Changing a villain's motive and back story in a comic book movie

[The Overlord]

What do you think about changing a villain's motive and back story for a comic book movie? It seems necessary in certain cases, someone like Whiplash as he is written the comics couldn't carry a movie, but the movie Whiplash was interesting enough to carry a movie.

 

[Spider-Kurt!]

I think it's a great idea and occasionally a necessary one as well.

 

[The Overlord]

I think it's a great idea and occasionally a necessary one as well.

Yes, though whether it should be done depends on the villain. Villains like Joker are already fleshed out in the comics, they don't need a change in personality. A one dimensional character like Whiplash though, does.

 

[bubbadoom]

Worked great with Crimson Dynamo/Whiplash, not so good with Dr. Doom. Just depends upon the changes and who's doing them.

The thing I fear more is changing the characters design for no real reason.

Is Green Goblin any "better" or more "believable" due to his visual alterations? The metal man mess they made of Doom in FF1 was pointless, but at least they tossed that out in FF2. If we are lucky enough to ever get a villain like Psycho Man, Dragon Man, or the real Galactus on screen, they damn well better look like they source material!

 

[El Payaso]

I thought that Green Goblin's motivations in Raimi's Spiderman were pretty weak and absurd. Sure, to kill those business men was natural, but once he killed them (pretty much immediately) he has little to do.

He spends the rest of the movie trying to be friendies with Spiderman and... that's it. Spidey says no and Goblin has a tantrum on it. And he was dumb enough to have Spiderman gassed for hours so he could remove his mask but he - somehow - doesn't, and it's not but far later that he "gets" that Spiderman's identity might be important.

 

[The Overlord]

I thought that Green Goblin's motivations in Raimi's Spiderman were pretty weak and absurd. Sure, to kill those business men was natural, but once he killed them (pretty much immediately) he has little to do.

He spends the rest of the movie trying to be friendies with Spiderman and... that's it. Spidey says no and Goblin has a tantrum on it. And he was dumb enough to have Spiderman gassed for hours so he could remove his mask but he - somehow - doesn't, and it's not but far later that he "gets" that Spiderman's identity might be important.

Well one has to ask why Green Goblin hates Spider-Man in the first place and frankly it to comes down to Gobby being an obsessive nut case who hates Spidey for very trivial reasons. Killing Spidey was a means to an end for Gobby, until Spidey started foiling him and Gobby, being an obsessive nut case, started to take personally. So frankly the motive in the movie mirrors one in the comic. Gobby's insane, his motives make no sense, because they are not supposed to make sense. They mare based on logic that makes sense to him

That's better then Lex's motives in Superman Returns, Lex is supposed to be a cool, suave in control villain, not a psychotic man child with a scheme that makes no sense what so ever.

Worked great with Crimson Dynamo/Whiplash, not so good with Dr. Doom. Just depends upon the changes and who's doing them.

The thing I fear more is changing the characters design for no real reason.

Is Green Goblin any "better" or more "believable" due to his visual alterations? The metal man mess they made of Doom in FF1 was pointless, but at least they tossed that out in FF2. If we are lucky enough to ever get a villain like Psycho Man, Dragon Man, or the real Galactus on screen, they damn well better look like they source material!

Well if its not broken don't fix it, but many of these villains are broken in one way or another, so they need some fixing. Motives and personality are important then costumes, though frankly even then some villains have bad costumes that. I think the Wizard's costume's pretty well sucks. Whiplash looked better in the movie then in the comics. I think there should some room to maneuver, if the costume isn't really iconic and is not pleasing to the eye.

 

[El Payaso]

Well one has to ask why Green Goblin hates Spider-Man in the first place and frankly it to comes down to Gobby being an obsessive nut case who hates Spidey for very trivial reasons. Killing Spidey was a means to an end for Gobby, until Spidey started foiling him and Gobby, being an obsessive nut case, started to take personally. So frankly the motive in the movie mirrors one in the comic. Gobby's insane, his motives make no sense, because they are not supposed to make sense. They mare based on logic that makes sense to him

So you're basically saying 'the character's motivations have always been lame'? Because that's a case where you should improve them.

That's better then Lex's motives in Superman Returns, Lex is supposed to be a cool, suave in control villain, not a psychotic man child with a scheme that makes no sense what so ever.

Lex is supposed to be the same Lex from STM. And in STM he hated Superman because he was stealing the attention from him and Lex was an egomaniac.

