Is the 'Marvel Cinematic Universe' franchise the best CBM franchise?

[johnnygobbs]

I don't see how this Luthor can ever be the credible respected businessman and would-be President of the USA, in view of the things I've heard about the ending...

But can I ask, does this Luthor have any sympathetic traits at all, or is he simply a weedy, kooky effeminate and irredeemably evil nerd?  And if that is the case, why couldn't Snyder have gone for a more traditional alpha-male version of Luthor?  Do the baddies in his films always have to be physically weak, nerdy and odd in comparison to the heroes (i.e. '300' where turncoat hunchback joined forces with the evil Persians against the perfectly-built ultra-macho Spartans)?

This is why I still prefer Burton's version of Batman.  He seems to find affinity with society's outsiders and with 'Batman Returns' he manages to make the confident All-American CEO the main villain in opposition to Batman, Catwoman and even The Penguin's misfits.

[thecolorsblend]

I don't see how this Luthor can ever be the credible respected businessman and would-be President of the USA, in view of the things I've heard about the ending...

Then it's quite possible that this version of Lex won't run for President.

But can I ask, does this Luthor have any sympathetic traits at all, or is he simply a weedy, kooky effeminate and irredeemably evil nerd?  And if that is the case, why couldn't Snyder have gone for a more traditional alpha-male version of Luthor?

The only version of Lex I'd characterize as "alpha male" is STAS. Gene Hackman was a used car salesman, John Shea was a debonair playboy and Michael Rosenbaum was a sexy bald posterboy for Millennial teenagers. None of them were the gold standard of rugged, bare-chested manliness. As for comics, I guess Lex was pretty assertive but usually not what most people would define as alpha male the way you have.

[johnnygobbs]

Then it's quite possible that this version of Lex won't run for President.

Yes.  Exactly.  So a very limited Lex Luthor then. 

The only version of Lex I'd characterize as "alpha male" is STAS. Gene Hackman was a used car salesman, John Shea was a debonair playboy and Michael Rosenbaum was a sexy bald posterboy for Millennial teenagers. None of them were the gold standard of rugged, bare-chested manliness. As for comics, I guess Lex was pretty assertive but usually not what most people would define as alpha male the way you have.

He's a tough, assertive businessman, not a club-waving caveman, but that's still an alpha-male in the scheme of things.  What he's not is a weedy, whiny, cackling, insane, effeminate nerd.

John Shea comes the closest to capturing the essence of the comic-book character with his suave, charismatic businessman.  Gene Hackman was at least close to the early pre-crisis scientist Luthor, and even if he had a cheesy used-salesman vibe at least he was funny and entertaining.  And I certainly don't see any of the others as the gold standard, which is even more reason why we should demand a better Lex now. 

He's arguably the most poorly served comic-book character after the Fantastic Four as far as films and TV go.  Basically he's the opposite to Batman, Superman and The Joker in that respect.

[thecolorsblend]

Yes.  Exactly.  So a very limited Lex Luthor then. 

You are aware, aren't you, that exactly one comic book storyline was about Lex running for President, right? And the only adaptation so far that has even poked a toe in that direction is Smallville. This isn't a major storyline that's crucial to the foundations of Lex as a character. It's an interesting story and some neat things were done with it but it isn't one of those defining stories for Lex. It may be for you but not for the character.

John Shea comes the closest to capturing the essence of the comic-book character with his suave, charismatic businessman.

He was a hedonist with a lot of sadistic qualities. Shea's was an engaging performance but I'd hardly call him definitive.

Gene Hackman was at least close to the early pre-crisis scientist Luthor, and even if he had a cheesy used-salesman vibe at least he was funny and entertaining.

I grow less enamored with Hackman's take all the time. People are free to bash on Superman IV if they want but he stole a strand of Superman's hair, genetically engineered a screwed up clone of Superman, hid his device on a nuclear missile and pointed Nuclear Man at Superman with orders to take him out. That did a lot to redeem the Hackman Luthor's scientific prowess in my estimation... which Kevin Spacey later undermined but I'll spare you that.

And I certainly don't see any of the others as the gold standard, which is even more reason why we should demand a better Lex now.

My point was that Eisenberg isn't even remotely close to the worst Lex there's ever been. He's no closer and no further away from the mark than any of his predecessors. My reading of Eisenberg's Lex is that he's a man lost in his own obsessions... and they're slowly eating him alive. I think history could look back very favorably on Eisenberg's performance.

[johnnygobbs]

My point was that Eisenberg isn't even remotely close to the worst Lex there's ever been. He's no closer and no further away from the mark than any of his predecessors. My reading of Eisenberg's Lex is that he's a man lost in his own obsessions... and they're slowly eating him alive. I think history could look back very favorably on Eisenberg's performance.

Lex is not a cackling kooky psychopath.  There are plenty of those already in the DC Universe.  What about a businessman villain who actually seems quite normal on the surface?  Apart from Tim Burton's brilliant Batman Returns, in which Burton made up a character, Max Shreck, we haven't had any of those in the films.  In other words, Max Shreck is a better Lex Luthor than any of the official versions of the character we've yet had in live-action.  All the other DC films have conformed to the offensive notion that a person has to be an outsider and/or mentally ill to be evil, or otherwise be an alien.

