Lex Luthor Casting Discussion

[pita]

There's probably an older thread on this but I didn't see it, and I'm somewhat wary of committing any more thread necromancy than I have...
Basically, I'm referring to the casting of Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor in the Man of Steel sequel. I made a comment when Gal Gadot was cast as Wonder Woman that she doesn't have the physicality I'd expect of the role (I called her a stick figure), and was criticized for judging a female actress based on her looks, that a man wouldn't be criticized for that.
The producers of this movie proved that wrong.
I'm going to make the same criticism of this casting. Eisenberg is an established excellent actor, and I don't doubt he'll be a good Luthor, acting-wise. But while Luthor was never a big, muscular guy, he always had some form of physical presence. STAS Luthor was a big guy. Gene Hackman had a physical presence. Eisenberg was known for a very long time as a poor man's Michael Cera, which was wrong about the roles he plays (The only Michael Cera role I really remember Eisenberg in is Zombieland), but very right about his physicality.

[Coidzor]

I just want another Luthor that's not white.

[SiuiS]

Huh. I can see it actually.

And... We had a noncaucasian Luther?

[Ravian]

He definitely seems to small and from what I've seen about him just f
Doesn't really have the right voice to play an egoist like Luthor. He did a good job with Zuckerburg but it's going to be really hard to imagine a Luthor that looks like he's just out of college without any sort of intimidation in his voice.

[Cristo Meyers]

Huh. I can see it actually.

And... We had a noncaucasian Luther?

The Justice League cartoons from the early 2000's.

[DigoDragon]

The Justice League cartoons from the early 2000's.

And in the Superman Animated Series around that time. I liked that version. Not too old, not too young, and had a great commanding voice for a corporation.

[Fan]

I just want another Luthor that's not white.

Why does it matter?

I mean the character was originally ginger, so that might be nice to see, but otherwise, it really doesn't matter.

And I liked the Justice League cartoon Luthor. One of the best portrayals he had in fiction, but the smallville Luthor was pretty good too and he'd be a decent cast for the part. I'd say look at who'd fit the role best rather than anything to do with "Not being white." or anything to do with race at all.

Get someone large, but intelligent looking. I'd definitely say an older Luthor would be pretty essential to playing the villain to Cavill and Affleck given how youthful they both look. It'd be a good way to show contrast. I could definitely see maybe The Rock fitting a darker, more aggressive, Luthor pretty well, and the man's proven that he's more than willing to take ANY acting role these days so he'd work for pennies to boot. Aside from that I could see Donald Sutherland playing a VERY good older Luthor.

Anyone would be better than Jessie Eisenberg.

[Coidzor]

Why does it matter?

Why is Morgan Freeman Morgan Freeman? Why is James Earl Jones James Earl Jones? Why is BRIAN BLESSED BRIAN BLESSED?

[Fan]

Why is Morgan Freeman Morgan Freeman? Why is James Earl Jones James Earl Jones? Why is BRIAN BLESSED BRIAN BLESSED?

None of that is relevant to what was said in the slightest.

I have no problem with them casting any ethnicity for the Luthor part, I'm saying it doesn't matter what ethnicity he is so long as he plays the part well, has a good voice and build for it, and is above all a good actor. There's no reason to bar anyone from the part based on skin color.

[SiuiS]

Why is Morgan Freeman Morgan Freeman? Why is James Earl Jones James Earl Jones? Why is BRIAN BLESSED BRIAN BLESSED?

Is his name really spelled with all caps?

[pita]

Is his name really spelled with all caps?

He's got a legal trademark... spelling his name without the caps could result in a horde of lawyers pounding at your front door. Legally, it's better to write the entire sentence in capital letters, but you should be safe with just his name.

[kpenguin]

And in the Superman Animated Series around that time. I liked that version. Not too old, not too young, and had a great commanding voice for a corporation.

DCAU Lex Luthor wasn't noncaucasian. Well, he was in the sense that he wasn't from the Caucases, but his appearance was inksuit dreamcasting of Telly Savalas.

[DigoDragon]

DCAU Lex Luthor wasn't noncaucasian. Well, he was in the sense that he wasn't from the Caucases, but his appearance was inksuit dreamcasting of Telly Savalas.

I heard that from somewhere once, but all the same, the qualities I liked about him are not related to ethnic background. :smallsmile: When I think 'Luthor', I imagine a tall man with a charismatic presence. ...and usually a bald head.

Probably blame the Superman animated series for that last part. Or Telly, either one.

[Fjolnir]

Luthor is supposed to be... sorta phyiscally boxy... he lives well and works out hard as well, he's not plush like the kingpin but he's the same sort of animal, strong, large and imposing, who sometimes looks like he's slightly gone to seed because he's not defined like a gym rat...

[Tiki Snakes]

I wouldn't call that a defining facet of the character, though.

[aberratio ictus]

I made a comment when Gal Gadot was cast as Wonder Woman that she doesn't have the physicality I'd expect of the role (I called her a stick figure), and was criticized for judging a female actress based on her looks, that a man wouldn't be criticized for that.


Now that is a strange claim. Actors are regularly judged by their appearance when considered for a specific role. And rightly so, actually.

[Fan]

Now that is a strange claim. Actors are regularly judged by their appearance when considered for a specific role. And rightly so, actually.

Indeed, appearances actually do matter when you're going in to act a specific character.

Honestly, I expect Wonder Woman to be tall, intimidating, and powerful. A female figure that can stand next to Cavill as his equal, not be the Scarlet Johanson eye candy of the movie.

However, I also think that Man of Steel 2 shouldn't be the Justice League movie, and at the very least Wonder Woman and Flash deserve their own movies.

[SiuiS]

Luthor is supposed to be... sorta phyiscally boxy... he lives well and works out hard as well, he's not plush like the kingpin but he's the same sort of animal, strong, large and imposing, who sometimes looks like he's slightly gone to seed because he's not defined like a gym rat...

Hmm. I always liked him as an older gent. Less big and boxy, more... Hmm. Old Italian monster shaped? I've got nothing.

[Fan]

Hmm. I always liked him as an older gent. Less big and boxy, more... Hmm. Old Italian monster shaped? I've got nothing.

That's why Luthor is difficult to cast.

On one hand, things like Allstar Superman (one of his best ) have him like this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RfUUJH2TvU).

But some kind of white collar criminal like he was in Smallville makes for SUCH a strong presence on the screen, and Sutherland would fit that role so well.

[Metahuman1]

Indeed, appearances actually do matter when you're going in to act a specific character.

Honestly, I expect Wonder Woman to be tall, intimidating, and powerful. A female figure that can stand next to Cavill as his equal, not be the Scarlet Johanson eye candy of the movie.

However, I also think that Man of Steel 2 shouldn't be the Justice League movie, and at the very least Wonder Woman and Flash deserve their own movies.

