BvS Jesse Eisenberg IS Lex Luthor - Part 10

[Guts]

If Supergirl shows up in the movies is anyone expecting this?

 

[Manofplastic]

to be honest, i have a gunuine problem with the precense or existance of supergirl.
especially her having the superman - logo on the chest.

if executed well, i think another kryptonian person living amongst humans is not fully unbelievable but, it is still out of place and it makes things more chaotic and insolveable - storywise.

as a concept completely out of the movie and comic canon, i can enjoy a 'supergirl' with her own universe which is based slightly on the superman universe so it can borrow some of that. but that really is it.

it would be like making a story of having another mega city that has a niece of Bruce Wayne playing batchick.

A nephew of Wonder Woman that has the same powers as the Amazons called Wonder Mister.

Like Jenny Bond, the teenage niece of James Bond, that also is a secret agent.

you can defend all this all you want , but it is still completely stupid.

so no, i really really hope there will be no any supergirl in this DC universe. no no no.

 

[morningmimosa]

Yeah, I also think that the concept of Supergirl is silly. I don't ever want to see her in the DCEU.

 

[godisawesome]

I love the Super-family, especially Superboy and Steel.

But I think if you want to show Lex having a blonde Kryptonian bodyguard, Powergirl could be introduced as Galatea before becoming Karen Starr.

 

[4thWallBreaker]

Is he Lex Luthor? Is he? :/

I'm not that type of nerd. Not a traditionalist, but sometimes you have to keep inside the ballpark to the keep things solid with the merit of the source material. I'm still not feeling it with him.

Though I've heard a theory. And it's probably true. He's putting on an act.

It was like a theory that I swear I came up with on my own. Others may have saw it, too, but The Joker from The Dark Knight. He put on this playful voice, to put peoples guards down and not come off as the threat that he truly was. And the evidence is in scenes of anger. "Why so serious?" "Look at me!" He's the opposite of Batman. His true voice is grizzled and imposing, while Bruce puts on that act for the theatrics. Kind of cool when rewatching the film to think that. Joker, like in the comics, is Batman smart, he's just lacking focus in the long run. He likes games. Dog chasing cars.

Edit/Sidenote: What is with this site and expiring polls? Fuu--! I mean, the movie isn't even out yet. Give us a second to vote, for Jimmy Olsen's sake.

 

[the last son]

I hate Supergirl as well. It makes the idea of our hero not seem unique because there's another one out there. Plus she's just lame.

 

[rogbngp]

I'll be honest that I don't want to see Supergirl anymore than Krypto. These are Silver Age era inventions, created during a time when DC Comics target audience was children.

Similar to how I'm reading what Manofplastic observes above, and the_last_son states directly above, I feel it would undermine Superman's special status as being the last survivor of an ancient alien race on our planet, a feature that is really a lynch pin to his identity. It dilutes the "Kryptonian brand."

 

[Ahasverus]

Extended families are the worst. The Bat-faily might have a leg or two more than the others due to extensive writing, but I still feel it cheapens the impact of the heroes. For all I care, I'm ok with just the original incarnation of the hero. I find the sex swapped and such characters a cheap pandering effort "See girls, there is a Superman FOR YOU" and such.

 

[4thWallBreaker]

I hate Supergirl as well. It makes the idea of our hero not seem unique because there's another one out there. Plus she's just lame.

Supergirl can be pretty cool. I've read two Karas and partly some of Linda Danvers. I think New 52's is good. The series before New 52 was ok. And Linda Danvers, though I've only read a little, was the coolest.

I do understand your sentiments about him supposed to being the last of his kind and all these Kryptonians popped up in the 90s and things were crazy. I never got into Superboy. I think he isn't all that interesting.

What I'd like is evidence that Kara had a role in something 10s of thousands of years ago. Like her lineage created the Amazons and it's been deluded in with most of those on Themyscara but Diana Prince. Straight from Queen Hippolyta. Not to say their weren't gods and magic influencing more. It's a theory hopping around. It just seems to me that lingering shot of him looking at an open pod wasn't just for the linear, simplistic tiny comic that came with the Man of Steel DVD/Blu-Ray after the movie left theatres. I think something more is going in this universe.

 

[The Guard]

The whole "Supergirl, Batgirl and extended families of superheroes are just derivative" thing...I wonder how many people with this mindset actually read those stories.

Yes, they were created to capitalize on the popularity of another hero (So was Batman). That is hardly the limit of their potential as characters or the limit of their potential to impact a mythology.

"Batgirl" isn't anymore "another Batman" than any other vigilante is. She has her own characterization, personality, and mythology. And even the parts of her that do rely somewhat on Batman's legacy add depth to her specific character.

Yes, Superman is often known as "the Last Son of Krypton".

