“A perfect update of Luthor’s origins…”

Whilst I had my problems with Man of Steel, I believe Zack Snyder is showing some great knowledge of the inherent source material in casting Eisenberg as Luthor. Whilst this casting means we will never see Luthor become the President (one of the comics’ best story lines), it is a risky move nonetheless, bute one that I believe will pay off.

Luthor, at his core, in all of his various incarnations, has always been one thing, and one thing only – a self-made man. Luthor as mad scientist, occurrent in the 1940s, relied entirely on his own work. Luthor as fascist CEO, prevalent in the 90s until today, made his billion dollars entirely on his own. So what is the modern image of this self-made man? None other than the modern youth moguls, particularly those such as Mark Zuckerberg.

Luthor as a youthful, arrogant, intelligent, and wealthy genius makes so much sense, and is a brilliant update of Luthor’s origins. Eisenberg has displayed all of these characters brilliantly in David Fincher’s The Social Network, so it makes a lot of sense to cast him in the role. Perhaps because of his turn in films such as Zombieland, ostensibly targeted at a younger demographic, popular culture has an image of Eisenberg as a teenager. However, oddly enough, both he and Henry Cavill are the same age – 30 years old! It makes so much sense for Luthor to be remodelled in this form, and Eisenberg is perfect for the role.

Furthermore, it will provide an interesting contrast to the elder Batman/Bruce Wayne as played by Ben Affleck. From what is known of the plot so far, this Bruce Wayne will be a recluse, and a leftover from this previous era of business – a business styled by CEO capitalist dominance. This remodelled Luthor will be completely at odds with Wayne Enterprises, and perhaps more brutal.

To address Bryan Cranston – or shall we call him Heisenberg – as Luthor: he simply would not have been right for the role. I think Cranston’s performance as Walter White would have bled too much into the role, and would have added menace, but not the right type of menace. Cranston would have been a gruffer, older, and grimier Luthor, whereas Eisenberg perfectly captures the manicured version of the character that we see in the comics. He may be violent, but Luthor is distinct from other villains in that he has never been a street character; he operates from his kingdom on the top floor of the Lexcorp building. Essentially, he believes himself not a man, but a god; and this dimension of arrogance will be brilliantly performed by Eisenberg.

Andrew Sztehlo

“I said Heisenberg, not Eisenberg!”

Director Zack Snyder alienated comic-book fans and cinephiles alike when it was announced last week that actor Jesse Eisenberg was cast as Lex Luthor in the Man of Steel sequel. Why all the animosity? Well there are multiple reasons, actually. The first lies with Eisenberg himself, who arguably doesn’t have the look, age or personality to adequately pull off the role. Lex Luthor is commonly portrayed in films and graphic novels as a methodically sinister yet charismatic older man. Eisenberg has a history of being typecast to play neurotic and socially awkward characters. He also looks like a 20-year old despite being in his thirties. Combine this with the fact that he’ll have to be bald for his performance as Luthor and you get a rather comical image of a dysfunctional, almost infant-like, man-child. Not my idea of an evil genius.

Secondly, there are multiple actors out there with the chops to do the role justice, chief among them being Bryan Cranston. No stranger to playing bad guys in need of follicle implants and/or hair restorers, Cranston left his mark on the small screen and popular culture in general through his portrayal of Chemistry-teacher-turned-meth-dealer Walter White in Breaking Bad. The winner of 3 consecutive Emmy awards also made clear his interest in playing the villain in an interview with Metro last year, saying “Give me a call. I like Lex Luthor”. I guess Warner Bros. have been living in a cave for the last decade with only a copy of Zombieland to keep them entertained.

Of course, this isn’t the first time that Snyder’s casting choices for the project have come under scrutiny. Casting Ben Affleck as the Caped Crusader left fans divided, at best, due to his mediocre portrayal of the Batman-clone Daredevil. Seriously Zack: he’s a better director than actor. Then there was the announcement that Gal Gadot, a slim and virtually unknown actress, would be playing Wonder Woman. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to be thinking about how Wonder Woman could really do with a sandwich when I see her on-screen.

I’ve wanted to be really hopeful about this film. I loved Man of Steel. But Snyder’s casting choice for Lex Luthor has been the last straw for me when it could have been an act of redemption. I am aware that fans criticised Christopher Nolan for casting Heath Ledger as the Joker before he epitomised the role. I have to retort by saying that bold choices only work out when everything around them is solid – director, cast, studio – all on the same page. The Dark Knight ticked these boxes. I think this sequel is going in the opposite direction.

Casey Davison

(Header Image Source)