Reasons why Lex Luthor (when he is in villain mode) needs to be evil.

[Superlad93]

I didn't know that. That'd be a shame. Although it just wouldn't be the same for me since it's a different Superman. I've already dropped Superman and Action Comics, and while it's tempting if (Roberson I believe?), I just couldn't do it. In any case, at least this gives something extra to check out. Thanks!

I believe Roberson made the set up, but Dennis Culver co writes and illustrates the book. As far as I know Culver was coming on to write Super Sons. But it would be great to have Roberson on one of the books too. And yeah no problem.

[llozymandias]

A little clarification here. No i don't see Lex as someone who cackles about evil he is. I think he sees himself as pragmatic. Whatever works in pursuit of his goals. It's just that his goals involve things like: defeating/destroying/killing his enemies; trying to conquer earth or the universe; using the world as his lab & the people as his lab rats. I also think Lex sees his being human as a mere accident of birth.

[Jim Kelly]

I really like the German actor, Bruno Ganz--who always brings a humanity to his roles. So playing Adolf Hitler in DER UNTERGANG [DOWNFALL], it's nearly dangerous as he almost makes you care about Hitler. And Hitler might be the one person who we shouldn't see as human--but of course he was and no human is so easily painted as absolute evil. It might even be wrong to promote the idea that anyone can be absolute evil--it makes them look too powerful.

Other than Hitler, I think villains should be given some good qualities. Not so we admire them, but so we see the tragedy in their misguided ways. I don't like the Luthor who is totally evil--for one thing it makes Superman look like a mug, if he thinks he can save such an irredeemable soul.

But the good Luthor we've seen lately is not my cup of tea. He's too sympathetic. I regard him as an alternate reality Lex and not the real Luthor. The real Lex Luthor is someone who could've done great things for the world, but was so eaten up by his own jealousy and egotism that he got lost and now he's so far down the path of corruption that he can't find his way back.

[13th Superman]

A little clarification here. No i don't see Lex as someone who cackles about evil he is. I think he sees himself as pragmatic. Whatever works in pursuit of his goals. It's just that his goals involve things like: defeating/destroying/killing his enemies; trying to conquer earth or the universe; using the world as his lab & the people as his lab rats. I also think Lex sees his being human as a mere accident of birth.

No worries. I totally get you.

[Persona J]

Playing the hero role does not automatically make Lex a godd guy. If i read it right Lex is playing hero (& wearing the "S" emblem) to show that he can do it better than Superman ever could. Also keep in mind; Lex loves challenges. He probably found it boring being a villain without a worthy opponent, like he had in Superman.

None of which negates any good that Lex does. The fact is, New 52 Superman succeeded where most versions of Superman have failed, in that he actually got Lex to commit to doing good. This isn't a small feat, given Lex's ego and narcissism.

[Adekis]

So, you are saying Lex is a mis-guided good guy? How you square that with the fact that his co-creator Jerry Siegel wrote him as evil & a conquerer?

I don't. Luthor is one of the most inconsistently written characters in comics because his three primary traits are 1) being "smart", whatever that means, 2) hating Superman, and 3) being bald, not that baldness is totally necessary. Most of the stories I think of as "Luthor" just aren't from that era. I tend more toward the sixties and seventies, writers like Edmond Hamilton and Elliot S! Maggin, who wrote Luthor as someone who would and should have been a hero but for a massive inferiority complex and pettiness against Superman.

Siegel's original Luthor story had him as an eastern European terrorist who engineered a war, unless I forget myself, but he pretty quickly escalated to zeppelin cities and blackmailing Superman into stealing the Power-Stone for him. He wasn't a very deep character, just a collection of gadgets and hunger for power. That's not inherently bad, Superman wasn't much deeper at the time, and I love Siegel's Superman! But nobody has ever really gone back and re-done Golden Age Luthor in an interesting way like folks have done time and again with Siegel's Superman.

To be honest, I like the idea of Lex ending up a hero in the main continuity. I think the fact that the New 52 Superman actually inspired Lex to truly give up being a villain and become a hero himself should be kept. If they have to bring in a new Lex, so be it, but I think that if the New 52 Superman doesn't come back then the heroic Lex Luthor should stand as one of his greatest accomplishments.

