Justice League Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor

[Wolfgangamadeus]

He did that stuff to get the public and powerful people on his side. Lex wanted the government to grant him an important license for a "silver bullet" and wanted Batman to either kill or be killed by Superman. For Lex, Superman's sin is existing. By existing as a powerful figure who the public looks to the way humans look to God is enough for Lex to want to break the spell for humanity.

Look, I could apply your logic to all incarnations of Lex Luthor. For example, if Lex is convinced in other incarnations that Superman is an impediment to human progress, then why does Lex spend so much time and energy on fighting Superman instead of using his vast resources and intelligence to cure cancer and achieve world peace?

Same reason. Because those feats will simply never match up to the inhuman feats of Superman. Everything he does will be an after thought and can never match up to what Superman does.

 

[misslane38]

Same reason. Because those feats will simply never match up to the inhuman feats of Superman. Everything he does will be an after thought and can never match up to what Superman does.

But it's still the same faulty logic that applies to both versions of Luthor. Both could do more to advance their cause if they were not pathologically obsessed with Superman. Luthor can never prove his thesis that man can achieve greatness on its own if he never tries because Superman exists. Luthor will never know that curing cancer wouldn't match Superman's feats unless he tries, but he doesn't try. If he doesn't try, then he's feeding into his own hysteria. It's his own fault that humanity sees Superman's achievements as unmatchable because he, too, is distracted and consumed by them.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

But it's still the same faulty logic that applies to both versions of Luthor. Both could do more to advance their cause if they were not pathologically obsessed with Superman. Luthor can never prove his thesis that man can achieve greatness on its own if he never tries because Superman exists. Luthor will never know that curing cancer wouldn't match Superman's feats unless he tries, but he doesn't try. If he doesn't try, then he's feeding into his own hysteria. It's his own fault that humanity sees Superman's achievements as unmatchable because he, too, is distracted and consumed by them.

But Luthor has tried though that's the thing. He's accomplished many feats that he's never gotten the respect or credit for because of Superman. The news and the public immediately shift to what Superman is doing and that's what ticks him off. He sees a threat he'll never be able to match up to. Not to mention traditional Lex Luthor also hates Superman because Superman foils all of his plans that he wants to do to make a name for himself.

But this Lex...what does he want?

 

[Da-Scribe]

I agree with why he brought in Batman and the intention of making them fight. I was fine with that. My question is solely to do with what about Superman does he hate? Because the only motivation he offers is "If God is all powerful, he cannot be all good". Uh....why? How did he come to that conclusion? Why did he come to that conclusion? What has Superman done to back up that conclusion?

He came to that conclusion based on a childhood experience where God did not save him from his father's abuse. The abuse and lack of divine intervention shaped his worldview and it lasted him into adulthood.

The next bit he does is offer "no God came to protect me from daddy's fists of abomination". Ok...so shouldn't he be glad that there is one now?

No, because he doesn't believe that God is actually all good or all powerful. One appearing would not change his mind about that. He'd see Superman save people and simply think of all the other people he didn't save, either by choice or by lack of ability. This was why he put Superman in that situation with Batman and Martha. Someone had to die there and it would perfectly encapsulate why gods don't deserve worship from humanity.

If dependency of monsters is an issue. Don't depend on them. But why do you have to eliminate them and make them get bad PR?

He doesn't depend on gods. The world does though and he sees that as a bad thing.

Traditionally, the classical alpha Male, cold, suave, intense, CEO domineering Lex Luthor has an issue with Superman because Superman represents the end of human achievement. Everything humanity achieves or tries to achieve will be undermined because of his existence. Nothing he, Lex Luthor can do will ever match up to the feats of Superman. And that plays into his superiority/inferiority complex as pure jealously as he wants to be the hero--the Superman for the world. But anything he does for humanity as a philanthropic act will just pale in comparison. Hence that dichotomy of Superman being a God trying to be a man and Lex being a man trying to be a God. Plus with all the moral dilemmas and such.

But Eisenlex doesn't talk about any of that.

Okay.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

He came to that conclusion based on a childhood experience where God did not save him from his father's abuse. The abuse and lack of divine intervention shaped his worldview and it lasted him into adulthood.

This is far too much concluding from a singular line spouted. If this was really the point they wanted to get across they should've explored the abuse aspect a lot more which they failed to do. And even if I were to buy that, he's not really a compelling villain because his ideology comes from his childhood view. So it's not an intelligent basis or a rational argument that we can get behind. Maybe some pity as to his circumstance but we'd never agree or at least understand his moral viewpoint.

