Superman (casting, rumors, pix till release)

[Obiwanshinobi]

i looked it up...Robin predates Alfred, while Gordon predates Robin...so i was wrong anyways.

I just assumed Alfred was there from the very beginning.

[Christopher]

AviTrek wrote:

---

Lex is more than Superman's enemy. He is supporting character in Superman's cast, just like Jimmy Olsen and Perry White.

In some versions, yes, and prominently so in screen/TV adaptations and later comics that have been influenced by them. But it has not always been so. In the Golden and Silver Age comics, he was Superman's primary foe, like the Joker was for Batman, but he wasn't a "regular" cast member, just the most prominent member of the rogues' gallery. Luthor never appeared in the 1940s Fleischer cartoons. He wasn't in the 1948 Kirk Alyn serial, though he was in the 1950 serial. He never appeared in the George Reeves series. He was only an occasional guest villain in the 1988 Superboy series. He was a regular in the first season of Lois and Clark but was then dropped and only rarely reappeared. He was a prominent character in Superman: The Animated Series, but plenty of episodes got by without him.

So no, Luthor is not always portrayed as a core member of the ensemble on the same level as Lois or Jimmy. My whole point is that it depends on the version.

Would you make a Batman movie without Alfred or Commissioner Gordon?

Commissioner Gordon was hardly even there in the Tim Burton movies anyway. And not much better off in the Schumacher films.

[Greg Cox]

Christopher wrote:

---

He never appeared in the George Reeves series.

You beat me to the punch. An entire generation grew up watching SUPERMAN on tv . . . without a sign of Lex.

[the G-man]

Admiral_Young wrote:

---

Yes, Clark has a few other villains, but the plain and simple fact is that a general audience is gonna know who Lex Luthor is. No one but comic book fans know who Zod, Brainiac, Metallo, are....

Actually, thanks to Superman 2, Zod is probably at least as famous as Luthor to non-comic book fans.

And, in any event, Nolan was able to make a pretty decent Batman movie with the Scarecrow and Ras, despite their being two of the villains not that well-known to the general public.

[Greg Cox]

ObiWanShinobi wrote:

---

i looked it up...Robin predates Alfred, while Gordon predates Robin...so i was wrong anyways.

I just assumed Alfred was there from the very beginning.

Nope, the whole idea that Alfred was a faithful family retainer who helped raise young Bruce after his parents died is a fairly modern idea.

Alfred was originally a portly comedy relief character who just showed at the mansion one day, long after Batman and Robin starting fighting crime . . . .

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The important thing to the story is determining exactly how the villain challenges the hero as an individual - not whether they're going to blow up the world or how, but basically how the two get under one another's skin so to speak.

In that regard, there isn't another established Superman villain who comes close to the modern versions of Luthor. Ignoring the whole you-made-me-bald nonsense, Lex's motivations for opposing Superman range from the completely narcissistic to the rational all the way to a twisted sense of responsibility to oppose what he believes is a public danger.

[Greg Cox]

the G-man wrote:

---

Actually, thanks to Superman 2, Zod is probably at least as famous as Luthor to non-comic book fans.

.

Zod and Brainiac and the others have also been popularized by the various animated shows, not to mention ten years of SMALLVILLE.

Trust me, my CW-watching niece, who has never read a comic book in her life, knows who Zod and Brainiac are now.

[Obiwanshinobi]

Does she say, the guy from Buffy and the guy from Dead like Me? well maybe not the latter.

[Greg Cox]

ObiWanShinobi wrote:

---

Does she say, the guy from Buffy and the guy from Dead like Me? well maybe not the latter.

Nah, I think BUFFY was before her time . . ..

[Captaindemotion]

Christopher wrote:

---

Do you? Not every Batman movie features the Joker. We've had two successful Iron Man movies without the Mandarin. Lex Luthor is not Superman's only foe. It's just that the live-action Superman movies to date haven't been very flexible in their choice of villains. Just because something has been done repetitively in the past, that doesn't mean it needs to be done.

And the recent Sherlock Holmes movie managed quite well without Moriarty.

[Christopher]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

And the recent Sherlock Holmes movie managed quite well without Moriarty.

Except that

it did set up Moriarty as the unseen mastermind behind its events.

[Obiwanshinobi]

Kind of hope that's where Lex's role fits in (if he does make it in) He is a criminal mastermind is he not? Not the main antagonist but a looming pain in Supes ass. Similar to BB and TDK with the use of the mob as secondary villains.

[A beaker full of death]

Christopher wrote:

---

In some versions, yes, and prominently so in screen/TV adaptations and later comics that have been influenced by them. But it has not always been so. In the Golden and Silver Age comics, he was Superman's primary foe, like the Joker was for Batman, but he wasn't a "regular" cast member, just the most prominent member of the rogues' gallery. Luthor never appeared in the 1940s Fleischer cartoons. He wasn't in the 1948 Kirk Alyn serial, though he was in the 1950 serial. He never appeared in the George Reeves series. He was only an occasional guest villain in the 1988 Superboy series. He was a regular in the first season of Lois and Clark but was then dropped and only rarely reappeared. He was a prominent character in Superman: The Animated Series, but plenty of episodes got by without him.

So no, Luthor is not always portrayed as a core member of the ensemble on the same level as Lois or Jimmy. My whole point is that it depends on the version.

Commissioner Gordon was hardly even there in the Tim Burton movies anyway. And not much better off in the Schumacher films.

It really bugs me when popular movie or tv versions supplant the popular conception of these characters (and ultimately change their portrayal even in the comic books themselves). And while I know that without this phenomenon Alfred would still be dead, there would be no Batgirl and I'd never have heard of Kryptonite, it still offends the purist in me.

Already people think that Kitty Pryde was one of the first X-Men, Sue Richards is a scientist and Captain America always wore a helmet.

[Nerys Myk]

ObiWanShinobi wrote:

---

Kind of hope that's where Lex's role fits in (if he does make it in) He is a criminal mastermind is he not? Not the main antagonist but a looming pain in Supes ass. Similar to BB and TDK with the use of the mob as secondary villains.

So he's not an evil real estate mogul?

[Obiwanshinobi]

I think he was a mad scientist first and then later became an industrialist.