Batman-Online.com

On Eisenberg:

Quote"Lex Luthor is often considered the most notorious of Superman's rivals, his unsavory reputation preceding him since 1940," Snyder said in Warner Bros' announcement of the castings today. "What's great about Lex is that he exists beyond the confines of the stereotypical nefarious villain. He's a complicated and sophisticated character whose intellect, wealth and prominence position him as one of the few mortals able to challenge the incredible might of Superman. Having Jesse in the role allows us to explore that interesting dynamic, and also take the character in some new and unexpected directions."

I can't be the only one hoping that Irons sports a familiar moustache...

Quote"As everyone knows, Alfred is Bruce Wayne's most trusted friend, ally and mentor, a noble guardian and father figure. He is an absolutely critical element in the intricate infrastructure that allows Bruce Wayne to transform himself into Batman. It is an honor to have such an amazingly seasoned and gifted actor as Jeremy taking on the important role of the man who mentors and guides the guarded and nearly impervious façade that encapsulates Bruce Wayne."

http://www.deadline.com/2014/01/jesse-eisenberg-jeremy-irons-superman-batman-movie-warner-bros/

Quote from: BatmAngelus on Fri, 31 Jan  2014, 18:00
I can't be the only one hoping that Irons sports a familiar moustache...

Quote"As everyone knows, Alfred is Bruce Wayne's most trusted friend, ally and mentor, a noble guardian and father figure. He is an absolutely critical element in the intricate infrastructure that allows Bruce Wayne to transform himself into Batman. It is an honor to have such an amazingly seasoned and gifted actor as Jeremy taking on the important role of the man who mentors and guides the guarded and nearly impervious façade that encapsulates Bruce Wayne."

http://www.deadline.com/2014/01/jesse-eisenberg-jeremy-irons-superman-batman-movie-warner-bros/#more-674746

I like Irons as Alfred but I'm not sure what to make of Eisenberg as Luthor.  I'm guessing it will be yet another 'evil nerd'. 

Nothing like eating the hand that feeds you (i.e. demonising the nerds that arguably swarm to these comic-book films to begin with).

Eisenberg really does not match up to Henry Cavill in my opinion. Unlike Christopher Reeve and Gene Hackman facing off against each other. How are we to believe this little "twerp" is the sworn enemy of Superman? I can't visualise it at all. Obviously a case of casting younger dudes to get the "chicks in the audience asses on seats".

Eisenberg irritated the HELL out of me in "The Social Network". To be fair to him though that's only because he was playing the truly annoying persona of Mark Zuckerberg. Who created the annoying website that is Facebook. That later got turned into the annoyingly smug David Fincher film. Who is himself smug and annoying. And then won lots of annoying Oscars to go with it all. So the words Eisenberg and annoying sadly go hand in hand for me. And it's extremely annoying Lex Luthor is he and not Joaquin Phoenix or Bryan Cranston (both physically perfect for it).

Jeremy Irons I like very much although I at first believed he'd been cast as a major villain. It's always nice how big "names" seem to get lured to the Batman movies more so than other comic book films. If you'd told me this guy (who started out on British daytime kiddies show "Playschool") would one day be the butler of Mr Wayne I'd have spat my dummy out lol So don't think I'll now be able to watch "The Lion King" or "Die Hard 3" again without going "Oooh it's Alfred!".

I've got to disagree with you about 'The Social Network' and David Fincher.  It's a great film and Fincher is one of the finest American directors currently making movies.

I'm ambivalent about Eisenberg's casting.  Haven't we seen enough nerds as baddies already?  What about a dashing charismatic playboy villain for once ('The Fantastic Four' tried lamely to do this with Dr Doom but that didn't suit that particular character who's more of a moody, dictatorial genius)?

On the other hand, a young whizz-kid genius is an interesting angle and credible in terms of the real-life hot-shots that currently rule the world.  As much as I like Cranston this is also a much more fresh take on the character than I suspect we would have seen from another middle-aged schlumpy character actor akin to Hackman and Spacey.  Plus, it frees up Cranston to play 'Commissioner Gordon' if that's still a possibility.

Plus, aren't we meant to hate Luthor anyway?  So 'smug and annoying' don't exactly mark Eisenberg as a bad choice.

QuoteAnd it's extremely annoying Lex Luthor is he and not Joaquin Phoenix or Bryan Cranston

..or George Clooney. I would have loved to see him in the role, but obviously they wanted something totally different, and much younger.

Quote from: Nycteris on Fri, 31 Jan  2014, 20:46

QuoteAnd it's extremely annoying Lex Luthor is he and not Joaquin Phoenix or Bryan Cranston

..or George Clooney. I would have loved to see him in the role, but obviously they wanted something totally different, and much younger.

After 'Batman & Robin' Clooney wouldn't touch a comic-book franchise with a barge-pole but I'm with you.  Clooney is exactly the type of handsome, smooth, suave actor I'd have liked to have seen play a new incarnation of Luthor.

Still, the bitter, self-made nerd-genius could be an interesting new angle for Lew Luthor after Hackman and Spacey's older incarnations.