I saw a picture of Gal the other day, and she has put on a fair bit of muscle for the amount of time that's passed since the announcement of her casting. So, combine that with doing some of the screen trickery they used in the hobbit/lord of the rings movies, but in reverse, to get in about the same height as Afflak and Cavill and let her keep bulking up at about this pace and she should be fine if she can actually act the part.



Now, the casting choice so far that I'M having a hard time with wrapping my head around is Jeremy Irons as Alfred.

[Fan]

I saw a picture of Gal the other day, and she has put on a fair bit of muscle for the amount of time that's passed since the announcement of her casting. So, combine that with doing some of the screen trickery they used in the hobbit/lord of the rings movies, but in reverse, to get in about the same height as Afflak and Cavill and let her keep bulking up at about this pace and she should be fine if she can actually act the part.



Now, the casting choice so far that I'M having a hard time with wrapping my head around is Jeremy Irons as Alfred.

http://www.theouthousers.com/images/templates/thumbnails/126386//galgadot_size3.jpg

That is the last picture I saw of Gadot, and I don't think it really compares. However, if she keeps bulking up at this pace it'll hopefully be our first portrayal of a properly Amazon Wonder Woman. If she stops here though.. eeeh.

[pita]

Now, the casting choice so far that I'M having a hard time with wrapping my head around is Jeremy Irons as Alfred.
I actually think it's a better casting than Michael Caine. I frickin love Jeremy Irons. I wouldn't complain if he were cast as Wonder Woman.

[Creed]

Eisenberg was known for a very long time as a poor man's Michael Cera



This is my thesis for every conversation about Eisenberg, and he's been so successful at being Michael Cera that he gobbled up all the roles that Michael Cera would have taken (Adventureland, The Social Network), but definitely came into his own with a few other pieces (Now You See Me, 30 Minutes or Less).

I agree with the idea that he doesn't have the physical presence, however. Eisenberg is 5'7'' (Gene Hackman is 6'2'', Kevin Spacey is 5'10'', John Shea is 6'0'', and Michael Rosenbaum is 6'0'') making him the shortest Lex Luthor... well, ever. But Luthor, while traditionally played by actors with some physical OOMPH, is a corporate executive. A super-evil corporate executive, who has super-technological prowess.
Now, I'm not going to say that Eisenberg has played that kind of role once before, but-

I think he has the ability to adapt to that role, and do a great job!

[Fjolnir]

I actually think it's a better casting than Michael Caine. I frickin love Jeremy Irons. I wouldn't complain if he were cast as Wonder Woman.

He can probably pull the outfit off....

[Cristo Meyers]

Now, the casting choice so far that I'M having a hard time with wrapping my head around is Jeremy Irons as Alfred.

Huh, hadn't heard about that one. Can't say it bugs me, though. I like Irons a lot, actually.

Affleck? Eh. We'll see.

Cavill? Still remember him as the fresh-faced boy from The Count of Monte Cristo. Probably colors my perception just a little.

Don't have an opinion one way or the other on Gadot.

Eisenberg, though, I'm really having trouble swallowing. It's just not in line with any image of Luthor I've ever known. I'm trying hard to give him the same benefit of the doubt I'm giving everyone else, but it's not working. Part of me kinda wishes they would continue with the JLA/Superman portrayal. Idris Elba, maybe...


He can probably pull the outfit off....

And that I would pay to see.

[Fan]

Huh, hadn't heard about that one. Can't say it bugs me, though. I like Irons a lot, actually.

Affleck? Eh. We'll see.

Cavill? Still remember him as the fresh-faced boy from The Count of Monte Cristo. Probably colors my perception just a little.

Don't have an opinion one way or the other on Gadot.

Eisenberg, though, I'm really having trouble swallowing. It's just not in line with any image of Luthor I've ever known. I'm trying hard to give him the same benefit of the doubt I'm giving everyone else, but it's not working. Part of me kinda wishes they would continue with the JLA/Superman portrayal. Idris Elba, maybe...

Pretty sure I saw him being cast as Jon Stewart Green Lantern in this film. (Also, Jon Stewart is best lantern.)

[Dienekes]

Luthor is supposed to be... sorta phyiscally boxy... he lives well and works out hard as well, he's not plush like the kingpin but he's the same sort of animal, strong, large and imposing, who sometimes looks like he's slightly gone to seed because he's not defined like a gym rat...

Huh? He's supposed to be, well, anything. He's been a stringy scientist without an ounce of muscle. He's been a fat businessman. He's even had hair at various points.

Now personally, I'm of the wait and see mentality. Personally, I think more important than Luthor's appearance is his voice and I've never heard anything Eisenberg has done that has the right sound to him. But I'm willing to give him a chance to prove himself. If nothing else it'll give me something to make fun of when the movie comes out.

[DigoDragon]

(Also, Jon Stewart is best lantern)

...Nearly spittaked upon reading that because my brain assumed the wrong Jon Stewart (http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mblwul5eWu1qi6zcz.jpg).

[Infernally Clay]

To be honest, I actually think it's criminal that they've cast Eisenberg as Luthor when they actually signed someone as brilliantly talented as Jeremy Irons. Could you imagine him playing Lex? An older, ruthless businessman whose experience and genius allow him to "battle" Superman in ways the Kryptonian didn't even believe were possible. We're talking not only figuring out Batman's and Superman's civilian identities, but using those to force the two to fight one another without ever making it known he's involved at all.

I mean... A Lex Luthor that's in his mid-60's, who has built up LexCorp from the ground up after over almost 50 years of hard work, facing off against Superman for monetary gain. A man that has, over the decades, manipulated other businesses and their executives to better position them for hostile takeovers by LexCorp and set his sight on Kryptonian technology. A man who on the surface is a well-respected business magnate but, behind the scenes, is a scheming bastard that few will speak ill of in public because he has power over them (blackmail, bribery, etc).

It's daft that they got the casting so backwards. Jeremy Irons would've been perfect for an older Lex Luthor and it would have been totally unique as far as incarnations go. Not only foil for Superman (mind vs matter, age vs youth, human vs alien) but Batman as well since they'd both be "grizzled veterans" so to speak that would understand each other better than either would like to admit.

[TheThan]

Wait, you want John stewart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Stewart) playing john Stewart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stewart_%28comics%29)?

Ok joking aside, I actually like the idea of him being significantly shorter than superman, makes for a good brain over brawn ideal. Which is the entire point behind lex anyway, he’s the one guy Superman can’t simply punch out. So by hiring an actor that’s shorter than Henry Cavill gives the audience a visual clue into this idea.
I loved the Gene hackman version, but he was a little too arrogant. Michael Rosenbalm had a solid amount of confliction but he rarely came off as downright evil, Kevin Spacey just seemed a bit too butt hurt over losing to superman previously.

So whomever Lex is played by, he needs to be able to pull off four things;
1: the bald look
2: charismatic personality
3: a high degree intellect.
4: clearly evil without the mustache twirl.

