Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yes, your interpretation is clear to you. The same way my interpretation is clear to me.The difference is only one of us is arrogant enough to assume that his interpretation is the only valid one.
You are not Snyder, stop trying to pass off your (oftentimes biased) interpretation as fact. It is not.
Seriously, what part of "open to interpretation" is so hard to understand here?
My interpretation is the common sense one...
He clearly says not really when asked about wether the armor enhances Batman's strength...
The only way you read "yeah it does enhance Batman's strength" into that is if you have a bias against Batman being superhumanly strong...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
My interpretation is the common sense one...He clearly says not really when asked about wether the armor enhances Batman's strength...
The only way you read "yeah it does enhance Batman's strength" into that is if you have a bias against Batman being superhumanly strong...
Yes, ignore sentence structuring and wording and go with the same, tired "common zenze" rebuttal that makes you believe that you don't need to logically explain your position.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yes, ignore sentence structuring and wording and go with the same, tired "common zenze" rebuttal that makes you believe that you don't need to logically explain your position.
I have explained my position; the movies director says not really when asked if the armor enhanced Batman's strength...
Not much else needs to be said; you either believe the director or you dont...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
I have explained my position; the movies director says not really when asked if the armor enhanced Batman's strength...Not much else needs to be said; you either believe the director or you dont...
Going "hurrrdurrr common zenze!" is not a good rebuttal regardless of how many times you repeat it.
And no, what the director said exactly was:
"It's not really enhancing his strength more than it is protecting him."
Cuz complete details are important, yknow.
But go ahead and stay arrogant in your belief that your interpretation is the only valid one.
One day, when you're older and understand logic better, I'm sure you'll figure out that there are many things that can be open to interpretation and by then, you'd be mature enough to acknowledge this reality.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Going "hurrrdurrr common zenze!" is not a good rebuttal regardless of how many times you repeat it.And no, what the director said exactly was:
"It's not really enhancing his strength more than it is protecting him."
Cuz complete details are important, yknow.
But go ahead and stay arrogant in your belief that your interpretation is the only valid one.
One day, when you're older and understand logic better, I'm sure you'll figure out that there are many things that can be open to interpretation and by then, you'd be mature enough to acknowledge this reality.
That doesnt change the meaning one bit...
The armor didnt enhance his strength; it enhanced his durability...
As a result Batman's feat of swinging Superman through several thick concrete columns validates his status as superhuman...
Combine that with what we know of the combatants in this thread and the result is Batman physically overwhelming and killing Black Widow 10/10...
Originally posted by TheLordofMurder
That doesnt change the meaning one bit...The armor didnt enhance his strength; it enhanced his durability...
As a result Batman's feat of swinging Superman through several thick concrete columns validates his status as superhuman...
Combine that with what we know of the combatants in this thread and the result is Batman physically overwhelming and killing Black Widow 10/10...
Um. Yes it does. It becomes a comparative statement (w/c requires 2 existing subjects) rather than a simple declarative one. Going "nuh uh", isn't an argument. Not an English language expert, but that tells me that strength enhancement was actually pretty much implied.
Also, you understand that I posted a ruling that director/moviemaker statments are not admissible as evidence, right?
Right now, as far as I'm concerned, this is a side argument not directly relevant to the thread at hand.
In all seriousness, the thread starter should have made this into a poll...
I know polls arent fool proof and are subject to trolling, but they are better than guys just arguing endlessly...
It would be nice to see what the Hive Mind here at KMC thought about this threads winner...
Edit: my energy for this thread has petered out; I'm done here...
Time to embrace the GLORY of the POWER of Magneto on Cybertron now... 🙂
Why are people making out Batman to be some kind of super powerhouse? Yes he's stronger than Black Widow due to size and gender but he's not superhumanly strong.
I see lots of people citing Batman smashing Superman through pillars, well I'd like to point out in the warehouse scene that Batman was overpowered and taken down quite a few times there by normal humans. He got kicked in the chest and it would slam him down. He got yanked by the cape and he got slammed down.
He also used a lot of gadgets in that fight. The few pure h2h fights he got into he needed multiple hits to take out opponents. He wasn't just one-shotting everyone.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Why are people making out Batman to be some kind of super powerhouse? Yes he's stronger than Black Widow due to size and gender but he's not superhumanly strong.I see lots of people citing Batman smashing Superman through pillars, well I'd like to point out in the warehouse scene that Batman was overpowered and taken down quite a few times there by normal humans. He got kicked in the chest and it would slam him down. He got yanked by the cape and he got slammed down.
He also used a lot of gadgets in that fight. The few pure h2h fights he got into he needed multiple hits to take out opponents. He wasn't just one-shotting everyone.
The reason for the superhuman strength being discussed is a interview at comic con where Snyder had a take on the suit and what it did for Batman. A interview that can be interpreted in various ways.
Originally posted by Utrigita
The reason for the superhuman strength being discussed is a interview at comic con where Snyder had a take on the suit and what it did for Batman. A interview that can be interpreted in various ways.
Which most likely isn't even admissible as Imp made a ruling some time back regarding using moviemaker comments as proof in VS debates.
Movie "feats" only ppls.
Originally posted by Utrigita
The reason for the superhuman strength being discussed is a interview at comic con where Snyder had a take on the suit and what it did for Batman. A interview that can be interpreted in various ways.
I don't really see how that changes anything.
1. Batman isn't wearing his armor in this fight
2. Batman getting overpowered every now and then by normal goons and him not completely smashing in their faces with one hit is proof enough that he doesn't have superhuman strength