• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers "Superman & Lois" Season 3

My point was actually that the re-invented Luthor basically became the expected version, and anything from before that is less-liked by some.

(For that matter, Superman III's Ross Webster basically was the post-Crisis Luthor.)
I've said the same myself.
 
I've enjoyed almost all the live-action Luthors (Sherman Howard's delightful scenery-chewing on Superboy should not be forgotten, and Hackman was a complete blast), but Rosenbaum and Cryer are the GOATs.
 
My point was actually that the re-invented Luthor basically became the expected version, and anything from before that is less-liked by some.

But you're drawing a false correlation by suggesting that's the only reason people might not care for the Hackman version. Hackman's version is equally unlike both the pre-Crisis and post-Crisis Luthors. It's a distinct interpretation all its own (aside from later versions imitating it). I don't dislike Hackman's Luthor because it's different from the John Byrne Luthor, but because it's different from, and inferior in concept to, the contemporary Luthor.


Sherman Howard's delightful scenery-chewing on Superboy should not be forgotten

I didn't like his Hackmanesque scenery-chewing in season 2 nearly as much as the more distinctive characterization he was able to develop in seasons 3-4.
 
The whole point of adaptation is change...unless I don't like the change. :)

Rather: The point of adaptation is change, but some changes are more successful than others. The question is not whether it was right to make a change in general, but whether this one specific change was good or bad. Nobody would take "That was a bad sandwich" to be a condemnation of all sandwiches.
 
But you're drawing a false correlation by suggesting that's the only reason people might not care for the Hackman version.
No I'm not. I'm suggesting that it is one reason that some people might not care for it.
 
No I'm not. I'm suggesting that it is one reason that some people might not care for it.

That's better. That was not evident from the phrasing "his Lex came from before the character's reinvention and many don't care for a more comedic Lex," so thank you for clarifying.
 
Of course it depends a lot of what the viewer wants from a Lex. Hackman is arguably the best actor in the bunch (without question, in my opinion), but his Lex came from before the character's reinvention and many don't care for a more comedic Lex.

That's why I liked him. I was holding him comparison to the comic book version. I didn't even know the comic book version. His character stands on his own and I liked him.
 
Jimmy Olson joins season 4

Weird. I still have to remind myself that they decided to make this an alternate universe despite spinning it off from the Arrowverse. I mean, it makes sense for Clark and Lois to be the married parents of teenagers in a universe where James Olsen has already grown up to become an accomplished photojournalist. It's more incongruous, and far more unoriginal, to revert Jimmy to his stock characterization as an eager young cub reporter when Clark and Lois are that far along in their lives.

And it looks like the trend of never casting a redhead as Jimmy Olsen (with the sole exception of Tommy Bond in the Kirk Alyn serials) remains unbroken. Unless they dye his hair.
 
This is fun and exciting news!
Superman & Lois’ incarnation of Jimmy is an extroverted 20-something known for being the “life of the party” around the office. “Despite being work colleagues with Clark, he’s been unable to get him out of his ‘awkward’ shell,” according to Jimmy’s official description. “Unaware of Clark’s super-secret, Jimmy’s still determined to become his pal.”
It sounds like this version of Jimmy might not be someone Clark and Lois have known and worked with for years, but instead a recent addition to the Daily Planet staff -- unless that description pertains to flashback appearances, which is possible since the Planet hasn't been much of a factor in the show's present day up to this point. Unless that's going to change in the final season? Interesting possibilities either way.

I sort of regret they're not bringing back Mehcad Brooks; I enjoyed him in the role, and always thought he and Hoechlin might have had decent buddy chemistry if they had been afforded more screentime together. Still, I very much look forward to seeing what Smith brings to the table.
 
And it looks like the trend of never casting a redhead as Jimmy Olsen (with the sole exception of Tommy Bond in the Kirk Alyn serials) remains unbroken. Unless they dye his hair.
Isn't this guy playing Jimmy in Gunn's film?
MBw0ibM.jpg
 
So I'm assuming these will be flashbacks to when they were working at the Daily Planet in the past and not them working there now?
 
So I'm assuming these will be flashbacks to when they were working at the Daily Planet in the past and not them working there now?
We shall see what we shall see.

My guess: flashbacks to establish their relationship with Jimmy (probably in connection with the Luthor story), then Jimmy also plays into the present-day narrative.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top