No, because he doesn't believe that God is actually all good or all powerful. One appearing would not change his mind about that.

Yes, but why?

He'd see Superman save people and simply think of all the other people he didn't save, either by choice or by lack of ability. This was why he put Superman in that situation with Batman and Martha. Someone had to die there and it would perfectly encapsulate why gods don't deserve worship from humanity.

Now see that is a compelling reason. How does Superman get to decide whom should be saved? But unfortunately it's coming from you and not the movie. Also he openly gets people killed, why would he care about people getting saved? He killed so many innocents in Africa and in the Capitol. So that loses on both fronts really.

He doesn't depend on gods. The world does though and he sees that as a bad thing.

But where is the world depending on him? Accidents happen and he saves people. It's not like people stopped responding or are not doing their jobs waiting for Superman.

 

[Da-Scribe]

This is far too much concluding from a singular line spouted. If this was really the point they wanted to get across they should've explored the abuse aspect a lot more which they failed to do. And even if I were to buy that, he's not really a compelling villain because his ideology comes from his childhood view. So it's not an intelligent basis or a rational argument that we can get behind. Maybe some pity as to his circumstance but we'd never agree or at least understand his moral viewpoint.

No, it's not. I'm literally just regurgitating stuff from the movie. He talks about gods being fallible and briefly rants about how God wasn't there to save him. The movie is insanely on-the-nose about that. I don't even know what else there is to explore. It's not like it's the only time he questions the nature of gods. The guy tells that whole story about Prometheus and talks about devils coming from the sky. Did we need to see him getting his ass beat while quoting biblical passages? The dialogue and his actions tell the story. And are you seriously saying intelligent and rational views can't come from childhood experiences? The fuh?

Yes, but why?

Because a god existing does not speak at all to that god's nature. Superman would literally have had to do something showing he was both all powerful and all good to change Lex's view. He did not and cannot.

Now see that is a compelling reason. How does Superman get to decide whom should be saved? But unfortunately it's coming from you and not the movie. Also he openly gets people killed, why would he care about people getting saved? He killed so many innocents in Africa and in the Capitol. So that loses on both fronts really.

I just explained how it came from the movie. Forcing him to choose between Batman and Martha was Lex showing that Superman can't save everyone. That people inevitably have to die when Superman is saving others. And Lex doesn't care about people getting saved. It's more that he cares that Superman, by not saving everyone, demonstrates a truth that Lex has known since childhood. Again, that he can't be both all good and all powerful.

But where is the world depending on him? Accidents happen and he saves people. It's not like people stopped responding or are not doing their jobs waiting for Superman.

People depends on gods in general. Most of the world is religious. Plus, they literally show someone with a giant "S" on their roof during a flood. Superman represented a larger issue for Lex that extended beyond Superman himself.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

No, it's not. I'm literally just regurgitating stuff from the movie. He talks about gods being fallible and briefly rants about how God wasn't there to save him. The movie is insanely on-the-nose about that. I don't even know what else there is to explore. It's not like it's the only time he questions the nature of gods. The guy tells that whole story about Prometheus and talks about devils coming from the sky. Did we need to see him getting his ass beat while quoting biblical passages? The dialogue and his actions tell the story. And are you seriously saying intelligent and rational views can't come from childhood experiences? The fuh?

I'm talking about abuse from his father. Where was that explored? He has ONE line about it. ONE line. A crammed in exposition to provide some haphazard motivation about some personal hatred from one line. He can quote all the literary works, and art pieces he likes but if his motivation had to do with reasoning he got as a result of abuse, it was never explored at all.

I'm saying judgements he made come from childhood experiences and not rational thinking. Thus, it's not an intelligent stance we can get behind.

Because a god existing does not speak at all to that god's nature. Superman would literally have had to do something showing he was both all powerful and all good to change Lex's view. He did not and cannot.

All powerful is a vague metric that is never defined. What is all powerful? And what is all good? See that's what I mean. Arbitrary philosophical metrics to make it sound intelligent but in actuality, just contrived paper thin motivations.
Superman is an all powerful being who went around saving people.

I just explained how it came from the movie. Forcing him to choose between Batman and Martha was Lex showing that Superman can't save everyone. That people inevitably have to die when Superman is saving others. And Lex doesn't care about people getting saved. It's more the he cares that Superman, by not saving everyone, demonstrates a truth that Lex has known since childhood. Again, that he can't be both all good and all powerful.

