Was Eisenberg's Lex more of a miscast or misinterpretation?

[Alan2099]

I've heard a lot of people say he felt more like he was trying to play the Joker, but to me it felt more like a less threatening more annoying version of Jim Carrey's Riddler.

[Slowpokeking]

It felt like, to me, the script wanted a Lex Luthor who was a bit unhinged. Whether it was the mother-box, whether it was his horrid upbringing, some kind of chemical imbalance, whatever, but it felt like that's what they were going for, a Lex who was already out-there.

The problem is that Eisenberg's Luthor was bouncing-off-the-walls, drooling-into-the-carpet crazy. And the thing is, if he was that insane, and that unhinged, then someone would've noticed. Oh, sure, plenty of successful and wealthy types are nuts, but they can at least pretend to be sane. There has to be at least some sanity in there for them to achieve success and wealth. Eisenberg's Luthor was just, pardon the swearing, batshit. He might as well have had "supervillain" tattooed on his forehead.

And the fact a critical part of his evil plan was peeing in a jar? That was the point where I gave up.

If the motherbox is so important that it affect Lex, then WHY did they only make 1 scene and deleted it without explanation? Even JL didn't mention Lex much.

[j9ac9k]

I would say both:
- Miscast: Regardless of how Lex was written, this is Superman's arch-enemy. When you see them in a room together, an audience should feel that these two are legit rivals and that Lex is a threat to Superman through presence alone. Eisenberg could play Lex to this new Superman, but standing next to Cavill, I just don't feel it.
- Misinterpretation: It's been said a million times, but yeah - the twitchy, goofy mannerisms was just a weird take.

[Powerboy]

His Lex was really awful to me, he doesn't look like Lex as well. But maybe his acting was ok but the script didn't write Lex well?

Maybe Zack Snyder should take more responsibility of it. The character had no clear motive and never got the calm appearance.

I think he was meant to be off the wall but most of us considered it a miscast. I just generally find Eisenberg's personality (and maybe appearance) annoying and not in a "I hate the character in way I'm supposed to hate the villain" way. Rather, in a "Oh this guy is in the movie. Now I won't go see that movie specifically because that annoying little s**t is in it" way.

It might have worked had he been playing the Joker or the Riddler. But I doubt it.

[Powerboy]

So is Lex Luthor.

Annoying, yes. But annoying for being an arrogant and evil S.O.B. Not annoying for being a twitchy twerp. That's just my reaction to him.

[AnakinFlair]

If the motherbox is so important that it affect Lex, then WHY did they only make 1 scene and deleted it without explanation? Even JL didn't mention Lex much.

Those cuts were studio-mandated, and I don't think they cared what was cut as long as the movie was shorter. As for Lex in JL, keep in mind that, along with being busy with Steppenwolfe, they all were under the impression that Lex was safely locked up in Arkham. They never knew he escaped, so they had no reason to think of him. I get the impression that he would have had a more central role in the sequel.

[Slowpokeking]

Those cuts were studio-mandated, and I don't think they cared what was cut as long as the movie was shorter. As for Lex in JL, keep in mind that, along with being busy with Steppenwolfe, they all were under the impression that Lex was safely locked up in Arkham. They never knew he escaped, so they had no reason to think of him. I get the impression that he would have had a more central role in the sequel.

No, the plot should clearly mention that if the villain Lex was under its effect in BVS.

[Scott Taylor]

Annoying, yes. But annoying for being an arrogant and evil S.O.B. Not annoying for being a twitchy twerp. That's just my reaction to him.

Thats fair. I had the same reaction, honestly. He is an annoying twerp. But he did genius level things in the movie, so the way I read things his twerpiness was him playing a part to set people off. Plus, he was a bit unhinged.

Definitely not what people accept from Lex Luthor. But I accepted it as a unique take. Happy enough not to see it done again, though, too.

[j9ac9k]

That twitchy guy Eisenberg played would have been a great cinematic Toyman and elevated that character. As a Lex Luthor, it felt like a step down.

[kingaliencracker]

As others have pointed out, you could see what they were going for in trying to mimic the modern magnates, but they certainly botched the execution. I think the other issue is that I don't find Eisenberg the least bit intimidating or threatening. He gives off more of a pretentious vibe than anything else.

[Valentis]

He was unlikeable, annoying and over the top. There were the good and bad of the Snyder films. A big bad is many of the characters were unlikeable including Batman and Superman as well.

[master of read]

oscars don't make a actor right for every part. just ask leto, both as joker and morbius.

i've seen a lot of lexs and jesse was among the worst. just annoying, goofy and not very intelligent. i mean, if lex was gonna unleash a monster to kill superman, he would made sure he had a way to either control or defeat it. this lex had neither. hell, even the guy who played lenny luthor played a better lex than jesse.

if you liked him, that's fine. but for me, i'm going with Smallville lex or DCAU lex.

[master of read]

I've heard a lot of people say he felt more like he was trying to play the Joker, but to me it felt more like a less threatening more annoying version of Jim Carrey's Riddler.

at least with carrey, he was channel frank gorshen when he played riddler. not sure who jesse was channeling.

[j9ac9k]

at least with carrey, he was channel frank gorshen when he played riddler. not sure who jesse was channeling.

Robert Carlyle's Rumpelstiltskin??

[KurtW95]

A total miscast.