The Official Lex Luthor Casting Thread - Part 8

[regwec]

That's not what I'm not saying at all, lol.

It may not be what you intend to say, but it is what you are inferring. The sum of the various rehearsals of your argument seems to be that skin tone is the single factor which can blow all other considerations out of the water. To me, that's just absurd. I am struggling hard not to use the 'r' word; suffice to say that I firmly believe that black actor x can have much more in common with 'white' character y than does white actor z.

Let me ask you, would you rather have Denzel play the part, or Tim Booth?

So you'd be okay with a green and purple suited Superman? As his main costume, not some alternate suit. Because he's usually inked red and blue.

Same thing.

No, it isn't. Human beings are more than just colours. With an actor, regardless of whether they are black or white, you get a human being with a lifetime of experience and emotional depth, an artist's skill and craftsmanship, and a personality replete with countless little nuances all contributing to their overall presence. The shade of their skin is a tiny, tiny, part of the package.

With a piece of red fabric you get a piece of red fabric. With a piece of purple fabric you get a piece of purple fabric.

You seem to be viewing people as mere physical objects with, furthermore, their skin colour as the most outstanding element of their identity. I suppose I just find that deeply immature.

Generally yes and you can see that in the Byrne version of the character who is middle aged, overweight and naturally BALDING, but in terms of high tech industries and the ruthless inventor/magnate hybrid that even more recent depictions of Lex seem to draw from, younger white males are probably just as iconic. Eg. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and their ilk.

Personally, I'm also a little uncomfortable with casting a minority actor as Lex because it may have unintended racial undertones (if they go with the slum upbringing backstory) and the character becomes another stereotypical minority gangster/thug if not written correctly. Minorities still have a hard enough time breaking into the highest reaches of corporate America and are still heavily underrepresented there, I don't know if it is a good idea to portray one of them as part of the worst excesses of that world when Hollywood is still greatly lacking in positive depictions of successful minority characters. But that is whole another can of worms.

Now, this argument I can buy. If a character's ethnic background contains a crucial cultural connotation (i.e. it has a bearing on their character or symbolism) then, no, it shouldn't be changed. For this reason, as I have said, Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne and James Bond probably have to be white. (I am surprised to be see someone with such a dogmatic racially purist outlook be so laissez faire about changes to James Bond, who is perhaps the most culturally specific character in genre fiction). For Lex...I don't see it myself. His background is not hugely important on the whole, and I certainly don't think it is culturally specific.

You argument is at least cogent and logical, however.

 

[Project862006]

for me i am against color change because lex is white in the comics it is as simple as that for me

nothing more nothing less i just want my comic book characters to resemble their material just like henry is white,blue eyes,black hair and square jawed just like the comics

perry was fine because he is a side character at best but lex luthor is an A- list villain and one of the most iconic comic book villains of all time

 

[Bruce Malone]

This page pretty much encapsulates everything as to why luthor hates superman. I really hope whoever they cast (assuming he's in the sequel), the film takes some inspiration in their lex from him in "Lex Luthor: Man of Steel".

I'd love to see this sort interaction between the two in the film.

 

[BH/HHH]

Those are horrible choices

In your opinion

 

[MrMaooz]

 

[Kevin Smith]

It may not be what you intend to say, but it is what you are inferring. The sum of the various rehearsals of your argument seems to be that skin tone is the single factor which can blow all other considerations out of the water.

In some cases, yes. Like in the case where you are casting for a white character. That obviously goes without saying.

To me, that's just absurd. I am struggling hard not to use the 'r' word;

Oh brother...

suffice to say that I firmly believe that black actor x can have much more in common with 'white' character y than does white actor z.

Let me ask you, would you rather have Denzel play the part, or Tim Booth?

Neither.

No, it isn't. Human beings are more than just colours. With an actor, regardless of whether they are black or white, you get a human being with a lifetime of experience and emotional depth, an artist's skill and craftsmanship, and a personality replete with countless little nuances all contributing to their overall presence. The shade of their skin is a tiny, tiny, part of the package.

Luthor is white. Therefore they should cast a white actor who looks the part and can act. Those last two (hell, all of that, really) should go without saying.

With a piece of red fabric you get a piece of red fabric. With a piece of purple fabric you get a piece of purple fabric.

You seem to be viewing people as mere physical objects with, furthermore, their skin colour as the most outstanding element of their identity. I suppose I just find that deeply immature.

