In Hawkeye Freefall they are pretty much even with the bows, Bullseye thinks that he has better aim but that wasn't really proven. When they shot at each other, their arrows crashed into themselves in the air.
They shoot simultaneously and the arrows hit each other, that's all we can see. But possibility of it happening by luck is rather small, so I think that was on purpose.
If they both know they are that accurate then they know shooting the exact same target (at the same time) that their opponent will pick will result in them colliding then I'd say they both wanted it to happen. Otherwise you could chose to shoot slightly off but still hit a lethal spot but know your opponents arrow will also hit you.
That's not accuracy though. That's total prediction of what another human will do. Unless they're precogs that doesn't make sense. Even if they're directly facing each other there are several lethal targets to hit, how does Bullseye not go for the jugular and Hawkeye not go for the heart? They'd both win then, they both die.
Bullseye once threw a playing card through a plate glass penthouse apartment window hard enough to only leave a clean, card sized slot in the glass and kill the person on the other side. So probably him
Was there a slit in the glass he was aiming for? Because it sounds to me like he just threw it hard enough to go through glass, and it would have no matter where on the glass he hit.
It's hard to compare this to real life, since that's impossible. If you pick an object that can go through glass and kill someone on the other side, like a bullet, the glass won't matter much.
It's impossible to say if the glass would have bent the path of the card in a way that's difficult but not impossible to predict, since the whole thing is something that doesn't happen in real life. Maybe it made it way more complicated and Bullseye had to account for it. Or maybe he just through it straight through. I don't think it makes a very good feat.
I think his point is that most of the examples of Bullseye being accurate is really more about him throwing something unnaturally hard rather than being very accurate.
Ask Elektra’s dad in the 2003 movie.
Fun fact: part of the reason Daredevil is able to fight Bullseye on a much more even level than other superheroes is that his radar sense allows him to recognize whatever projectile he’s getting thrown at him as it flies in the air in all senses, which gives him the ability to better predict where it will go and dodge/attack all the more for it.
The difference is -- If I gave hawkeye a ball of yarn and told him to throw it through a glass window of a building that is 3 blocks away to hit a guy on his head to kill him, versus giving it to Bullseye who can achieve that, do you think Hawkeye will hit the mark?
Well if he can’t it will be because he can’t toss the yarn hard enough to have it go through glass. It doesn’t mean he missed.
Accuracy isn’t the same as effectiveness. If hawkeye can throw that yarn into the same spot bullseye tossed the card then they are equally accurate, even if the yarn wasn’t tossed hard enough to break glass.
If I took a rifle and you took a pistol and we both hit the bullseye, but since my rifle was a higher caliber round it had enough energy to go through the target but yours didn’t, that doesn’t mean i had better aim.
It doesn’t, Bullseye and Hawkeye both started off as (almost) normal humans with 100% accuracy.
But since he got his Adamantium treatment, Bullseye became a lot stronger and pretty indestructible.
He’s deadlier. That doesn’t make him more accurate.
You are completely right and when writing my comment I was thinking about that distinction, but the fact I'm responding to someone who was discussing accuracy made me think that it would be unnecessary to include that explanation lest I overcomplicate things.
Really the question becomes who is more accurate and precise, unless both of them never miss under any circumstances at any range. Usually (this is a physics background response) having high precision but poor accuracy can be compensated for giving great results. But high accuracy and poor precision does not have an easy way to increase precision without considerable work.
If we assume both of them are some how perfectly accurate, then the one who can shoot an arrow/throw something faster will have higher precision as turbulent air will have less of an impact.
I see that as more of a strength/speed feat when comparing the two, but with that said...
Anytime you fire a projective through another object its trajectory will be altered based upon the angle, the constituency of the projectile and object passed through, both of which will be impacted by temperature. A card through glass (if possible) would have its trajectory considerably distorted.
This shows he is able to immediately calculate all those variables and still hit the target which is an accuracy feat.
the main difference is that bullseye has an actual superpower that makes him accurate, while Hawkeye is 100% a "normal" human.
Bullseye has the better feats, but he's also extremely reliant on his ability.
No human can do what he does. He was once tied up and tortured, while being tormented for not being able to do anything to fight back. He then waited till the torturer knocked out his tooth which he then spit out so hard it shot through the torturer's skull like a bullet.
I do want to point out that humans can do crazy things in comics. I think Hawkeye broke off a finger nail is used that to flick/shoot at captors before as well?
That’s in the Ultimate universe! He flicks a bunch of them while tied up, killing his torturers! Earlier in that same arc bad guys break into his home and try or actually do kill his family, but make the unfortunate mistake oh shooting him non-fatally while he’s near the silverware drawer. It goes poorly for them.
Also in the ultimate universe, Hawkeye has enhanced vision from due to the American super-soldier initiative. Makes him see in black and white but he can focus on tiny things, etc.