[Cristo Meyers]

Pretty sure I saw him being cast as Jon Stewart Green Lantern in this film. (Also, Jon Stewart is best lantern.)

Oooh, hadn't heard that either. Very interesting.



It's daft that they got the casting so backwards. Jeremy Irons would've been perfect for an older Lex Luthor and it would have been totally unique as far as incarnations go. Not only foil for Superman (mind vs matter, age vs youth, human vs alien) but Batman as well since they'd both be "grizzled veterans" so to speak that would understand each other better than either would like to admit.

And if all else fails, he could just ham it up and still make for an enjoyable watch. :smallbiggrin:

I'm just running scenes and such through my head and can't for the life of me imagine how Eisenberg isn't going to stick out like sore thumb. I'm having a hard time imagining him having the carriage and voice that Luthor has and being convincing at it.

[Hyena]

No. No, Eisenberg is a horrible choice. This is not Lex Luthor, this is your average nerdy roommate. And if he shaves his head, he'll look even worse.


Jon Stewart Green Lantern in this film.
There will be the Green Lantern too?! Three heroes are way too much for one movie. But I agree, he is the best lantern... Of course, I might be biased, because I am familiar with the Justice League thanks to the cartoon.

[Metahuman1]

I honestly think Flash and Lantern in this movie are gonna have really small parts. Think what they did with Nick Fury in Iron Man 2 or Hawkeye in Thor or Tony Stark in The Incredible Hulk.

Wonder Woman will likely have more, but, not a lot more. Think Black Widow in Iron Man 2.



As for Irons, I'm worried here. I've seen the Dungeons and Dragons movie, and Eragon. And for Lex's casting, bulking up would help him, as would some of the same FX stuff to make him look taller I want for Gal, but the voice is all important.

And as for Gal, I didn't say she was there yet, I said she was off to a good start. If she stops here I'll never forgive Zack Snyder.

[DigoDragon]

Could you imagine him playing Lex?

Irons as Lex? Well it certainly is different. I'd give that one a chance.

[pita]

As for Irons, I'm worried here. I've seen the Dungeons and Dragons movie, and Eragon. And for Lex's casting, bulking up would help him, as would some of the same FX stuff to make him look taller I want for Gal, but the voice is all important.

The Dungeons and Dragons movie was him intentionally giving the worst performance he can. He occasionally does that. He did it in The Time Machine and (This one I suspect, I can't prove) Discworld.
And I thought he was pitch perfect in Eragon. The only decent actor. Everyone else was either phoning it in (John Malkovich or Rachel Weisz) or just plain terrible (The guy who played Eragon). The problem with Eragon was the script. And the novel it was adapted from. And the acting, Irons excepted. And the matte painting backgrounds. And pretty much everything about the entire movie. What a godforsaken ****pile of a film.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Two pages in and I apparently must point out what they are doing here...

Because its REALLY obvious to me. (http://www.lifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/markzuckerberg.jpg)

And umm... honestly probably trying too hard for that idea, but lets at least understand what's going on here people.

[SeeDarkly_X]

Because the deepness of my disappointment with almost everything DC has done in recent years runs so deep, I now simply condense my rants to three simple words:
Make Mine Marvel!
'Nuff Said...
(or I'll be at my keyboard for days!)

[Coidzor]

Two pages in and I apparently must point out what they are doing here...

Because its REALLY obvious to me. (http://www.lifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/markzuckerberg.jpg)

And umm... honestly probably trying too hard for that idea, but lets at least understand what's going on here people.

Right, because everyone who dislikes it doesn't get the pitiful attempt at a joke.

[Thrawn183]

I'm holding out hope that this is all a joke, and we'll actually get a superman movie without Zod or Lex.

[Kris Strife]

Luthor is supposed to be... sorta phyiscally boxy... he lives well and works out hard as well, he's not plush like the kingpin but he's the same sort of animal, strong, large and imposing, who sometimes looks like he's slightly gone to seed because he's not defined like a gym rat...

Kingpin isn't plush. He weighs 400 lbs and most of it is muscle, with only the minimum amount of fat. He's as strong as Captain America (according to official Marvel sources, both rated at 3/7 and at Peak Human Strength) and a highly skilled fighter (6/7). The movies should have him played by a Strong Man competitor.


Pretty sure I saw him being cast as Jon Stewart Green Lantern in this film. (Also, Jon Stewart is best lantern.)

That's a funny way to spell Guy Gardner. :smallamused:

[Jayngfet]

There will be the Green Lantern too?! Three heroes are way too much for one movie. But I agree, he is the best lantern... Of course, I might be biased, because I am familiar with the Justice League thanks to the cartoon.

This movie is a total freaking trainwreck and lets not pretend otherwise.

They announced Wonder Woman so late they were obviously just doing it to get people off their backs. They were also talking about Nightwing and throwing out some mediocre to bad casting choices for him too. Then we got ridiculous ideas like Green Lantern and Aquaman of all people being thrown in, though I'm not sure how much of that was actually confirmed. Meanwhile the actual central villains are twisting in the wind, with some supposedly major antagonist roles still being vacant during this entire circus.

Then came the film getting pushed back a year to be rewritten again. Goyer is basically getting demoted at this point and nobody involved seems even remotely excited to be working on this movie.

You see Fan's picture of Gadot there? That'd basically be what she'd look like if the movie was running on schedule. I've been against having Diana being eight feet tall and full of muscle but I kinda have to draw the line somewhere both ways. Gadot is a skeleton of a woman who's been rather flippant about the role and basically sits back and watches as people crawl out the woodwork to defend her over body politics. Not to mention that they're apparently basing huge chunks of their first meeting on TDKR despite it being the character's first meeting, to the point of basically grabbing Frank Millar off the street when even he has no idea what's going on. Or literally anything of the dozens of shoddy, half baked actions Warner Bros. has done up until today.

Justice League probably won't get made until Avengers 3 comes out at this pace. That's such a hilarious statement of incompetence I don't even need to comment otherwise.

[Cen]

This thread again? So, I'll repeat myself.
The one and only choice for epic awesome amazon queen is this (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005128/) girl.

For Luthor? I'd say Michael Clarke Duncan, because his Kingpin was only good part of Daredevil... But maybe John Malkovich?

[Soras Teva Gee]

Right, because everyone who dislikes it doesn't get the pitiful attempt at a joke.

And nobody comments on it?

Of course its not a joke at all but rather simply an attempt to update the character to modern times. Much as the transition to big and bad corporate overlord was in the 80s from ye olde scientist mad about loosing his hair. Or for that matter Gene Hackman's take way back when, something of a prototype for the corporate model.

Ultimately that's all actually a very good idea creatively (and financially) lest you get yourself in the trap comics are as a medium. You need to be continually reinventing things or you should kill them off, which also is reinvention just via new characters. Otherwise you are just regurgitating the same old same old. Its a recipe for death, creatively and financially.