I'm not trying to argue that a person is the equivalent to a piece of fabric, I'm simply saying that how something looks is also an equally important part of the equation, along with acting ability, personality, etc. One does not trump the other if you want the right person for the part. So you may have a guy who looks like Luthor physically but has no personality or acting ability, he should not get the job because of that. You may have a guy who looks NOTHING like Luthor physically, be it black, hispanic, midget, or a white guy who simply looks nothing like him no matter what you do or how many hairs you shave (Harry Knowles if he were an actor), except this person can act, well they are ALSO wrong for the part.

I wish people would just accept what I'm saying at face value instead of looking for ways to extrapolate it to brow beat and condescend that this somehow makes me "shallow" or "immature" when the things they have a problem with (re: me as a "racist", "appearance being all that matters" ) only exist in their heads.

 

[Kevin Smith]

Perfect. Luthor incarnate.

 

[DKDetective]

Now, this argument I can buy. If a character's ethnic background contains a crucial cultural connotation (i.e. it has a bearing on their character or symbolism) then, no, it shouldn't be changed. For this reason, as I have said, Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne and James Bond probably have to be white. (I am surprised to be see someone with such a dogmatic racially purist outlook be so laissez faire about changes to James Bond, who is perhaps the most culturally specific character in genre fiction). For Lex...I don't see it myself. His background is not hugely important on the whole, and I certainly don't think it is culturally specific.

You argument is at least cogent and logical, however.

LOL, don't get me started on Bond as well. The character was an archaic St. George archetype, harking back to the public school educated gentlemen adventurers of Britain's golden age, from his very creation in 1950s. That sort of privilege, history and stuffy old-fashioned-ness is hard to reconcile with the character being a member of a minority, who would necessarily be of recent immigration, wealth and standing.

As you said, it is all about the symbolism and importance to the character's internal logic that determines whether race is a core characteristic that should not be changed. I don't know if you saw my other post on the topic as well, but my argument regarding the symbolism of Lex's background and race is related solely to the Byrne/Post-Crisis version of the character. If you are going for a corporate/big business Lex who represents the worst of America as a foil to Superman who represents the best of America, Lex should be white because that is the race of that social demographic, the one percenters. It strengthens his character archetype.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Perfect. Luthor incarnate.

Yep.

Because as we all know, people who post on message boards would absolutely write a blockbuster Superman script.

Look, there's WB calling me right now.

 

[Lencho01]

http://io9.com/top-10-dumbest-evil-geniuses-of-all-time-635754194

2) Lex Luthor from Superman

There have been many different versions of the scourge of Metropolis: the mad scientist who's mad at Superman because Superboy zapped his hair off, the business mogul who just wants Superman out of the way, the shadowy politician... but they're all kind of clueless when it comes down to it. Lex Luthor usually has everything you could possibly want — power, prestige, hot babes in chauffeur outfits, even the White House — but he still blows it all going after Superman. His battlesuit is emblematic of the problem: For one thing, it's a hideous green-and-purple color scheme. But also, it often goes wrong in the worst possible way. At one point, Lex gets his own whole planet of people who love him, Lexor, marries an alien princess. But then his battlesuit goes off during a battle and accidentally overloads the "Neutrarod," a spire he'd built to counter the planet's geological instability. And as a result, all of Lex's subjects die, including his wife and kid. He blames Superman, of course.

 

[Kevin Smith]

Yep.

Because as we all know, people who post on message boards would absolutely write a blockbuster Superman script.

Look, there's WB calling me right now.

Better than Goyer.

And MOS is a hit...not quite a "blockbuster" (if they had someone else on dialogue and script duties and better editing, it would have been....but Goyer no care).

Doesn't take a good writer to recognize a bad one. Goyer has some good ideas every now and then but he's bad at executing them and a terrible dialogue man ("dick splash"? ).

 

[Majik1387]

Yeah, the whole priest scene had bad Goyer written all over it.
I think Goyer is good for the brainstorming stage, but someone else needs to write and/or edit the script for it to be decent.

 

[ArmsHeldOut]

Yeah, the whole priest scene had bad Goyer written all over it.

The priest scene was fine; it even got a lot of laughs from most audiences I've seen the film with.

 

[BH/HHH]

I loved the priest scene and yeah the audience I was with laughed when he gulped

 

[Rowsdower!]

Better than Goyer.