Jeremy Irons as Alfred is an inspiring choice. But Jesse Eisenberg as Lex makes me laugh, and I doubt he is going to play the business executive/playboy type! If he's typecast as the Zuckerberg-like douche, it's going to be hilarious to see him play alongside Cavill and Affleck.

Quick, someone edit Man of Steel's "You Are Not Alone" trailer with Eisenberg's quotes from The Social Network!  ;D ;D ;D

ok i havent been following news on this movie much but jeremy irons as alfred? sh*t just got real kiddies. i LOVE him.

(https://www.batman-online.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-prn1%2Ft1%2Fq71%2F1546345_676075935768793_2056529535_n.jpg&hash=31f091e03c61c2c8b3a2ed3f0d5ddfd0729cf421)

Quote from: Paul (ral) on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 00:59
(https://www.batman-online.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-prn1%2Ft1%2Fq71%2F1546345_676075935768793_2056529535_n.jpg&hash=31f091e03c61c2c8b3a2ed3f0d5ddfd0729cf421)

Win  :D

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Fri, 31 Jan  2014, 21:46
Still, the bitter, self-made nerd-genius could be an interesting new angle for Lew Luthor after Hackman and Spacey's older incarnations.

Hmm, yes. It is very much 'today'. I can get behind the concept.

Irons as Alfred is a good choice.

I was hoping for someone older. Not necessarily Cranston but someone reminiscent of John Shea who, while somewhat hammy, did an excellent job of portraying the modern businessman Lex Luthor.

Still, I can get behind this casting, especially if it's similar to Rosenbaum.

Now if only they'd announce that Caviezel/Brolin/Urban/Whoever was replacing Affleck...

Quote from: phantom stranger on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 05:14
I was hoping for someone older. Not necessarily Cranston but someone reminiscent of John Shea who, while somewhat hammy, did an excellent job of portraying the modern businessman Lex Luthor.

Still, I can get behind this casting, especially if it's similar to Rosenbaum.

Now if only they'd announce that Caviezel/Brolin/Urban/Whoever was replacing Affleck...

::)

How about let's wait and see how Affleck does before we judge him (and for that matter, let's do the same for Eisenberg too, despite my initial joke about him earlier)?

After all, his Batman can't be anywhere near as laughable as Bale's was.

Yea,  I didn't want to hijack the thread.

But as the only person in the world who liked Daredevil (and thinks Affleck did a good job in the role--would've wanted to see him in the reboot) I think I've earned the right to take a cheap shot or two.  :P

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 05:26
How about let's wait and see how Affleck does before we judge him (and for that matter, let's do the same for Eisenberg too, despite my initial joke about him earlier)?

After all, his Batman can't be anywhere near as laughable as Bale's was.

I'm looking forward to Affleck quite a bit. I think he can be really good, possibly the best after Keaton. After all the moaning and 'will he walk' drama, I want to see him succeed in the role more than ever.

Quote from: phantom stranger on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 05:14
I was hoping for someone older. Not necessarily Cranston but someone reminiscent of John Shea who, while somewhat hammy, did an excellent job of portraying the modern businessman Lex Luthor.

Still, I can get behind this casting, especially if it's similar to Rosenbaum.

Now if only they'd announce that Caviezel/Brolin/Urban/Whoever was replacing Affleck...

I hope Eisenberg won't be too similar to Rosenbaum.  I'd prefer to see Eisenberg as a self-made genius, akin to his 'Mark Zuckerberg' role, than as the spoiled rich boy version of Luthor Rosenbaum played.

But ideally I'm on the same page as you phantom stranger.  With all dues respect to Hackman's fun and highly memorable performance, John Shea is still probably my favourite onscreen incarnation of Luthor, the suave, charismatic but menacing businessman who could conceivably win over Metropolis and even win the presidency, a plot angle that was never covered in the show but would quite conceivably have worked with Luthor.  Sadly I can't see  Eisenberg covering the 'Luthor for President' angle form the comic-books, particularly at his age.  But imagine, a comic-book movie where the guy in charge of the Free World is Superman's number one nemesis.

A mock trailer HAHA! [WARNING: Contains some adult themes]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gIntDen7fv0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gIntDen7fv0)

I'll give Eisenberg a chance.  Like Affleck, it's a choice that seems to come out of the blue.

One thing I thought I'd point out in the press release:

QuoteChris Terrio is currently writing the script from a screenplay by David S. Goyer. Charles Roven and Deborah Snyder are producing, with Benjamin Melniker, Michael E. Uslan, Wesley Coller, David S. Goyer and Geoff Johns executive producing.

I think Chris Nolan is definitely off the project.  This is not the first press release relating to the movie where his name was absent.

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 06:54But ideally I'm on the same page as you phantom stranger.  With all dues respect to Hackman's fun and highly memorable performance, John Shea is still probably my favourite onscreen incarnation of Luthor, the suave, charismatic but menacing businessman who could conceivably win over Metropolis and even win the presidency, a plot angle that was never covered in the show but would quite conceivably have worked with Luthor.