And back then he already had plans that included destroying part of the country. Because once the west coast should be destroyed don't tell me the authorities wouldn't put two and two together and find out who was benefitted by that, a man who resembles a lot the one who stopped the missiles convoys twice.

Luthor creating a new continent of his own makes a lot more sense than a villiain who is perpetually angry because he wanted to be friends with the hero and the hero said no. And certainly if Superman wore a mask - and thus Luthor could foresee a secret identity - then he would try to find it out. If you know that you don't spend hours with your enemy dozed off and NOT remove his mask. Being crazy is one thing, being an idiot is completely different.

 

[The Overlord]

So you're basically saying 'the character's motivations have always been lame'? Because that's a case where you should improve them.

Madness is a valid motive in my opinion, it works very well in fiction. Not all villains have logical goals. Lex should have a logical goal, but Gobby's motives should make no sense to anyone but himself. What's Joker's motive besides madness?

Lex is supposed to be the same Lex from STM. And in STM he hated Superman because he was stealing the attention from him and Lex was an egomaniac.

And back then he already had plans that included destroying part of the country. Because once the west coast should be destroyed don't tell me the authorities wouldn't put two and two together and find out who was benefitted by that, a man who resembles a lot the one who stopped the missiles convoys twice.

I never liked that version of Lex, so that argument does nothing for me. Saying Lex is egomaniac seems like a pretty shallow motive, that's all he is the movies, a one dimensional character.

Luthor creating a new continent of his own makes a lot more sense than a villiain who is perpetually angry because he wanted to be friends with the hero and the hero said no. And certainly if Superman wore a mask - and thus Luthor could foresee a secret identity - then he would try to find it out. If you know that you don't spend hours with your enemy dozed off and NOT remove his mask. Being crazy is one thing, being an idiot is completely different.

Except it doesn't make sense unless Lex was supposed to a genocidal maniac who likes killing people for no reason, that's what his plan was. It wasn't feasbile at all, it had a million holes in it that we have gone over a million times, even Roger Ebert brought up how this plan made no sense.

I would have prefer a plan from Lex that would have more sense, selling the tech to become rich or making weapons to take over the world. Using this tech to create Metallo or Parasite would have been way cooler then this stupid continent thing.

 

[El Payaso]

Madness is a valid motive in my opinion, it works very well in fiction. Not all villains have logical goals. Lex should have a logical goal, but Gobby's motives should make no sense to anyone but himself. What's Joker's motive besides madness?

Madness is great. When it's interesting, not just 'not making sense.'

In Joker's case, his madness is about destroying what's opposite to him. Make the rest to face their darkest selves. Now that is an inetresting madness. Being angry because someone didn't want to be your friend might work whenever the relationship between both characters is good. But Goblin and Spiderman had nothing in common (their alter egos did, but not their masked personas) so this came out as gratuitous.

His original motivation - revenge - was far better, even when it has been done to death.

And what came out as more bizarre is how he passed from one to the other for no reason.

I never liked that version of Lex, so that argument does nothing for me. Saying Lex is egomaniac seems like a pretty shallow motive, that's all he is the movies, a one dimensional character.

Man, you're defending one of the most one-dimensional versions of madness; 'it just makes no sense'. And being angry because someone didn't want to be your partner was as shallow as it gets.

Except it doesn't make sense unless Lex was supposed to a genocidal maniac who likes killing people for no reason, that's what his plan was.

So you didn't get the part where he planned to sell plots of land?

People being killed is just a side effect that he happens to enjoy.

And even if it was about killing people for pleasure, it sounds more serious than being offended because someone said no to my friendship request.

It wasn't feasbile at all, it had a million holes in it that we have gone over a million times, even Roger Ebert brought up how this plan made no sense.

Am I supposed to take Roger Ebert's opinion seriosuly or something?

And well, let's say it didn't mnake sense. How does that help your Green Goblin's case?

I would have prefer a plan from Lex that would have more sense, selling the tech to become rich or making weapons to take over the world. Using this tech to create Metallo or Parasite would have been way cooler then this stupid continent thing.

Absolutely.

And I'd have prefered that Green Goblin had a motivation. And even if his motivation was just to hate Spiderman, then I'd have prefered him to be intelligent enough to get that if you have your enemy sleeping, then finding out his identity is a no-brainer.

 

[The Overlord]

Madness is great. When it's interesting, not just 'not making sense.'