The existence of Supergirl doesn't really change that.

And if you think "Superman is special because he can fly and shoot heat vision and so on and Supergirl cheapens that", then you don't really understand the character that well.

Superman stories where he believes he is the last Kryptonian at first don't lose their impact because later on he discovers he is not. His feelings and emotions and growth in understanding about his homeworld and its legacy and his attempts to reconcile these things are what matter to the character, not the mere "status".

As for complaints about "All these Kryptonians in the 90's", please pick look up some comics from the 40's and 50's. There have been other Kryptonians in various incarnations in the comics for A LONG time.

I dunno, it just strikes me as a shortsighted, shallow and very limited view of a character anytime I hear someone complain about this stuff. It shows a lack of imagination in some respects. Because of course they can't possibly be more than just a "carbon copy" of another hero.

We might as well complain that Superman is yet another "hero" character.

You can reduce anything to its basic elements. But why do so? That's not what makes characters work, or not work, it is the execution of said character.

 

[L33CHem]

Supergirl worked well in the animated series I thought, alongside an established Superman. Very fun to watch how a teenage female would handle trying to learn everything. The right age is key. Having a Super"girl" in 20's is kinda dumb.

 

[ironman29758]

The whole "Supergirl, Batgirl and extended families of superheroes are just derivative" thing...I wonder how many people with this mindset actually read those stories.

Yes, they were created to capitalize on the popularity of another hero (So was Batman). That is hardly the limit of their potential as characters or the limit of their potential to impact a mythology.

"Batgirl" isn't anymore "another Batman" than any other vigilante is. She has her own characterization, personality, and mythology. And even the parts of her that do rely somewhat on Batman's legacy add depth to her specific character.

Yes, Superman is often known as "the Last Son of Krypton".

The existence of Supergirl doesn't really change that.

And if you think "Superman is special because he can fly and shoot heat vision and so on and Supergirl cheapens that", then you don't really understand the character that well.

Superman stories where he believes he is the last Kryptonian at first don't lose their impact because later on he discovers he is not. His feelings and emotions and growth in understanding about his homeworld and its legacy and his attempts to reconcile these things are what matter to the character, not the mere "status".

As for complaints about "All these Kryptonians in the 90's", please pick look up some comics from the 40's and 50's. There have been other Kryptonians in various incarnations in the comics for A LONG time.

I dunno, it just strikes me as a shortsighted, shallow and very limited view of a character anytime I hear someone complain about this stuff. It shows a lack of imagination in some respects. Because of course they can't possibly be more than just a "carbon copy" of another hero.

We might as well complain that Superman is yet another "hero" character.

You can reduce anything to its basic elements. But why do so? That's not what makes characters work, or not work, it is the execution of said character.

This says it all for me.

 

[King23DC]

to be honest, i have a gunuine problem with the precense or existance of supergirl.
especially her having the superman - logo on the chest.

if executed well, i think another kryptonian person living amongst humans is not fully unbelievable but, it is still out of place and it makes things more chaotic and insolveable - storywise.

as a concept completely out of the movie and comic canon, i can enjoy a 'supergirl' with her own universe which is based slightly on the superman universe so it can borrow some of that. but that really is it.

it would be like making a story of having another mega city that has a niece of Bruce Wayne playing batchick.

A nephew of Wonder Woman that has the same powers as the Amazons called Wonder Mister.

Like Jenny Bond, the teenage niece of James Bond, that also is a secret agent.

you can defend all this all you want , but it is still completely stupid.

so no, i really really hope there will be no any supergirl in this DC universe. no no no.

Plus it takes away from the uniqueness of Superman. It works in the comics. A bit hokey with more plausibility. So does too many Robins or other Bat themed sidekicks.

On topic love what we're seeing from Eisenberg's performance. And the characterization in these entertaining viral marketing material. Don't get the issues with the choice in actor or dialogue or performance thus far.

I've always saw the vision of what Snyder was going for with this modernization of the character while still keeping the classic elements intact. That's how these mythologies and characters stay fresh after so many retellings.

 

[godisawesome]

...Okay, if I might take some time out form this Supergirl discussion to tie in something about that panel that actually deals with Lex...

The idea of Lex having a powerful female ally he's either charmed or programmed to act as his bodyguard/assassin is a big bonus to me. I like the idea of Mercy and Hope being extraordinary warriors in one way or another, either as cyborgs, Amazons, or cloned Kryptonians. We've got a Mercy for this film, and personally, I'm hoping they show she's extremely dangerous for her size in one way or another.

