kept evading him? Simple question was he? Using your logic... I could put another 120 woman against Myers and say she'll win cause hey loook how much trouble myers had killing a Curtis.. See how illogical this argument is? That is exactly what you're saying here about Raptors... Look they suck at killing things.. they couldn't even kill armed kids and were evaded... which forgets the fact that of course that is how they'll live by evading. That is what they woud've done to ANYTHING dino sent there way. Evade or have something allow them to live. Holding that against the raptors and using that as evidence doesn't work. Thus I've now crushed your assertion. Do you have another?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi

That batman would still win if he doesn't go up high? Simple is that your stance? If so, we'll debate this subject further.

That's not his stance:

Originally posted by Stealth Moose

1. Batman's going to go up high. Because he's not a moron.

2. I never said he can "stay low and win".

Bats goes to an elevated position and picks the raptors off with batarangs. No reason he would go for any option or strategy besides that.

Bat-win batman /thread

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
There was nothing further to say on the matter. I had been dicussion it with Stealth and Ares LONG before you even showed up. I had said the same things to them as I did you and there was not much more to say on the matter. Odd you think you won because I stopped typing in the thread. Odd is kinda the word...more like silly or stupid since threads eventually die.. doesn't mean there is a winner or loser. For this thread...

Look at this guy, lol.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Still waiting on those 1st age feats again... LULZ

Here we see you gloating and acting as though you won the thread (While I was busy actually reading the Silmarillion to verify my stance mind you) when no one really responded after a while.

Strange how you hold other people to standards above yourself.

Anyway, Sauron wins 10/10 gg. 👆

yes I pointed out PIS in the movies because you wrere using a PIS example as proof.. That isn't proof of anything. Thus I had to correct your evidence, or should I say, lack there of. I'm not saying Batman can't win, in fact, I said he could if he fought really smart and went up hgih from the get go. If he can't or doesn't.. he's done. I think that is a far assesment.

Which PIS examples were those now?

Frankly I don't know why raptors being eluded by some humans is PIS. It isn't like they were ever shown to be more competent. The only real PIS showing I've (semi-jokingly) used is the ****ing kid killing them in Lost World.

Anyway, there is no reason why Batman couldn't or wouldn't go high up. And when he does, he wins.

The Raptors wins, plain and simple.

Raptors>Dogs>Batman

Shut up Supra.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Shut up Supra.

Dude batman got taken down by dogs. Cmon dude.