No but if he doesn't care about people being saved, then why does it matter to him what Superman does? You can't have it both ways. Either Lex is deeply invested in humanity and is afraid people following Superman is bad and he's a bad influence or he kills people willy nilly and doesn't care. Also how does people dying make Superman a bad person?

People depends on gods in general. Most of the world is religious. Plus, they literally show someone with a giant "S" on their roof during a flood. Superman represented a larger issue for Lex that extended beyond Superman himself.

Right so Lex is fighting a war on organized religion? Lex doesn't like humanity following Superman so he kills a bunch of humans to show he's bad....? Far too many contradicting characteristics here. One second he loves humanity so he's worried for them, next second he doesn't care about offing a few of them.

 

[Da-Scribe]

I'm talking about abuse from his father. Where was that explored? He has ONE line about it. ONE line. A crammed in exposition to provide some haphazard motivation about some personal hatred from one line. He can quote all the literary works, and art pieces he likes but if his motivation had to do with reasoning he got as a result of abuse, it was never explored at all.

It's not haphazard. It's not even elaborate. He prayed to God for the abuse to stop and it didn't. That's really all that needs to be said. It doesn't take more than one line to get the point across. There's a weird fixation around here about line count. I don't get it.

I'm saying judgements he made come from childhood experiences and not rational thinking. Thus, it's not an intelligent stance we can get behind.

It's not supposed to rational. Unfounded hatred rarely ever is. I wouldn't say racists or sexists were rational either. That stuff largely comes from our upbringing though.

All powerful is a vague metric that is never defined. What is all powerful? And what is all good? See that's what I mean. Arbitrary philosophical metrics to make it sound intelligent but in actuality, just contrived paper thin motivations.
Superman is an all powerful being who went around saving people.

All powerful and all good means exactly that. These arbitrary philosophical metrics are the basis for one of the largest Abrahamic religions in the world. It is the foundation of what most Christians believe to be the nature of God, that nature being omnipotence. Superman is not all powerful. He is weakened by kryptonite and can't see through lead. He can't be in more than one place at a time. He is not all powerful.

No but if he doesn't care about people being saved, then why does it matter to him what Superman does? You can't have it both ways. Either Lex is deeply invested in humanity and is afraid people following Superman is bad and he's a bad influence or he kills people willy nilly and doesn't care. Also how does people dying make Superman a bad person?

It's not about what Superman does. It's about humanity believing in what he considers to be a lie. Destroying the very concept of Superman would allow humanity to see the truth about gods. He is willing to kill in order to prove that point. This doesn't stem for some overwhelming love for humanity. It just stems from the belief that gods do not deserve to be worshipped and Lex's problem with most of the world feeling the opposite.

Right so Lex is fighting a war on organized religion? Lex doesn't like humanity following Superman so he kills a bunch of humans to show he's bad....? Far too many contradicting characteristics here. One second he loves humanity so he's worried for them, next second he doesn't care about offing a few of them.

Lex is trying to cripple the false idolization of gods. He kills humans to demonstrate that Superman, as a god, is not omnipotent. There's no such thing as omnipotence as far as Lex is concerned. I never said anything about him loving humanity. Lex will kill whomever he needs to in order to prove his point and destroy gods.

 

[the last son]

Still can't believe dc managed to destroy two of the biggest villains in fiction history all in one swoop. This is insane.

 

[MaceB]

Still can't believe dc managed to destroy two of the biggest villains in fiction history all in one swoop. This is insane.

Technically it took them two swoops, but yep... that's what they did alright. Not to start a brand war here, but it's clear that Marvel trusts in their product and leans into the characters to make them compelling. On the other side, there seems to either be a failed searching for what makes the characters interesting or a full on disregarding of it.
When I first saw TDK, I was really impressed by how Nolan changed the appearance of the Joker, but got his personality just right by making him a character that wanted to show everyone was just as crazy as him.
The Suicide Joker, on the other hand, seems to be different in both appearance and character. Yes, he's an unpredictable character who appears to be a malevolent clown, but that's where it stops more or less.
Luthor is much worse, being full on unrecognizable when compared to the source material.
The irony is that I'm actually all for adapting the characters for cinema... but none of the changes seem to be an improvement. Instead, what it looks like is WB leaning back from the source material, almost as if they are embarrassed of it. It doesn't need to be a 100% loyal interpretation, but jeez... they're throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.
On the plus side, they're much better on the hero side of things.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Lol, never thought I'd actually hear someone claim Marvel has good villains. Time to abandon thread.