Comics are a case in point here. Marvel makes more on single films then on its entire publishing line. They are best mostly ignored if not actively kicked into the shredder.

This just doesn't feel like one of those ideas that's going to actually stick. Feels like its too ambitious and will just be lost on the general audience.

[Jayngfet]

This thread again? So, I'll repeat myself.
The one and only choice for epic awesome amazon queen is this (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005128/) girl.

For Luthor? I'd say Michael Clarke Duncan, because his Kingpin was only good part of Daredevil... But maybe John Malkovich?

Eh, Lawless is too old to play Diana, especially if you're doing it right as an origin story and not trying to stupidly jump into grittyold millardark versions like they seem to be with Supes and Bats.

Diana becomes Wonder Woman around the time she turns eighteen or so and is able to truly prove herself for the first time this way. She needs to be a young genius or prodigy who's skilled and strong with good instincts, but undeniably young and still willing to learn, such as in Perez's run.

[pita]

Michael Clarke Duncan is a little deceased to be playing Luthor, but I agree with the sentiment. My dream casting is Harry Lennox, but he was in MoS.

[DigoDragon]

Two pages in and I apparently must point out what they are doing here...
Because its REALLY obvious to me. (http://www.lifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/markzuckerberg.jpg)

And umm... honestly probably trying too hard for that idea, but lets at least understand what's going on here people.

I thought it it was pretty obvious what they're trying to do, and maybe it falls into the category of "obvious enough it need not be said" (so I didn't say anything about it), but either way I personally don't like it. :smallsmile:

If I were to base Lex on a modern business figure, I'd pick someone who was seen quite often in the media spotlight, such as Steve Jobs. I've only seen Mark in about 3 images, including the one you just linked. Never seen a video of him. Steve's face would show up any time Apple announced a new product because he'd be the one holding it up for the camera.

And that's how I'd see a modernized Lex. A man who's face is almost the corporate logo itself.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I thought it it was pretty obvious what they're trying to do, and maybe it falls into the category of "obvious enough it need not be said" (so I didn't say anything about it), but either way I personally don't like it. :smallsmile:

If I were to base Lex on a modern business figure, I'd pick someone who was seen quite often in the media spotlight, such as Steve Jobs. I've only seen Mark in about 3 images, including the one you just linked. Never seen a video of him. Steve's face would show up any time Apple announced a new product because he'd be the one holding it up for the camera.

And that's how I'd see a modernized Lex. A man who's face is almost the corporate logo itself.

Oh. Yes.

That was my second thought. Why not Steve Jobs, much more powerful imagery.

I will point out that Steve Jobs is no closer to that paragon of masculinity version of Luthor visually excepting a similar hair style, and especially if you know about his rather hippie-esque aspects like the weird diet and not showering for extended periods of his life. I seem to recall Apple (the name) was inspired by a commune. Jobs also liked to project a certain counter-cultural aspect that could not be farther from traditional Luthor.

On the other hand Jobs was also quietly known as an absolute asshat to work with and that sort of grandstanding presence from his presentations.... oh yes there's an Evil Steve Jobs idea out there waiting for exploitation.

Something I just am not sold on for Zuckerburg. I don't think Evil Zuckerburg makes a worse Luthor... just doesn't inspire much confidence as a villain period.

[Coidzor]

And nobody comments on it?

Anyone on social media has seen all of the relevant memes flying around by now, so does it really need to be commented upon? :smalltongue:

[DigoDragon]

I will point out that Steve Jobs is no closer to that paragon of masculinity version of Luthor visually excepting a similar hair style, and especially if you know about his rather hippie-esque aspects like the weird diet and not showering for extended periods of his life.

True, he would be a very different version than the Luthor I envision.
Still, it supports the concept of modernizing the image and I can get behind this one since it still projects the figure of a corporate leading giant.



On the other hand Jobs was also quietly known as an absolute asshat to work with and that sort of grandstanding presence from his presentations.... oh yes there's an Evil Steve Jobs idea out there waiting for exploitation.

I've read some interesting stories from his coworkers, yeah.



Anyone on social media has seen all of the relevant memes flying around by now, so does it really need to be commented upon? :smalltongue:

I have this odd super power that allows me to miss memes. Trouble is, I can't control it. :smallredface:

[Fan]

No. No, Eisenberg is a horrible choice. This is not Lex Luthor, this is your average nerdy roommate. And if he shaves his head, he'll look even worse.


There will be the Green Lantern too?! Three heroes are way too much for one movie. But I agree, he is the best lantern... Of course, I might be biased, because I am familiar with the Justice League thanks to the cartoon.

Try 6 heroes, plus side kicks.

Yeah this movie is going to be introductions with Lex Luthor yelling at the crowd of heroes talking to each other.

[Fjolnir]

I thought they were going with "Experienced Batman meets Young Naive Superman"? with superman skewing younger than batman, having a young(ish) Lex is not out of the question...

[Jayngfet]

I thought they were going with "Experienced Batman meets Young Naive Superman"? with superman skewing younger than batman, having a young(ish) Lex is not out of the question...

...which would be nice, but the effect is kind of skewered when Supeman is in his thirties already and we've known him longer than Ben's Batman.

[zlefin]

As I don't know all that much about all this, please tell me what would be wrong with Samuel L. Jackson as Luthor?

[pita]

As I don't know all that much about all this, please tell me what would be wrong with Samuel L. Jackson as Luthor?

Not a motherf***ing thing would be wrong with Samuel L Jackson as Lex Motherf***ing Luthor, motherf***er.
EDIT- I think he'd actually be a great Lex Luthor. Samuel L Jackson has perfected the art of "I am calm and rational but deep down I want to murder everyone around me." It's what makes his performance in Unbreakable one no other actor could pull off as well. It's why he pulled off the "I'm the one who knocks" speech so great. If Luthor is presented as someone who sees himself as the greatest thing mankind can offer, only to be supplanted by this new being, one who dares call himself "Superman", Samuel L Jackson is a frickin perfect bit of casting.
I'm mildly upset that Bryan Cranston was never actually cast. It would've meant that this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4U4he3GgC4) trailer would've been spot on about the casting. Weird that they got Jeremy Irons in time as well. They put him in one shot. How could they have known? It's not like the trailer had to have Alfred in it...

[Fan]

As I don't know all that much about all this, please tell me what would be wrong with Samuel L. Jackson as Luthor?

The man is also Nick Fury, and people would see him as "Nick Fury", he's also presumably contracted to work for Marvel in Major Films right now, and for the forseeable future, in various Marvel and Avengers titles.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Well I think it would be paranoid even for Hollywood (though not impossible) for there to be a no-working-for-DC-properties clause in the contract and Ryan Reynolds in theory already cross pollinated.... but no sane casting director would do it.