I've got to agree with gobbs and phantom stranger here. Shea is my favourite Luthor too. His performance as Lex is one of the most underrated and overlooked in the history of comic adaptations. He was suave, charming, funny, intimidating, seductive and psychotic in equal measure. In some adaptations Lex and Superman have appeared unevenly matched, but in Shea's case I could believe he was a worthy adversary for the Man of Steel. Their ongoing stalemate felt totally believable to me, as did the idea that this guy could fool almost everyone into thinking he was a benevolent philanthropist - even to the point where he could get Lois Lane to fall in love with him. He was one of the best examples of the 'magnificent bastard' trope, and I actually felt slightly sorry for him whenever he lost.


I would have liked to have seen something along those lines in the new movie. That being said, I've got nothing against Eisenberg. Technically Luthor is meant to be 6'2 and 210 lbs, which is the same height and weight as Batman. But artists have portrayed him in a variety of different ways over the years. Sometimes he's an overweight middle-aged man, other times he's an athletic youngster. Sometimes he's tall, sometimes he's short. There's a lot of leeway when it comes to the actor's physical appearance. I'm assuming Snyder and Goyer have a specific take in mind, and that Eisenberg fits the profile. So fingers crossed he does a good job.

And of course Irons is a solid choice for Alfred. No complaints there. Like BatmAngelus, I'm hoping he'll sport the thin moustache.

Quote from: Paul (ral) on Sat,  1 Feb  2014, 00:59
(https://www.batman-online.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-prn1%2Ft1%2Fq71%2F1546345_676075935768793_2056529535_n.jpg&hash=31f091e03c61c2c8b3a2ed3f0d5ddfd0729cf421)

Lol!

I didn't like the movie that much,  but Kevin Spacey is my favourite on-screen Lex. He was an emotionless bastard. Nothing surprised him, nothing fazed him, he was in control and that was it.  This portrayal hinted at a more philosophical Lex when he gives his Prometheus speech about wanting to steal the fire of the gods and give it back to humanity, which I liked.

No complaints about Irons. Eisenberg is a fair actor, not a great one, and I was one of those people who found Social Network over-rated.

Aces with Jeremy Irons as Alfred. I'm sure he'll be good in the role.


Now .... to Eisenberg .....

(https://www.batman-online.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi416%2Fjokertdk%2FVarious%2520Images%2FCGzRkHE_zps14a7e8d2.jpg&hash=eefbec35b500c88fb806779d4f4533b444ae09fd) (http://s1092.photobucket.com/user/jokertdk/media/Various%20Images/CGzRkHE_zps14a7e8d2.jpg.html)

Back in 2006/2007, I really can't speak for those who are shocked by the news, but I wasn't pissed at Heath Ledger being cast as the Joker. Because he was a relatively unknown actor to me at the time. Though of course, following the announcement, I began checking out more films with Ledger in the cast, and quickly saw how evidently talented he was as a versatile actor. Now with jesse Eisenberg, I've seen him in plenty of movies, and find him to have decidedly less range for sure. As he typically plays uppity, angsty, anxiety riddled characters. That's his shtick from what I've seen. With absolutely zero alpha tendencies. Which, by the way, is what I think makes Luthor such a great character, his alpha dominancy and how that gives him the belief that he's truly in Superman's league.

Really not sure about this. I honestly was hoping for a Post-Crisis competent, well executed Luthor, but it appears, thanks in large part to The Social Network I'm sure, we're going to end up with a Mark Zuckerberg-esque Lex Luthor now .....  Yay.

The H is silent...

Quote from: The Joker on Sun,  2 Feb  2014, 06:11
Really not sure about this. I honestly was hoping for a Post-Crisis competent, well executed Luthor, but it appears, thanks in large part to The Social Network I'm sure, we're going to end up with a Mark Zuckerberg-esque Lex Luthor now .....  Yay.

It is a bit of a shock to the system, to be sure. It will take getting used to. But...I like the approach. A movie of this calibre could very easily cast itself and cruise through on autopilot. WB and Snyder are choosing to do something very different, especially with their casting decisions. Gal Gadot could prove to be a dud acting wise when they easily could've cast someone experienced. Eisenberg and the young guy concept could prove to be a mixed bag. Affleck may not be any really different to his Daredevil days. There's a fair share of risks here. And it has raised my interest considerably for the final product.

I need to reply what I think about this statement from this article.

QuoteNow Batman Vs Superman's Lex Luthor is set to be played by Jesse Eisenberg, an actor nobody expected to fill the role. Lex Luthor has always been cast as an eccentric genius whose confidence allowed him to ignore how physically unmatched he was against Superman. Jesse Eisenberg simply doesn't appear to have any of those qualities, from what we've seen in Zombieland, Now You See Me, and The Social Network (though he does play a bit of a genius in that one).

It seems Jesse Eisenberg won't need to be any of those things in Batman Vs Superman. Lex Luthor is reportedly being reimagined as a tattooed skinhead street punk, a decision which could easily turn off a lot of DC Comics purists. When we think of the tattooed street punk, we usually think of the villains from the Mad Max films, or the gang members from Back to the Future and Police Academy.