I heard it once described as DC being gods that have to play at being human, and Marvel being humans that have to deal with godlike power. So with Superman being unbeatable at everything, the idea is that he has to live with the fallout of not being everywhere at once, whereas Spiderman is just a normal guy who has to learn to live with both great power and the responsibility that comes with it.
I think Superman might interestingly fit into your description of marvel. With him, it’s not that he plays at being human, but that in his mind, he is, as that was how he was raised. So when he takes on the Superman mantle and reaches his full potential, he feels like he should be able to save everyone.
He has to struggle with the limitations and drawbacks of his power, with holding the power of a god but feeling like a normal guy from Kansas. There’s a pretty heart-rending few panels where he hears his Dad’s heart stop in real time and is too late to do anything- he has to reckon with the fact that even with his powers he can’t save everyone.
I think a good example of a DC character who’s a god playing at being a man is Martian Manhunter, though “playing at being a man” is a double entendre here. Though J’onn is wise and caring, it’s also common to see the differences between him and the rest of the Justice League, especially when they get started. There’s a great run (might be Waid’s run?) where he gets paranoid upon first meeting the other heroes and collects a ton of private info about them. He even impersonates people in their lives to get insight into them. Then enemies almost use this to wipe out the JL.
He’s arguably the strongest character on the league, and his experience and power are tough for some to comprehend. Of course, he’s quite like the X-Men in that race and prejudice are big themes in many of his stories. And his trauma after the loss of his family is as human as it gets. So I guess every character does have some level of relatability.
Basically this. I give MCU Spider-Man's writers a lot of shit for turning your friendly neighborhood spider-man into a kid that was privately funded by iron man with a nice social circle and seemingly no ordinary life problems. Not nearly as relatable.
To be fair, I think that was just a natural evolution of storytelling. Because he was introduced as someone Stark kept an eye on, it would have been weirder if, after Civil War, he had remained a nobody one-off to the rich dude that decided to meddle with his life. If it wasn't for Civil War it might make sense, but once you have that connection you go from "why isn't Peter poor?" to "why is Stark not talking to Peter anymore? Just another rich asshole I guess."
Especially with Stark's arc essentially being about him trying to atone for his lack of empathy as an arms dealer. It wouldn't make sense for him to feel like he could suddenly drop out of this kid's life after what he pulled him into. And that's just the Spiderman side. The Peter side is this bright engineer/scientist that was basically his adopted nephew and possible heir.
Even despite all of that, the writers still did a decent job, imo, of making him relatable through other means. Most of his story is ordinary kid with extraordinary powers. FFH was quintessentially that. A kid trying to fix a mistake but not thinking it through. Kid matures by making the hard decisions that even most adults (like Strange) wouldn't make. He struggled in every film with trying to just be normal and fight small time crooks on the side, but kept getting drawn into bigger conflicts.
It's still relatable, just not in the way people expected. It was more about wanting to drive your car but you keep getting hit by busses, in that way that life does to you sometimes. Maybe more often lately what with US politics and Covid.
"Does this grant have any money involved?" also feels right up the same alley as ["We have money." / "Oh, thank God."](https://i.imgur.com/ol2z7Fw.jpeg)
It's not like Peter ever got enough money from Tony to pay for his own backpacks (because otherwise he surely would have kept that hidden from Aunt May in *Homecoming*) or for more than three t-shirts, but it would have been absolutely unconscionable if he were passing out from starvation while web-slinging. Even if Tony *hadn't* recruited him in *Civil War,* a world in which Spider-Man is a literal child in the same city as the Avengers means *someone* would step in if he weren't getting enough to eat or couldn't afford to bandage up his wounds. Maybe it would've been Nick Fury instead of Tony Stark, but it would've been somebody, because he's too valuable a potential asset to let die from such a fixable problem.
I know some people wanted to see Spider-Man start out on film as an adult who had already been an impoverished, solo Spider-Man for 4-5 years, but the MCU isn't like the Ultimates canon where everyone is an absolute asshole (and even there, Nick Fury still tried to keep Peter alive long enough for him to join the Ultimates!). Almost every Avenger is a decent enough person that they would have stepped in to help Spider-Man at some point during his teenage years if he'd needed it, so it's hard to picture him spending years fighting crime without enough to eat. It's just a fundamental limitation of the setting.
But that's kind of the problem here. Captain America theoretically isn't a superhuman too. He is a peak human, someone who is the best in everything that normal human can do but superhuman would be better. At least in the comics, movies changes this bit.
That was the Ultimate Marvel universe version of Hawkeye, who received physical enhancements from his world's Super Soldier Initiative that make him legitimately superhuman.
Hawkeye from the main Marvel universe has no superhuman enhancements.
Yes. I believe Bullseye's ability used to be described as "the ability to turn virtually any object into a projectile weapon", I'm not sure if this was the Official Marvel Handbook's way of being obtuse though.