In Joker's case, his madness is about destroying what's opposite to him. Make the rest to face their darkest selves. Now that is an inetresting madness. Being angry because someone didn't want to be your friend might work whenever the relationship between both characters is good. But Goblin and Spiderman had nothing in common (their alter egos did, but not their masked personas) so this came out as gratuitous.

His original motivation - revenge - was far better, even when it has been done to death.

And what came out as more bizarre is how he passed from one to the other for no reason.

I thought Gobby either wanted to break Spidey's spirit so he would join him or merely kill Spider-Man as an example to those who would defy him. Again why does Gobby want revenge against Spidey in the comics, Spidey never did anything to Gobby. Are his motives shallow in the comics, doesn't seem that way considering how many people like the relationship between Spidey and Gobby. I mean how would you have presented his motives in the movie.

Man, you're defending one of the most one-dimensional versions of madness; 'it just makes no sense'. And being angry because someone didn't want to be your partner was as shallow as it gets.

A lot of crazy people in real life do things that have no real explanation, why do some people push strangers in front of subways? That doesn't make sense and yet some mentally unstable people do it.

So you didn't get the part where he planned to sell plots of land?

People being killed is just a side effect that he happens to enjoy.

And that made no sense. Lex would have been the most hated man in the world, people would have only done business with him to get a chance to kill him. Lex only had 6 guys working for him, what's to stop someone purchasing land there and murdering Lex in his sleep.

This plan made Lex look like an idiot and Lex shouldn't be a fool.

And even if it was about killing people for pleasure, it sounds more serious than being offended because someone said no to my friendship request.

That's not what Lex is supposed to be about though.

Am I supposed to take Roger Ebert's opinion seriosuly or something?

I have more reason to respect his opinion then your's.

And well, let's say it didn't mnake sense. How does that help your Green Goblin's case?

It shows you have a double standard in terms of how you rate motives for characters in these movies.

Absolutely.

And I'd have prefered that Green Goblin had a motivation. And even if his motivation was just to hate Spiderman, then I'd have prefered him to be intelligent enough to get that if you have your enemy sleeping, then finding out his identity is a no-brainer.

And creating a plan that makes you the most hated man in the world is insanely stupid, it goes against everything a Machiavellian villain like Lex should be. Comic book Lex seems to have read the Prince and taken it to heart, SR Lex can't seem to read anything more complex then a Twilight novel. That's the problem I have with SR Lex's motives and personality, they are completely counter to all the things that made Lex great in the comics.

If you are going to complain about Gobby's motives, then I think Lex's motives deserve a similar critical inspection.

 

[WarBlade]

Oh, this topic again. It's what? The Third iteration? Fourth? Fifth?

Anyway, it's unsurprising to see that everyone has once again ignored Deacon Frost.

 

[The Overlord]

Oh, this topic again. It's what? The Third iteration? Fourth? Fifth?

Anyway, it's unsurprising to see that everyone has once again ignored Deacon Frost.

Can you link me to the other examples? Its kinda hard to look this up in the search engine, if I look up the word "motive" in the search engine, I will get a ton of hits, so how I supposed to find these other threads?

 

[El Payaso]

I thought Gobby either wanted to break Spidey's spirit so he would join him or merely kill Spider-Man as an example to those who would defy him.

If I'm reading this correctly you're not sure what it was. And I'm not surprised since it was vague and shallow.

When Goblin kills the business men, he's left without nothing to do so he just happens to want to be friends with Spidey. When Spidey says no, he's again left without nothing to do so he just happens to want to know Spiderman's identity to break his spirit (and this is the villiain who has taken the longest time in realizing that the superhero's secret identity might be important).

Now, break his spirit for what exactly? One's left to guess if it's because of despite (b/c Spiderman said no to him), because he's so evil that he hates Spiderman's good heart or whatever the reason could be.

We're explained that Norman feels a special care for Peter - even more than for his own son - but when Norman realizes that Peter is Spiderman, there's not even a conflict about that. He forgets about how special this boy was to him and insists in destroying him just because he's the villiain.

Again why does Gobby want revenge against Spidey in the comics, Spidey never did anything to Gobby. Are his motives shallow in the comics, doesn't seem that way considering how many people like the relationship between Spidey and Gobby. I mean how would you have presented his motives in the movie.

Comics and movies, yes.