So far all we have to go on for reference is the first Man of Steel, which has drawn strongly mixed feelings from all around. Batman Vs Superman's Lex Luthor reimagining is only the latest in the shocking revelations surrounding Zack Snyder's latest film about the Kryptonian orphan, and it's uncertain how much more can be changed before the purists give up entirely.


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1126648/batman-vs-superman-lex-luthor-jesse-eisenberg/#qfIb8wyYYJOuP3SV.99

Yeah, well when I first saw Heath Ledger dressed up as the kind of Joker who had scars on his face and goth-looking makeup smeared everywhere, I honestly thought the purists would've screamed with rage and rejected the way he looked. To my surprise, it was widely praised instead. When I think of the Joker, I think of a homicidal clown who murders people with comedic gags - not a totally scarred maniac who looks like he belongs in a horror movie.
Just to be clear, I'm not too enthusiastic about this rumour about Lex's characterisation either. But assuming that is true, I better not hear complaints from the same "purists" who praised the way Ledger's Joker looked. That for me would be too much of a double standard to tolerate.  >:(

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 10 Feb  2014, 06:18
Yeah, well when I first saw Heath Ledger dressed up as the kind of Joker who had scars on his face and goth-looking makeup smeared everywhere, I honestly thought the purists would've screamed with rage and rejected the way he looked. To my surprise, it was widely praised instead.

I think it was praised because it was in stark contrast to what was being painted. A cutesy, gay cowboy caricature. Instead we received a long haired lout with a liking for knives. It surprised and shocked people in equal measure.

I like Ledger's Joker, but it's hardly what I would call definitive.

Entertaining debate.  :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=er1_580CB4I

This is what Irons said recently about his version of Alfred:

Quote"Oh he'll be quite different. He has an interesting history. He's a very competent man. He's the sort of man I think anyone would like to be married to. He can sort of do everything: change light bulbs, blow up bridges if he has to."

http://www.movieweb.com/batman-v-superman-alfred-jeremy-irons

It sounds like they could be taking cues from Earth One, where Alfred saved Batman's life by shooting the Penguin to death with a shotgun.

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 10 Feb  2014, 06:18

QuoteLex Luthor is reportedly being reimagined as a tattooed skinhead street punk

Are they f***ing serious? How can they screw up probably the second greatest comic book villain ever that badly?

Yeah not quite so excited anymore :-\

Pretty sure the Lex Luthor thing was debunked a long while back when a guy wrote his own BvS script that incorporated the tattoos and then "leaked" that intel to other places so they'd think his script was legit.

Yea helps if I freaking read the dates lmao.

I'm blonde, I have an excuse. :-\

http://legionsofgotham.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/1st-official-pic-of-jesse-eisenberg-as.html

He looks more like a Neo-Nazi and less like a poewrful, cunning, ruthless, shrewd business man who truly believes he can go toe to toe with Superman and bend steel....just saying...

Quote from: Catwoman on Wed, 25 Mar  2015, 20:58
http://legionsofgotham.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/1st-official-pic-of-jesse-eisenberg-as.html

He looks more like a Neo-Nazi and less like a poewrful, cunning, ruthless, shrewd business man who truly believes he can go toe to toe with Superman and bend steel....just saying...

;D  I doubt it since Jesse Eisenberg is Jewish.

I think he looks great.

Nothing to write home about. It's a bald Zuckerberg. OoOoh!  ::)

People may be unsure about Eisenberg' s performance as Luther but let's keep an open mind. One thing we learnt from Keaton's casting uproar; give people a chance.

Quote from: The Joker on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 00:56

Nothing to write home about. It's a bald Zuckerberg. OoOoh!  ::)

lmao

He just doesn't look intimidating to me like Lex should. Of course neither did the dude in the Smallville show. I guess I got so wrapped up in the Lex from the Superman cartoon that I feel like he should be this tall, imposing man with a voice deeper than the ocean. He was actually sexy in a cartoon character kind of way lol. I wrote a short, terrible story back in the day (it was on notebook paper! ohmergaaad!) about him and Mercy. My mom found it and was not amused. Thank God she can't see the stuff I've written on my computer now.

Speaking of Mercy she should be in the movie. Of course it won't have the same dynamic since we have a pipsqueak Lex. Bleh.

I generally agree Catwoman.  I also prefer Luthor to be a powerfully-built, imposing man rather than a reedy kid, but the nature of business these days is that it's the reedy internet entrepreneurs who are now the central power-mongers in society so I suppose this casting makes sense.

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 02:58
I also prefer Luthor to be a powerfully-built, imposing man rather than a reedy kid, but the nature of business these days is that it's the reedy internet entrepreneurs who are now the central power-mongers in society so I suppose this casting makes sense.

