Bane (movie) vs jason bourne

[Chrosis]

Easy on the personal attacks.

About the fight in TDKR - an "essential" part of his character is supposed to be intelligence. Not "step in and take a few in the mouth." An intelligent person realizes he's in a trap against an unarmed man who is clearly larger, stronger and WANTS this exact scenario, checks what he has in his pockets, realizes that he's got explosives and knockout darts and proceeds to fire that crap off to win the fight without ever taking the risk of engaging a larger, stronger fighter who set that exact trap for Batman with the obvious desire of engaging Batman and Batman's cripled, broken body in fisticuffs.

I am not taking potshots at "Batman", I'm saying (the screenwriters made him) / (the plot required him to be) DUMB AS F&#$ for that fight. If not, the film ended there and we missed everything else. That is the DEFINITION of Plot Induced Stupidity.

Since there isn't any PIS in a Rumble, Bourne, either with Batman's standard equipment or with his own standard equipment, BRUTALLY stomps the unarmed Bane without ever aproaching him. If someone wants to see what would happen in pure HtH, OK, Bourne STILL takes that, at least 9 out of 10, due to VASTLY superior speed and skill.

On the points of the gadgets: Poison darts aren't standard equipment, he used them once. Explosives against an unarmed man are out of character for Baleman. You keep talking about the poison darts like "OMG WHY DIDNT HE USE THEM", but they were only used in one scene.

Bourne does not know how strong Bane is. He blocks one punch and is crippled. Bane takes it from there.

Also, Bane's mask weakpoint isn't common, Bourne wouldn't know to aim at it. Maybe Bourne will pull this off, but unlikely. Bane just has too much power.

Bane, 8/10

[Becoming An Anthropologist]

You'd kind of have to be an idiot to not figure out via common sense that the guy with the tubes pumping into his mouth would get messed up by them being torn out. And since Bourne isn't an idiot...

I honestly don't see much difference in speed if we're granting Bane roughly the same speed as Bruce. Hell, the only holy crap speed feat I even remember from bourne was when he blitzed those cops inside a room. Then again, I haven't seen the movie since it came out...

bourne should win if in the first exchange he manage to get Bane's joints. Bourne would win if he just looked around the sewer location for any weapon...say a pipe, and jammed it into Bane.

[big_adventure]

You'd kind of have to be an idiot to not figure out via common sense that the guy with the tubes pumping into his mouth would get messed up by them being torn out. And since Bourne isn't an idiot...

I honestly don't see much difference in speed if we're granting Bane roughly the same speed as Bruce. Hell, the only holy crap speed feat I even remember from bourne was when he blitzed those cops inside a room. Then again, I haven't seen the movie since it came out...

bourne should win if in the first exchange he manage to get Bane's joints. Bourne would win if he just looked around the sewer location for any weapon...say a pipe, and jammed it into Bane.

A few of Bourne's impressive reaction/HtH speed feats, off the top of my head:

KTFO the two cops who wake him on the park bench in the first movie. He does it in fractions of a second.

Killing the armed Treadstone guys who come to his apartment in Paris - the HTH parts are insane for both parties.

Beating the armed Treadstone guy in his house.

KTFO the agents in the room when arrested coming through customs into Europe in the second film. This is the scene you mentioned.

Taking out the Blackfriar dude in Casa.

All of those are better than anything Baleman or Bane ever show, by MILES.

[MorphyVSFischer]

Easy on the personal attacks.

About the fight in TDKR - an "essential" part of his character is supposed to be intelligence. Not "step in and take a few in the mouth." An intelligent person realizes he's in a trap against an unarmed man who is clearly larger, stronger and WANTS this exact scenario, checks what he has in his pockets, realizes that he's got explosives and knockout darts and proceeds to fire that crap off to win the fight without ever taking the risk of engaging a larger, stronger fighter who set that exact trap for Batman with the obvious desire of engaging Batman and Batman's cripled, broken body in fisticuffs.

I am not taking potshots at "Batman", I'm saying (the screenwriters made him) / (the plot required him to be) DUMB AS F&#$ for that fight. If not, the film ended there and we missed everything else. That is the DEFINITION of Plot Induced Stupidity.

Since there isn't any PIS in a Rumble, Bourne, either with Batman's standard equipment or with his own standard equipment, BRUTALLY stomps the unarmed Bane without ever aproaching him. If someone wants to see what would happen in pure HtH, OK, Bourne STILL takes that, at least 9 out of 10, due to VASTLY superior speed and skill.

I'm sorry yes or no did the post you quoted not mention that batman should have used a gun and killed bane and you approved of this? Because that would have made for a terrible Batman film, because as long as you agree thats a good idea then you're not getting the idea of "batman" whatsoever.