Again, if you say so I believe you but then again, if the Goblin's original motivations in comics are that lame, then it was the perfect oportunity to improve that point, which is the purpose in this thread.

A lot of crazy people in real life do things that have no real explanation, why do some people push strangers in front of subways? That doesn't make sense and yet some mentally unstable people do it.

Oh yes. In real life that kind of things do happen.

And then when you're making a movie you don't put anything that happens in real life but the ones that are actually interesting.

OIr well, you go the Raimi way and you forget about that and just put a lot of fights and special effects.

And that made no sense. Lex would have been the most hated man in the world, people would have only done business with him to get a chance to kill him. Lex only had 6 guys working for him, what's to stop someone purchasing land there and murdering Lex in his sleep.

This plan made Lex look like an idiot and Lex shouldn't be a fool.

Luthor wants to make money and that will make him hated amongst other business men. Yes, because we all know that business men are socially concerned about what the cost of making a fortune could be in terms of human explotation.

Every business man has enemies who could kill him. That doesn't stop them to do anything in order to make money.

We're all surrounded of business men like Luthor who are not worried about lying, killing or whatever. Once they're covered in millions they always have people around trying to get a slice of the cake.

If anything Luthor should be worried about the world's authorities, but hated by other business men? lol.

That's not what Lex is supposed to be about though.

Luthor is not about him killing people in order to get what he wants? Are you actually serious?

I have more reason to respect his opinion then your's.

Then I wonder why are you talking to me and not mailing him.

It shows you have a double standard in terms of how you rate motives for characters in these movies.

Ooooooh, so this whole thing was about making this personal. About making me the subject and not the movies.

No, pal. That never ends well. I advice you against it.

And creating a plan that makes you the most hated man in the world is insanely stupid, it goes against everything a Machiavellian villain like Lex should be.

Yes, business men live to being liked, not for the money.

Comic book Lex seems to have read the Prince and taken it to heart, SR Lex can't seem to read anything more complex then a Twilight novel. That's the problem I have with SR Lex's motives and personality, they are completely counter to all the things that made Lex great in the comics.

If you are going to complain about Gobby's motives, then I think Lex's motives deserve a similar critical inspection.

And yes he does deserve the same critical inspection. And so does the Joker, Riddler, Loki or whoever the character is.

Your point?

Now, we might say that comics Luthor moptivations are different than movies Luthor. But still is a man hating Superman for a reason and trying to maker billions of dollars which is always a good enough reason. Goblin has no motivation at all other than be friendies with Spiderman and, again, the only villiain not getting that removing the hero's mask is a must for every villiain - as he realizes way too late into the movie.

 

[WarBlade]

Can you link me to the other examples? Its kinda hard to look this up in the search engine, if I look up the word "motive" in the search engine, I will get a ton of hits, so how I supposed to find these other threads?

Found one

 

[SPIDERFIST]

If memory serves me correctly(but often doesn't), in the movie Goblin's motive against Spiderman was this: Osbourne's desire to maintain his company and his position within it was the motivating factor in his using the serum on himself. That exacerbated his lust for power while at the same time unleashing a madness for chaos and mayhem. He wanted Spidey as an accomplice in his mayhem otherwise he would turn out to be a potential nemesis which is of course what happened.

IMO --- Luthor has has always been motivated by 2 things: A desire for power and envy of the power that Superman possesses which he views as the ultimate possession of power that he desires.

As for the topic of the thread: I think that, yes, a villain's motive and back story sometimes needs to be changed/re-addressed. Most villains in comics really don't have much for back stories. They are simply evil and take pleasure in harming people in a variety of ways and on numerous levels. A hero needs to stop them --- end of story. Some villains lend themselves to better motives and back stories than others. The meat on the bone is this: that good triumphs over evil, right over wrong, and the pay-off of perseverance in times of trial.

 

[JAK®]

There was a definite trend in the early 2000's for comic book movies to have villains with very shallow or nonexistent plans, and seem to be there just because they needed an antagonist. Dr. Doom in Fantastic Four being one of the worst examples.

Comic book movies will usually change the villain a lot more than they do the hero, especially if the villain is quite obscure (Whiplash). It really depends on the character. In Dr. Doom's case it ruined the character.

 

[Incrediblejeff]

The thing about Dr Doom is that he didn't really need a change.Comic Doom could of worked great on film,but for some strange reason they decided to change him .

 

[The Overlord]

Found one

That's not the same, a thread on the most butchered character isn't the same as thread about whether there is positive benefits for changing a villain's personality.