Terrible publicity to poach that closely and openly. You can already find comments on DC trying to "out Marvel Marvel" with this project.

Presuming the man with the BAMF wallet would even be interested.

[Coidzor]

As I don't know all that much about all this, please tell me what would be wrong with Samuel L. Jackson as Luthor?

The only possible downside I can envision is that he might accidentally show up the rest of the cast by being more of a BAMF than everyone else combined.

[Metahuman1]

You see Fan's picture of Gadot there? That'd basically be what she'd look like if the movie was running on schedule. I've been against having Diana being eight feet tall and full of muscle but I kinda have to draw the line somewhere both ways. Gadot is a skeleton of a woman who's been rather flippant about the role and basically sits back and watches as people crawl out the woodwork to defend her over body politics. Not to mention that they're apparently basing huge chunks of their first meeting on TDKR despite it being the character's first meeting, to the point of basically grabbing Frank Millar off the street when even he has no idea what's going on. Or literally anything of the dozens of shoddy, half baked actions Warner Bros. has done up until today.

Wait. Miller's in on this thing now? Freaking Frank Miller has been allowed access to this project?


Well, that's it, that's all folks, good night everybody, were done, game over.

It will take a miracle for this whole thing to not bomb now.

[Fan]

Wait. Miller's in on this thing now? Freaking Frank Miller has been allowed access to this project?


Well, that's it, that's all folks, good night everybody, were done, game over.

It will take a miracle for this whole thing to not bomb now.

That's what I said when I heard it too.

I ****ing LOATHE Frank Millar, my hatred for him is unequaled even compared to Liefield, or Geoff Johns, because at least people acknowledge that Liefield and Johns are bad.

[Agrippa]

I few months ago I was talking with my father about a rumor saying that Bryan Cranston would play Lex Luthor. He said that after watching Breaking Bad Cranston would make a pretty good Luthor. If only he were (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_DASt7hDs) cast as Lex Luthor. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMEq1mGpP5A)

[Metahuman1]

That's what I said when I heard it too.

I ****ing LOATHE Frank Millar, my hatred for him is unequaled even compared to Liefield, or Geoff Johns, because at least people acknowledge that Liefield and Johns are bad.

*Sigh*.

The mans done good work. He has. I like his Daredevil run, I liked DKR, and I liked about 95% of Batman Year One. I even liked 300 and Sin City.

But somewhere around the time he was working on Sin City he just freaking lost his mind, and while I make no claims to have read everything he's put out since then, everything I've had the misfortune of coming into contact with that he's done has been horrible, with the exception of the Sin City and 300 movies, and I'm convinced that that was only cause Robert Rodriges and Quintin Tarantino (I have likely spelled both there names wrong, sorry.) were there both times to keep things under control.

I wish I could still defend the man, but sadly he's moved to a point were that's no longer an option I can entertain in good frame of mind myself. On the bright side, at least I can say the mans done work in the past I liked, which is more then I can say for, oh, Gary Bronskey and Joe Quisada. (Again, I stink on ice with names, sorry if I messed those up too.)







What kills me is that I'd heard that Afleck did an interview were he explained that he get's the fan rage against him as Batman, and that if he though this was gonna be anther Daredevil Fiasco he'd be out, and I saw separate bits that Gal was Bulking up, really bulking up, and that they were gonna spend a lot of time dealing with Zods Death and using that as the jumping point for him to make it public that he'll never take human life.

I, for a short time, had hope that maybe, just maybe, this was gonna come together and work.



That hope is gone now.

[Cen]

That's what I said when I heard it too.

I ****ing LOATHE Frank Millar, my hatred for him is unequaled even compared to Liefield, or Geoff Johns, because at least people acknowledge that Liefield and Johns are bad.

Huh? What's wrong with Frank Millar? (http://www.frankmillar.com/FrankMillar/Home.html) Poor guy didn't deserve the hatred, his photos ain't THAT bad...

...but seriously, could you elaborate? I have soft spot for him in my heart becasue his Daredevil made me love comic books. What's wrong with him?

[Fan]

Huh? What's wrong with Frank Millar? (http://www.frankmillar.com/FrankMillar/Home.html) Poor guy didn't deserve the hatred, his photos ain't THAT bad...

...but seriously, could you elaborate? I have soft spot for him in my heart becasue his Daredevil made me love comic books. What's wrong with him?

Frank "Summon the Whores" Millar has difficulty writing women at all in manners that don't have them either end up as prostitutes, or having sex with / idolizing a man. I'm not even a Social Justice Warrior and it offends me to no end.

The man is the sole reason for the push forward behind ultra gritty grim dark BULL**** with the success of his works like Sincity (trash), The Dark Knight Returns (which is an awful work that serves only to dial up THE EDGE up to 11000% and state repeatedly that big government is evil.), 300 (need I say more?) and is also a homophobe. While I can say nothing bad about his run of Daredevil, it was something I was exposed to before I knew the rest of these things about him, the majority of his works are overrated tripe that got the reviews they did because they flourished in the age of Heavy Metal and Grunge where darkness and good writing were considered synonymous.

So. Yeah. This too (http://frankmillerink.com/2011/11/anarchy). Frank Millar is a monster.

[Metahuman1]

Huh? What's wrong with Frank Millar? (http://www.frankmillar.com/FrankMillar/Home.html) Poor guy didn't deserve the hatred, his photos ain't THAT bad...

...but seriously, could you elaborate? I have soft spot for him in my heart becasue his Daredevil made me love comic books. What's wrong with him?

Ok.

Read Batman: The Dark Knight Returns.

Read Sin City. A couple of them, if possible.

Read any of his better known works from after he wrote Sin City. In particular both The Dark Knight Strikes Again and All Star Batman and Robin The Boy Wonder.

The quality of his art and his writing just tanked for reasons I don't think anyone has ever properly understood after he worked on Sin City. He's all but the poster child for poor treatment of women and female characters in the comic book industry, and his Batman isn't batman, he's a Sociopath Thug whom the writer (Miller.) turns into a Gary Stu cause he's just so very awesome at everything.

As I said, work he did earlier in his career, I liked and still like. But after/around the time of Sin City, he just, lost it. And what makes even less sense is that he's still good at talking to people, intervening, discussing things, running a blog, but sit him down to write a comic and it all just magically goes out the window and comes back when he's done.

Edit: Ninja'd.

Can't lay all the blame for the Iron Age on Miller Fan. Even if doing so is Tempting. David Loyd and Allen Moore have to be at least as if not more responsible for it with works like Watchment, The Killing Joke and V for Vendetta. I doubt Todd McFarland helped with the invention of Spawn either.

And to be honest, the time the Iron Age ran, Comics weren't the only things going very often for Grim and Gritty and Ultra Dark and violent and Graphic. That spoke for large swaths of the entertainment industry.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Mmmm, is it too late in the thread to break out the popcorn? :smallwink:

I mean, come on now. We don't even have a trailer. This is speculation par excellence.