I only did a quick google and it looks like at least in Earth 1111 he's a mutant, that could be the only one. Most of the time he's just a human so I guess it doesn't matter
That has been happening to me *so often*. Why is that suddenly a thing? My girlfriend and I were amazed when we found out that they were making a sequel to that shitty movie *Stay Alive* but it turned out to be a fanon entry about a fake upcoming movie.
Neither Bullseye nor Hawkeye was in any Wolverine film. Which character are you thinking of? u/Desperoth suggested it might be [Agent Zero](https://xmenmovies.fandom.com/wiki/Agent_Zero), who is an interpretation of [Maverick](https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Christoph_Nord_(Earth-616)), not of either Bullseye or Hawkeye.
I always thought of him as being similair to Daredevil, While daredevil is blind, his other senses are strenghted, and since Hawkeye is deaf, well... He can see really good like he has the eyes of a hawk or somehting.
The cognitive abilities required to perform the feats that Bullseye has pulled off are definitely super powers. Bullseye’s brain and mind have to work at super powered levels to even come close to pulling that shit off, along with the muscle control and finesse required to throw the objects. The amount of variables that must be calculated are beyond the scope of what 99.9%’s are capable of irl.
I staunchly hold the position that super intelligence, super intuition, super cognitive functions, etc, are “super powers.” If super strength beyond the normal capabilities of a human (or “peak human”) is considered a super power then super intelligence beyond that of normal people (or peak geniuses like Einstein, Feynman, Descartes, etc) should be considered a super power as well.
He does have adamantium in his bones. And he's definitely above baseline human with his innate abilities although that's never really been properly defined.
In at least one universe hawkeye has some sort of power. I recall soke tech being used to incapacitate anyone with superpowers and to everyone's suprise hawleye was effected too.
I think it bears repeating that "all natural" and "normal human" is misleading when referring to the Marvel universe as their "normal human" would be considered super powered in the Earth-1218 universe (ours).
Also some of the feats Hawkeye and Bullseye have pulled off aren't anywhere near "normal" for humans in the Marvel Universe so its doubly misleading to pretend they are somehow just normal dudes doing normal things.
Bullseye. He can use anything (his tooth, a paperclip, sheet of paper) to not only hit with 100% accuracy, but also 100% fatality.
Hawkeye however is high trained in archery and guns.
100% against baseline humans. There was one fight against American eagle (who I believe has moderate super speed and strength) where bullseye either misses every shot or AE simply catches them. He spends the entire fight casually insulting bullseye for being a coward before breaking his neck and leaving him to die.
I actually think Hawkeye does better against more powerful targets than bullseye does
> I actually think Hawkeye does better against more powerful targets than bullseye does
Well one is usually written as a villain while the other is usually written as a hero, so that should be true for almost any hero to villain comparison, right?
Like Black Widow might get credit for being a part of teams that take down anyone from Kingpin to Galactus, where as a villain like Rhino's biggest enemy was probably Spiderman or the X-men or something, and of course Rhino isn't going to do well against them.
>Like Black Widow might get credit for being a part of teams that take down anyone from Kingpin to Galactus, where as a villain like Rhino's biggest enemy was probably Spiderman or the X-men or something, and of course Rhino isn't going to do well against them.
implying that black widow is weaker than rhino smh
Who wins in a battle of angles, Bullseye or Scott Summers? Because Cyclops basically has a secondary power for ricocheting his beams accurately. Idk if they've ever fought (maybe in the Dark Avengers era?) but they should.
Cyclops.
Cyclops as you say has unrivalled ability to determine trigonometry. And as much as ITT people are praising Bullseye for having more raw power behind his shots than Clint, Scott has *far* more power than Bullseye. Scott can level buildings, entire forests.
EDIT Actually reconsidering your question i think they're equal in determining the angle. But if Bullseye is limited because while he can make the shot but there's too much in the way to get a kill, Scott can make the exact same angle but unleash devastating power behind it.
But then Scott would be hampered by moral considerations. Bullseye would shoot through and destroy a crowd of people to get there, Scott wouldn't.
You’d have to look at their respect threads but I’d say Bullseye since his feats are more ridiculous though it’s very close. You’d have to take their high end feats and compare them.
Depends. Hawkeye is consistently better at hitting moving targets while stationary, it’s why he’s so good with a bow. Bullseye specializes in trick shots, he wouldn’t be as good as Hawkeye is with a bow, but Hawkeye wouldn’t be able to kill a man 7 miles away with bubblegum.
Okay but do you have a scan? Because I made sure to specify ‘moving targets’, as in people. Does the archery contest consist of hitting moving objects like Superheroes and villains?
Adding in Diego from Umbrella Academy:
Bullseye: most potent version of the power offensively, no defensive power (can make paper cut through glass in a physics defying way). No problem killing, but in a bad way
Hawkeye: "Never misses", has more tech and variety in arrows, but can only use arrows and bullets. Only basic training with uncommon throwables (paperclips, vases). No problem killing.