Going that route with Lex just comes across as a attempt to be 'current' and 'unconventional', especially in terms of Eisenberg being cast, than something that would actually be worthwhile for the actual character itself. Sure, I understand the idea of going that route, but to me, it comes across as pretty narrow minded. As Lex, in this film, could have easily been so much more than a bald 'reedy internet entrepreneur' Zuckerberg.

Personally, I would have much more preferred a older actor for Lex. One that conveys intelligence, but also a evident charisma, both in terms of attitude and body language, that radiates Lex's commanding alpha male tendencies. Also, in this universe, the DC cinematic universe, an older Lex could have easily been presented as essentially a amalgam of both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. A individual that, in the DCCU, has already shaped the world several decades ago as a pioneer of the personal computer revolution, along with being a long-time influential business magnate, and of course, a steady inventor. To me, something along those lines would have been much more effectual for a character like Lex than going all social network.

Actually, the casting is still perplexing to me given that Snyder, once upon a time, was quoted as saying that he envisioned Lex to be a mixture of Richard Branson and Brad Pitt. I don't see neither in who we got.  :o

I'll wait and see before I judge Eisenberg, but I for one thinks that he does look menacing in that photo. Now people can stop complaining about his hair.  :P

Quote from: The Joker on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 11:21Actually, the casting is still perplexing to me given that Snyder, once upon a time, was quoted as saying that he envisioned Lex to be a mixture of Richard Branson and Brad Pitt. I don't see neither in who we got.  :o

I'm just trying to accept what we've got.  :-\  But Brad Pitt as 'Lex Luthor' would have been amazing.  Imagine, a suave, charismatic, handsome Luthor who also happens to be a self-made billionaire and one of the smartest men in the world.  For once we'd have a Luthor who was a real match for Superman.

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 12:37
I'm just trying to accept what we've got.  :-\  But Brad Pitt as 'Lex Luthor' would have been amazing.  Imagine, a suave, charismatic, handsome Luthor who also happens to be a self-made billionaire and one of the smartest men in the world.  For once we'd have a Luthor who was a real match for Superman.

I know, bro. As a Lex fan, he's probably my 2nd favorite villain behind the Joker of course, I just can't help but be disappointed with everything pertaining to him thus far. It's clear that deciding to go with the unconventional route, especially in terms of casting, was a conscious decision that was made with this film, even though there really wasn't nothing wrong or unacceptable with going with the more conventional approach to begin with.....

Quote from: The Joker on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 14:05

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Thu, 26 Mar  2015, 12:37
I'm just trying to accept what we've got.  :-\  But Brad Pitt as 'Lex Luthor' would have been amazing.  Imagine, a suave, charismatic, handsome Luthor who also happens to be a self-made billionaire and one of the smartest men in the world.  For once we'd have a Luthor who was a real match for Superman.

I know, bro. As a Lex fan, he's probably my 2nd favorite villain behind the Joker of course, I just can't help but be disappointed with everything pertaining to him thus far. It's clear that deciding to go with the unconventional route, especially in terms of casting, was a conscious decision that was made with this film, even though there really wasn't nothing wrong or unacceptable with going with the more conventional approach to begin with.....

Well film-wise the conventional choice would have been another goofy, comical, paunchy middle-aged scheming crook/scientist, as per Gene Hackman and Kevin Spacey's performances.  They're great of course but personally speaking the only live-action Lex Luthor that comes close to my vision of the character is John Shea's suave and superficially charming businessman in the 1990s "Lois and Clark" TV show.  Jon Hamm did a commercial or short film as Lex I believe and he would certainly have been in the vein of what I'm looking for, although I don't really count that because it was so brief (plus, Hamm is still my ideal post-millennium Bruce Wayne/Batman).

Film-wise, Lex has yet to get his due. Though I wasn't just singling out past film versions when I referred to the idea of conventional... Fortunately television has been more kind to Lex. Michael Rosenbaum as the younger Lex from Smallville (Pre-Crisis nod), Clancy Brown in TAS, and of course, John Shea's decidedly Post-Crisis influenced take in Lois & Clark. All good stuff. Taking up the slack and succeeding where film-wise versions have not-aged well, or just flat out failed.

Here's a new image of Eisenberg's Lex and a little piece of viral marketing in this fake Fortune interview. ***Warning:*** article may contain spoilers.

(https://www.batman-online.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn1-www.comingsoon.net%2Fassets%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F10%2Fsoclexne.jpg&hash=0a92c92fbab3ebaf164bc37a1bf9864a65fdbc62)

Source: http://fortune.com/contentfrom/2015/10/05/lex-luthor-jr/ntv_a/3dsBA58oDAfxgFA

I read the article.  I don't care for it and what it tells us about this Luthor at all.

I was hoping this Luthor would be the self-made kid from Suicide Slum rather than simply a spoiled rich kid ala Tony Stark.  ::)  The former version possesses an interesting pathos for a villain by contrasting him with the privileged likes of Bruce Wayne and his billion-dollar inheritance and Clark Kent with his loving nuclear family in Smallville.  But now that we know Luthor will be born into money it's hard to see how he will generate any sympathy and thus complexity as an antagonist.  Moreover, I can't help thinking that Eisenberg is completely the wrong actor for a character that was initially described by Zach Snyder as being a cross between 'Brad Pitt and Richard Branson'...yeah, right.  ::)  And I don't see how Eisenberg and his awkward geeky laugh (see the trailer) evokes the 'easy charm' described in the 'Fortune' article.