But I do still love the idea of Lex perfecting his cloning process throughout the series. He starts with Doomsday as the out of control mutation (possibly the defense mechanism of the codex DNA in Clark or some kind of smorgasbord of genetics leading to constant evolution), then maybe moves towards creating a perfect but controllable clone that kinda fails, like B-0 Bizarro, then perhaps works with the government's Cadmus Labs to create a perfect hybrid with S-13 Superboy, then, after planting that Manchurian Candidate in Superman's fold, clones some female bodyguards like Cir-El and Power Girl.

 

[rogbngp]

The whole "Supergirl, Batgirl and extended families of superheroes are just derivative" thing...I wonder how many people with this mindset actually read those stories.

Yes, they were created to capitalize on the popularity of another hero (So was Batman). That is hardly the limit of their potential as characters or the limit of their potential to impact a mythology.

"Batgirl" isn't anymore "another Batman" than any other vigilante is. She has her own characterization, personality, and mythology. And even the parts of her that do rely somewhat on Batman's legacy add depth to her specific character.

Yes, Superman is often known as "the Last Son of Krypton".

The existence of Supergirl doesn't really change that.

And if you think "Superman is special because he can fly and shoot heat vision and so on and Supergirl cheapens that", then you don't really understand the character that well.

Superman stories where he believes he is the last Kryptonian at first don't lose their impact because later on he discovers he is not. His feelings and emotions and growth in understanding about his homeworld and its legacy and his attempts to reconcile these things are what matter to the character, not the mere "status".

As for complaints about "All these Kryptonians in the 90's", please pick look up some comics from the 40's and 50's. There have been other Kryptonians in various incarnations in the comics for A LONG time.

I dunno, it just strikes me as a shortsighted, shallow and very limited view of a character anytime I hear someone complain about this stuff. It shows a lack of imagination in some respects. Because of course they can't possibly be more than just a "carbon copy" of another hero.

We might as well complain that Superman is yet another "hero" character.

You can reduce anything to its basic elements. But why do so? That's not what makes characters work, or not work, it is the execution of said character.

It can also be that even if some fans haven't read all the comics for the superhero family spinoff characters, regardless, it still boils down to a matter of personal taste, no? One might not really care how well the spinoff characters might be developed--even if those 'superfamily members' are, it still dilutes the impact of the main character for them.

 

[Wise]

If Supergirl shows up in the movies is anyone expecting this?

Lex Luthor II was a boss.

 

[rogbngp]

...Okay, if I might take some time out form this Supergirl discussion to tie in something about that panel that actually deals with Lex...

The idea of Lex having a powerful female ally he's either charmed or programmed to act as his bodyguard/assassin is a big bonus to me. I like the idea of Mercy and Hope being extraordinary warriors in one way or another, either as cyborgs, Amazons, or cloned Kryptonians. We've got a Mercy for this film, and personally, I'm hoping they show she's extremely dangerous for her size in one way or another.

But I do still love the idea of Lex perfecting his cloning process throughout the series. He starts with Doomsday as the out of control mutation (possibly the defense mechanism of the codex DNA in Clark or some kind of smorgasbord of genetics leading to constant evolution), then maybe moves towards creating a perfect but controllable clone that kinda fails, like B-0 Bizarro, then perhaps works with the government's Cadmus Labs to create a perfect hybrid with S-13 Superboy, then, after planting that Manchurian Candidate in Superman's fold, clones some female bodyguards like Cir-El and Power Girl.

Cloning is so central to Kryptonian bio-tech (and the allegory of the fall of Krypton as a cautionary tale) that the military has evidently contracted Lex to reverse-engineer, that I think it has to be central to this story in BvS. This is one reason that a number of fans here felt that some of the scenes and images of a snarling, very ill-tempered Superman (and including a fairly blurry one standing behind Lex when he is apparently Frankenstein-ing his Doomsday creation) might be an evil clone of Superman. If the scout ship has data that was shared from the Black Zero, that should include the Superman's DNA structure from the blood sample Zod's science officer took from Supes.

For Doomsday I'm thinking that Lex used Zod's stem cells, the mysterious blob in the ocean that we see in the first full length trailer, and perhaps fragments of Bertron's code for Doomsday (or maybe even the full code). That speculation is based on these images (including from MoS: a Kryptonian birthing chamber and an 'extra' Easter egg reference to Doomsday):

looks like the blob is being used. I'm wondering if it is a mineral that has organic properties created by the World Engine, which could have some relation to Bertron's DNA code of Doomsday.

This is essentially very much along the lines of Lex's cloning pursuits in the comics, which in the New 52 results in specimen "B-0." And in earlier comic book iterations Lex creates Bizarro soldiers from Zod. (And perhaps the Batman's "Knightmare" desert dream/vision is a kind of premonition of just one of the terrible things what could eventually be done with reverse-engineered Kryptonian cloning tech.)

