Well... there's always the Star Wars films.
Seriously though, a show solely about Lex Luthor? No Clark Kent/Superman/Last Son of Krypton angle at all?
Pfft. No thanks. That sounds awfully boring, not to mention depressing.
Clark would play the same role he played in Lex's life in Smallville - just the show in general would be less about Clark fighting FOTW villian X, and more about Lex's experiences. I think a show like that would better play to the strengths of the Smallville crew - while they can come up with horrible, horrible plots, their characters always fine a way to keep the show watchable.
Agreed. I think he's the best live action version of Lex to date, in fact.
The only version of Lex I have seen that can compete with SV Lex is Lex: Man of Steel - both are exactly the way I want to see the character displayed.
On the surface, they all start that way. That's the point. But looks and actions are deceiving. In the Pilot, everybody thinks Clark is just a klutz around Lana LOL. By the second episode, the writers are already setting up events that wouldn't fully unfold for another five years, and characterizations about
Superman and the adult Lex Luthor that are benchmarks of their bookend-like personalities. Just look at Lex's dialog in Metamorphosis...
To Lana: "While you're nursing your boyfriend back to health, ask him what he was doing before the big game."
Lex is surreptitiously trying to initiate a break-up between Lana and Whitney.
Referencing the Troy model: "It wasn't a gift. It was a strategy tool. My father equates business with war. Take the battle of Troy. It started because two men were in love with the same woman..."
Foreshadows the distant future.
To Clark about Whitney: "If you hadn't pulled him out of that truck, your problems would be solved."
This is a yin/yang of Crimson's enraged Kal declaration to Lex that if he knew the man Lex were to become, he never would have saved him from bridge.
But see, I don't see Lex's actions here as being evil, nor a product of some suppressed darkness. Lex meets this great guy who saved his life, they become friends. Friends are suppose to look out and help each other achieve their wants and dreams. Lex is trying to see Clark is happy - by trying to help him get the one thing he wants more than anything: Lana Lang. Does Lex have a different way of doing things than Clark? Yes. Does that make him a worse person? No. While I clearly see how these lines show the parallelism of the Whitney-Lana-Clark triangle, and the Lex-Lana-Clark triangle, I don't see how it shows how Lex is any worse a person.
No, they're polar opposites, but like two sides to the same coin, they're inextricably connected. More dialog...
Lex [regarding the lead box]: My mother bought it in a Kasban in Morocco. A little guy told her it was made from the armor of St. George, the patron saint of boy scouts. [He offers it to Clark]
Clark: I can't take that.
Lex: What is it about Kents and gifts? It's yours. Hand it to Lana. Tell her what happened. Trust me, once she opens it, you'll win her heart. That necklace gives you the power. All you've got to do is use it.
Lex is all about power and recognition. He uses gifts as a means to acquire power through gratitude, which become the building blocks to the high pedestal of esteem from which he wishes to be metaphorically worshiped. By contrast, Clark already HAS enormous power, yet his decision to help people by wielding it isn't out of a desire for personal glorification and adoration. In fact, when Clark later DOES wield his powers openly *as* Superman, he neither asks for or accepts gifts in return for his deeds. This behavior is the antithesis of everything that Lex Luthor is about. Clark is the better person by far. He always was, and he'll always be.
Yes - I fully understand that Clark and Lex are different people with different personalities, that is not my point. My point is that Lex Luthor is as good, if not a better person - and a much better friend than Superman is during the early years of Smallville.
Yes -power and recognition are important to Lex, but that doesn't prevent him from using these tools to benefit others. Lex saves the Talon for Lana, giving him power and recognition in the community - the end result is that Lana has something to remind her of her parents, and the community has a new business - I don't see how that is a black mark on Lex.
Lex Luthor and Superman are very powerful people, in very different ways. Lex Luthor's power comes from capitalism, money and influence. Superman's from natural physical strength and dedication. Neither is inherently good nor bad. Lex Luthor in the early days of Smallville uses his powers for good, just as Clark Kent does.