All in all, the more I read about the DC Universe the more I feel inclined to stick with the MCU, and be thankful that we've at least got the Burton Batman films, the first two Christopher Reeve Superman films and TDK trilogy, as far as DC goes.

Just a final thought, Man of Steel, the DC Cinematic Universe franchise launcher, has got a 56% 'Rotten Score' on the Rotten Tomatoes meter in contrast to the twelve theatrically-released MCU films, every single one of which has a 'fresh' RT score.  :-\

Wait, so Eisenberg's long-haired/redheaded character is named Alexander Luthor Jr.??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Luthor,_Jr.

;D

It does seem like they took the Smallville route of having a Lex who grew up rich and (presumably) ended up killing his father and taking over the company. Not a huge fan of them doing what the last live action version of Lex Luthor did, but we'll just have to see next year.

Quote from: BatmAngelus on Tue,  6 Oct  2015, 16:58It does seem like they took the Smallville route of having a Lex who grew up rich and (presumably) ended up killing his father and taking over the company. Not a huge fan of them doing what the last live action version of Lex Luthor did, but we'll just have to see next year.

I hope I'm wrong and I've misunderstood the article and its implications, but at present that does seem to be the direction they're going with.  :(  As I've said before, I could only see Jesse Eisenberg's awkward, geeky and far from charismatic-looking Lex Luthor (or Alexander Luthor Jr.  ::) ) working if he was portrayed as the tenacious self-made man from the slums.  I don't buy him as a self-assured silver-spoon billionaire type to rival playboy Bruce Wayne.  If Snyder had actually got an actor who met his early description of the character (i.e. 'a mix between Brad Pitt and Richard Branson), say Brad Pitt playing a version of Richard Branson, this character might have worked, but so far nothing I've seen pertaining to Eisenberg and his stuttering one-note Mark Zuckerberg retread convinces me, and making statements about having no interest in the comic-books and describing Comic Con as being akin to the Holocaust do even less to endear me to the idea that he's playing one of the premier villains in the DC Universe.  Goodness knows how long we'll be stuck with him.

Yet another reason I'm afraid for ignoring the DC Cinematic Universe (until its inevitable reboot some day) and sticking with the MCU.  :-\

Alexander Luthor Jr., huh?

Can we get Superboy Prime to do some retcon punching now?!?

Ehhh ... Just sounds like a deliberate ploy to set up a contrast between Bruce and Junior here, in the way of, "Hey kids, this is how Bruce Wayne could have turned out! dun dun dunnnn!!!". Which I guess could be said of the Smallville show as well with Lionel Luthor's "Luthorcorp", and Lex being born into privilege like Bruce, but unlike B V S, Bats nor Gotham were major running factors in that show's universe, atleast not to my knowledge, thus viewers were not beaten over the head with any sort of contrast.

I might have found Eisenberg's Lex more acceptable if they actually would have chosen to do, in a future sequel down the road, the "Lex Luthor II" idea from the Post-Crisis comics where Lex secretly faked his own death, had his brain removed from his ailing body (Cain from Robocop 2 style), and was later "reborn" in a brand new cloned body (6th day?) posing as his own son upon returning to Metropolis. In that sense, I could personally reconcile Eisenberg's, apparently, neurotic portrayal of Lex, as a process like that definitely could have affected his mind/personality, but given Eisenberg's Lex Luthor Jr. is going to be our Lex from the very start, with Senior probably perishing during the Supes/Zod battle from MOS, eh. Ok. Whatever.   

Quote from: The Joker on Tue,  6 Oct  2015, 23:18

Alexander Luthor Jr., huh?

Can we get Superboy Prime to do some retcon punching now?!?

Ehhh ... Just sounds like a deliberate ploy to set up a contrast between Bruce and Junior here, in the way of, "Hey kids, this is how Bruce Wayne could have turned out! dun dun dunnnn!!!". Which I guess could be said of the Smallville show as well with Lionel Luthor's "Luthorcorp", and Lex being born into privilege like Bruce, but unlike B V S, Bats nor Gotham were major running factors in that show's universe, atleast not to my knowledge, thus viewers were not beaten over the head with any sort of contrast.

I might have found Eisenberg's Lex more acceptable if they actually would have chosen to do, in a future sequel down the road, the "Lex Luthor II" idea from the Post-Crisis comics where Lex secretly faked his own death, had his brain removed from his ailing body (Cain from Robocop 2 style), and was later "reborn" in a brand new cloned body (6th day?) posing as his own son upon returning to Metropolis. In that sense, I could personally reconcile Eisenberg's, apparently, neurotic portrayal of Lex, as a process like that definitely could have affected his mind/personality, but given Eisenberg's Lex Luthor Jr. is going to be our Lex from the very start, with Senior probably perishing during the Supes/Zod battle from MOS, eh. Ok. Whatever.

