I’m the guy that which does Love and Capes.
To be fair, nobody is really certain why this happens. It’s the same reason that, in Superman Returns, the bad guy uses all the ammunition in a fighter-jet sized gatling gun on Superman unsuccessfully, and THEN pulls out a handgun and shoots him. It’s like smacking a rock with your fists and then throwing a pebble at it.
They throw it more out of frustration than anything else (although on “Barnie Miller” they had a story where a cop in a bullet-proof vest was killed by a thrown gun to the temple).
In superman Returns, after finding random high-powered shots to the body didn’t work, the gunman tried a single accurate shot to the most vulnerable place he could find. Given that, at that point, he had nothing to lose, it was worth ‘a shot’ (sorry… bad pun).
I think they do it for the lolz. They figure eh I’m going down but at least I’ll go down funny.
I guess some mysteries can never be explained……..
What is more confusing is how, in some shows, the hero will dodge the thrown gun after standing defiantly before the bullets.
In the old shows the gunfire would be special effects while the gun was an actual prop. If the hero got hit by one it would actually hurt.
I just figured that while he was bulletproof his real weakness was the guns themselves. That and kryptonite.
And now I’m having flashbacks to the Super Smash Bros. Series of videogames, where throwing your gun is actually a completely valid tactic, and in some cases better than actually firing it.
i just remembered: the golden-age Green Lantern, Alan Scott, was vulnerable to WOOD-so a crook throwing a gun with a wooden stock at him would actually be more effective than shooting it…
I believe it’s more of an homage to the old Superman TV series. The bad guys would always empty their guns shooting at Superman, and then they would throw the guns at him. But because of the tech of the time, they would show show a shot of Superman standing there and animated bullets ‘bouncing’ off him, but when they cut back to the scene, they’d show him ducking the thrown gun or slapping it away with his hand or something. It made it seem like the thrown gun was way more effective then the bullets.
Well, speaking as someone who has a problem knowing when to give up, even if you’re going down, you go down fighting with your last breath, with the last drop of blood in your body. Out of bullets, and they just bounced off anyway? Throw the gun. Thrown gun makes him giggle? You draw a knife. Knife breaks? You break your fist on his face, then your teeth, and then knock yourself out trying to break his nose with a head butt.
That makes sense. If you’re just not going to give up, you do everything you can to save yourself, regardless whether or not it’s going to work.
Tetsuhara… You’re right. It’s a reference to the 1950s Superman series.
If only the prop department could have made a foam rubber gun
that could have bounced off the actor’s head.
Did any of the movies reference this for comedic effect?
Bang Bang Bang click click toss thud “OW!”
(Perhaps a sarcastic “Ow”? An unconvincing “Ow”?)
It’s actually not so illogical. In most scenarios where you run out of bullets (say against a team of cops) throwing the gun is a valid tactic. So it might be reflexes
© 2015 Thomas F. Zahler