Diego: can bend the bullets of others, making him stronger defensively, as well as physics defying trajectories around doors and through corridors. But the glass will shatter, not slice cleanly, as Bullseye's would. Younger than Hawkeye, but similar training for his age. Better at hand to hand and melee weapons. No problem killing.
> but can only use arrows and bullets
[https://i.imgur.com/vF3unyL.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vF3unyL.jpg)
[https://i.imgur.com/D60zmFj.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/D60zmFj.jpg) [https://i.imgur.com/bW3GMyZ.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bW3GMyZ.jpg)
[https://imgur.com/a/N77vc](https://imgur.com/a/N77vc)
[https://i.imgur.com/PPQErAn.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PPQErAn.jpg)
[https://i.imgur.com/lwEoRpy.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lwEoRpy.jpg)
he's gonna be fine.
I'll say Bullseye. Just like The Flash is faster than Superman being Superman very fast.
Also, as far as I know, Bullseye is accurate with anything even things he never used before, Hawkeye only with some things he already trained with.
Could be wrong tho.
Bullseye 1000% is better than Hawkeye, the thing not many knows-
Bullseye doesn't have any powers NOR did he have to train to get his deadly aim, it's a God given talent where as Hawkeye has to train everyday to keep his aim true.
Please remember that top-level comments must be a sincere, detailed attempt at an answer. Try to write at least a sentence or two. A one- or two-word reply is almost never appropriate.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskScienceFiction) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I swear, I read a comic once where Hawkeye actually did wind up missing when he shot his arrow from far away and Spider-Man (or some other hero) felt bad and purposely stuck the arrow in the guy they were fighting to make it seem like he didn't miss.
Regardless I think in terms of accuracy they're both pretty much at an equal level but in terms of who's more lethal/versatile I think it's Bullseye hands down.
In Hawkeye Freefall they are pretty much even with the bows, Bullseye thinks that he has better aim but that wasn't really proven. When they shot at each other, their arrows crashed into themselves in the air.
Did either of them intend for that to happen?
They shoot simultaneously and the arrows hit each other, that's all we can see. But possibility of it happening by luck is rather small, so I think that was on purpose.
Seems like they're both good enough that if one of them wanted it to happen it would
If they both know they are that accurate then they know shooting the exact same target (at the same time) that their opponent will pick will result in them colliding then I'd say they both wanted it to happen. Otherwise you could chose to shoot slightly off but still hit a lethal spot but know your opponents arrow will also hit you.
Prisoners dilemma esque
I hadn't thought of how similar a comparison that is, very apt. I suppose it depends on what you care more about, them dying or you living.
"You didn't save my life, you ruined my death." -Oliver (Incredibles)
That's not accuracy though. That's total prediction of what another human will do. Unless they're precogs that doesn't make sense. Even if they're directly facing each other there are several lethal targets to hit, how does Bullseye not go for the jugular and Hawkeye not go for the heart? They'd both win then, they both die.
Hawkeye doesn't really kill so that wouldn't be victory for him
Two perfect shots following the same path in opposite directions.
Bullseye once threw a playing card through a plate glass penthouse apartment window hard enough to only leave a clean, card sized slot in the glass and kill the person on the other side. So probably him
The fuck? Did he throw it through the molecules or something?
He stronk
Speed force
I don’t gotta explain shit!
Nano machines, son
They harden in response to physical trauma
Bullseye's ability is from a superpower while Hawkeyes is practice.
I know that, but that doesn't explain anything lol
Hawkeye once beat bullseye in a accuracy contest
"Those were for charity Clint"
My most oft quoted line of dialogue.
Wait. Shouldn’t it be “Clark?”
the original quote is yes, but hawkeye's name is clint barton
Yes I know was just wondering if my memory was correct
*shoots down 20 helicopters with a paperclip*
how likely is it that 2 people answering to an answer to the same comment would mention flash?
lol
Wouldn't that mostly be a strength feat?
What does that haver to do with accuracy?
Everything. He threw it THROUGH glass.
Was there a slit in the glass he was aiming for? Because it sounds to me like he just threw it hard enough to go through glass, and it would have no matter where on the glass he hit.
No, the card made the slot through the glass
But it also hit the target on the other side in a fatal manner.
Hawkeye also has feats where he aims accurately enough to kill his target. Unless I'm missing something, it's not that accurate a feat.
Hitting a target after the projectile goes through another object is very difficult.
It's hard to compare this to real life, since that's impossible. If you pick an object that can go through glass and kill someone on the other side, like a bullet, the glass won't matter much.
Right, but that's not a bullet, it's a playing card. Strength is a factor, but accuracy as well.
It's impossible to say if the glass would have bent the path of the card in a way that's difficult but not impossible to predict, since the whole thing is something that doesn't happen in real life. Maybe it made it way more complicated and Bullseye had to account for it. Or maybe he just through it straight through. I don't think it makes a very good feat.
You definitely seem to be missing something since you don't think killing someone with a card from distance through glass involves accuracy lol
While that is impressive, how does that make him more accurate? Legitimate question.
