Batman: Hush Highlights DC Animated Original Movies in 2019
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/io9.giz...1827774909/amp

The next 4 films in the DCAO line have been unveiled. First up is Reign of the Supermen we already knew about fleshing out the first film ever did. Then Justice League vs Fatal Five. This is interesting as they are Legion of Super Heroes foes. Will The Legion show up? Are qe stuck with the New 52 JLA lineup? Third up is one of two I have been waiting for years for, Batman: Hush. This is a great story in itself even with the twist well known and somewhat of a formula from Jeph Loeb. It was the second ever storyline that I ever read off the rack at the comic shop as well. The other one I have long wanted adapted is 2007's Sinestro Cotps War. Finally, Wonder Woman: Bloodlines is adaoted strategically released in the same quarter of Wonder Woman 1984.

The DC animated films tend to be a mixed bag, but I'm looking forward to these.

I'm most curious about the Wonder Woman film

The original Wonder Woman animated movie was so good, too bad that it bombed so badly that they cancelled the in production Batgirl Year One which I was looking forward to and they weren't allowed to make any more female hero movies for what nearly a decade now.

Hush was such an awesome storyline, I always wanted to see it animated and was surprised it never did in previous Batman shows in the 00's. I don't like the ending since Jason Todd being teased back then when he was still alive was too HYPE for me to care about the real identity Hush anymore.

It's too bad these movies are a hit or miss, especially after the Nu52 reboot which was an utter failure. A shame, DC was so good with animation I don't know what happened. Marvel also became really competent in animation right before Disney bought them and now they're mediocre again too.

Voice Cast Announced


The film brings back many DC Universe Original Movie veterans, including Jason O’Mara, who reprises the role of Batman. O’Mara is joined by Jennifer Morrison as Selina Kyle, Jerry O’Connell as Superman, Rebecca Romijn as Lois Lane, Rainn Wilson as Lex Luthor, Sean Maher as Nightwing, Bruce Thomas as Jim Gordon, Stuart Allan as Damian Wayne, and James Garrett as Alfred.

Homeland actor Maury Sterling voices the key role of Thomas Elliot. Rounding out the cast are Geoffrey Arend as Riddler, Vanessa Williams as Amanda Waller, Jason Spisak as Joker, Adam Gifford as Bane, Dachie Alessio as Lady Shiva, Peyton List plays dual roles as Batgirl and Poison Ivy, and Tara Strong voices Reporter.

https://i.imgur.com/lJC0KHG.jpg

https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/03...oice-cast-news

Kinda weird that Tara isn't playing Batgirl, or an otherwise more prominent role than "Reporter".

"Reign of the Supermen" was a bit of a mixed bag so my expectations for this are tempered. Could be fun, but I doubt it'll touch the book.

Having Damian Wayne around for the "Hush" debut storyline just feels like 31 flavors of wrong. It's a Baskin-Robbins of wrong Robins.

Yeah, that's terrible.

I am curious, though, how Bane and Batgirl are supposed to fit in this. Also, WHICH Batgirl?

The Lois and Clark dynamic was the best thing about the last two movies, looking forward to them appearing in this.

It'll probably be Rebirth era Babs being used for this.

But the animated movies TRY to be loosely in continuity with each other. And we had The Killing Joke just a year or two ago.

But you're probably right. :tsad:

So this is not a direct adaptation,huh? That is what Batgirl and Bane would suggest? We can guess any role Oracle played Barbara can do as Batgirl. However Lex Luthor and Bane had nothing to do with the story. Harvey Dent who played a key rolecm is also strangely absent. Perhaps Bane is promised to be cured of an addiction to venom and flips to help Batman once cured? Just guessing the angle gone for here. Also, Damien could likely assume Tim's role in the arc.

Interesting note being Jerry and Rebecca playing a married couple since they are in real-life.

That's another problem, they try to be loosely connected but that isn't what's best for everything, and it imposes restrictions on a lot of these things that shouldn't be there. Rather than try and serve the story best, they ALSO have to tie it into something completely disconnected and unrelated.

I dunno why they can't just do straight 1-1 adaptations, except for the rare instances where you need to tweak things.

Like Under the Red Hood, it would've been a little weird wedging Superboy Prime into the beginning. Though, I suppose, it could've been done...

I completely agree..... These movies have slowly been getting worse and worse.

It seems that they are trying to take classic arcs or story lines and try to put a "Rebirth" spin on it. I absolutely hate Rebirth..... I enjoyed the New 52 so much more..... But that is bc of Snyder's run on Batman.

So, I haven't watched any of these since Son of Batman. Are they still using the same New 52 continuity established by JL:War?

I think they are using a little bit of everything. Like Raven appears to be from re-birth. Like I said in my previous post they seem to be mashing different continuities into the same arc. I am in the minority with liking the New 52, but that just bc I loved Snyder's run like I said. :lol:

The movies have also been following a loose continuity sense JL:War But like I said the movies are meshing different continuities together and some borrow from one more than the other in different movies.

I wish Conroy was voicing batman though.... I need his voice for Batman :ohwell:

Jason O Mara is my least favorite voice actor for Batman

I mean why not Conroy or Bruce Greenwood (Young Justice and Under The Red Hood batman)

They're moving away from a lot of N52 elements without necessarily rebooting (Superman ditched Diana off-screen and got with Lois, switched to his Rebirth outfit lately etc)

They need to take the opportunity to ditch that terrible, AWFUL Wonder Woman costume. Seriously. Sh*t's terri-bad.

Why do they even make these animated movies if they don’t bother building a consistant universe or do straight up comic adaptations? What’s the point of these loosely connected semi-one off things? There’s no JLU type series to tie everything together. It’s weird.

Weird as fvck, yep.