[chilled monkey]

We get that you want Bane to win this - but you're not paying attention. Batman is shown to carry knockout and other batarangs, guns that shoot harpoons through concrete, and powerful explosives, and he didn't use any of those. THAT'S what we're talking about.

No, you are not paying attention. People were inferring that Batman did not use tricks/gadgets and I simply pointed out that he did, in fact, use tricks and gadgets, which he did.

No, you are wrong, since the OP says "same situation" it could, you know, actually BE the same situation - when the OP says it's the same situation, you can absolutely assume that he means identical if you want, OR you can at least ask for clarification. However, in any case, it's WORSE for Bane if it's Bourne's standard equipment, since that includes AT LEAST a pistol, where Bourne just double-taps the Gimp wannabe in the face.

Use a little common sense. The title of this thread is "Bane vs Jason Bourne" not "Bane vs Jason Bourne with all Batman's stuff." The entire point of these "Character A vs. Character B" threads is to determine which of them would win on their own merits. That means neither one has advantages they don't normally have.

It's like those threads where Character A replaces B in various plots/scenarios. The idea is to determine how he/she would do with whatever skills, abilities etc they normally have. If they were just exactly the same as whoever they were replacing then what's the point? Unless specifically stated otherwise they are assumed to have only their normal capabilities.

Besides, if as you say, Bourne doesn't need any of Batman's gear, then why quibble over it?

I am not taking potshots at "Batman", I'm saying (the screenwriters made him) / (the plot required him to be) DUMB AS F&#$ for that fight. If not, the film ended there and we missed everything else. That is the DEFINITION of Plot Induced Stupidity.

Beg your pardon but no, it is not. Abmccray explained it perfectly; Batman underestimated Bane. He even said "Bane's just a mercenary."

I've said it before; characterisation is NOT PIS. That is not the screenwriters making him do it, that is simply having an actual character with personality traits, views, beliefs etc that hinder him. Even smart people can make poor judgement calls.

[chilled monkey]

I think the issue was that it was essential to the thematics of the film as well as film Bruce's character development that he underestimate and fight Bane head-on like that. It wasn't stupid or badly written in terms of the film, because it was consistent to the character and where he was mentally at that point, and was previously established and developed.

YES! Thank you.

However, for Rumbles terms, it is PIS -since- he did have other gear he could have used, and he wasn't using everything he had to peak ability (insta-KO batarangs, for instance).

No offence but no, it isn't PIS. In Rumbles terms that would be described as a lack of Rumbles Bloodlust. Rumbles Bloodlust is used so that characters fight "all-out" without the usual personality traits, beliefs and such that would impede them (underestimating the opponent, wanting to toy with them etc)

[Guy1]

Let's just do this then.

1: H2H.
2: Both with guns.

Boom. Problem solved.

[big_adventure]

Let's just do this then.

1: H2H.
2: Both with guns.

Boom. Problem solved.

As I already stated -

HtH - Bourne 9/10 due to vastly superior speed and skill. Bane just isn't going to hit him, and even if he lands a glancing blow or two, that isn't taking Bourne down. And Bourne can ABSOLUTELY damage Bane. Not feeling pain isn't helping him with broken bones and shredded tendons.

Both with guns - Bourne, close to 10/10 - Bane has no real gun feats at all, Bourne's got some decent ones, plus the mentioned huge speed and dodging advantages.

[greatmetropolitan]

Bourne is just ludicrously fast, and wouldn't screw around like Bruce did. Bane may be tough and strong, but he's not landing with this strength and toughness won't help his eyes or joints, throat etc.

Guns, Bourne puts a bullet in Bane's head almost immediately. Hell, I give the whole thing to Bourne 10/10.

[Sharpandpointies]

Both with guns - Bourne, close to 10/10 - Bane has no real gun feats at all, Bourne's got some decent ones -

Not to get into the rest of the discussion, but this is a gross understatement.

Bourne rarely misses in the movies, and has feats like 'while falling several stories atop someone, puts a single bullet dead-center into the forehead of some guy he passes by on the way down.'

Barring Bane having some serious aim-dodging feats - SERIOUS ones - Bourne with a pistol simply shoots him.

[big_adventure]

Not to get into the rest of the discussion, but this is a gross understatement.

It's rare, but sometimes even I make understatements. :-)

[abmccray]

As I already stated -

HtH - Bourne 9/10 due to vastly superior speed and skill. Bane just isn't going to hit him, and even if he lands a glancing blow or two, that isn't taking Bourne down. And Bourne can ABSOLUTELY damage Bane. Not feeling pain isn't helping him with broken bones and shredded tendons.