Also, it's easy to say 'history will look back favourably on x or y' but none of us can see the future, and as it stands even the majority of this film's supporters consider Jesse 'Comic Con is like the Holocaust'/'I didn't bother with the comics' Eisenberg to be the weak link.

[thecolorsblend]

Lex is not a cackling kooky psychopath.

Perhaps not in your idealized conception of the character. But it remains a valid depiction of Lex Luthor. And, might I add, one that's light years ahead of some of his predecessors. I go with it.

Also, it's easy to say 'history will look back favourably on x or y' but none of us can see the future, and as it stands even the majority of this film's supporters consider Jesse 'Comic Con is like the Holocaust'/'I didn't bother with the comics' Eisenberg to be the weak link.

It's been my experience that jews (which I think Eisenberg is) mention the holocaust more casually than do others. I'm sure there are reasons for that and none of them concern me. I only mention it to say that you and I might not be so cavalier about it but that isn't necessarily a jewish restraint in my observation.

As to his "I didn't bother with the comics" bit, Eisenberg has spent a fair amount of the past several years trying like hell to establish a more foo-foo type of film career. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he accepted the role for the money so that he could afford to do an indie film or two for practically nothing. But at the same time he's shown a remarkable level of personal investment in the film and the character. Based on jacknothing, I wonder that Terrio signing on to write/co-write the film didn't deeply impress Eisenberg.

I digress. He clearly wants to be taken seriously as a respected film actor. I would totally understand him saying he hasn't read any comics. In fact, not all actors are Method. Some are from a less personal school where they build the character from the outside in as opposed to the Method approach of working from the inside out.

I say this because Lex reminds me a fair amount of Mark Waid's depiction of Lex Luthor from Birthright. The hair, some of the clothes but also the mannerisms. This would seem a thin justification... until you remember that Birthright was an undeniable inspiration for MOS, particularly aspects of Krypton.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Eisenberg later 'fessed up that "Yeah, I might have glanced at Birthright." There are too many similarities there for SOMEone not to have read it.

[The Laughing Fish]

Mel Gibson recently derided BvS as he expressed that he doesn't have time for the superhero genre. Judging by this interview with The Washington Post, it doesn't sound like he's crazy about the MCU either.

Gibson laments what he sees as the "violence without conscience" of many modern films. "To talk about the violence question, look at any Marvel movie," he says, dismissively. "They're more violent than anything that I've done, but [in my movies,] you give a s--- about the characters, which makes it matter more. That's all I'll say."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/mel-gibson-proves-a-tad-tetchy-on-his-hacksaw-ridge-comeback-tour/2016/11/03/aa072c78-a04e-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html

More violent than Braveheart or Lethal Weapon? MCU having no characters to care about? Whatever, Mel. 

[The Laughing Fish]

If I had to rate the MCU films in Phase 1 and 2:


Phase 1:

• Captain America: The First Avenger
• Thor
• The Avengers
• Iron Man
• The Incredible Hulk
• Iron Man 2

Phase 2:

• Captain America: The Winter Soldier
• Iron Man 3
• Ant-Man
• Guardians of the Galaxy
• Thor: The Dark World
• Avengers: Age of Ultron

Too soon to list Phase 3.

[The Laughing Fish]

So we're well over a week away from Infinity War coming out in theatres. I think right now is a good time to look back at some of our favourite scenes in the MCU over the last decade.

Here are some of my favourites.

Tony Stark goes to Gulmira, Yinsen's home village, to take out the Ten Rings terrorists in his first solo outing. This was right after Stark watches the news footage in anger, knowing the terrorists are using his weapons against the innocent.

Thor, born with a new sense of humility and morals, confronts Loki and destroys the Bifrost Bridge to save Yotunheim in his first solo outing.

Captain America sacrifices himself and crashes Red Skull's ship into the arctic, saying his goodbye to Peggy Carter in The First Avenger....

...until they meet again more than 70 years later, during this heartbreaking scene in The Winter Soldier.

The Avengers assembling for the first time in combat against the Chitauri.

[The Dark Knight]

James Cameron has spoken about the saturation of comic book movies. He's not really the best man to be talking about franchises due to his commitment to several more Avatar films. And I'm not the biggest fan of the guy. But for the purpose this debate, I 100% agree with his opinion.

I catch the bus to work and I've been going past this massive Avengers banner, and I think to myself how embarrassing it all is, and what the older generation think of it. Superheroes aren't embarrassing, but the state of the industry is. It's so predictable and stale. And when a director does something bold and daring like BvS, they get shouted out of town.

This is what modern cinema has become. Constant, and I mean constant, superhero films with the rest of the landscape consisting of reboots and absolutely forgettable 'comedies'. It's not cinema anymore. It's numbing and blah to the point it's all the same, effectively being extended sizzle reels dressed up as art.

Accusing Joel Schumacher of being toyetic seems so tame now.

Something happened to Hollywood and I don't see them getting out of this rut any time soon.