Jesse Eisenberg cast as Lex Luthor

[gargantual]

I have this theory, and it might be wrong with it, but if I'm even slightly right, I'm going to be quite happy.

Jesse Eisenberg is brilliant casting to me, and the reason I think that is due in no small part to Terminator 2.
Work with me on this. In The first Terminator, Schwarzenegger was the villain. In the sequel, Robert Patrick is the villain, playing the T-1000, and he's deadly. When you see Arnold, you would probably have something to say about how he could play the part brilliantly, but really, when you cast somebody small, There is the lack of muscle that makes that scarier.

The T-1000 is scary because he assumes the role of a police officer, sure, but he's realistically proportioned. Arnold is of a superhuman build. To cast a villain with a superhuman build feels wrong to me, because there is nothing to the table: Supes V. Luthor, Wham! Bang! Boom! Game over. With Eisenberg playing maybe a smaller, slimier, maybe not as big villain, who makes up with it for smarts and money, he can take on Superman (and perhaps Batman and Wonder Woman) with money. He's smarter and can buy armor to improve his strength, why bulk up?

It makes perfect sense to me, the movie just has to keep up with my theories to work, but we will see Next year. I'm pumped, honestly. Can't wait.

And as for Jeremy Irons... Like I said on another forum, I'm just glad to see he's getting work. He's a great actor, I really need to watch more of him.

Hmmm. so its more of...the smaller they are, the presumably larger their inferiority complex (i.e. lex luthor's insecurities) and thus the greater and more sadistic their pursuit to bring down the hero. Whereas an equal is not as threatened and thus not as threatening from a viewer perspective. Yeah I can see it. Plus with Eisenberg's penchant for short and distant communication is probably what most drew the casters to putting him in as Luthor.

Outside of the context of this film I think this brilliant elusiveness, or determined hunger can make any villain scary. regardless of their size.

Consider a large foe in a fighting game that we'd feel looks like a big dumb bullseye for our quick tactics, but this enemy has incredible timing and bait moves that have us within an inch of your life. Then we see this 'goliath' per se ravage a whole host of follow-up warriors that are at first confident in their ability to win. Foes like Onslaught and Doomsday communicated that intimidating type of fear to me.

 

[Parasondox]

I would be ok with this casting, IF BRIAN CRANSTON WASNT PERFECT FOR IT! and if Gal Gadot wasnt Wonder Woman, at this point i dont believe any casting decision could be brilliant in any way, and that includes a Zuckerbergish Lex Luthor.
I firmly believe this movie will be mulch.

And tell me why you want to see Brian Cranston as Lex Luthor? Because you have seen him as bold in Breaking Bad? Because he can play a menacing villain, like in Breaking Bad?

Maybe, just maybe, do you not think the reason why Brain Cranston weren't picked was because that will just have audience thinking,

"hey look it's Heisenberg"
"no it's Brian Cranston playing Lex Luthor"
"still Heisenberg though"
"for crying out loud"

You see as much as many would love for him to play that character, deep down several Breaking Bad fans will only get the Walter White/Heisenberg vibe instead of Lex Luthor which is what I think the studio is trying to avoid. Granted if Brian Cranston didn't do Breaking Bad, then others will just think of him as "the dad from Malcolm in the Middle". Also Maybe Brian Cranston don't want to be typecast as a villain for the rest of his career.

1.- Brian Cranston likes to be villains and he showed interest in the Lex Luthor role before
2.- Your argument about "hey look it's Heisenberg" makes no sense at all, as you say yourself, even Vince Gilligan was told to not to cast Cranston for Walter Whitman's role, do you imagine a world where he did not give him a chance? why he shouldnt get the chance to be Lex Luthor then (or at least Max Payne, that would be even better).
3.- If the studio wanted to avoid the aforementioned statement then they would not have caste Zuckerberg for Luthor....
4.- I want Brian Cranston for Lex Luthor becuase he himself wanted to, and he looks the part and hes a great actor.
5.- TBH they could have cast the Rock and i would still believe the movie will be mulch , i jut have no faith on it anymore.

I'm not going to put numbers because I want this short. Many times i said "maybe" to indicate that there could be different factors to play here. That's great, you want Brian Cranston to be Lex Luthor because he has an interest in the role but Channing Tatum wants to be Gambit but doesn't mean he automatically get it. I never once said he would be bad for the role, because I too think he would be great but then I also think of alternatives and the approach they would go with the story. I brought up that statement because "Heisenberg" and "Breaking Bad" are both still recent trending hyped conversation that would still carry on today and as much as The Social Network was 2010, it's still breaking bad that's getting the most talk.

Do I imagine a world where Vince Gilligan didn't give Brian Cranston a chance to play Walter White? I don't know, anything can happen but he still gave him a chance. Wouldn't that kind of contradict everything, with you yourself as a viewer, not giving Jessie Eisenberg a chance without knowing what they can do first? Or maybe I am just lose in my ways.

That's fine, if you wish to give up because of casting then I respect that. Your choice.

Brian Cranston as Max Payne? Yeah I have no clue on that one and if that would work or not.

 

[HorrendusOne]

Jesse Eisenberg barely even portraits diversity in his acting! I have not once even come close to being impressed by any of this roles ever... and I'm a movie buff who will tolerate watching almost anything. This... this has to be the worst casting in the recent history of movies... Jesse as Lex LUTHOR!? HOW!? HOW could this even come close to possible working!? Lex is one of my favorite villains of all time and his character is going to get shit on by this damn derp.

 

[shogunblade]

Outside of the context of this film I think this brilliant elusiveness, or determined hunger can make any villain scary. regardless of their size.
Consider a large foe in a fighting game that we'd feel looks like a big dumb bullseye for our quick tactics, but this enemy has incredible timing and bait moves that have us within an inch of your life. Then we see this 'goliath' per se ravage a whole host of follow-up warriors that are at first confident in their ability to win. Foes like Onslaught and Doomsday communicated that intimidating type of fear to me.

I'm going to say that though I haven't seen Man of Steel yet, I take one look at Zod and I feel like because Superman and Zod are proportionally sized (I'm only going off of what I've seen in Trailers, I am probably wrong with this assumption), plus the fact that Superman is Superman, that probably makes the fights seem like they carry less weight. As I understand from reviews, Superman and Zod's fight scenes are akin to Dragonball Z fights, again, have to see the movie to confirm this.
Another thought I have to Eisenberg's casting: Maybe the Justice League movie is trying to take a page out of Marvel's Avengers movies (besides doing the whole 'Superhero Team up movie'). Loki was never a big guy, but he was smarter than most of them. Perhaps Eisenberg's casting is supposed to be, Little Guy, Middle Guy, Big Guy. Your mentioning of Doomsday made me think to myself, "Avengers brought in Loki, then Ultron, and by Avengers 3, It's supposed to be Thanos. maybe JL is trying to do the same thing, so Doomsday could possibly end up a rival at some point". You start small, and by the next sequel, you bring in the big guns.

I could be completely wrong with all of this, but it's a thought, and I'm still looking forward to it.