>Dude, let's throw in a plot twist that is a major deviation from the source material to throw off people already familiar with this story! Even though this is literally the first time this story isn't told through a comic, so most people won't be familiar with it in the first place. Which means that instead they just get a version that is needlessly confusing and seemingly pulls something out it's ass.
Don't you just hate this kind of shit? Like what's the point? Maybe if it's like Dracula or Frankenstein, where it's a story that has been adapted a billion times, then I can get it. Here it's like why? And if they had to do something like this, at least do it in a way that makes more sense than "I had brain cancer that I never mentioned until now".
It's not even the only time shit like this happened. The adaptation of Gotham by Gaslight makes Gordon the villain. Then there's the omission of the Squid in Watchmen. And don't even get me started on the Walking Dead.
Agreed. I am so sick of modern writers attempting to "subvert" expectations.
Hudson Smith
But it was better and they set up red herrings in the movie
Charles Sanders
They are trying to pull another “Under the Red Hood” where they make a movie better than the source material by changing it.
Unfortunately it has never worked since.
Gabriel King
Most adaptations of novels have to condense or trim stuff to make it into a movie or show, and it's no different for comics. Sometimes the original story has elements you just can't manage or don't have the budget for, and you have to do something else. Sometimes the source material is old and you have to change things because modern sensibilities have changed. Sometimes it's a Mark Millar comic and you have to remove a lot of the edgelord parts to make it palatable for humans.
There are many reasons why it could be necessary to make changes. There are times when something about the source material is genuinely bad, or just doesn't fit, and you think you're making an improvement, and the audience will decide if you were right.
And then there's crap like this where something was changed for the sake of being different, like swerving the fans and subverting expectations are more important than being entertaining or coherent.
Charles Davis
The only reason anyone cares about this story is wondering if batman and catwoman will fuck
Juan White
>Gotham by Gaslight makes Gordon the villain This was WAY better done in the movie than in the comic book
The current DC animated universe is trash. It's like a worse version of new52 and that says somehting
Matthew Brooks
What you say is true, right now I'm reading the Manga of Nasicaa on Yas Forums,both the manga and the movie where made by the same guy. But the story is hundred of pages long while the movie was only two ours long. That movie like many movie adaptation had to change stuff, cut some elements that where too convoluted to be explored in the movie or just to simplify the story and have a satisfying resolution by the time the credits rolled.
Its true that some movies just change things for the sake of it, but other times is necessary. In OPs case I didn't had any strong emotion either way for Hush I never read the original so I wasn't stressed out by the changes, although I didn't saw the Riddler plot twist coming I thought it was going to be that one OC character that was friends with Bruce.
Jayden Thomas
When I was watching the Red Son movie, I had to go read the comic again because I literally thought I must have just made up or misremembered details about the original book
Blake Sanders
There is something to be said about adaptation changing so much that it nullifies the core message of the original work. One would say that if you are going to change so much you might as well do something brand new, but in this day and age stories are less narratives with text and subtext and more like brands with a core idea and surface level aesthetic. The idea is no longer to adapt a piece of fiction as to make a product based in an idea that is both already been tested to see if it works and just original enough to be considered fresh by the potential buyers.
Eli Evans
I guess so. What gets me is that it wasn't twisted so glaringly that it was obvious things were so different, it's like it was twisted just enough to make me think, "wait, what the fuck, did I remember this wrong." The overall story themes didn't change that much so then you are just left wondering why they changed anything at all, but if it's to seem original enough, I dunno I suppose that's a valid enough reason to some writer.
David Green
Nearly all of the changes UtRH made were for the sake of streamlining it into a coherent film that you don't need comic knowledge to understand. Cutting fat like Deathstroke, Mr. Freeze, etc. that would really only be distracting, and changing Jason's plan a little so there's more narrative payoff than him just conveniently stumbling upon the Joker by luck. Nothing that fundamentally changes the story just for the sake of throwing people off.
Eli Carter
>Sometimes it's a Mark Millar comic and you have to remove a lot of the edgelord parts to make it palatable for humans. Sure, but in the process the point of Kick-Ass went from "Don't take the moral actions in Superhero comics literally, applied to the real world it just results in bruises and tragedy with no purpose" to "Oh, it's totally fine if there's real motives and you have a jetpack. Also the chick will totally fuck your brains out, LOL!".
Riddler was the mastermind in both. The movie just removed the extra step in Tommy, but it's still the same conclusion. Even the stupid brain tumor plot was lifted from the comics.
>The adaptation of Gotham by Gaslight makes Gordon the villain
What was wrong with that? The original story had a very cliche and predictable villain and the story was already too short to be faithfully adapted. What we got was fine. More enjoyable than Hush and the other Nu52 trash, at least.
Cooper Campbell
Do you guys honestly even give a rats ass about HUSH? It's one of the most entry level, overrated Batman stories to ever exist. Hell it was Riddler's plot to begin with.
Isaac Parker
>take a mediocre story >turn it into a shitty story I don't care for Hush, but I do want to be entertained.
Charles Morales
>but I do want to be entertained. Then why the hell did you even bother with the movie in the first place? HUSH is a shit story, of course the adaptation is going to be a waste of time. That's like being pissed off that an animated Heroes In Crisis movie is bad.
Lincoln Morgan
Call me naive but I was hoping they could improve upon it like Under the Red Hood.
Asher Torres
Cutting out Thomas is arguably an improvement. Didn't really matter much though. The concept itself was flawed, a stupid whodunit
Grayson Martinez
The movie is better than the comic
Jose Ross
For some reason the comic ended up following the movies' philosophy. Kickass summons the courage to win his fight by imagining his parents congratulating him on harnessing the power of comic books, and Hit-Girl's mom is ecstatic that her daughter has been indoctrinated as a child soldier.
Jeremiah Hill
Would have The Batman's planned adaptation of the story have been any better? Do you think it would've been faithful or pretty much its own thing?
Joshua Morgan
There are legitimate reasons to make changes from source material but this isn't one of them. Imagine if they changed the identity of the Phantasm in the Mask of the Phantasm but didn't change the story significantly until that point. There is no hints to Hush being Riddler.
The bad faith changes to the source material are usually from "moving up" in this weird pecking order of mediums. Look at all those retards defending Netflix Castlevania.
The lowest to highest, it is: Videogames Comics Cartoon series Books Animated Movies Live action movies
When the source material is from a different country, put it one rank down.
Character assassinating Riddler to do it sure wasn't an improvement.
Ian Davis
They did change some stupid shit like the whole "Kill me or the Joker" ultimatum where Batman doesn't nearly kill Jason again to save the Joker. Cutting the fat and streamlining is exactly what UtRH needed because it was a sloppy story.
John Adams
Where was the character assasination? He went from joke to proper villian.
Evan Ramirez
fuck you, edgy murder Riddler will always be garbage and I hate that's his entire character nowadays
Andrew Gray
I honestly like most of the movie better, Millar isn't a very good writer.
>posting a soijack That's more of a self-inflicted insult than anything. Especially since they're numbered, better go commission some more diaperfur.
Eli Roberts
Under the Red Hood had some input from the original author and changing how Jason came back to life was mostly there to keep things self contained.
For adaptions, there is also changing the explanations of old sci-fi stories to be less retarded and inline with new scientific information. I hated the alternate ending of the I Am Legend movie because the movie already changed too much from the source material and homos are acting like the alternate ending should have been the one released.
Austin Reed
Yes, because Jack the Ripper there was the OC. Of course he'd be the only suspect.
