Superman's arch nemesis Lex Luthor has been officially cast, and it is Jesse Eisenberg that will be playing the iconic villain. It is official, DC wants of the movie to fail miserably. Okay, maybe this is not a terrible choice, but when compared to someone like Bryan Cranston, Eisenberg might not be the best idea. Depending on how the movie wants to take the character, Eisenberg could actually be a good choice that will bring something new and original to the role, but will he even be bald? Part of wants to say this is not a terrible choice, but the half wants to say, "Go home DC, you're drunk." Even though last year's Now You See Me was not a particularly great movie, Eisenberg had a lot of charisma and likability in the role. On other casting news, Jeremy Irons has been officially cast as Alfred Pennyworth, Batman's iconic butler. At least Irons is known for being a decent actor, so I cannot say that he is a terrible choice by any means. However, my interest is this Batman vs. Superman movie is beginning to wane. None of their creative choices are impressive and the movie is likely to end up overloaded with characters and special effects that it will be an epic fail. Maybe, there is a chance that the movie will actually turn really well, but at the same time, there is so much working against it right now. What do you think of the casting choices? Please comment below.
If you want to contact us or have any questions please send an e-mail to johnstarslayer@gmail.com.
I'm rather indifferent about this. I think I'd rather stick to DC's animated movies (DC seems better suited for animation, I guess?) and the comics, unless I hear some good news about the live-action movies.
ReplyDeleteYeah, DC animated movies have been better than their live-action work outside of The Dark Knight Trilogy, which was rather good. Man of Steel was more like Meh of Steel.
Delete-James
Aaaannnnd suddenly I'm interested in this movie! I can't say that Eisenberg won't be horrible, but they're certainly trying something different, and, well, I like Eisenberg. He's a brave choice. I think if they go about it right, he could pull it off very interestingly. He should definitely keep his hair though. :P
ReplyDeleteJeremy Irons -- nice. Very different from Michael Caine, but not completely against the current.
Still, with Zach Snyder directing, I'm not holding out much hope.
Really? You are more interested now that Eisenberg is apart of it? But I do agree, they are trying something different.
DeleteI agree, Irons is a great pick for the character!
Snyder can ruin just about anything, and I am sure he can ruin this movie.
-James
I'm just thinking it can't get any worse than Affleck and Snyder, so with this new news my mindset went from being annoyed that it probably won't be any good, to excited at the idea of it being so ridiculously bad it's good... although it'll probably end up being just plain bad anyway... :P
DeleteIm usually the type of person that defends casting choices such as this but I cannot in a million years see how this will work out. For starters, I dislike Eisenberg. I think he is a bit of an arrogant prick in real life just because he got so much recognition for The Social Network. I could see him being a villain, but just not Lex Luthor.
ReplyDeleteAnd the more important fact is that CRANSTON WANTED TO DO IT! How in the **** do you pass up on probably the current best actor (other than Daniel Day Lewis) who wants to play your role and who already did a kick-*** job as a menace with a bald head.
I guess Im no so much angry with the fact that Eisenberg was chosen (even if I dont think it will work), I'm more angry that they had an able and willing Bryan Cranston and decided to pass him up.
/End rant
I haven't seen any interviews with him, so I don't know what he is like, but I would likely agree once I watch some.
DeleteExactly, if Cranston wants the part give it to him as soon as possible! He would probably be an awesome villain!
-James
unless this movie has one heck of a trailer there not even the slightest chance ill see it in the theaters
ReplyDeleteThat sounds like a good plan.
Delete-James
I know it's completely different that never expected it to be like this. Jeremy Irons was a favourite actor of mine and probably noted for villainous types and I liked him for purposely portraying the voice of Scar in the Lion King. It's a predictable choice that Irons is likely a possible candidate for Alfred and I think Michael Caine would give away his role to him.
ReplyDeleteI am so furious that Lex Luthor was to be portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, he is a wrong actor and should he turn down the role for being too imperfect and handsome. It's nowhere as bad of having Ben Affleck to play Batman. I'll find out what happens next!
I do agree Jeremy Irons is an excellent choice for the role of Alfred, and I am sure he will do well. And I am also angry about Eisenberg as Luthor. He is such a terrible choice!
Delete-James
Now I officially don't want to see this movie. At all.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's not a bad idea.
Delete-James
I don't even know what to think of these castings as I'm not familiar with either actor. However, I love Michael Caine's Alfred TO DEATH, so it will be extremely hard for any other Alfred version to replace him in my standards of who Batman's butler is. All I can really think right now is that I'm looking forward to seeing the reviews and rantings once this movie comes out...
ReplyDelete~Jamie
I know what you mean. The casting is getting absurd! Haha, I can't wait to read your rant about the movie! That is going to be a lot of fun.
Delete-James
Jesse Eisenberg has never played anything other than 'Jesse Eisenberg': the rapid-line delivery machine part nebbish, part arrogant twit. Can anyone really think of an Eisenberg performance where he didn't basically play the same part the same way (even Social Network, he was just an angry nebbish). Yes, we haven't seen a frame of footage, but I doubt Eisenberg will slow down his delivery or be menacing to even the wooden Affleck and even more wooden Cavil.
ReplyDeleteW/that, this movie doesn't know what it wants. Already it piles on too many superheroes (Batman, Wonder Woman, and Superman) who should get their own film. Now w/the exception of Irons, each casting decision has been more...curious, than the last. Hackman and Spacey at least were highly respected actors when they took on Luthor. Eisenberg, on the other hand, has shown no range. How is HE going to threaten Kal-El or Bruce Wayne...deny their Friend request?
I have to agree with you. I don't see anything coming out of this movie other than a huge mess. The casting choices so far have been uninspired to say the least. They're so desperate to make a Justice League franchise that they're willing to throw in every character they can regardless of this being a Man of Steel sequel, a movie which I found to be terrible anyway.
DeleteI agree with both of you! DC is trying to play catchup with Marvel and The Avengers and the result is going to be a giant mess.
Delete-James
I'm willing to give this decision the benefit of the doubt. Maybe DC are looking for a younger actor to do multiple pictures over the next decade. Eisenberg will bring a much different energy to the character and I could see a 'year one' type of origin retelling for Lex Luthor (kind of how Man of Steel was a year one story). Lex is a villain and Eisenberg is great at playing unlikable characters, i.e. Mark Zuckerberg = Lex Luthor!
ReplyDeleteMaybe there is a chance that Eisenberg will not be terrible in the role, but I am incredibly skeptical, but I suppose I will have to wait and see until the movie and a trailer is released.
Delete-James