 

[Benal]

The Jesse casting might be one of the worst in comic book movies history. I thought Zack was going to knock it out of the park with this inspired casting, imagined Jesse being charismatic and powerfull and people having a Heath Ledger moment, because there's no way they cast him to play a Jesse Eisenberg role.. But no, it is indeed a bad casting choice.

Technically it took them two swoops, but yep... that's what they did alright. Not to start a brand war here, but it's clear that Marvel trusts in their product and leans into the characters to make them compelling. On the other side, there seems to either be a failed searching for what makes the characters interesting or a full on disregarding of it.
When I first saw TDK, I was really impressed by how Nolan changed the appearance of the Joker, but got his personality just right by making him a character that wanted to show everyone was just as crazy as him.
The Suicide Joker, on the other hand, seems to be different in both appearance and character. Yes, he's an unpredictable character who appears to be a malevolent clown, but that's where it stops more or less.
Luthor is much worse, being full on unrecognizable when compared to the source material.
The irony is that I'm actually all for adapting the characters for cinema... but none of the changes seem to be an improvement. Instead, what it looks like is WB leaning back from the source material, almost as if they are embarrassed of it. It doesn't need to be a 100% loyal interpretation, but jeez... they're throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.
On the plus side, they're much better on the hero side of things.

And you're right. You can hear Zack say it (01:02). He wanted to change Lex and make one that you "can't tell what he's thinking".

[YT]t8ZVvhrbZiA[/YT]

 

[The Guard]

But there are plenty of people in the world more powerful than Lex Luthor. World leaders, politicians, fellow industrialists etc.

And in the few sequences we see him interacting with anyone with any kind of serious power in the film, what's he doing with them?

He is either displaying his power and messing with them, or gaining the upper hand over them somehow. This is a major part of this version of Lex Luthor.

You say he mistrusts metahumans, but then he goes on to create something far worse---like the equivalent of 5 Superman's with Doomsday so why would he create something even more powerful that could destroy everything when he hates a guy for his apparent reason of power?

No, HE says he mistrusts metahumans. That is quite possibly an act designed to get clearance to make a weapon to kill Superman, which Finch foils. Though I suspect it's both Luthor's personal thoughts wrapped in an attempt to manipulate.

Looking for a rational reason for a villain to do everything is pointless. Villains, by their very nature, are seriously flawed individuals. Part of their tragic flaw usually has to do with something irrational they think or do.

If his issue is "absolute power corrupts absolutely" then I can see him draw his hypothesis from Superman's f*** ups. But instead he creates those f*** ups to validate his hypothesis whilst Superman does absolutely nothing to support it. Which clearly shows that his hatred for the man is far more than just that if he has to create situations for him to look bad.

Superman's actions in Metropolis have been viewed as a serious threat/problem within this franchise, and by viewers of MAN OF STEEL. They are heavily referenced in this film.

That alone is enough for Luthor to be concerned, and for Bruce to be. If we accept that the arrival of a superhuman race capable of causing that kind of massive destruction and upsetting the balance of power in the world is concerning to Bruce and the rest of the world, then we have to accept the same for Luthor.

Just the sheer amount of effort he goes through in his convoluted plan makes you think Superman did something to him personally but he didn't...

That's the issue really. Zemo in Civil War has an equally convoluted plan but at least he has a dire personal hatred and vendetta to fulfill and thus, the effort is worth it. The Avengers came in and destroyed his family.

Superman has done absolutely NOTHING to Luthor.

Except that for people with serious ego issues, someone being more powerful than you can be a deathly serious, personal issue.

If you think about it, Superman has effectively "done something" to not just Luthor, but to the entire human race, simply by revealing himself to exist.

If anything he has helped Luthor by giving him contracts to rebuild the city---making him richer. So what does Lex hate here? If absolute power corrupts absolutely then why create situations to make him look bad? And is he not worried he'll get corrupted via the power? Why go to such lengths for some arbitrary thesis? What has Superman done to (without his intervention) to back up said thesis? Nothing.

Superman potentially threatens the very existence of human life and the existing power structures in the world. Batman and Luthor have similar issues with Luthor...they believe his power represents a shift in the balance of power away from humanity. And to be fair, if Superman wasn't a good person, it very much would.

The movie makes it readily apparent that Luthor has issues with power and control.

Within the film, when he cannot control someone, he destroys them (Senator Finch).

He cannot control Superman. Therefore he must destroy him.