That's the point, init? Clark Kent is raised with good morals by loving parents. He stresses other people's happiness and well being before he ever acknowledges his own. He's the embodiment of altruism and selflessness. Lex was never truly loved by his father, and the morals he was taught were more about strategy and self gratification. He has no problem using nefarious methods as long as the end justifies the means.
But see, Smallville Clark Kent IS at times selfish - not selfless. He feels appalled that Lex didn't fully give up his investigations on para-normal activities of Smallville (and, by association - Clark) and hurt that Lex dare lie to him (ignoring the fact that Clark constantly lies to Lex) that he throws away years of friendship. He refused to help Lex understand these things, things that Lex feels have a direct influence on himself, because he doesn't dare risk the possibility his secret would be revealed. That is being selfish.
When he sees that Lana may die if he tells her his secret, he refuses to tell Lana. While this is an act that could be looked upon as selfless - he is taking control of Lana's life away from her. Lana clearly loved Clark, loved him enough to agree to become his wife - she understood his secret and would of understood its risks. Clark had no right to take the choice away from Lana. He couldn't bare to deal with the pain of her death being on his hands, that he would rather them both be miserable.
Now as far as Lex goes, yes he does eventually turn to using less than moral methods for what he sees as the greater good. However he does not start crossing the line until AFTER he has loss his connections with Clark. The Season 1-3 Lex would not be involved with 33.1.
Both characters influence each other - they are the legendary Naman and Sageeth after all - but one doesn't create the other. Lex is shrewd and far from being codependent. His actions have always been his own doing. That would include his decision as a boy to take the blame for his brother's murder at his mother's hand, as well as the premeditated action of taking a married woman he was interested in to a club where he *knew* she would see her unfaithful husband canoodling with other women. Clark had nothing to do with these and other actions.
Lex does have control of his own life, however he is open to influence. The two incidents you mentioned could be viewed as noble: he protects his mother, he shows a woman the true man he is about to marry. I don't see how one could use those events against Lex.
The role of influences can be seen at Lex's boarding school: when surrounded by less-than noble people, Lex becomes less-than noble. When Lex is in Smallville and is friends with Clark Kent, Lex's actions tend to be compassionate and generous - just like Mr. Kent.
As far as Clark keeping secrets from Lex or interacting with Lionel, I can see how that might piss somebody off, but it's far from being the keystone for a decent into evil. Lex's continued prying into Clark's personal life isn't a good reason for Clark to just all of a sudden give in a spill the beans. Clark has had no obligation to tell Lex anything, and in point of fact, Clark has had a very difficult time telling his closest friends his secret. Regardless, lack of disclosure of personal information is NOT a reason to go all psycho, and Lex is well on his way in that direction.
Your best friend looks at you as if you are the scum of the Earth, and took the word of a KILLER over that of your own. You don't think that doesn't have a damaging impact on someone? Clark did not OWE Lex his secret, but he DID owe Lex the chance to explain the sites he saw in Lex's hidden room - after all.
I feel to characterize Lex Luthor in any form as psycho is unfair to the character.
I don't see him as the best actor on the show, though he IS very good, and as I previously stated, I think he's the best live action Lex ever. He's not goofy. He has real problems, and he's very relatable, which grants him a pathos from the audience a campy character would never receive.
I just see Michael Rosenbaum as a scene stealer, I could say the same for Erica Durrance and John Glover - that added with the incredibly fascinating character he is given, and plus my love of his Flash in JL(U) (another show in which he has a knack of improving every scene he is in) makes me hold MR in a special place in my heart.
I think the reason I so love this character is that - for better or for worse - I see a lot of myself in Lex, or at least Smallville Lex . I am not sure if that is something I should be proud of, but it does give me a certain bond to the character.
Yes, yes it was!
.