And MOS is a hit...not quite a "blockbuster" (if they had someone else on dialogue and script duties and better editing, it would have been....but Goyer no care).

Doesn't take a good writer to recognize a bad one. Goyer has some good ideas every now and then but he's bad at executing them and a terrible dialogue man ("dick splash"? ).

Yeah, if only we could have had Jonah Nolan giving Superman lines like "I'M NOT WEARING HOCKEY PADS" and "This city showed you... that it's filled with people who believe in goooooooooooooooood."

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah, if only we could have had Jonah Nolan giving Superman lines like "I'M NOT WEARING HOCKEY PADS" and "This city showed you... that it's filled with people who believe in goooooooooooooooood."

Ha ha you know what bothered me in TDK how characters see, to have the same bits if dialogue as one anothe even though they haven't said it to each other i.e. the line "like to play your cards pretty close to your chest" some it's just so ugh!

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, that close to the chest thing is really weird. I know exactly what you mean.

Like I said in another thread... as much as I like TDK, I think it has the weakest story and the worst dialogue of all three Batman movies and MOS. I think people tend to ignore its flaws because Ledger is so amazing in it.

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah, that close to the chest thing is really weird. I know exactly what you mean.

Like I said in another thread... as much as I like TDK, I think it has the weakest story and the worst dialogue of all three Batman movies and MOS. I think people tend to ignore its flaws because Ledger is so amazing in it.

Hmmm maybe been a while since I watched it ill have to watch the trilogy again t:

 

[Kevin Smith]

Yeah, if only we could have had Jonah Nolan giving Superman lines like "I'M NOT WEARING HOCKEY PADS" and "This city showed you... that it's filled with people who believe in goooooooooooooooood."

"Measuring *****" ...like the first line out of Lois' mouth. Lovely.

The priest scene got a big roll of the eyes from me. Who is he, Zorro now? Kents were methodist anyway....it was so cliche. If he just needed someone to talk to why not Ma Kent? Hell, why not a bartender? I just didn't care for the priest bit. People "laughed" in my theater too but I think it was more in a scoffing way than genuine LOL.

Aaaand then the 33 years old bit combined with an up close shot of Cavill's face with a HUGE stained glass window of JESUS behind him. A caption that read "SUPERMAN = JESUS" would have been subtler.

Oh, Goyer...

 

[Rowsdower!]

They're all great movies, IMO. But TDK bugs me a bit because they take a little too much of the focus off Batman and they give him some of the worst lines in the film. Yet some people act like it's perfect and every other superhero movie is dogsh** in comparison. I don't get it.

 

[Kevin Smith]

Zod had some good lines though so I will give credit there. I enjoyed most of his dialogue, and Shannon's performance....he was awesome.

 

[Majik1387]

Lois Lane's first lines had no mention of the word cocks; that was the interior scene after she got out of the helicopter.

And yes, the priest scene was ridiculously stupid and felt overly out of place. Added nothing to the movie.

 

[Rowsdower!]

"Measuring *****" ...like the first line out of Lois' mouth. Lovely.

The priest scene got a big roll of the eyes from me. Who is he, Zorro now? Kents were methodist anyway....it was so cliche. If he just needed someone to talk to why not Ma Kent? Hell, why not a bartender? I just didn't care for the priest bit. People "laughed" in my theater too but I think it was more in a scoffing way than genuine LOL.

Aaaand then the 33 years old bit combined with an up close shot of Cavill's face with a HUGE stained glass window of JESUS behind him. A caption that read "SUPERMAN = JESUS" would have been subtler.

Oh, Goyer...

Like it or not, Superman and religion (as well as the Jesus stuff) has been present in comics (Kingdom Come, For Tomorrow, Superman For All Seasons) and other movies (SR). Maybe they piled it on a bit thick here, but it's not like Goyer just pulled it out of his ass.

 

[Kevin Smith]

Jor El was cool....but that bit where Lara tells Zod her son's name and how he is safe and he'll never find him....was the worst bit of overacting in the movie. She was so melodramatic with how she said that. Like a stage actor.

 

[BH/HHH]

Jor El was cool....but that bit where Lara tells Zod her son's name and how he is safe and he'll never find him....was the worst bit of overacting in the movie. She was so melodramatic with how she said that. Like a stage actor.

Don't agree at all, she was fine in that scene. I was dragged in emotionally with that aswell.