[Metahuman1]

Break it out? You mean you didn't have it before now? =)

[Cen]

Humm. Let me make myself clearer - Daredevil was first but not only work of his that I've read... Let me see my shelf... All of SinCity, Ronin and Batman: TDR. Not much and not recent, but I'm pretty sure that's all that was published in my country.
I never noticed anything wrong with his females, but most of them were from Sin CIty so it was part of the setting. Though in Ronin main antagonist evil AI is female, that's not a prostitute or physically interested in anyone. That's gotta count as something.

And his work being grimdark... wasn't it just popular in the 80's? Alan Moore was fair more prominent writer back then, and his work is much darker.
Hmm. You say that his work dropped in quality after SC? That's a shame...

[Fan]

Humm. Let me make myself clearer - Daredevil was first but not only work of his that I've read... Let me see my shelf... All of SinCity, Ronin and Batman: TDR. Not much and not recent, but I'm pretty sure that's all that was published in my country.
I never noticed anything wrong with his females, but most of them were from Sin CIty so it was part of the setting. Though in Ronin main antagonist evil AI is female, that's not a prostitute or physically interested in anyone. That's gotta count as something.

And his work being grimdark... wasn't it just popular in the 80's? Alan Moore was fair more prominent writer back then, and his work is much darker.
Hmm. You say that his work dropped in quality after SC? That's a shame...

I haven't touched Ronin admittedly. That's a lapse in my own knowledge there that I will acknowledge as my mistake.

[Metahuman1]

Humm. Let me make myself clearer - Daredevil was first but not only work of his that I've read... Let me see my shelf... All of SinCity, Ronin and Batman: TDR. Not much and not recent, but I'm pretty sure that's all that was published in my country.
I never noticed anything wrong with his females, but most of them were from Sin CIty so it was part of the setting. Though in Ronin main antagonist evil AI is female, that's not a prostitute or physically interested in anyone. That's gotta count as something.

And his work being grimdark... wasn't it just popular in the 80's? Alan Moore was fair more prominent writer back then, and his work is much darker.
Hmm. You say that his work dropped in quality after SC? That's a shame...

I've never read Ronin but if I remember right that came out before The Dark Knight Returns did, it was his first experimentation with Graphic Novel as opposed to ongoing comic.

But yeah, it started fairly subtly with stuff he was doing during the Sin City part of his career, Batman Spawn was an example of this. The first one I think he did were everyone collectively went "What the crap was he on when he made this?!!! This is horrible!!!" was The Dark Knight Strikes Again, which was a sequel to The Dark Knight Returns. The one were I think even his fans collectively gave up and said "We can no longer defend him." was All Star Batman And Robin The Boy Wonder.

If you can't get them in your country, look up the episodes of Atop The Forth Wall that review them, (In case your not familiar with it, Atop the Forth Wall is a weekly Web series that's been running for over 5 years now that reviews comics. Mostly really bad ones.), and you'll probably get an idea of what the problems are.

And, Ironically, given that it was grim, gritty film Noir, I didn't mind it in Sin City. It's when he started doing it everywhere else with every other female character he wrote for that it became a problem.

And yes, as I and you mentioned, he was one of the earlier one's to get into doing things the way they were done in the Iron (or "Dark") age of comic books, but he was far and away from the only or even at times the worst one.

But not being the first, only, or worse one is very different form not being very bad after a certain point.

[Ravian]

I've never read Ronin but if I remember right that came out before The Dark Knight Returns did, it was his first experimentation with Graphic Novel as opposed to ongoing comic.

But yeah, it started fairly subtly with stuff he was doing during the Sin City part of his career, Batman Spawn was an example of this. The first one I think he did were everyone collectively went "What the crap was he on when he made this?!!! This is horrible!!!" was The Dark Knight Strikes Again, which was a sequel to The Dark Knight Returns. The one were I think even his fans collectively gave up and said "We can no longer defend him." was All Star Batman And Robin The Boy Wonder.

If you can't get them in your country, look up the episodes of Atop The Forth Wall that review them, (In case your not familiar with it, Atop the Forth Wall is a weekly Web series that's been running for over 5 years now that reviews comics. Mostly really bad ones.), and you'll probably get an idea of what the problems are.

And, Ironically, given that it was grim, gritty film Noir, I didn't mind it in Sin City. It's when he started doing it everywhere else with every other female character he wrote for that it became a problem.

And yes, as I and you mentioned, he was one of the earlier one's to get into doing things the way they were done in the Iron (or "Dark") age of comic books, but he was far and away from the only or even at times the worst one.

But not being the first, only, or worse one is very different form not being very bad after a certain point.

Yeah All Star Batman and Robin was definitely going off the deep end for me, I honestly was not sure if Batman was supposed to be the protagonist given how sadistically violent he was. I have nothing against a grim and gritty batman, but when you're intentionally inflicting permanent damage to a random mugger (and bragging about it) I think that you've stepped into villain territory (Code against killing or not)

[Metahuman1]

And that's not even getting into doing things like outright kidnapping a 12 year old boy and trying to force him to kill and eat rats out of your cave, lighting entire groups of hired muscle on fire while you go to make out with a different vigilante, the stories overall treatment of Women and any Hero OTHER then Batman, Beating on Alfred, the confusing time/date stamps that conflict with themselves,

Yeah, it was a freaking Horrible comic book. And I agree with Linkara, I refuse to acknowledge that that was the real Batman. I also refuse to acknowledge that that stories versions of Wonder Woman and Superman were the real Wonder Woman and Superman.

[Fan]

And that's not even getting into doing things like outright kidnapping a 12 year old boy and trying to force him to kill and eat rats out of your cave, lighting entire groups of hired muscle on fire while you go to make out with a different vigilante, the stories overall treatment of Women and any Hero OTHER then Batman, Beating on Alfred, the confusing time/date stamps that conflict with themselves,

Yeah, it was a freaking Horrible comic book. And I agree with Linkara, I refuse to acknowledge that that was the real Batman. I also refuse to acknowledge that that stories versions of Wonder Woman and Superman were the real Wonder Woman and Superman.

Though Hal Jordan being as dumb as a fencepost is canon.

I see it as Frank Millar's own fanfiction getting put into print.

[Closet_Skeleton]

And, Ironically, given that it was grim, gritty film Noir, I didn't mind it in Sin City. It's when he started doing it everywhere else with every other female character he wrote for that it became a problem.


He gave Catwoman a Prostitute background before he wrote Sin City, which may have lead to a nasty trend.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I find it all terribly interesting you're all discussing someone not actually involved with the production.

Or does anyone have a source on that other then wild reactions based other forum posts?

The most Miller Time seems to be that DKR is an influence on Synder and the film.