The official reasoning when the first one came out in 2006 or so was that it was not to be affected by continuity and that they were based on the comics. but many of the original run ones could've been in continuity even if not explicitly said, obviously not all the movies fit but a good chunk did. After they did the Nu52 makeover of the DCU films they were in more explicit continuity but I think they've done away with that now, I'm not sure since I haven't really watched any of the post Nu52 films.

The forced New-52 elements have really hurt some of their recent films. And yet some of them like Killing Joke are still in their own singular continuity. So I'm not sure why stuff like Hush, or Death of Superman/Reign of the Supermen needs to be forced into a place where it doesn't fit.

Just do each one however it would best serve the story. If they were all supposed to be in the same continuity to start with, it would obviously be different, but the entire point was to adapt various stories that would never be possible to adapt in a cartoon show or otherwise, just to give some of these iconic stories a broader reach. It's so inconsistent, and the connective tissue feels so forced, it doesn't really help a story like "Death of Superman" to have awkward Lois/Wonder Woman scenes, and so on.

I'm a huge fan of continuity but these things weren't designed for that, they just decided to arbitrarily make it that way after they'd already done a bunch of them. I mean is "Public Enemies" in continuity with "Death/Reign"? Or "Justice League: War"? I doubt it. And I'd prefer not to have to try and figure out where these things "fit", either. They're altogether more enjoyable as stand-alone works.

If they were all gonna be in the same "universe", that should have been the way it was executed from the beginning. Now it's just a clusterf*ck.

I turned Death of Superman off after five minutes, mostly based on how ugly it looked. I probably would have finished it if it looked more like 90s Superman, and less like whatever the hell they've been doing over the last ten years.

I definitely wasn't in love with the art style. Do these people understand the geometry of the human skull? That's it's "Wide up top and narrow at the bottom", NOT the other way around? WHY is Superman's head "smooshed" like that? Terrible. I hate the whole "stylization" trend in animation. Draw people the way people look, for f*ck's sake. Any idiot can draw things "incorrectly", which I guess is why everyone is an "artist", nowadays. Understanding and execution of proper form and proportion takes skill and talent. People used to have to go to school for this stuff. Now it's all, "LOOK, I drew googly eyes on a rectangle and gave it a Spaghetti-O mouth. That's a Human Face! PAY ME FOR THIS!" :roll:

As a movie, though, "Death..." actually works very well. It condenses too much of the story and adds in a bunch of needless New 52 stuff, but it's as good as it can ever possibly be done in 88 minutes, mediocre art style aside. "Reign" was very underwhelming and I didn't like it as much as I wanted to after thinking the first part was pretty good. They just went too far off the rails from the comic and became completely its own thing, and not a single change made anything better so they really needn't have bothered.

Good set-up and execution with Part I, but Part II was a fumble. Not terrible but not at all what it should have been.

It's still haunting my Netflix cue so I may get bored enough to finish it one day.

The heads do look weird, and the torsos are way too long. I think they want to make the heroes look yoked, so they draw the arms too low, then draw the waist in relation to where the elbows fall, which is now in the wrong place. Their proportions also seem to change a lot depending on the angle and no doubt how far behind schedule the production is at any given time.

I couldn't do any better to be fair, but I do find the munted art style distracting.

You have definitely given this a lot of observation and thought, and I applaud you for it.

Mostly, people ask me specifically what's so "wrong" with it, and all I can come up with is, "Just LOOK at it, fer chrissakes." But yeah, what you said pretty much hits it. :)

sneak peak of the movie

https://www.reddit.com/r/DC_Cinemati...sh_sneak_peek/

it looks great

Spoilers for the adaptation of Batman:Hush.

















https://www.cbr.com/batman-hush-movie-twist-riddler/

It better not have bat sex again or any other bs filler.

No but

And the twist is that

At least that’s a decent twist. I never fancy Tommy, so if Riddler gets more screen time then that’s just swell.

I'm neutral on this. Its not War of Jokes and Riddles out of character twist that hurts the core character instead of increasing his threat. Makes sense,but downplays Tommy at the same time.

This movie was alright. I didn't love it, I didn't hate it. You'll have to forgive me that I'm not familiar with the source material. I think what I liked most about the movie was this version of Catwoman. I was disappointed that the villain ended up being Riddler, as I'm not the biggest Riddler fan. In fact, as the movie was wrapping up, I was have a tough time believing that the entire thing didn't just take place in Bruce's head when he had the injury earlier in the movie.

While I like putting The Riddler on a high profile level it was erasing Hush aka Tommy Elliott from really existing and Harvey Dent's role was absent. We gained a solid Riddler in exchange for two other roles. I would trade putting my favorite Nat Rouge down a peg for that.

I feel like it takes Riddler DOWN a peg. Dude never needed to hide behind false identities before. Riddler's not supposed to be a lightweight or pansy, some schmuck who is afraid to be around other rogues. He's BETTER than them, and he knows it. He's a genius, and doesn't need to get his hands dirty.

This whole "the Arkham sleepover gang won't respect me so I'll pretend to be somebody COOL" shtick is complete bull$hit. :trolleye:

Hush being riddler is lame, it should be a new villain not one we already know of, there's no fun in that. Hell I personally still hate DC didn't make Jason Todd Hush, that would've been a much cooler persona than Red Hood.

Well in the source material Hush is actually Thomas Elliot, Bruce's childhood friend. I am confused and curious why they decided to my the Riddler Hush....

My guess is to show that it is different from the source material instead of a straight up adaptation. Also, and perhaps more importantly its stuck in a continuity opposed to The Dark Knight Returns which was much more faithful due to it not having to stick to a continuity. The New 52 two continuity adaptations a year brought this one down.