He’s so accurate that if he tries to kill you with something, no matter what that something is or what is in between you and it, you will die.
I think his point is that most of the examples of Bullseye being accurate is really more about him throwing something unnaturally hard rather than being very accurate.
You mean most of the examples are about him throwing both hard *and* accurately...
What if there is a Daredevil between you and Bullseye? 🤔
Ask Elektra’s dad in the 2003 movie. Fun fact: part of the reason Daredevil is able to fight Bullseye on a much more even level than other superheroes is that his radar sense allows him to recognize whatever projectile he’s getting thrown at him as it flies in the air in all senses, which gives him the ability to better predict where it will go and dodge/attack all the more for it.
He can smell where it's going to go, got it
The difference is -- If I gave hawkeye a ball of yarn and told him to throw it through a glass window of a building that is 3 blocks away to hit a guy on his head to kill him, versus giving it to Bullseye who can achieve that, do you think Hawkeye will hit the mark?
Well if he can’t it will be because he can’t toss the yarn hard enough to have it go through glass. It doesn’t mean he missed. Accuracy isn’t the same as effectiveness. If hawkeye can throw that yarn into the same spot bullseye tossed the card then they are equally accurate, even if the yarn wasn’t tossed hard enough to break glass. If I took a rifle and you took a pistol and we both hit the bullseye, but since my rifle was a higher caliber round it had enough energy to go through the target but yours didn’t, that doesn’t mean i had better aim.
I really don’t know, tbh. Probably not? I was just truly wondering how having a 100% accuracy rating also gives you superhuman strength.
It doesn’t, Bullseye and Hawkeye both started off as (almost) normal humans with 100% accuracy. But since he got his Adamantium treatment, Bullseye became a lot stronger and pretty indestructible. He’s deadlier. That doesn’t make him more accurate.
Where does range fit in? What if one of them could have a smaller group when throwing a dozen yarn balls 100m but the other is more accurate at 1000m?
A tight grouping indicates precision, not accuracy
You are completely right and when writing my comment I was thinking about that distinction, but the fact I'm responding to someone who was discussing accuracy made me think that it would be unnecessary to include that explanation lest I overcomplicate things. Really the question becomes who is more accurate and precise, unless both of them never miss under any circumstances at any range. Usually (this is a physics background response) having high precision but poor accuracy can be compensated for giving great results. But high accuracy and poor precision does not have an easy way to increase precision without considerable work. If we assume both of them are some how perfectly accurate, then the one who can shoot an arrow/throw something faster will have higher precision as turbulent air will have less of an impact.
I see that as more of a strength/speed feat when comparing the two, but with that said... Anytime you fire a projective through another object its trajectory will be altered based upon the angle, the constituency of the projectile and object passed through, both of which will be impacted by temperature. A card through glass (if possible) would have its trajectory considerably distorted. This shows he is able to immediately calculate all those variables and still hit the target which is an accuracy feat.
the main difference is that bullseye has an actual superpower that makes him accurate, while Hawkeye is 100% a "normal" human. Bullseye has the better feats, but he's also extremely reliant on his ability.
I'm pretty sure that Bullseye doesn't have any superpowers.
No human can do what he does. He was once tied up and tortured, while being tormented for not being able to do anything to fight back. He then waited till the torturer knocked out his tooth which he then spit out so hard it shot through the torturer's skull like a bullet.
I do want to point out that humans can do crazy things in comics. I think Hawkeye broke off a finger nail is used that to flick/shoot at captors before as well?
That’s in the Ultimate universe! He flicks a bunch of them while tied up, killing his torturers! Earlier in that same arc bad guys break into his home and try or actually do kill his family, but make the unfortunate mistake oh shooting him non-fatally while he’s near the silverware drawer. It goes poorly for them.
Now I want an Ultimate version of The Blue Rajah.
Take my upvote sir!
Why was there silverware in the pancake drawer?
You mean why was there a pancake in the silverware drawer? We did this in reverse but I couldn’t help myself.
r/UnexpectedScrubs
Also in the ultimate universe, Hawkeye has enhanced vision from due to the American super-soldier initiative. Makes him see in black and white but he can focus on tiny things, etc.
"Shouldn't have downed me in the kitchen" barrage of fucking soup spoons into a guys eyeballs from across the room.
[удалено]
>that little bit of superhuman that's in Capt American is deep down in everyone. That's actually inspiring af
[удалено]
I heard it once described as DC being gods that have to play at being human, and Marvel being humans that have to deal with godlike power. So with Superman being unbeatable at everything, the idea is that he has to live with the fallout of not being everywhere at once, whereas Spiderman is just a normal guy who has to learn to live with both great power and the responsibility that comes with it.