And I'd argue Batfleck alone should easily establish is a pretty loose influence (think 'stylistic elements' not 'plot adaptation') because there's not nearly the age. Also being older then Supes is arguably a very substantial dynamic shift not from DKR which went with the normal peer arrangement.

[Aotrs Commander]

Maybe they should just go "screw it" and cast Mr Krabs as Lex Luthor.
It's not like Clancy Brown is unfamiliar with the role...

Because that literally could not make this movie any worse that it's virtually garenteed to be at this point, and in fact it would likely make it fracking amazing.

...

...

Actually, now I'm wondering if Mr Krabs isn't actually Lex Luthor (or vise versa). Because that makes way too much sense...

[MLai]

Wow, first Batfleck, then Wonder Gal, now Lexberg. This movie is vying against the old Batman movies for "Worst Casting Superhero Circus" award. At least the old Batmans had the decency of making 2 good movies before that happened.

Frank Miller... Basically he caught the same bug that infected George Lucas and Orson Scott Card. That happens to ppl, even creative visionaries. I keep having visions of their youthful idealistic selves going forward in time to do battle with their corrupt tyrannical aged counterparts, for the good of humanity.

[Kris Strife]

Wow, first Batfleck, then Wonder Gal, now Lexberg. This movie is vying against the old Batman movies for "Worst Casting Superhero Circus" award. At least the old Batmans had the decency of making 2 good movies before that happened.

Adam West Batman was amazing, and he played the light-hearted, campy Batman of the time perfectly.

Also, Julie Newmar Catwoman. :smallbiggrin:

[Metahuman1]

He gave Catwoman a Prostitute background before he wrote Sin City, which may have lead to a nasty trend.

Huh, somehow I always thought Year one was during the Sin City run.

[Kitten Champion]

I think I read some of Miller's Daredevil run, I don't really remember it. If Batman: Year One was like the animated movie, then it was pretty terrible. Grim and dull with characters I didn't give a damn about, a Gotham so stupidly corrupt as to make me wonder if I stumbled into a Spawn crossover, and so very monotone.

As to Eisenberg, he's fine. I could see him fitting into the role easily. Honestly I don't see controversy here, as opposed to Gal Gadot whose filmography lends me to believe she was chosen to save money and Affleck whose Daredevil performance was flat and toothless. Eisenberg can play a villain, most of his characters are kind of arrogant *******s to begin with, and he can deliver sharp dialogue which works well in Superhero movies.

[Hyena]

Wait. What? What? WHAT?! Frank Miller is in this one?! No! NO! NOOOO! No-no-no-no-no. No. No, it can't be. No.
I hate this writer - and now also this movie. Don't bother asking why - I'm not sure how it could be. Oh wait, I'm sure. Thin muscleless supermodel as Wonder Woman, nerd college version of Lex Luthor as a villainous bald mastermind, Ben Affleck, of all possible people, as Goddamn Batman, and now Frank Miller has creative input?! Oh, there's also Superman in it too.
I wonder how this movie could be made worse. Perhaps, Superman could be played by Nicholas Cage?

[Closet_Skeleton]

Huh, somehow I always thought Year one was during the Sin City run.

Year One is 87, Sin City is 91-2 and then 95-00.

[hamishspence]

Weren't people extremely skeptical of Kevin Spacey's ability to play Lex?

It's possible that the skeptics were wroooooong. :smallamused:

[MLai]

Weren't people extremely skeptical of Kevin Spacey's ability to play Lex?
It's possible that the skeptics were wroooooong. :smallamused:
You mean that Superman movie that sucked? Including the character of Lex Luthor?
Mr. Spacey played his Lex Luthor like it was 1978. We weren't in 1978 anymore.

[VexingFool]

This comic book movie has some of the worst casting since David Ogden Stiers was cast as Martian Manhunter.

[GoblinGilmartin]

Weren't people extremely skeptical of Kevin Spacey's ability to play Lex?

It's possible that the skeptics were wroooooong. :smallamused:

How could they doubt Spacey?

My thoughts were this. They said that they were re-imagining Luthor as a "skinhead street punk". I don't really get this, considering all of the Lexcorp gas tanker trucks that get blown up in MoS, how could he be a "street punk" AND the owner of a multimillion dollar corporation?

[Soras Teva Gee]

How could they doubt Spacey?

My thoughts were this. They said that they were re-imagining Luthor as a "skinhead street punk". I don't really get this, considering all of the Lexcorp gas tanker trucks that get blown up in MoS, how could he be a "street punk" AND the owner of a multimillion dollar corporation?

Simplest answer is there is no conflict there in the first place.

Lexcorp trucks in Man of Steel are an inside joke and easter egg only. The actual value to the plot is exactly and precisely zero. They are meaningless. Thus they can (and at the slightest need should) be disregarded for anything the new movie wants to do.

Unless of course he was a street punk before creating a multibillion dollar corporation. Or its more a vague character trait then societal position thing. Lots of possibilities. But the trucks are of absolutely no relevance or value to whatever was decided.

[DigoDragon]

Because that literally could not make this movie any worse that it's virtually garenteed to be at this point, and in fact it would likely make it fracking amazing.

So, basically make is so perposterously cheesy and bad like Snakes on a Plane that it screen-wraps to good and becomes a success?

[Ravian]

Simplest answer is there is no conflict there in the first place.

Lexcorp trucks in Man of Steel are an inside joke and easter egg only. The actual value to the plot is exactly and precisely zero. They are meaningless. Thus they can (and at the slightest need should) be disregarded for anything the new movie wants to do.

Unless of course he was a street punk before creating a multibillion dollar corporation. Or its more a vague character trait then societal position thing. Lots of possibilities. But the trucks are of absolutely no relevance or value to whatever was decided.

Eh, just seems lazy to stick in references like that and then not follow through on them. Maybe I'm just spoiled by Marvel sticking tie-ins all over their movies.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Eh, just seems lazy to stick in references like that and then not follow through on them. Maybe I'm just spoiled by Marvel sticking tie-ins all over their movies.

A reference is not a plot element, its just a reference. Movies do that sort of thing.

A Marvel example would be the Donald Blake gag in the first Thor movie. A totally different example would be Ancient Egyptian Droids (http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j20/ryoga_sgcollects/droids_in_indy.jpg) in Indian Jones. What do they actually mean? Nothing really, its a fun little bit to amuse the filmmakers and give a little pay off to amuse those that notice.

Heck all this other stuff from the first Thor (http://marvel-movies.wikia.com/wiki/Odin%27s_Trophy_Room)... I'm not expecting to see again. Perhaps especially the first one listed, I figure the story will have moved on by the time the actual prop is needed and nobody will feel a desire to go back to the vault.

[Xondoure]

A reference is not a plot element, its just a reference. Movies do that sort of thing.

