Batman Soul of The Dragon DC Animated movie

[Autbot_Benz]

The Dark Knight is headed to the 1970s for his latest animated adventure, the upcoming Batman: Soul of the Dragon.

The film is an original tale, rather than based on a specific comic book storyline. It sees Bruce Wayne face a deadly menace from his past, with the help of three former classmates: world-renowned martial artists Richard Dragon, Ben Turner and Lady Shiva.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/he...e-cast-1306722

[CyberCubed]

I thought this was going to be a Bruce Lee crossover from the picture.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I thought this was going to be a Bruce Lee crossover from the picture.

Me, too.

[Autbot_Benz]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

Me, too.

thought the black guy on the right was Luke Cage for a second

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

I also thought the lady looked like a middle-aged Mulan.

Boy, we're all just so culturally sensitive in this thread, aren't we?

[Autbot_Benz]

Originally Posted by CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy

I also thought the lady looked like a middle-aged Mulan.

Boy, we're all just so culturally sensitive in this thread, aren't we?

hard not to think that guy is luke cage/power man yellow shirt cuffs around arms and jeans with a fro. that's 70's power man

[CyberCubed]

I still wonder who all these DC animated movies are aimed at. They're all mostly standalone and sometimes comic adaptions, but they don't have anything to do with the cartoons airing, and comic book fans don't like them because they're toned down.

Blows my mind they made like 50 of these movies already, remember they've been going on since Superman Doomsday way back in 2007. Nearly 15 years of these movies.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I still wonder who all these DC animated movies are aimed at. They're all mostly standalone and sometimes comic adaptions, but they don't have anything to do with the cartoons airing

I think this is a stab at normalizing Bronze Tiger because the latest rumor is that Idris Elba is taking up the role in live action. The character hasn't appeared anywhere else in media in forever so this is a good way at indoctrinating him as legit for a movie appearance.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

and comic book fans don't like them because they're toned down.

Blows my mind they made like 50 of these movies already, remember they've been going on since Superman Doomsday way back in 2007. Nearly 15 years of these movies.

Fans love the DC animated movies. They are some of the most reliably fun form of animated entertainment around. Not that they are without criticism, but what are you talking about? 15 years of those movies because they've been successful, even amidst an environment where they are easily pirated without paying for them. LMAO! Huh?

[oldmanwinters]

I looked at the preview image and I thought it was a crossover with the cast of Enter the Dragon...

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I thought this was going to be a Bruce Lee crossover from the picture.

Ditto.
I was even surprised how they could get "rights" for Bruce Lee.

[Leo656]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Fans love the DC animated movies. They are some of the most reliably fun form of animated entertainment around. Not that they are without criticism, but what are you talking about? 15 years of those movies because they've been successful, even amidst an environment where they are easily pirated without paying for them. LMAO! Huh?

Some people love them. Some of them DO deserve the high marks they get.

But a LOT of them aren't just flawed, they're awful. Not just by way of adaptation, which they mostly fail at, but in terms of character or storytelling. Some of them just aren't very well done.

They've been so successful, mostly because the current generation would rather Watch than Read. They like the characters, but they don't want to spend more than an hour and a half with them at a time, and they don't want to get TOO emotionally invested. They want something cheap, fast, and easily-digestable before they move on to the next thing.

If DC Comics are Ponderosa Steakhouse (dated reference, I know), then DC Animated Films are McDonalds. Little bit in common, they'll both fill you up, but they're catering to different tastes despite ostensibly doing the same thing.

I'd argue they've been about 50/50 overall. Some of them I like and even love - "Batman: Year One", "The Dark Knight Returns", "Superman/Batman: Public Enemies", etc. - and some of them were "Meh" - "The Killing Joke" - and some of them were awful and completely pervert the original story to the point of being unrecognizable despite a few superficial and meaningless similarities - "Batman: Hush" and "Reign of the Supermen".

So, yeah, they're consistently successful but not consistently good, same as Marvel movies or Star Wars or anything else. They just do a good job of presenting a "microwaved" version of DC stories to a mainstream audience that can't be bothered to read but still liked the characters.

So, in answer to Cubed's question of "Who are they for", that's the answer. They're for the guy who likes Batman but can't sit still or focus long enough to actually read, and figures something halfway there is "just as good" just because it's simpler.