 

[JAK®]

The thing about Dr Doom is that he didn't really need a change.Comic Doom could of worked great on film,but for some strange reason they decided to change him .

I remember when the film was in very early stages; fans were saying that Doom should be made a businessman because it was 'more realistic' than a dictator that rules a country. Even though this was in 2004, and a year earlier Saddam Hussein was deposed as the dictator of Iraq.

 

[The Overlord]

If I'm reading this correctly you're not sure what it was. And I'm not surprised since it was vague and shallow.

When Goblin kills the business men, he's left without nothing to do so he just happens to want to be friends with Spidey. When Spidey says no, he's again left without nothing to do so he just happens to want to know Spiderman's identity to break his spirit (and this is the villiain who has taken the longest time in realizing that the superhero's secret identity might be important).

Now, break his spirit for what exactly? One's left to guess if it's because of despite (b/c Spiderman said no to him), because he's so evil that he hates Spiderman's good heart or whatever the reason could be.

We're explained that Norman feels a special care for Peter - even more than for his own son - but when Norman realizes that Peter is Spiderman, there's not even a conflict about that. He forgets about how special this boy was to him and insists in destroying him just because he's the villiain.



Comics and movies, yes.

Again, if you say so I believe you but then again, if the Goblin's original motivations in comics are that lame, then it was the perfect oportunity to improve that point, which is the purpose in this thread.

I never said Gobby's motives were lame, I asked how they were different from the motives in the movie? Is there any good reason why Gobby wants revenge on Spidey in the comics, besides him being a lunatic? You didn't answer my question, how would you have presented Gobby's motives in the movie?

Oh yes. In real life that kind of things do happen.

And then when you're making a movie you don't put anything that happens in real life but the ones that are actually interesting.

OIr well, you go the Raimi way and you forget about that and just put a lot of fights and special effects.

If its a real problem I don't see why fiction shouldn't deal with it. Seems like madness comes in many different shapes and there is no objective way to say what kind of mental illnesses are more interesting then others, its all in the eye of the beholder.

Luthor wants to make money and that will make him hated amongst other business men. Yes, because we all know that business men are socially concerned about what the cost of making a fortune could be in terms of human explotation.

Every business man has enemies who could kill him. That doesn't stop them to do anything in order to make money.

We're all surrounded of business men like Luthor who are not worried about lying, killing or whatever. Once they're covered in millions they always have people around trying to get a slice of the cake.

If anything Luthor should be worried about the world's authorities, but hated by other business men? lol.



Luthor is not about him killing people in order to get what he wants? Are you actually serious?

No in the comics Lex's motives never just greed, he wanted people to love him, that's why he was threatened by Superman, because Superman was more beloved by the citizens of Metropolis then he was. So Lex devising a plan that would make him the most hated man in the world, is not in character. Lex would want a plan that made him wealthy, beloved and killed Superman in the process.

Then I wonder why are you talking to me and not mailing him.

I am just saying if you can dismiss his opinion so easily, what makes your opinion any less dismiss able?

Ooooooh, so this whole thing was about making this personal. About making me the subject and not the movies.

No, pal. That never ends well. I advice you against it.

I think you are being self important, I am criticizing your style of arguments, that's a not a personal slight. I am questioning your objectivity in this subject, that's a style criticism not one against your person. If I criticize someone from how they wrote an essay that doesn't mean I have personal grudge against that person.

Yes, business men live to being liked, not for the money.

Business men don't like to be unpopular, its harder to make money when you are disliked and people are less likely to do business with you. Haven't you ever read the Prince? Being hated is the worst thing that can happen to someone seeking power.

And yes he does deserve the same critical inspection. And so does the Joker, Riddler, Loki or whoever the character is.

Your point?

Now, we might say that comics Luthor moptivations are different than movies Luthor. But still is a man hating Superman for a reason and trying to maker billions of dollars which is always a good enough reason. Goblin has no motivation at all other than be friendies with Spiderman and, again, the only villiain not getting that removing the hero's mask is a must for every villiain - as he realizes way too late into the movie.

That's not Lex though, Lex would never gamble everything on one gambit, with no

The plan in SR made Lex look like a fool. It only ensures that people he does business with hate him and will try to murder him in his sleep. That's not the suave, cool, in control Lex from the comics, that's an idiot man child with no sense of business or tactics. That's a far bigger betrayal of the character then Gobby's portrayal in Spider-man 1, IMO. Have you ever read a post crisis Lex Luthor story?