A Marvel example would be the Donald Blake gag in the first Thor movie. A totally different example would be Ancient Egyptian Droids (http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j20/ryoga_sgcollects/droids_in_indy.jpg) in Indian Jones. What do they actually mean? Nothing really, its a fun little bit to amuse the filmmakers and give a little pay off to amuse those that notice.

Heck all this other stuff from the first Thor (http://marvel-movies.wikia.com/wiki/Odin%27s_Trophy_Room)... I'm not expecting to see again. Perhaps especially the first one listed, I figure the story will have moved on by the time the actual prop is needed and nobody will feel a desire to go back to the vault.

I'm almost positive that the infinity gauntlet was placed there as a deliberate tie in, considering how much focus on the gems there has been.

[Ravian]

A reference is not a plot element, its just a reference. Movies do that sort of thing.

A Marvel example would be the Donald Blake gag in the first Thor movie. A totally different example would be Ancient Egyptian Droids (http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j20/ryoga_sgcollects/droids_in_indy.jpg) in Indian Jones. What do they actually mean? Nothing really, its a fun little bit to amuse the filmmakers and give a little pay off to amuse those that notice.

Heck all this other stuff from the first Thor (http://marvel-movies.wikia.com/wiki/Odin%27s_Trophy_Room)... I'm not expecting to see again. Perhaps especially the first one listed, I figure the story will have moved on by the time the actual prop is needed and nobody will feel a desire to go back to the vault.

Well yeah a little gag like that I can understand. But the fact is that Lexcorp has become a very large part of how most people imagine Lex Luthor.

Also I really can't imagine how a "Skinhead and street thug" is supposed to be intimidating to Superman. It just doesn't really feel like Luthor to me unless he's in a suit.

[Metahuman1]

Wait. What? What? WHAT?! Frank Miller is in this one?! No! NO! NOOOO! No-no-no-no-no. No. No, it can't be. No.
I hate this writer - and now also this movie. Don't bother asking why - I'm not sure how it could be. Oh wait, I'm sure. Thin muscleless supermodel as Wonder Woman, nerd college version of Lex Luthor as a villainous bald mastermind, Ben Affleck, of all possible people, as Goddamn Batman, and now Frank Miller has creative input?! Oh, there's also Superman in it too.
I wonder how this movie could be made worse. Perhaps, Superman could be played by Nicholas Cage?

Oh, Sure it could worse with out the need to recast Superman. We could have Eddie Murphy be John Stewart, Arnold could be cast for Barry Allen, Justine Bieber could be allowed to play Robin after all, while were at it they could use pure CG for the other bad guy and give him no dialog and Super Girl could show up and be played by Miley Cyrus and hey, since were going all in for "no hope of recovery." Joel Shumacker could be called in to help Miller with creative control, Alec Baldwin could be cast to be Aquaman, and we can do a completely CGI Martian Manhunter with a voice created on a synthesizer.

Yeah, I'll stop there while some of your souls are still intact.


Closet Skeleton: Huh, weird. Well, I'll just chock that one up to an early warning sign. I didn't much care for what he did with Selena in DKR's, but it was just a bit and didn't ruin the whole book.


Kitten Champion: That's sorta the point. If you look at early golden age Batman stories, before Robin was around, Batman was fighting a serious uphill battle. Gothem is Corrupt to it's core, which was part of why it needed Batman, and if Bruce wanted to make a difference he needed, the anonymity, the symbolism and the ability to go outside the system in order to fix the system the Batman Identity allowed for. Year one was a Modernization of those stories. The point is that it did eventually get better if you took it with main Canon. Though if you stick it in Miller Canon it got worse, but that's not the point of that book.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I'm almost positive that the infinity gauntlet was placed there as a deliberate tie in, considering how much focus on the gems there has been.

Yeah, but that's entirely besides the point. The foreshadowing is still reasonably likely to have been purely meta-level.

Given that the "gems" aren't in the Gauntlet, or evidently gems anymore. And the Cosmic Cube never was one to start with of course. Reinterpretation is clearly being practiced and where that will end is anybody's guess. Maybe no literal gauntlet at all but a play on the metaphorical challenge of gathering the gems? Sky isn't even the limit

Or short version... don't go into Avengers 2 expecting Thanos to go loot Odin's vault for a blingy glove.

That might happen sure, but its not required to happen. A vast an important difference.


Well yeah a little gag like that I can understand. But the fact is that Lexcorp has become a very large part of how most people imagine Lex Luthor.

That matters not a single bit.

The only thing that matters is the context of the reference itself. Which is a couple of items in the background had a mythos element painted on them. That's... nothing and remains nothing. No matter how important it is the the mythos its essentially not in the movie.

[Aotrs Commander]

So, basically make is so perposterously cheesy and bad like Snakes on a Plane that it screen-wraps to good and becomes a success?

That would seem to be the best option...

Aside from casting Adam West as Proper Batman (or having CGI/cartoon Batman voiced by Adam West)...

[The Glyphstone]

Is Thanos even going to be in Avengers 2? It's called Age of Ultron, and Ultron is the primary villain.

[Metahuman1]

Is Thanos even going to be in Avengers 2? It's called Age of Ultron, and Ultron is the primary villain.

He will likely have a bit part in that and in Guardians of the Galaxy, and possibly in some other up coming marvel movies. Get things all set up for Avengers 3, which right now is when everyone is theorizing there gonna deal with Thanos and the Infinity Gauntlet since it looks like there bypassing his original story were the thing he needed was the Cube.

[MLai]

I thought the grapevine says there is not going to be an Avengers 3.
I'd be the first to call BS on that news (riiiiiight Hollywood is not already salivating at the prospect of Avengers 3), but that's what I heard.

[Jayngfet]

I thought the grapevine says there is not going to be an Avengers 3.
I'd be the first to call BS on that news (riiiiiight Hollywood is not already salivating at the prospect of Avengers 3), but that's what I heard.

At this point anything anyone hears about Avengers 3 is probably wrong. 2 hasn't even come out yet and they need at least a couple of years to build up to 3. It can go through a dozen or more rewrites and retoolings from now and then and probably will.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Consider the dueling mix of directors, writers, executives, producers, crew, actors, and actually implementing ideas practically....

Yeah movies are written on water until they get shipped the theaters, which is why its fundamentally impossible to expect anything other then a handful fairly major plot points to be upheld in a series.

And even those expect vagaries because when the first movie was put together anything following it was probably at best somewhere between an elevator pitch and a script outline.

[masamune1]

I thought the grapevine says there is not going to be an Avengers 3.
I'd be the first to call BS on that news (riiiiiight Hollywood is not already salivating at the prospect of Avengers 3), but that's what I heard.

Its the opposite- Avengers 3 pretty much has a date (2018- it will be either May or November). I don't have a clue where you heard it isn't happening.

Marvel is planning 2 films a year for every year up to 2018 at least. Ant Man, Dr Strange, Thor 3, Cap 3, and Avengers 3 are all either confirmed or about to be, with others in the pipeline.