[sdp]

I also though this was a Batman Bruce Lee crossover, which isn't crazy to think counting how liberal they are with these movies.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I still wonder who all these DC animated movies are aimed at. They're all mostly standalone and sometimes comic adaptions, but they don't have anything to do with the cartoons airing, and comic book fans don't like them because they're toned down.

Blows my mind they made like 50 of these movies already, remember they've been going on since Superman Doomsday way back in 2007. Nearly 15 years of these movies.

I think they're mostly for the most casual of DC fans and comic fans in general, you know now that geek culture is cool those people eat it up since it's for "adults" and not for "kids" like the tv shows which are ironically better despite being for kids. Also kids like them since parents buy them seeing Batman on the cover and not realizing they're not for kids, which really they are fine for kids, I watched worse as a kid through anime and it didn't scar my mind.

Because of this a continuity of films did not work out when they tried to, people prefer stuff that is not serialized in these casual releases. At least that's my guess, they seem to sell decently enough to continue making them but who knows and I'm sure they profit but not enough for them to get more marketing or a better budget. AT&T seems to be cutting corners everywhere and things that aren't super profitable are being shutdown so it wouldn't surprise me if these end now under the new CEO. (And no, DC isn't being sold AT&T loves owning DC).

[Leo656]

If anything, with everything going on we'll be seeing MORE of these animated projects and a lot fewer actual comic books, given the general sense of priorities over at "corporate" right now, post-merger.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Some people love them. Some of them DO deserve the high marks they get.

But a LOT of them aren't just flawed, they're awful. Not just by way of adaptation, which they mostly fail at, but in terms of character or storytelling. Some of them just aren't very well done.

They've been so successful, mostly because the current generation would rather Watch than Read. They like the characters, but they don't want to spend more than an hour and a half with them at a time, and they don't want to get TOO emotionally invested. They want something cheap, fast, and easily-digestable before they move on to the next thing.

If DC Comics are Ponderosa Steakhouse (dated reference, I know), then DC Animated Films are McDonalds. Little bit in common, they'll both fill you up, but they're catering to different tastes despite ostensibly doing the same thing.

I'd argue they've been about 50/50 overall. Some of them I like and even love - "Batman: Year One", "The Dark Knight Returns", "Superman/Batman: Public Enemies", etc. - and some of them were "Meh" - "The Killing Joke" - and some of them were awful and completely pervert the original story to the point of being unrecognizable despite a few superficial and meaningless similarities - "Batman: Hush" and "Reign of the Supermen".

So, yeah, they're consistently successful but not consistently good, same as Marvel movies or Star Wars or anything else. They just do a good job of presenting a "microwaved" version of DC stories to a mainstream audience that can't be bothered to read but still liked the characters.

So, in answer to Cubed's question of "Who are they for", that's the answer. They're for the guy who likes Batman but can't sit still or focus long enough to actually read, and figures something halfway there is "just as good" just because it's simpler.

I thought year one was well done, but man TDKR? God I thought Peter Weller was going to knock it out of the park, but then....? ugh. Havent gotten to Reign yet. Hush was fine. TKJ was.... not good.

[Leo656]

"Hush" was the opposite of "fine". Hush completely missed the point of the book and told an entirely different, and much dumber story.

Agree to disagree, I guess, but that's one of the few that didn't just annoy me, it actively raised my blood pressure. "Well drawn" was the nicest thing I could say about it. Story-wise, I think it's garbage. It's like they didn't even read the book. Or they thought that the Superman fight and Batman beating Joker half to death was all that was "important", which again... they missed the entire point.

I've harped on this one before, too, but it bears repeating:

Comic book Catwoman in "Hush": "I'm not gonna let you betray your ideals and start killing people just because it's easier. That's not who you are."

Animated Catwoman in "Hush": "You really ought'a just start killing people, man, it's so much easier."

They didn't understand the plot, they didn't understand the characters, and they completely didn't get the point. If they wanted to tell a completely different story, give it a completely different title. Instead, they piggybacked on an "iconic" and well-known story title, to get attention for their very dumb "Riddler Is Now A Psychopath and also, Bruce Finally Gets Pussy" story.

