People Noticed this about the ending of HUSH right?

[Choppa]

This seems really obvious to me, but I was wondering if other people picked up on it. In LH and DV Riddler was always made to look like a fool, and when Batman confronted him, he was totally worthless as a suspect.

Then in HUSH, it seemed like things were the same once again. Riddler tried another low-key scheme and seemed to be worthless as a suspect. But then, as we all know, he turned out to be the main mastermind behind it all.

It was a nice little touch for those who had read LH and DV before HUSH, (though I wish that it could have been worked in a little better- the amount of off panel stuff that had to happen to make it work was a bit much). But anyway, did you guys like this or even pick up on it?

Btw there was another connection to LH/DV that I noticed (and it wasn't the reference to Joker beating up Harvey).

[Choppa]

Damn 148 views and no replies? I'm guessing that this is either incredibly obvious to people or totally missed by everyone.

[Paul Dee]

What was it then? You've been quite vague up to now.

[Loren]

Btw there was another connection to LH/DV that I noticed (and it wasn't the reference to Joker beating up Harvey).

That it was a 12-issue mystery story that employed Batman's entire Rogue's gallery, and finally ended in the revelation that there were actually *two* people responsible for the murders, one of whom was the ordinary person who had been established as being either dead or crippled earlier in the series only to turn up alive and healthy at the end?

You mean that connection?

[The Shadow]

I'm guessing that this is either incredibly obvious to people or totally missed by everyone.
Option 3: Nobody cared because Hush isn't worth any indepth analysis.

[Paul Dee]

Option 3: Nobody cared because Hush isn't worth any indepth analysis.



Haha. That would probably be true if it wasn't for the fact that a new Hush-related topic turns up on here every couple of days. That, along with various Batman and Robin and all-Star threads.

[Agentum]

I don't see much in Hush that makes you think, it looks nice but i think it's mostly surface.

[Choppa]

In depth analysis? What's so in depth about noticing the way Loeb used a character across multiple stories?

And the other connection was just that some lines from LH/DV were repeated in HUSH.

But that's just a side thing. The main point was that the ending had that twist to it and I just wanted to see if people had caught that.

[OverMaster]

In depth analysis? What's so in depth about noticing the way Loeb used a character across multiple stories?

And the other connection was just that some lines from LH/DV were repeated in HUSH.

But that's just a side thing. The main point was that the ending had that twist to it and I just wanted to see if people had caught that.

The twist was very superficial and kinda contrived, though. Maybe that's we readers didn't care about it.

[Totoro Man]

well, I was glad that the Riddler could actually be a criminal mastermind... sorta. but Jeph Loeb already threw SO many characters into the narrative that were COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY! there were more red herrings in that story than really needed to be there.

I've grown very tired of Jeph Loeb's "twist" endings... and the twists aren't even surprising anymore... especially as he uses the same ones in every story-arc connected to Batman

Alberto Falcone presumed dead is actually the killer!
Sofia Falcone presumed dead/crippled is actually the killer!
Tommy Elliot presumed dead is actually the killer

see a pattern? :rolleyes:

if he'd JUST focused on building up the Riddler as the main bad in HUSH it might have been more interesting... because you'd start wondering just how much he actually knows.

or, consider the 'Dark Victory' story... where he could have gone for the OBVIOUS solution of making Two Face responsible for all the murders... and then wondering which twisted facet of Harvey Dent's personality was going to be in control next. just because all the clues point to a particular suspect doesn't mean that the story lacks in suspense. geez, look at "M" by Fritz Lang... pretty much the first serial killer movie ever made. it's not lacking in drama and suspense (by 1930s standards at the very least) even though we ALREADY KNOW who the killer is within the first two minutes!

Jeph Loeb is so busy trying to be smarter than the audience that it's insulting and formulaic.

[Choppa]

well, I was glad that the Riddler could actually be a criminal mastermind... sorta. but Jeph Loeb already threw SO many characters into the narrative that were COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY! there were more red herrings in that story than really needed to be there.

I've grown very tired of Jeph Loeb's "twist" endings... and the twists aren't even surprising anymore... especially as he uses the same ones in every story-arc connected to Batman

Alberto Falcone presumed dead is actually the killer!
Sofia Falcone presumed dead/crippled is actually the killer!
Tommy Elliot presumed dead is actually the killer

see a pattern? :rolleyes:

if he'd JUST focused on building up the Riddler as the main bad in HUSH it might have been more interesting... because you'd start wondering just how much he actually knows.

or, consider the 'Dark Victory' story... where he could have gone for the OBVIOUS solution of making Two Face responsible for all the murders... and then wondering which twisted facet of Harvey Dent's personality was going to be in control next. just because all the clues point to a particular suspect doesn't mean that the story lacks in suspense. geez, look at "M" by Fritz Lang... pretty much the first serial killer movie ever made. it's not lacking in drama and suspense (by 1930s standards at the very least) even though we ALREADY KNOW who the killer is within the first two minutes!

Jeph Loeb is so busy trying to be smarter than the audience that it's insulting and formulaic.