If his problems are with metahumans in general. Then wtf would he create something far worse?

Because he can. Because it presents him with the means to destroy the thing he hates. It's not rational. It's not meant to be.

Other than some ill fashioned supposed ideological stance that is paper thin to begin with, and doesn't warrant any of the effort he goes through--this Luthor has no real reason to hate Superman.

I don't know about "real"...he has no "logical" reason to hate Superman. But as has already been pointed out, hatred often isn't logical. It is Luthor's illogical hatred and psychological need to control others that, in fact, makes him a villain.

To me it came off as, Superman and Batman needed to come into conflict so they had Lex be the guy to spark the flame and get them together by pulling various strings, but in the end there was no real reason for himto do so---other than some half baked philosophical stance thrown in the last minute to make it appear deep but instead was quite paper thin along with some abusive history with his father which is given one line and never really explored AT ALL.

To be fair, Luthor's reasons for hating Superman have never been particularly logical or deep.

Even the much-celebrated "you diminish us as a species" angle doesn't really hold much water in that regard, because Superman's presence does not, in fact, prevent the potential of human achievement in any real sense.

Nor has Lex Luthor traditionally, even in modern comics, been a particularly deep or hard to fathom character. He's a creature of ego with fairly simple drives that he masks under an illusion of complex ambitions. But it usually boils down to something fairly petty, usually his ego.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

And in the few sequences we see him interacting with anyone with any kind of serious power in the film, what's he doing with them?

He is either displaying his power and messing with them, or gaining the upper hand over them somehow. This is a major part of this version of Lex Luthor.

That's Lex Luthor period isn't it?

No, HE says he mistrusts metahumans. That is quite possibly an act designed to get clearance to make a weapon to kill Superman, which Finch foils. Though I suspect it's both Luthor's personal thoughts wrapped in an attempt to manipulate.

Looking for a rational reason for a villain to do everything is pointless. Villains, by their very nature, are seriously flawed individuals. Part of their tragic flaw usually has to do with something irrational they think or do.

He mistrusts methumans....but why? What have they done for him to mistrust them?

Joker is quite a rational villain (in terms of his ideological beliefs). Khan is quite a rational villain. Even traditional Lex Luthor is quite a rational villain. Some villains do fall in the category you mention, most compelling villains have an ideology or a side that has a rational argument to make which we can get behind. Like the Joker in TDK for example whereas Lex really doesn't.

Superman's actions in Metropolis have been viewed as a serious threat/problem within this franchise, and by viewers of MAN OF STEEL. They are heavily referenced in this film.

That alone is enough for Luthor to be concerned, and for Bruce to be. If we accept that the arrival of a superhuman race capable of causing that kind of massive destruction and upsetting the balance of power in the world is concerning to Bruce and the rest of the world, then we have to accept the same for Luthor.

So if he's concerned about destruction and upsetting the balance of power, he goes on create....DOOMSDAY. A being that is 5 Supermen put together!! That'll inevitably cause more chaos and more destruction!

Also if that's what he's worried about then why create scenarios for Superman to look bad when there already is one? Surely if Superman is a bad individual you don't have to CREATE situations for him to appear bad in. And if he thinks Superman is a danger, shouldn't he be supplying his crew or the military with kryptonite weapons rather than some rogue vigilante in another city that has nothing to do with any of this?

And when does Luthor actually discuss the Metropolis event and even suggest that he's afraid of Superman can do? He never discusses the Metropolis event and all the people that perished.

Except that for people with serious ego issues, someone being more powerful than you can be a deathly serious, personal issue.

If you think about it, Superman has effectively "done something" to not just Luthor, but to the entire human race, simply by revealing himself to exist.

Every president, prime minister, chancellor, senator and world policy maker is more powerful than Lex Luthor. Does he spend time worrying over each and every one of them?

What has he done to them by existing?

Superman potentially threatens the very existence of human life and the existing power structures in the world. Batman and Luthor have similar issues with Luthor...they believe his power represents a shift in the balance of power away from humanity. And to be fair, if Superman wasn't a good person, it very much would.

The movie makes it readily apparent that Luthor has issues with power and control.

Again, the guy makes DOOMSDAY. A monster with 5 times the power a sSuperman. And since when is Lex Luthor concerned with existence of human life? in BvS he regularly offs people without a care in the world. He killed innocents in Africa, the Capitol and threw Lois off a building.

Within the film, when he cannot control someone, he destroys them (Senator Finch).