 

[Incrediblejeff]

I remember when the film was in very early stages; fans were saying that Doom should be made a businessman because it was 'more realistic' than a dictator that rules a country. Even though this was in 2004, and a year earlier Saddam Hussein was deposed as the dictator of Iraq.

Such a Missed Opportunity to be topical.

 

[bubbadoom]

yet another reason to leave well enough alone...

 

[SPIDERFIST]

I wish they would've stuck to Doom's true origin: College rival of Reed who tries to blend science with the Occult and disfigures himself so hideously that he becomes a self-imposed man-in-the-iron-mask. I really didn't have a problem with what they did with him in the movie with the exception that his genetic make-up is altered so that his skin becomes metallic. Well, that and no cape. Come on! At least give him his cape!

 

[GhostPoet]

i'm on the fence...in some cases, many villains backstories really could be improved on from the comic...in other cases the comic version is perfect.

 

[El Payaso]

I never said Gobby's motives were lame, I asked how they were different from the motives in the movie? Is there any good reason why Gobby wants revenge on Spidey in the comics, besides him being a lunatic?

I said I believed you: his motivations are the same as in comics. How is that immediately good, especially when the motivations are reduced to a simplistic 'he's just crazy'?

You didn't answer my question, how would you have presented Gobby's motives in the movie?

For example, alluding to the special admiration Norman had for Peter. He clearly wanted Peter were his son. Something similar could have happened between Goblin and Spiderman, which leads Norman-Goblin to feel personally betrayed. But it's all reduced to a friendship request that's denied.

And in no casee I'd have had the villiain ignoring that a hero's identity is important enough to take his mask out when he could have done it.

If its a real problem I don't see why fiction shouldn't deal with it. Seems like madness comes in many different shapes and there is no objective way to say what kind of mental illnesses are more interesting then others, its all in the eye of the beholder.

When you can't say anything else but 'it's madness so anything goes' it is certainly not a very interesting form or shape of madness.

When madness is based on real psychopath behaviour then things turns tastier.

No in the comics Lex's motives never just greed, he wanted people to love him, that's why he was threatened by Superman, because Superman was more beloved by the citizens of Metropolis then he was. So Lex devising a plan that would make him the most hated man in the world, is not in character. Lex would want a plan that made him wealthy, beloved and killed Superman in the process.

It might be pout of character. Nevertheless many people hates Luthor in comics and I don't see him too worried about it as long as he gets what he wants. I never saw Luthor as a man who needs other people - specially common people's - approval.

When there's no other place to live, they will be buying portions of the new Luthor continent no matter what. Luthorville, Costa del Lex, those names are all the narcissism this Lex needs.

And in or out of character it still makes more sense than just trying to be friends of the hero for absolutely no reason.

I am just saying if you can dismiss his opinion so easily, what makes your opinion any less dismiss able?

I don't dismiss his opinion. I was wondering why should I consider his opinion over anyone else's.

I think you are being self important, I am criticizing your style of arguments, that's a not a personal slight. I am questioning your objectivity in this subject, that's a style criticism not one against your person. If I criticize someone from how they wrote an essay that doesn't mean I have personal grudge against that person.

I could also question why you can't defend Goblin' motivations without trying to bash a different movie.

It simply seems like you have to throw my objectivity in so you can make a case here, because the movie you're defending is not enough.

Business men don't like to be unpopular, its harder to make money when you are disliked and people are less likely to do business with you. Haven't you ever read the Prince? Being hated is the worst thing that can happen to someone seeking power.

Not when you own a continent and people have nowhere else to live. When you are at that level, then you don't need to be loved.

That's not Lex though, Lex would never gamble everything on one gambit, with no

The plan in SR made Lex look like a fool. It only ensures that people he does business with hate him and will try to murder him in his sleep. That's not the suave, cool, in control Lex from the comics, that's an idiot man child with no sense of business or tactics. That's a far bigger betrayal of the character then Gobby's portrayal in Spider-man 1, IMO. Have you ever read a post crisis Lex Luthor story?

Ah, your only point is who's closer to the comics?

I thought we could argue when this kind of things should be changed/improved.

I don't dismiss comcis Luthor's motivations at all. But movies Luthor's greedy motivations still make more sense that Goblin's inexplicable need for the hero's friendship.