If you check the full fake article on the 'Fortune' magazine website, it says Sr. died in 2000, so I don't think it had anything to do with the Superman/Zod battle.  In fact, I'd say it was heavily implied that Jr. killed pops himself.

QuoteAlexander Joseph Luthor Jr. is a 31-year-old wunderkind who transformed an aging petrochemical and heavy machinery dinosaur into a tech darling of the Fortune 500 in what some call a superhuman feat.

This jeans-wearing genius is equally at ease rappelling the climbing wall in his employee "inspiration station" and coding in "the crucible": the cutting-edge R & D lab where the baby-faced billionaire verbally extemporizes computer code like Miles Davis improvising a trumpet solo.

As we patiently wait our turn at the complimentary LexCorp vegan food truck (this day's fare: pesto-olive pizza with raw almond crust), the son of Alexander Luthor Sr. — Lex Luthor — explains the evolution of LexCorp.

"Dad named the company after himself ten years before I made my unexpected entrance into his life. But investors seemed to respond to the idea of an adoring father building a legacy for his precious son. He used that to his advantage. It was a good shtick and, whatever else he was, he was a good businessman," the younger Luthor explains.

Referring to Alexander Luthor Sr. as a "good businessman" is not unlike calling Napoleon Bonaparte a "competent conqueror." The East German émigré, who passed away unexpectedly in 2000, arrived on our shores with nothing, but managed to carve out an empire of oil and machinery. By all accounts, he accomplished this feat through sheer grit and ferocity. His enemies, of which there are many, would also probably add "viciousness."

"Well, Dad was a complicated guy," his down-to-Earth son notes as we pass a tasteful display of his world-famous collection of meteorite crystals. "He came from a country where the government, in the guise of protector, had absolute control over the citizens. That drove him. I get it. Heck, I'd hate to see that sort of thing happen over here."

But the achievements of LexCorp's founder pale in comparison to the astonishing accomplishments of the younger Luthor, who was the youngest ever to be named Fortune's Businessperson of the Year and included on the magazine's list of the World's 50 Greatest Leaders.

Taking the reins of the family business after the untimely death of his indomitable father, the prodigal son boldly changed the direction of the firm from oil and heavy machinery to tech. LexCorp has quickly become the second largest emerging technology corporation in the world next to Wayne Enterprises.

Partly, the success of this young company comes from Luthor's willingness to go where Wayne fears to tread. Wayne Enterprises has shied away from military contracts in the last decade.

"It's a necessity," Luthor insists. "We live in the most dangerous point of time in all of human history. Statistically speaking, it's a near certainty that another world-changing crisis is hurtling toward us like a speeding bullet. We have to be ready to defend ourselves. No civilization was ever conquered by having a strong military."

As for the accusations of a few fringe outliers who accuse him of being a "war monger," Luthor just laughs them off. "I don't know very many 'war mongers' who have a foosball table in the conference room."

In the face of Luthor's self-effacing, easy charm, it's tempting to see him as "just one of the guys" and not for what he truly is: a giver. Only when pressed does he admit that LexCorp is in the top three charitable corporations in America, just after Kord Industries and Wayne Enterprises. "It's not a competition," laughs Luthor. "Besides, I can't hold a candle to those guys in the debauched billionaire playboy department!"

But he downplays the corporate generosity side of LexCorp. "Handouts don't change the world. The true gift of LexCorp is our products. We are on the cusp of unveiling a technology that will change the world forever."

When pressed, the youthful mogul will only hint. "It's about safety. This is a product that will protect you, and everyone, from threats you don't even know about yet. I don't want to scare anybody... much. But there are a lot of threats out there, and they're here today."

It's just lucky for us that, whatever the dangers lurking for us today, we have on our side Lex Luthor, a man of tomorrow.

It almost seems like they're treating the "Smallville" version of Lex as canon.  ::)

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Tue,  6 Oct  2015, 23:50
If you check the full fake article on the 'Fortune' magazine website, it says Sr. died in 2000, so I don't think it had anything to do with the Superman/Zod battle.  In fact, I'd say it was heavily implied that Jr. killed pops himself.

What a Post-Crisis' thing to do.

I've read a theory, that I like and would go some way to redeeming this apparent version of Lex Luthor for me, and that is that Lex Jr. is in fact a (young) clone of Lex Sr. which would explain the former's 'unexpected entrance' and the latter's 'unexpected' death.  Maybe 'Lex Jr.' could explain it all by stating that he was in a foreign boarding school or kept away from the public with private tutors for the early parts of his life (i.e. pre-2000).

But would this 'gritty and realistic' version of the DC Cinematic Universe go for such an outlandish plotline?

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Wed,  7 Oct  2015, 02:39
I've read a theory, that I like and would go some way to redeeming this apparent version of Lex Luthor for me, and that is that Lex Jr. is in fact a (young) clone of Lex Sr. which would explain the former's 'unexpected entrance' and the latter's 'unexpected' death.  Maybe 'Lex Jr.' could explain it all by stating that he was in a foreign boarding school or kept away from the public with private tutors for the early parts of his life (i.e. pre-2000).