He cannot control Superman. Therefore he must destroy him.

How does he plan to control Doomsday? or the Flash? or Aquaman? But apart from research he doesn't seem to be going after them.

Also when was control the issue? He was spouting some stuff about how God cannot be all powerful or all good as his motivation. And wasn't he manipulating Superman by sending him all that Batman stuff and telling him to go fight him? So he can manipulate him.

Because he can. Because it presents him with the means to destroy the thing he hates. It's not rational. It's not meant to be.
I don't know about "real"...he has no "logical" reason to hate Superman. But as has already been pointed out, hatred often isn't logical. It is Luthor's illogical hatred and psychological need to control others that, in fact, makes him a villain.

I would buy that if he was xenophobic or a staunch humanist. But doesn't appear to be either of those things. He simply hates Superman because his name is Lex Luthor and that's what he's supposed to do.

To be fair, Luthor's reasons for hating Superman have never been particularly logical or deep.

Even the much-celebrated "you diminish us as a species" angle doesn't really hold much water in that regard, because Superman's presence does not, in fact, prevent the potential of human achievement in any real sense.
Nor has Lex Luthor traditionally, even in modern comics, been a particularly deep or hard to fathom character. He's a creature of ego with fairly simple drives that he masks under an illusion of complex ambitions. But it usually boils down to something fairly petty, usually his ego.

It doesn't prevent human achievement but yes it does diminish it. If Lex Luthor build a refuge for victims of an earthquake he'd be hailed as a hero. But Superman saving people from the earthquake, makes that irrelevant. Anything Lex Luthor does or any human does will just be pale compared to what Superman can do. There is no way the human species can match up to Superman. Human progress is effectively halted because there is a Superman. That's also only part of the reason. The other half is anything he tries to do Superman repeatedly stops him. So there's a personal reason as well as a moral stance.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Lol, Lex sounds worried about human celebrity not achievement. It's selfishness guised as morality. That ain't bad or anything, but it's not this super deep motivation you make it out to be. I'm sure the actual victims would love the refuge.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

It's not haphazard. It's not even elaborate. He prayed to God for the abuse to stop and it didn't. That's really all that needs to be said. It doesn't take more than one line to get the point across. There's a weird fixation around here about line count. I don't get it.

They should've at least shown in this in some form or fashion. Then it would've at least been a part of it. It's that they didn't spend any time or effort on it but just threw ONE line to sum up the whole reason for his actions and it wasn't enough at all. For all the things Lex Luthor did and all the events he had his hands behind, that simply wasn't a good enough motivation. There is no reason for him to despise Superman that much.

It's not supposed to rational. Unfounded hatred rarely ever is. I wouldn't say racists or sexists were rational either. That stuff largely comes from our upbringing though.

Racists and Sexists even today bring up biology to mold their hypothesis. Different races were in different parts of the world and evolved differently and thus we have differences in IQ, cranial structures and muscle composition and some races are superior to others. I've seen that been used so many times while arguing with racists.

All powerful and all good means exactly that. These arbitrary philosophical metrics are the basis for one of the largest Abrahamic religions in the world. It is the foundation of what most Christians believe to be the nature of God, that nature being omnipotence. Superman is not all powerful. He is weakened by kryptonite and can't see through lead. He can't be in more than one place at a time. He is not all powerful.

But how powerful is all powerful--that's my question. How good is all good. Are intentions fine or is action required or are you not allowed to have impure thoughts? What is the metric here?

So Lex knows Superman is weakened by kryptonite so he knows he's not all powerful. So according to his own thesis, if he's not all powerful he can be all good. So why bother?

It's not about what Superman does. It's about humanity believing in what he considers to be a lie. Destroying the very concept of Superman would allow humanity to see the truth about gods. He is willing to kill in order to prove that point. This doesn't stem for some overwhelming love for humanity. It just stems from the belief that gods do not deserve to be worshipped and Lex's problem with most of the world feeling the opposite.

So this is Lex going after organized religion then? But who exactly is worshipping Superman? Apart from a few groups that like him. A lot of people are against him. So Lex is angry at a few folks liking him? And that still doesn't explain why he has to concoct scenarios to make him look bad. IF he's inherently bad then he should act that way without interference.

Lex is trying to cripple the false idolization of gods. He kills humans to demonstrate that Superman, as a god, is not omnipotent. There's no such thing as omnipotence as far as Lex is concerned. I never said anything about him loving humanity. Lex will kill whomever he needs to in order to prove his point and destroy gods.