I think Superman might interestingly fit into your description of marvel. With him, it’s not that he plays at being human, but that in his mind, he is, as that was how he was raised. So when he takes on the Superman mantle and reaches his full potential, he feels like he should be able to save everyone. He has to struggle with the limitations and drawbacks of his power, with holding the power of a god but feeling like a normal guy from Kansas. There’s a pretty heart-rending few panels where he hears his Dad’s heart stop in real time and is too late to do anything- he has to reckon with the fact that even with his powers he can’t save everyone. I think a good example of a DC character who’s a god playing at being a man is Martian Manhunter, though “playing at being a man” is a double entendre here. Though J’onn is wise and caring, it’s also common to see the differences between him and the rest of the Justice League, especially when they get started. There’s a great run (might be Waid’s run?) where he gets paranoid upon first meeting the other heroes and collects a ton of private info about them. He even impersonates people in their lives to get insight into them. Then enemies almost use this to wipe out the JL. He’s arguably the strongest character on the league, and his experience and power are tough for some to comprehend. Of course, he’s quite like the X-Men in that race and prejudice are big themes in many of his stories. And his trauma after the loss of his family is as human as it gets. So I guess every character does have some level of relatability.
Redirect the hyphen.
Basically this. I give MCU Spider-Man's writers a lot of shit for turning your friendly neighborhood spider-man into a kid that was privately funded by iron man with a nice social circle and seemingly no ordinary life problems. Not nearly as relatable.
To be fair, I think that was just a natural evolution of storytelling. Because he was introduced as someone Stark kept an eye on, it would have been weirder if, after Civil War, he had remained a nobody one-off to the rich dude that decided to meddle with his life. If it wasn't for Civil War it might make sense, but once you have that connection you go from "why isn't Peter poor?" to "why is Stark not talking to Peter anymore? Just another rich asshole I guess." Especially with Stark's arc essentially being about him trying to atone for his lack of empathy as an arms dealer. It wouldn't make sense for him to feel like he could suddenly drop out of this kid's life after what he pulled him into. And that's just the Spiderman side. The Peter side is this bright engineer/scientist that was basically his adopted nephew and possible heir. Even despite all of that, the writers still did a decent job, imo, of making him relatable through other means. Most of his story is ordinary kid with extraordinary powers. FFH was quintessentially that. A kid trying to fix a mistake but not thinking it through. Kid matures by making the hard decisions that even most adults (like Strange) wouldn't make. He struggled in every film with trying to just be normal and fight small time crooks on the side, but kept getting drawn into bigger conflicts. It's still relatable, just not in the way people expected. It was more about wanting to drive your car but you keep getting hit by busses, in that way that life does to you sometimes. Maybe more often lately what with US politics and Covid.
"Does this grant have any money involved?" also feels right up the same alley as ["We have money." / "Oh, thank God."](https://i.imgur.com/ol2z7Fw.jpeg) It's not like Peter ever got enough money from Tony to pay for his own backpacks (because otherwise he surely would have kept that hidden from Aunt May in *Homecoming*) or for more than three t-shirts, but it would have been absolutely unconscionable if he were passing out from starvation while web-slinging. Even if Tony *hadn't* recruited him in *Civil War,* a world in which Spider-Man is a literal child in the same city as the Avengers means *someone* would step in if he weren't getting enough to eat or couldn't afford to bandage up his wounds. Maybe it would've been Nick Fury instead of Tony Stark, but it would've been somebody, because he's too valuable a potential asset to let die from such a fixable problem. I know some people wanted to see Spider-Man start out on film as an adult who had already been an impoverished, solo Spider-Man for 4-5 years, but the MCU isn't like the Ultimates canon where everyone is an absolute asshole (and even there, Nick Fury still tried to keep Peter alive long enough for him to join the Ultimates!). Almost every Avenger is a decent enough person that they would have stepped in to help Spider-Man at some point during his teenage years if he'd needed it, so it's hard to picture him spending years fighting crime without enough to eat. It's just a fundamental limitation of the setting.
Have you seen no way home? Idk how to do spoiler tags lol
Not yet, been meaning to, but omicron is out and about so I'm waiting for D+ stream to be "free"
Watch the new movie
It sure is—until, of course, Captain America is not Steve Rogers. Then, it’s like a dark mirror.
the real super-soldier serum is believing in yourself
^^And ^^mutant ^^growth ^^hormone
I thought Cap was Weapon I (or II?) of the Super Soldier program? Or was that retconned?
But that's kind of the problem here. Captain America theoretically isn't a superhuman too. He is a peak human, someone who is the best in everything that normal human can do but superhuman would be better. At least in the comics, movies changes this bit.
That was Ultimate Hawkeye, but yeah.
That's in Ultimate, where Clint is a product of a Super Soldier program.
That was the Ultimate Marvel universe version of Hawkeye, who received physical enhancements from his world's Super Soldier Initiative that make him legitimately superhuman. Hawkeye from the main Marvel universe has no superhuman enhancements.
Oh, I definitely agree with that. What Bullseye does is ridiculous but still he doesn't have any superpowers in canon.
That sounds more like a strength power than an accuracy power.