Yeah you're right. I was just thinking about how much extra stuff there is in the story that goes nowhere and has no bearing on the overall plot. We really didn't need all that internal monologue about Huntress and Dick and all that.

And I disagree with Overmaster. The story could have worked very well if the focus had been more on Riddler, and if there was some hint about all the stuff that had happened to him so that when you find out in the last issue, it isn't totally out of nowhere.

[knightsintights]

well, I was glad that the Riddler could actually be a criminal mastermind... sorta. but Jeph Loeb already threw SO many characters into the narrative that were COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY! there were more red herrings in that story than really needed to be there.

I've grown very tired of Jeph Loeb's "twist" endings... and the twists aren't even surprising anymore... especially as he uses the same ones in every story-arc connected to Batman

Alberto Falcone presumed dead is actually the killer!
Sofia Falcone presumed dead/crippled is actually the killer!
Tommy Elliot presumed dead is actually the killer

see a pattern? :rolleyes:

if he'd JUST focused on building up the Riddler as the main bad in HUSH it might have been more interesting... because you'd start wondering just how much he actually knows.

or, consider the 'Dark Victory' story... where he could have gone for the OBVIOUS solution of making Two Face responsible for all the murders... and then wondering which twisted facet of Harvey Dent's personality was going to be in control next. just because all the clues point to a particular suspect doesn't mean that the story lacks in suspense. geez, look at "M" by Fritz Lang... pretty much the first serial killer movie ever made. it's not lacking in drama and suspense (by 1930s standards at the very least) even though we ALREADY KNOW who the killer is within the first two minutes!

Jeph Loeb is so busy trying to be smarter than the audience that it's insulting and formulaic.


Man... nicely put. I agree to many twists and turnsand in the end Im sure even Loeb lost where he was headed. I think Hush could be a cool villian to add to Batman gallery but someone needs to write him well. Loeb created him and ruined him all in the same arc. Then Leiberman(?) over in Gotham Knights just made it worse.

[Petertime]

[QUOTE=Totoro Man] just because all the clues point to a particular suspect doesn't mean that the story lacks in suspense. geez, look at "M" by Fritz Lang... pretty much the first serial killer movie ever made. it's not lacking in drama and suspense (by 1930s standards at the very least) even though we ALREADY KNOW who the killer is within the first two minutes!
QUOTE]

Excellent point, and an excellent movie.

I read the first Hush storyline but not the ones before (or anything since...I read Batman occasionally, for no particular reason)

Worth reading?

[The Mirrorball Man]

What are "LH" and "DV"?

[DonC]

"The Long Halloween" and "Dark Victory." Apparently they share some mysterious similarity only Choppa and Jeph Loeb know about.

[The Mirrorball Man]

"The Long Halloween" and "Dark Victory." Apparently they share some mysterious similarity only Choppa and Jeph Loeb know about.
Thank you!

[Choppa]

"The Long Halloween" and "Dark Victory." Apparently they share some mysterious similarity only Choppa and Jeph Loeb know about.

What's mysterious? Did you even read what I wrote?

[DonC]

I think repeated lines of dialogue is probably a coincidence, even with the same writer. I don't recall any iconic lines like, "Bond, James Bond" or "I have a bad feeling about this."

[Choppa]

I think repeated lines of dialogue is probably a coincidence, even with the same writer. I don't recall any iconic lines like, "Bond, James Bond" or "I have a bad feeling about this."

I don't remember the exact line, but it's defenitly not a coincidence. Go back and read what he says about Robin in DV and about Catwomen in HUSH.

[karaokefanboy]

The really unfortunate twist at the end of "Hush" is that the Riddler "figures out" Batman's identity. Anyone notice THAT? Has the Riddler been seen since this story, and if so, did he give a link wink-wink to Bats, like, "Remeeeeeember! I know who you aaaaaare!" Not only did Loeb take away a good motivator behind the Riddler/Batman conflict (besides the general good guy/bad guy thing) -- Nigma figuring out the greatest riddle in Gotham -- but he neutered a good villain in the process. Now, Riddler is in the same league as Ra's and Bane? Those guys are mental and physical powerhouses. The Riddler has always been just a beloved classic villain with a story-of-the-month status. Very clever, Loeb. Really good writing, there. Actually, it's SELFISH.

I remember reading some of the same lines, too. You know who Loeb's biggest fan is?




Loeb.

[Choppa]

The really unfortunate twist at the end of "Hush" is that the Riddler "figures out" Batman's identity. Anyone notice THAT? Has the Riddler been seen since this story, and if so, did he give a link wink-wink to Bats, like, "Remeeeeeember! I know who you aaaaaare!" Not only did Loeb take away a good motivator behind the Riddler/Batman conflict (besides the general good guy/bad guy thing) -- Nigma figuring out the greatest riddle in Gotham -- but he neutered a good villain in the process. Now, Riddler is in the same league as Ra's and Bane? Those guys are mental and physical powerhouses. The Riddler has always been just a beloved classic villain with a story-of-the-month status. Very clever, Loeb. Really good writing, there. Actually, it's SELFISH.



That's been addressed in Detective OYL.