No but why that obsession with Gods? Even Superman never said he was one. So he knows he's not omnipotent so he knows he's not all powerful. So Superman as I said as per his own weak thesis can be all good. So what's the issue here?

I don't know man, it seems to be like they're trying to make Lex Luthor seem philosophically complex and religiously sophisticated when those motivations are so arbitrary and disorganized and would never cause anyone to become so angry and manipulate events so much. It would've been fine even if he just was worried about Superman due to the black zero event but he doesn't mention that either.

 

[The Guard]

That's Lex Luthor period isn't it?

He mistrusts methumans....but why? What have they done for him to mistrust them?

Joker is quite a rational villain (in terms of his ideological beliefs). Khan is quite a rational villain. Even traditional Lex Luthor is quite a rational villain. Some villains do fall in the category you mention, most compelling villains have an ideology or a side that has a rational argument to make which we can get behind. Like the Joker in TDK for example whereas Lex really doesn't.

I'm not going to touch Joker and Khan, but even traditional Lex Luthor has largely irrational reasons for hating Superman.

So if he's concerned about destruction and upsetting the balance of power, he goes on create....DOOMSDAY. A being that is 5 Supermen put together!! That'll inevitably cause more chaos and more destruction!

The film also shows Luthor becoming more and more "unhinged", so his statements earlier in the film don't neccessarily have to align completely with who he becomes over the course of the film.

As far as Doomsday, Luthor is probably ok with the, because A, he thinks Doomsday will kill Superman, so its a means to an end, and B, he created him and thinks he can control him. Seeing the pattern yet?

Also if that's what he's worried about then why create scenarios for Superman to look bad when there already is one?

Because the world started to move on and embrace Superman. Luthor didn't want that to happen.

Surely if Superman is a bad individual you don't have to CREATE situations for him to appear bad in. And if he thinks Superman is a danger, shouldn't he be supplying his crew or the military with kryptonite weapons rather than some rogue vigilante in another city that has nothing to do with any of this?

But Superman's not a bad individual.

He has a limited amount of Kryptonite, and who's to say he could even manipulate it like Batman did? Even Batman could only make a spearhead and three gas canisters with what he had.

And when does Luthor actually discuss the Metropolis event and even suggest that he's afraid of Superman can do? He never discusses the Metropolis event and all the people that perished.

He doesn't need to directly reference it for you to understand that Superman's existence concerns him as a member of the human race. The film references it several times. It is an event that occurred within the history of the people living in this film, and is key to the narrative and this version of the mythology.

Every president, prime minister, chancellor, senator and world policy maker is more powerful than Lex Luthor. Does he spend time worrying over each and every one of them?

Maybe. But this movie isn't about Luthor's interactions with them. It's about his interaction with Superman.

What has he done to them by existing?

He concerns them with the knowledge of how easily he could upset the balance of power.

Again, the guy makes DOOMSDAY. A monster with 5 times the power a sSuperman. And since when is Lex Luthor concerned with existence of human life? in BvS he regularly offs people without a care in the world. He killed innocents in Africa, the Capitol and threw Lois off a building.

Where in the film are we shown that Luthor knows Doomsday is "five times as powerful as Superman"? Doomsday GROWS in power throughout the final battle. Where are we even shown that Luthor knows Doomsday has this potential?

I never said Luthor was concerned with the existence of human life.

How does he plan to control Doomsday? or the Flash? or Aquaman? But apart from research he doesn't seem to be going after them.

I don't know. It's not really relevant to the events of this particular film.

Realistically, why would he need to go after Aquaman and The Flash at present? They're not the ones operating in the city he does.

Also when was control the issue? He was spouting some stuff about how God cannot be all powerful or all good as his motivation.

That's what he says.

Pay attention to what he does. Actions often speak louder than words, even in cinema.

And wasn't he manipulating Superman by sending him all that Batman stuff and telling him to go fight him? So he can manipulate him.

Yes, and that's part of what Luthor enjoys. Manipulating people with power. Look how much pleasure he's getting out of it.

It doesn't prevent human achievement but yes it does diminish it.

If Lex Luthor build a refuge for victims of an earthquake he'd be hailed as a hero. But Superman saving people from the earthquake, makes that irrelevant.

So?

Does that prevent Luthor, or any other human, from achieving something else wonderful?

Anything Lex Luthor does or any human does will just be pale compared to what Superman can do. There is no way the human species can match up to Superman.

Since when has doing something great been about matching up to the best thing that ever happened in the world?