The fact is, New 52 Superman succeeded where most versions of Superman have failed, in that he actually got Lex to commit to doing good. This isn't a small feat, given Lex's ego and narcissism.

I agree- I do like the idea that Lex's heroism is fairly complex and self-interested, but that doesn't change the good he does. The way I see it, Pre-Crisis Luthor would never consider being a hero because he wouldn't take second place to Superman, Post-Crisis and Pre-Flash Luthor would never have been interested, as he was a monster (except maybe for a little bit in the middle there) but post-Flashpoint Luthor has not only become a hero, but he did it before Superman died. It's the ultimate feather in post-Flashpoint Superman's cap! Even pre-Crisis Superman, the Optimus Prime of Supermen, couldn't convince Luthor to quit his life of crime, but the late Mister Kent pulled it off before he even died!

Nothing would please me more (given the death of Superman and Krypto) than for Lex Luthor to keep on being the best damn hero he can be, even though he's ultimately doing it as a challenge to the memory of his late rival and colleague, rather than out of the goodness of his heart.

[Jim Kelly]

The Lexor stories by Edmond Hamilton are probably my favourite version of Luthor. This whole arc of tales begins with the classic "The Showdown Between Luthor and Superman" in SUPERMAN 164 (October ’63)--and it hits the peak of excellence with the two-part "The Death of Luthor/The Condemned Superman" in ACTION COMICS 318 (November ’64) & 319 (December ’64).

What's intriguing yet frustrating in these adventures is that both Lex and Superman cannot let sleeping dogs lie. Once Luthor has gotten away to Lexor--where he is the most respected citizen and guardian of the planet--Superman should just leave him there. Lex has essentially reformed--he may still have to pay for his crimes on Earth (in Superman's mind), yet as there's no extradition treaties between Lexor and Earth, Superman is really over-extending his personal code to go after Lex at all costs. At the same time, Luthor can't resist pursuing his personal vendetta against Superman, even though he could remain happily on Lexor with his wife, admired by everyone there.

This is why Lex is a villain. Not because he's irredeemably evil, but because he can't resist his own self-destructive impulses. And this is why Luthor is Superman's greatest adversary--because Superman is so wounded over whatever past he had with Lex, that he can't just let him alone. Luthor is like an itch that Superman needs to scratch--but that only gives both of them greater distress.

[llozymandias]

[QUOTE=Adekis;2287938]I don't. Luthor is one of the most inconsistently written characters in comics because his three primary traits are 1) being "smart", whatever that means, 2) hating Superman, and 3) being bald, not that baldness is totally necessary. Most of the stories I think of as "Luthor" just aren't from that era. I tend more toward the sixties and seventies, writers like Edmond Hamilton and Elliot S! Maggin, who wrote Luthor as someone who would and should have been a hero but for a massive inferiority complex and pettiness against Superman.

Siegel's original Luthor story had him as an eastern European terrorist who engineered a war, unless I forget myself, but he pretty quickly escalated to zeppelin cities and blackmailing Superman into stealing the Power-Stone for him. He wasn't a very deep character, just a collection of gadgets and hunger for power. That's not inherently bad, Superman wasn't much deeper at the time, and I love Siegel's Superman! But nobody has ever really gone back and re-done Golden Age Luthor in an interesting way like folks have done time and again with Siegel's Superman.



Hey you know that silver age Superman is also largely Siegel's Superman. Siegel was one of the main writers/architects of the silver age. Luthor's first appearance said nothing about where Luthor was from.

[Jim Kelly]

I know that Luthor's baldness is explained as an artist's accident--but I'm skeptical that's the whole story.

When Luthor is introduced in the syndicated newspaper strip, he's called the "Ultra-Scientist"--which makes clear Siegel's association of Luthor with the Ultra-Humanite. We should really consider the Ultra-Humanite as the original Luthor. You could even imagine that the brain was transplanted from Delores Winters to Red Luthor (one story followed on the heels of the other). In Ultra, Siegel seems to be going back to his original Superman concept, where that Superman was a villain. Although of infirm body, Ultra is the "Ultra-Humanite" because his brain power makes him a Superman. It's an interesting parallelism that, not long after Superman appears on the scene, another kind of super-being appears to challenge him.

That's really the essence of Ultra/Luthor--he exists to challenge Superman.