Worst of all, it convinced millions of people who never read the book that they now never have to. That's a sin. It is a very poor adaptation of a story that was much better in print.

There's few of the animated movies I outright hate, but that's definitely up there.

[IMJ]

I can understand why. I was scratching my head at the end of the flick with the Riddler changes. Like I said - eh- it was fine.

But I understand your anger - it's probably like mine at Iron Man 3.

[Leo656]

I imagine so! I've read so much about Iron Man 3 despite never seeing it, and all I've read simply ensures that I have no reason to watch it. I don't hate myself!

See, I read the Hush comic and watched the cartoon within the same 2.5-hour period, and when you do that, it really jumps out at how lousy the cartoon really is. It starts with the deviations, but it doesn't end there. It's just not even a good story.

The only thing I've ever seen people try to justify, is that "Well, in the comic it was too obvious that Hush was Tommy, it's a poorly-presented mystery, having Riddler be the villain makes more sense." Except No, it doesn't, and "Hush" is NOT a mystery, it is a TRAGEDY, and it's very unfortunate that the media (and DC themselves) presented and framed it as a mystery because yes, they give the game away before the first issue is done. But if you actually read "Hush", it's not about unraveling the mystery of the villain - Batman's trying to solve a mystery, but we the reader already know who it is unless the reader is an idiot. It's about how Bruce Wayne can never fully trust anyone because everyone eventually betrays him, whether willingly or by coercion. THAT is what "Hush" was about, not who was wearing the stupid bandages. It baffles me that people don't get that. "They SAID it was a Mystery, though." Yeah, that's called "marketing", which means "Lying for attention." And it's unfortunate, but it happens everywhere. People who get hung up on that missed the point entirely. It's not a good mystery story, but a very good tragedy. The distinction is important.

Considering I timed it, and it takes exactly 15-20 minutes longer to read the entire 12 issues than it does to watch the cartoon... yeah, the cartoon has no reason to exist at all. It fails utterly at every single thing it tries to do.

The art and animation were nice, though. But that's par for the course, most of these at least LOOK very good. Great job doing what you're supposed to do!

"Public Enemies" might be my very favorite, though. I haven't seen all of 'em but that one's just always so much fun.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I imagine so! I've read so much about Iron Man 3 despite never seeing it, and all I've read simply ensures that I have no reason to watch it. I don't hate myself!

See, I read the Hush comic and watched the cartoon within the same 2.5-hour period, and when you do that, it really jumps out at how lousy the cartoon really is. It starts with the deviations, but it doesn't end there. It's just not even a good story.

The only thing I've ever seen people try to justify, is that "Well, in the comic it was too obvious that Hush was Tommy, it's a poorly-presented mystery, having Riddler be the villain makes more sense." Except No, it doesn't, and "Hush" is NOT a mystery, it is a TRAGEDY, and it's very unfortunate that the media (and DC themselves) presented and framed it as a mystery because yes, they give the game away before the first issue is done. But if you actually read "Hush", it's not about unraveling the mystery of the villain - Batman's trying to solve a mystery, but we the reader already know who it is unless the reader is an idiot. It's about how Bruce Wayne can never fully trust anyone because everyone eventually betrays him, whether willingly or by coercion. THAT is what "Hush" was about, not who was wearing the stupid bandages. It baffles me that people don't get that. "They SAID it was a Mystery, though." Yeah, that's called "marketing", which means "Lying for attention." And it's unfortunate, but it happens everywhere. People who get hung up on that missed the point entirely. It's not a good mystery story, but a very good tragedy. The distinction is important.

Considering I timed it, and it takes exactly 15-20 minutes longer to read the entire 12 issues than it does to watch the cartoon... yeah, the cartoon has no reason to exist at all. It fails utterly at every single thing it tries to do.

The art and animation were nice, though. But that's par for the course, most of these at least LOOK very good. Great job doing what you're supposed to do!

"Public Enemies" might be my very favorite, though. I haven't seen all of 'em but that one's just always so much fun.

Love Public Enemies. Love it.
And that was all very well said about Hush. The thing is that the Riddler reveal as the mastermind in the comics still serves the mystery with a spin. As a manipulator of Hush, the Riddler reveals that Batman was trying to solve the wrong mystery all along.

But then the animated movie came along.... and... well.