Both with guns - Bourne, close to 10/10 - Bane has no real gun feats at all, Bourne's got some decent ones, plus the mentioned huge speed and dodging advantages.

As stated multiple times - Batman hits WAY harder than Bourne. Breaking brick walls, one hit KOing multiple people via blunt force as opposed to joint/throat attacks, has stronger strength feats than Bourne (the cliff -grab) and is faster than Bourne (he actually has an aim dodging FEAT as compared to Bournes faster CHOREOGRAPHY. Even with choreography, the suitless Bruce was similarly as fast, with the editing style). Bane was presented as being able to simply tank Batman's hits and then counterattacking - he had enough speed to counter Batman after a tank or block, even in the second fight with Batman fighting him at peak.

Also, regarding Bane's tubes, the, once again, much stronger than Bourne, Batman, had to wail on Bane's tubes over and over to break them. It wasn't one - hit, it was multiple targeted strikes from a stronger guy (wearing armor).

As for breaking bones, and shattering tendons, it's very doubtful that someone than can tank hits from Batman and punch through concrete with absolutely no damage to himself will get broken bones from Bourne's CQC.

[abmccray]

No offence but no, it isn't PIS. In Rumbles terms that would be described as a lack of Rumbles Bloodlust. Rumbles Bloodlust is used so that characters fight "all-out" without the usual personality traits, beliefs and such that would impede them (underestimating the opponent, wanting to toy with them etc)

Yeah, I actually agree with this. I was basically being as generous as possible, as, in a Rumble, Bruce wouldn't "forget" to have the batarangs, etc. But as far as the film goes, Bruce was overconfident, was just told the truth about Rachel, and had a deathwish. It was very much in character.

[Siriel]

Just chiming in to note that I object to the use of "ludicrously fast" to describe someone who isn't particularly above what's humanly possible.

Because that's not what ludicrous means.

Now, if you said something like "the camera work in Bourne's movies is ludicrous", I would be 100% behind you.

[big_adventure]

As stated multiple times - Batman hits WAY harder than Bourne. Breaking brick walls, one hit KOing multiple people via blunt force as opposed to joint/throat attacks, has stronger strength feats than Bourne (the cliff -grab) and is faster than Bourne (he actually has an aim dodging FEAT as compared to Bournes faster CHOREOGRAPHY. Even with choreography, the suitless Bruce was similarly as fast, with the editing style). Bane was presented as being able to simply tank Batman's hits and then counterattacking - he had enough speed to counter Batman after a tank or block, even in the second fight with Batman fighting him at peak.

Also, regarding Bane's tubes, the, once again, much stronger than Bourne, Batman, had to wail on Bane's tubes over and over to break them. It wasn't one - hit, it was multiple targeted strikes from a stronger guy (wearing armor).

As for breaking bones, and shattering tendons, it's very doubtful that someone than can tank hits from Batman and punch through concrete with absolutely no damage to himself will get broken bones from Bourne's CQC.

First, talk feats, not "this guy took a blitz from a crippled version of a tough guy and so must be faster/stronger/cooler than guy X" Bane has no speed feats, at all, and Bourne's are impressive, repeated and on-film. Show just one feat of Bane's that's even close to one of Bourne's good ones and we can have a discussion about this. Until then, you are pretty much just arguing that Bane wins "because muffins".

Second, I can punch a pretty hard surface with hundreds of pounds of force - I've done it, it's been measured, and it's not really that impressive for a 6'2", 190 lb dude who knows how to strike - and suffer no damage whatsoever. But my bones and ligaments and tendons are still human, and can be broken, sprained or torn by vectored forces MUCH lower than that (an order of magnitude lower, really). So Bane making a directed strike that does a little damage to rotted cement / plaster / MAYBE featless concrete (like in the film) does not grant him immunity to locks, angled strikes and such from a sublimely trained attacker with VASTLY superior speed.

Third, even in the second Bat/Bane match, Bruce was NOWHERE NEAR "Prime". In the first Batman/Bane fight, he basically came off of 7 years on the couch. He was limping on a cane days before. For the second, let's see: a broken spine and 5 months of being crippled and malnourished somehow regrew his missing tendons, ligaments, cartilidge and bone while erasing years of built up scar tissue and oh-by-the-way subtracted 7 years of age? Really?

I've granted that Bane has better strength - but how on earth is he bringing it to bear against someone so much faster and more skilled, who isn't a total pussy himself? (Bourne one-shots more people HtH in his films than Bane does - easy fact) He just isn't. Hence, HtH about 9 of 10 for Bourne (maybe Bane manages to land something somehow that sufficiently slows Bourne once in a while), and with guns an easy 10/10 for Bourne (given Bourne's feats, Bane's total lack thereof and Bourne's much better speed).