We have an unmistakable Easter egg in MoS of a Zod/Bizarro connection in this scene:

[YT]o8R2M_nrlSA[/YT]

But as Filup Molina points out in this excellent analysis of the most recent BvS trailer (see at 14:50),

[YT]OlfDdz3z9ok[/YT]

Bizarro is a politically incorrect character. So it would make sense to see Bizarro adapted as more of a horror creation a la Frankenstein (who in Mary Shelley's novel is intelligent and tragic, btw).

Anyway, I have little doubt that reverse-engineered Kryptonian cloning tech is absolutely pivotal to the BvS story.

I have my own theory that Batman may be heavily upset about Superman failing to stop the military from giving Lex access that technology. Batman knows that the government simply cannot be trusted with it. But Superman due to his efforts to foster good will with human civilization allows the military to keep the scout ship. Batman knows better.

 

[The Guard]

It can also be that even if some fans haven't read all the comics for the superhero family spinoff characters, regardless, it still boils down to a matter of personal taste, no? One might not really care how well the spinoff characters might be developed--even if those 'superfamily members' are, it still dilutes the impact of the main character for them.

One doesn't need to read remotely all the comics to understand how the concept can work, or why it works.

And if one hasn't, and really has no idea, why the blanket statements about a character's potential within the mythos?

Yes, it can be a matter of personal taste. And in that case, something along the lines of "I just plain don't like that" makes a lot more sense than "It adds nothing to the mythology", "It's just a carbon copy", "It's the same character but female", etc.

I have no issue with people not liking it. I have an issue with the hyperbolic and often illogical reasons people continually reach for in order to justify said dislike.

Also, yay, cloning!

 

[rogbngp]

One doesn't need to read remotely all the comics to understand how the concept can work, or why it works.

And if one hasn't, and really has no idea, why the blanket statements about a character's potential within the mythos?

Yes, it can be a matter of personal taste. And in that case, something along the lines of "I just plain don't like that" makes a lot more sense than "It adds nothing to the mythology", "It's just a carbon copy", "It's the same character but female", etc.

I have no issue with people not liking it. I have an issue with the hyperbolic and often illogical reasons people continually reach for in order to justify said dislike.

Also, yay, cloning!

A well reasoned response, and FWIW I concur!

 

[DC Batman]

Interesting article. Ben Affleck praises Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor.
http://www.enstarz.com/articles/130...-to-heath-ledger-in-the-dark-knight-video.htm

 

[craigaat]

@rogbngp I enjoyed reading your theory, but I think that Zod/Doomsday comparison is a bit of a stretch, but only if it's based off that one scar. Wouldn't whatever fixed Zod's neck also fix the scar?

 

[rogbngp]

@rogbngp I enjoyed reading your theory, but I think that Zod/Doomsday comparison is a bit of a stretch, but only if it's based off that one scar. Wouldn't whatever fixed Zod's neck also fix the scar?

I don't think Doomsday is Zod's corpse reanimated but rather a whole new creature birthed using Zod's stem cells. He's grown from a fetus in the birthing chamber--and because its Doomsday the growth rate is probably super accelerated. The scar reappearing would just be artistic license, maybe explainable as an anomaly in the process, since Lex is still learning how to make all the Kryptonian tech work.

Or hey, maybe not! It's just a theory.

 

[The Guard]

Lex Luthor II was a boss.

Wasn't it just Lex Luthor, though?

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah it was the real Lex. I think his brain was in a clone body or something.

I always hated the way LL II looked, but I did love that awesome soliloquy he gave in Superman's tomb during the Funeral for a Friend storyline. He was all like "I win" and "I killed my bodyguard just to rub it in your face because you can't do anything about it." So evil. So LEX.

 

[egg]

Cloning is so central to Kryptonian bio-tech (and the allegory of the fall of Krypton as a cautionary tale) that the military has evidently contracted Lex to reverse-engineer, that I think it has to be central to this story in BvS. This is one reason that a number of fans here felt that some of the scenes and images of a snarling, very ill-tempered Superman (and including a fairly blurry one standing behind Lex when he is apparently Frankenstein-ing his Doomsday creation) might be an evil clone of Superman. If the scout ship has data that was shared from the Black Zero, that should include the Superman's DNA structure from the blood sample Zod's science officer took from Supes.

For Doomsday I'm thinking that Lex used Zod's stem cells, the mysterious blob in the ocean that we see in the first full length trailer, and perhaps fragments of Bertron's code for Doomsday (or maybe even the full code). That speculation is based on these images (including from MoS: a Kryptonian birthing chamber and an 'extra' Easter egg reference to Doomsday):

i've seen these ideas thrown around in a lot of places. while this isn't the first time i've seen these exact ideas laid out, i've got to believe that we've figured out quite a bit of the movie as fans. it will be super exciting to see the story points that we have not gotten figured out yet