[Slaughter]

My opinion on how good/bad Lex is like this: I think he should be evil enough to be a villain, but not evil enough to make the readers wonder why Superman or one of the less savory members of the super-heroic community simply doesn't kill him.

In a way, I think Lex is more powerful than Superman. Superman is not human and is also immensely super-powerful, so in a way he's a Knight of the Status Quo and helps out when he can, but he can't babysit humanity or do everything for us, and even his help could backfire immensely (which is why Supes doesn't simply give out free kryptonian tech like candy). Lex can do things that Superman never could, he could be THE visionarie who leads humanity into a golden age, but he would rather spend his money on a war against Superman. "Where's that cancer cure, Lex?"

Also I don't like the idea of Lex being a world conqueror - Lex as a bussinessman gives him a whole new way to conquer. He can simply play legitimate bussinessman and take-over corporations and countries, etc. Lex always passed me as the sort of guy who plays it sly and smart and then when everyone wakes up, BAM, Lex defacto owns your city/corporation/country/world. And when he does something more blatant, he uses a handy-dandy plausibly deniable puppet.

I remember that pre-OWAW issue where Liri Lee plays The Ghost of Christimas Future to a Superman who's absolutely revolted that Luthor was elected, and shows him what happens if he goes away - Lex saves the world from Imperiex but the solar system and Earth are clearly damaged, a lot of super-heroes die due to Lex's strategies and by the end Lex pretty much takes over the world by using the presidency + corporate power + B13 tech. Now that's a Lex Conquest!

Of course, the collorary is when Lex goes absolutely crazy and backed into a corner, which is rare but happens - like when he destroyed Metropolis, or the end of Public Enemies, or in 52 when he gets superpowers. When Lex falls from his perch, it should be epic.

I'm liking Super-Lex for now because he's just playing the super-hero role - he's clearly still a narcisist and sociopath, he just walks among the good guys for now.

[Jim Kelly]

When we first see Red Luthor, he's the puppet-master--he's not out in the open but directing things from behind the scenes, a kind of Rasputin figure. And other stories put him in a similar role. This is why Luthor would never be President--he would be Dick Cheney. Luthor is an egoist, but he doesn't derive pleasure from being the centre of attention. He considers himself so far above other people, he doesn't need such dullards to admire him. So I don't see him, under normal circumstances, becoming a super-hero just to make himself look important.

On top of that, it reflects badly on the other super-heroes when they let Luthor become President or act as a super-hero. Batman, at the very least, should be able to prevent that. It certainly shouldn't be allowed to go on for more than a few issues.

[Francisco]

I don't think there's an actual need for Lex to be completely evil. Eliott S! Maggin managed to make Lex a believable threat to Superman without actually having him committing heinous acts. By instances Lex never murdered anybody. His plots were mostly directed at making a fool out of Superman.

[Francisco]

When we first see Red Luthor, he's the puppet-master--he's not out in the open but directing things from behind the scenes, a kind of Rasputin figure. And other stories put him in a similar role. This is why Luthor would never be President--he would be Dick Cheney. Luthor is an egoist, but he doesn't derive pleasure from being the centre of attention. He considers himself so far above other people, he doesn't need such dullards to admire him. So I don't see him, under normal circumstances, becoming a super-hero just to make himself look important.

On top of that, it reflects badly on the other super-heroes when they let Luthor become President or act as a super-hero. Batman, at the very least, should be able to prevent that. It certainly shouldn't be allowed to go on for more than a few issues.

Luthor should always be a lot smarter than Batman. Bruce won't like Luthor as a president but there is little he could do about it. IMO

[Jim Kelly]

It's not really about being intelligent. All the Justice League know that Lex Luthor is a bad guy--so they would never work with him. They would put him in a space prison, if no prison on Earth will hold him. Besides, I don't see Batman and Lex being smart in the same way. Batman is much more clever, while Lex knows more stuff.

[llozymandias]

I don't think there's an actual need for Lex to be completely evil. Eliott S! Maggin managed to make Lex a believable threat to Superman without actually having him committing heinous acts. By instances Lex never murdered anybody. His plots were mostly directed at making a fool out of Superman.

Actually Maggin's Luthor was trying to kill Superman. Though sometimes Lex might be a little reluctant to kill Kal. It's probably because of much he truly hates Kal. If Kal is dead there is nothing else Lex can do to hurt him. Even most evil people have some good in them & are capable of doing good things.