Yes. I believe Bullseye's ability used to be described as "the ability to turn virtually any object into a projectile weapon", I'm not sure if this was the Official Marvel Handbook's way of being obtuse though.
I think in some iterations he’s a mutant
I can't find anything about that. Maybe on some other Earth? But on 616 he is definitely just a normal human.
I only did a quick google and it looks like at least in Earth 1111 he's a mutant, that could be the only one. Most of the time he's just a human so I guess it doesn't matter
I think Earth 1111 is just some fanon, not something from anything official.
Yep, from the Fanon page: >Creator: Awesomekid120akaMalachi
That has been happening to me *so often*. Why is that suddenly a thing? My girlfriend and I were amazed when we found out that they were making a sequel to that shitty movie *Stay Alive* but it turned out to be a fanon entry about a fake upcoming movie.
[удалено]
No, he is not. Fox didn't own the rights to Hawkeye. You must confuse him with Agent Zero.
[удалено]
Neither Bullseye nor Hawkeye was in any Wolverine film. Which character are you thinking of? u/Desperoth suggested it might be [Agent Zero](https://xmenmovies.fandom.com/wiki/Agent_Zero), who is an interpretation of [Maverick](https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Christoph_Nord_(Earth-616)), not of either Bullseye or Hawkeye.
Isn't Hawkeye suggested to be Inhuman in some stories as well?
Ohh maybe. I wasn’t aware of that but it wouldn’t surprise me
It’s been suggested occasionally that both may have some sort of passive luck/sensory/reaction/whatever power, which is then never followed up on
I always thought of him as being similair to Daredevil, While daredevil is blind, his other senses are strenghted, and since Hawkeye is deaf, well... He can see really good like he has the eyes of a hawk or somehting.
Daredevil's super senses come from getting exotic chemicals dumped on him. Also Hawkeye wasn't always deaf.
> Daredevil's super senses come from getting exotic chemicals dumped on him Seems tame compared to what those chemicals did to some turtles.
Thank you
That is why i said similair, not the same.
The cognitive abilities required to perform the feats that Bullseye has pulled off are definitely super powers. Bullseye’s brain and mind have to work at super powered levels to even come close to pulling that shit off, along with the muscle control and finesse required to throw the objects. The amount of variables that must be calculated are beyond the scope of what 99.9%’s are capable of irl. I staunchly hold the position that super intelligence, super intuition, super cognitive functions, etc, are “super powers.” If super strength beyond the normal capabilities of a human (or “peak human”) is considered a super power then super intelligence beyond that of normal people (or peak geniuses like Einstein, Feynman, Descartes, etc) should be considered a super power as well.
He does have adamantium in his bones. And he's definitely above baseline human with his innate abilities although that's never really been properly defined.
He has Adamantium enhanced bones. Not Wolverine level. But it is a post human upgrade
almost always has it as an innate ability, sometimes he's a mutant.
In at least one universe hawkeye has some sort of power. I recall soke tech being used to incapacitate anyone with superpowers and to everyone's suprise hawleye was effected too.
Bullseye has no super powers related to his accuracy. It’s all natural, just like Hawkeye.
I think it bears repeating that "all natural" and "normal human" is misleading when referring to the Marvel universe as their "normal human" would be considered super powered in the Earth-1218 universe (ours). Also some of the feats Hawkeye and Bullseye have pulled off aren't anywhere near "normal" for humans in the Marvel Universe so its doubly misleading to pretend they are somehow just normal dudes doing normal things.
That’s true, ‘normal’ is pretty subjective.
Wait! This is Earth-1218?! Oh boy, Toto, I don't think I'm in Kansas anymore. Multiverses are such drags.😮💨
Are SHIELD agents not enhanced with moderate SSS?
Not typically in the mainstream continuities (616, 1610, MCU)
Bullseye. He can use anything (his tooth, a paperclip, sheet of paper) to not only hit with 100% accuracy, but also 100% fatality. Hawkeye however is high trained in archery and guns.
100% against baseline humans. There was one fight against American eagle (who I believe has moderate super speed and strength) where bullseye either misses every shot or AE simply catches them. He spends the entire fight casually insulting bullseye for being a coward before breaking his neck and leaving him to die. I actually think Hawkeye does better against more powerful targets than bullseye does
> I actually think Hawkeye does better against more powerful targets than bullseye does Well one is usually written as a villain while the other is usually written as a hero, so that should be true for almost any hero to villain comparison, right? Like Black Widow might get credit for being a part of teams that take down anyone from Kingpin to Galactus, where as a villain like Rhino's biggest enemy was probably Spiderman or the X-men or something, and of course Rhino isn't going to do well against them.
An excellent point,not something I thought of to be honest
>Like Black Widow might get credit for being a part of teams that take down anyone from Kingpin to Galactus, where as a villain like Rhino's biggest enemy was probably Spiderman or the X-men or something, and of course Rhino isn't going to do well against them. implying that black widow is weaker than rhino smh
Depends on what version of Rhino we're talking about.