Human progress is effectively halted because there is a Superman.

How?

How would human progress be halted because Superman exists? More to the point, how IS it halted in the comics and other forms of mythology.

It's not.

Luthor is wrong.

His fear over this and hatred of Superman for it is irrational.

Hence, he is the villain, and not the hero.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Are you presenting biology as a rational basis for racism and sexism? Yep, we're done.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

Lol, Lex sounds worried about human celebrity not achievement. It's selfishness guised as morality. That ain't bad or anything, but it's not this super deep motivation you make it out to be. I'm sure the actual victims would love the refuge.

It's not super deep. It's out in the open, and some of it is quite high school. It's that Superman destroys human progress because humanity is getting lazy and letting Superman handle everything. Lex has always been about the celebrity status though. He wants the attention, he wants people to love him and he wants to be Superman. All that's gone now. If NASA or SpaceX create a probe that can go to Mars and come back in 4 years it's laughable when a man can eat dinner on Mars and then be back on Earth in time for dessert. Lex wants to be superior. He also hates Superman because he was handed his powers without ever having to work for them. So it's a combination of a bunch of reasons. Not just one.

 

[The Guard]

I don't know man, it seems to be like they're trying to make Lex Luthor seem philosophically complex and religiously sophisticated when those motivations are so arbitrary and disorganized and would never cause anyone to become so angry and manipulate events so much.

Halfway right. They're trying to make a Lex Luthor that THINKS he is these things.

They're not trying to make him seem deep. They're presenting a character who THINKS he has all the answers and is better than everyone else.

When in fact he's just a sad, jealous, insecure, hypocritical little man.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

Are you presenting biology as a rational basis for racism and sexism? Yep, we're done.

I'm not presenting it. I'm saying racists present it. Seriously go read some of Jared Taylor's stuff where he talks about how black people have smaller cranial structures and on average have lower IQ's than other races so we can't expect all humans to be on the same level. It is quite repulsive and repugnant really.

 

[Wolfgangamadeus]

Halfway right. They're trying to make a Lex Luthor that THINKS he is these things.

They're not trying to make him seem deep. They're presenting a character who THINKS he has all the answers and is better than everyone else.

When in fact he's just a sad, jealous, insecure, hypocritical little man.

Alright this I can actually buy. I never noticed this before. Perhaps I should watch the film again or his scenes again with this in mind! Thank you! This is the first answer I haven't come across before. Maybe this is what I've been missing.

 

[Da-Scribe]

I'm not presenting it. I'm saying racists present it. Seriously go read some of Jared Taylor's stuff where he talks about how black people have smaller cranial structures and on average have lower IQ's than other races so we can't expect all humans to be on the same level. It is quite repulsive and repugnant really.

I'm aware. It's still irrational and unfounded hatred. I don't know what point you're trying to make by introducing the concept.

 

[Da-Scribe]

Alright this I can actually buy. I never noticed this before. Perhaps I should watch the film again or his scenes again with this in mind! Thank you! This is the first answer I haven't come across before. Maybe this is what I've been missing.

Eisenberg said this stuff in interviews IIRC.

 

[The Guard]

It's not super deep. It's out in the open, and some of it is quite high school. It's that Superman destroys human progress because humanity is getting lazy and letting Superman handle everything.

But Superman doesn't do that.

He doesn't handle everything.

He saves people, but he doesn't and cannot save everyone or solve all humanity's problems on his own.

Most versions of the character are conscious of this issue and do not seek to "handle everything". The only one that comes anywhere close to doing "everything" is in All Star Superman, and that's a version of the character that hadn't been consistently seen since the Golden Age of comics. And there's a reason he's trying to handle everything. Some of the gifts he wants to bestow on humanity are to be his legacy because he thinks he's dying.

Lex has always been about the celebrity status though. He wants the attention, he wants people to love him and he wants to be Superman. All that's gone now. If NASA or SpaceX create a probe that can go to Mars and come back in 4 years it's laughable when a man can eat dinner on Mars and then be back on Earth in time for dessert.

Why?

How does that actually lessen the achievement of humanity developing the technology and having the fortitude to get there?

If anything, it is humanity who is most impressive, because what they did took serious effort, and wasn't easy and handed to them.

It's a bit like saying that a kid who hits his first homerun doesn't mean anything because somewhere there's someone who gets paid to do so with relative ease.

That's not how humanity measures success.

That's how Luthor, with his twisted egocentric way of viewing the world, does.