So just because Hackman played a version of Luthor you view as 'incorrect' (even though it was pretty accurate considering the time period it came out, and was the inspiration for the modern Lex Luthor, as admitted by Marv Wolfman himself) he is no longer a good actor? All those films hes done, and just because his Lex Luthor wore a wig he is a bad actor?
I don't care if you disliked his interpretation or not, but don't say he is a bad actor because of it. That's the kind of logic I expect from children.
But his wig-wearing Luthor was the last straw, I bet
...his Luthor was even goofier than Hackman's, and had considerably less depth (although that was the script's problem). Spacey's Luthor danced. The goofiest thing Hackman did was make jokes.
The first two X-Men movies were successful, despite not being faithful AND directed by Bryan Singer. Funnily enough, these are the movies that I see you complain about the most.
Which goes to prove that faithfulness does not mean success, I DO believe that staying close to the comics will make a film the general audience love, simply because the outlandishness is what attracts people anyway. But it is impossible for faithfulness to have any impact, because the general audience don't read comics, so they have no idea what is faithful or not.
I appreciate that all you want is a faithful comic book movie (what everyone here wants) but you are being far too aggressive and unreasonable.
t: .