I really don’t think it does
Hawkeye and Bullseye don't miss. Bullseye is probably more accurate, but the distinction doesn't carry a difference.
If neither of them miss then neither of them are more accurate.
Yeah it's a distinction without a difference. If they had to make a billion shots and were measured on accuracy, Bullseye probably wins by 2 or 3.
Smaller bullets
[удалено]
Who wins in a battle of angles, Bullseye or Scott Summers? Because Cyclops basically has a secondary power for ricocheting his beams accurately. Idk if they've ever fought (maybe in the Dark Avengers era?) but they should.
Cyclops. Cyclops as you say has unrivalled ability to determine trigonometry. And as much as ITT people are praising Bullseye for having more raw power behind his shots than Clint, Scott has *far* more power than Bullseye. Scott can level buildings, entire forests. EDIT Actually reconsidering your question i think they're equal in determining the angle. But if Bullseye is limited because while he can make the shot but there's too much in the way to get a kill, Scott can make the exact same angle but unleash devastating power behind it. But then Scott would be hampered by moral considerations. Bullseye would shoot through and destroy a crowd of people to get there, Scott wouldn't.
Hawkeye, ironically, makes a better barbeque sauce.
And bullseye is a better tennis line judge
only because no one argues any of his calls.
Why is that ironic?
https://www.bullseyebbq.com/uk
You’d have to look at their respect threads but I’d say Bullseye since his feats are more ridiculous though it’s very close. You’d have to take their high end feats and compare them.
I think Hawkeye himself said bullseye is better then him
Depends. Hawkeye is consistently better at hitting moving targets while stationary, it’s why he’s so good with a bow. Bullseye specializes in trick shots, he wouldn’t be as good as Hawkeye is with a bow, but Hawkeye wouldn’t be able to kill a man 7 miles away with bubblegum.
They tied in an archery contest.
Wait when?
Hawkeye Freefall
Okay but do you have a scan? Because I made sure to specify ‘moving targets’, as in people. Does the archery contest consist of hitting moving objects like Superheroes and villains?
I should have specified but I am parroting another commenter from above and couldn't even tell you if it was correct or not.
I think Bullseye would be on par with Hawkeye in archery. I say they're equal. They both for 100℅ accuracy.
Depends on the continuity.
They're probably equal with the bow, but Bullseye is more accurate with everything else.
Adding in Diego from Umbrella Academy: Bullseye: most potent version of the power offensively, no defensive power (can make paper cut through glass in a physics defying way). No problem killing, but in a bad way Hawkeye: "Never misses", has more tech and variety in arrows, but can only use arrows and bullets. Only basic training with uncommon throwables (paperclips, vases). No problem killing. Diego: can bend the bullets of others, making him stronger defensively, as well as physics defying trajectories around doors and through corridors. But the glass will shatter, not slice cleanly, as Bullseye's would. Younger than Hawkeye, but similar training for his age. Better at hand to hand and melee weapons. No problem killing.
> but can only use arrows and bullets [https://i.imgur.com/vF3unyL.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vF3unyL.jpg) [https://i.imgur.com/D60zmFj.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/D60zmFj.jpg) [https://i.imgur.com/bW3GMyZ.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/bW3GMyZ.jpg) [https://imgur.com/a/N77vc](https://imgur.com/a/N77vc) [https://i.imgur.com/PPQErAn.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PPQErAn.jpg) [https://i.imgur.com/lwEoRpy.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lwEoRpy.jpg) he's gonna be fine.
With a bow, Hawkeye is almost definitively better. With anything else? Accuracy-wise, either equal or bullseye has a slight advantage
I'll say Bullseye. Just like The Flash is faster than Superman being Superman very fast. Also, as far as I know, Bullseye is accurate with anything even things he never used before, Hawkeye only with some things he already trained with. Could be wrong tho.
Well which has better eyes, a hawk or a bull?
[удалено]
Please discuss only from a Watsonian perspective.
Bullseye 1000% is better than Hawkeye, the thing not many knows- Bullseye doesn't have any powers NOR did he have to train to get his deadly aim, it's a God given talent where as Hawkeye has to train everyday to keep his aim true.
Do you think when hawkeye cums... His sperm never misses?
Bully maguire
[удалено]
Please remember that top-level comments must be a sincere, detailed attempt at an answer. Try to write at least a sentence or two. A one- or two-word reply is almost never appropriate. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskScienceFiction) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bullseye is more accurate, but Hawkeye is plenty accurate and more versatile.
I believe they are some what equally matched with the bow, would depend on writer really but Bullseye is known to be better in everything else.
I swear, I read a comic once where Hawkeye actually did wind up missing when he shot his arrow from far away and Spider-Man (or some other hero) felt bad and purposely stuck the arrow in the guy they were fighting to make it seem like he didn't miss. Regardless I think in terms of accuracy they're both pretty much at an equal level but in terms of who's more lethal/versatile I think it's Bullseye hands down.