That's ... pretty much Lex Luthor II. Not sure if you're referring to a clone who may or may not have retained the memories of Senior, but yeah, that would be another Post-Crisis thing to do.

QuoteBut would this 'gritty and realistic' version of the DC Cinematic Universe go for such an outlandish plotline?

Probably. With Justice League, Wonder Woman, Flash, Aquaman, Shazam!, ect, being scheduled/considered, the whole DC Extended Universe, or whatever it's called, is just going to get more and more fantastical as it goes. A clone should be easily acceptable.

Here is another piece of viral marketing: a corporate video from LexCorp promoting its new operating system.

https://youtu.be/fjCGKzD-Lec (https://youtu.be/fjCGKzD-Lec)

Here's another fake interview of Lex speaking to Ron Troupe.  ;)

It shows good insight of Lex's attitude and explores his sense of responsibility of the world around him. The reference to a video game in the beginning feels like the kind of dialogue that Joss Whedon would write.

Source: http://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/12/lexical-analysis-lex-luthor-on-disrupting-the-vigilante-industrial-complex/

I like Jeremy Irons as Alfred... better than the one on Gotham, anywyay, so far.

So, they did get one part right out of the thread title.  :D

Looking back at the fuss over Eisenberg as Lex in BvS, I got to admit that like a lot of people, I kinda wished we saw a more traditional, Post Crisis corrupt businessman.

The problem is we already had that kind of villain, with Jeff Bridges starring as Obadiah Stane in Iron Man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF_vJgMBtOk

Stane might not have been in charge of Stark Industries, but he was seen as the respected businessman who was doing a lot of manipulation behind the scenes. The difference is, Stane's agenda focused on war profiteering, whereas Lex in BvS projecting his hatred of deity onto Superman, making it more ideological.

Eisenberg gets a lot of flack for overacting, but I found his Lex to be rather manic than silly for the most part. I only thought he was overacting in the helipad scene, i.e. the way he mocks Superman by saying "We've got big problems up here". It didn't fit to me. Otherwise, I thought he was a far more menacing villain than he's given credit for, i.e. manipulating Batman and Superman to battle each other, how he chose the troubled Batman as his champion to defeat Superman etc. Sure, he's not perfect, but what is?

Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 21 Nov  2016, 01:26Looking back at the fuss over Eisenberg as Lex in BvS, I got to admit that like a lot of people, I kinda wished we saw a more traditional, Post Crisis corrupt businessman.

The problem is we already had that kind of villain, with Jeff Bridges starring as Obadiah Stane in Iron Man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF_vJgMBtOk

Stane might not have been in charge of Stark Industries, but he was seen as the respected businessman who was doing a lot of manipulation behind the scenes. The difference is, Stane's agenda focused on war profiteering, whereas Lex in BvS projecting his hatred of deity onto Superman, making it more ideological.

Eisenberg gets a lot of flack for overacting, but I found his Lex to be rather manic than silly for the most part. I only thought he was overacting in the helipad scene, i.e. the way he mocks Superman by saying "We've got big problems up here". It didn't fit to me. Otherwise, I thought he was a far more menacing villain than he's given credit for, i.e. manipulating Batman and Superman to battle each other, how he chose the troubled Batman as his champion to defeat Superman etc. Sure, he's not perfect, but what is?

The corrupt businessman thing had also been done really with Smallville. That version of Lex was icy cool and detached. Probably about as close as Lex will ever come to being portrayed as a Michael Corleone figure.

On that basis, an unhinged and kind of manic Lex who clowns a bit in public but goes off the deep end in private is pretty innovative. It's a pretty original way to play Lex Luthor that hadn't been done before. I'd wondered when Lex would be portrayed as the head of a tech company along the lines of Google or something and here we are. I've got very few problems with Lex as shown in BVS. And I dig how it leads to Lex as a criminal mastermind, which hasn't really been done in live action (unless those serials from the 40's count).

I've enjoyed Hardy's Bane in recent years due to the extensive damage he inflicts upon Batman and Gotham. But my choice for best DC villain, especially in recent years, is EisenLex. I think he's more intelligent than Hardy's Bane, and perhaps even more ruthless. He's a true strategist and string puller.

Strong likelihood of killing his father
Orchestrates the Africa frame job on Superman with the bullets and flamethrower
Smuggles in krypronite
Had metahuman data
Gets access to Zod's corpse and creates Doomsday, who kills Superman
Orchestrates a prison murder
Knew both Batman and Superman's identities
Manipulated Batman to kill Superman
Uses a cripple, giving him a new wheelchair covered in lead and containing a bomb
Using said bomb to kill everyone at the hearing, including Mercy
Has the whistleblower killed by an oncoming train
Has Martha kidnapped, and pushes Lois off a building
Awakens Steppenwolf

Just look at the sheer volume of plotting there. Very impressive. Plus, his hair is similar to mine.