Poll: Joker vs. Lex Luthor: Who Is Off to a Worse Start?

[The Joker]

http://io9.gizmodo.com/batman-v-sup..._source=gizmodo_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

Both Leto and Eisenberg are on the Razzie shortlist for Worst Supporting Actor.

Both were bad, but Eisenberg is in a class of his own. He deserves to win.

 

[Flint Marko]

I like Eisenberg as an actor, I truly do, but his Lex is easily the worst performance I saw in a movie this year. Actually that title might go to the girl who played Deadshot's daughter, but Eisenberg undoubtedly deserves the Razzie and I'll be disappointed if it's given to someone else.

 

[hellblazer103]

Man, Michael Pitt WOULD be a great Joker. He was terrifying in Funny Games.

Psychopath terrorizing innocent people for fun? Not far off

His Mason Verger is another great example of Jokerness. Bryan Fuller basically said the character is like "The Joker meets Scott Disick"

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Eisenberg deserve the Razzie the most for worst acting.

 

[Elayis]

Joker was just mediocre, but can be improved given the right characterization and direction imo. Lex's characterization was just bad, and its gonna be hard to redeem or improve that version or characterization of the character unless they took a radical shift in the direction for the character in the future.

Ironically though, Eisenberg was more convincing playing his version of Lex than Leto was playing his version of Joker.

My thoughts exactly. I think Eisenberg's performance was much better than Leto's, it just didn't make for a good take on Luthor.

 

[MrsKent26]

Definitely Lex Luthor.

The Joker is immortal thanks to previous excellent portrayals by Ledger and Nicholson. The latter especially is still fresh in the public mind and people will forgive the character for the Letto version and embrace the next one that manages to be good, regardless of who plays him.

Luthor, IMO, has never had a great on screen portrayal and, yes, I'm including the Donner version. Even if people are a fan of Donner Lex, that was so long ago that people just don't have a defining modern take to hold dear like the Joker fans do that will give them a positive association with the character.

 

[writer0327]

Luthor.

You could make the argument that Leto's Joker still sorta kinda felt like the Joker and did 'Joker-y' things. But Eisenberg's Luthor? What in the hell was that?

 

[Luke234]

I didn't witness a bad performance from Eisenberg. He was just very different than the character he was based on, it seems to me. The only other Lex I'm familiar with is Gene Hackman and Kevin Spacey who are great actors but it's a cheesy representation. I have no idea if that's the comic book Lex or not.

 

[Luke234]

Luthor.

You could make the argument that Leto's Joker still sorta kinda felt like the Joker and did 'Joker-y' things. But Eisenberg's Luthor? What in the hell was that?

I thought the Joker was creepy in the club scene. I really liked him there. But the dude was barely in the movie.

 

[Rowsdower!]

Nope. None of them are. I suppose you could argue that Hackman's Luthor in the first Superman film was somewhat closer to his Silver Age counterpart, but not really. Though he was the best of the lot. Spacey's Lex had a few moments where he came off like the classic Lex but he was mostly phoning it in and the character was written horribly.

Eisenberg was a joke.

 

[cleverusername8]

I don't expect anyone to hear me out on this, but the more than I watch BvS, the more that I like Lex Jr. I've successfully separated this character from my idea of a 'Lex Luthor' in this continuity by holding onto the idea that the REAL Lex is A) his father and B) still to be revealed.

As for Eisenberg's character himself, I actually really enjoy his monologues - especially the rooftop one where he manipulates Superman to go fight Batman. Even though the delivery is quirky, it still gives me the good kind of chills with out creepy and evil this guy really is. His plan was convoluted and nonsensical, but the fact that he pulled it off is kind of impressive. And his sense of humor is there and I appreciate that.

Joker on the other hand was humorless (to me), more of a dirty mobster/gangster than the "agent of chaos" that he tends to be. As unfaithful as the Nolan interpretation was, at least he had that part of the character down. This Joker seems like just a murderer that's off his rocker. He isn't trying to destabilize society or play mind games with anyone, he's just out to kill people.

 

[The Joker]

As unfaithful as the Nolan interpretation was, at least he had that part of the character down.

http://jokerfans.blogspot.ie/

Unfaithful? NAY!

 

[hellblazer103]

As unfaithful as the Nolan interpretation was, at least he had that part of the character down.

Most people don't have the attention span anymore to read that article , Joker, but I appreciate the fact it exists.

 

[Rorschach2012]

The permawhite is a huge part of the character. That's the only downside of Nolan's Joker.

 

[hellblazer103]

I guess you could say the permanently bleached skin is replaced with the permanent Glasgow smile.

 

[cleverusername8]

http://jokerfans.blogspot.ie/

Unfaithful? NAY!

Most people don't have the attention span anymore to read that article , Joker, but I appreciate the fact it exists.

Sorry for the late reply, but what I meant by unfaithful was not embracing the full gadget wielding clown thing.

The Joker has been around long enough to have developed a bit of diversity as far as how his interpretations go, so it was probably wrong of me to say unfaithful flat out.

I sort of meant unfaithful to my favorite version of the character. I admit that's unfair for me to say it the way I originally did.

 

[hellblazer103]

I guess they figured a more practical Joker ( lol, that wasn't done on purpose ) made sense in that particular world. He still has certain little gadgets of his own, like the knife-in-the-shoe and all.

 

[Lantern Venom]

Suicide Squad's EC fixes many of the Joker's personality problems, more so than the BvS UC did for Lex.

 

[Gotham Fury]

They're off to a bad start?
I feel like they both work well in the world of the DCEU.
I didn't have an issue with either.

Both are actually refreshing, IMO.
I'm anxious to see Leto's Joker & Affleck's Batman have
a proper interaction. I wish we would have gotten that in Suicide Squad.

 

[AbsentKnightFF]

Leto's over acting, and bad acting, mixed with him being shoe-horned into the film has me leaning towards Joker on this one.

 

[BH/HHH]

They're off to a bad start?
I feel like they both work well in the world of the DCEU.
I didn't have an issue with either.

Both are actually refreshing, IMO.
I'm anxious to see Leto's Joker & Affleck's Batman have
a proper interaction. I wish we would have gotten that in Suicide Squad.

 

[InCali]

Leto's over acting, and bad acting, mixed with him being shoe-horned into the film has me leaning towards Joker on this one.

You can add either name at the beginning of the first phrase.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Leto tried too hard to be seen as crazy, and just looked like a dumbass. However, Leto is still a very good actor, and as long as they could get the right writers, ditch the dumbass "instagram thug" BS Ayer wanted, those wrongs could be righted. Even as much as I hated him in SS, there were a few moments where he was good. I do genuinely like the "oooh, this is neat" thing he did.


Lex, however is a different story. Not only did they completely and utterly take a dump on him, he is played by an actor who has absolutely zero level of menace.

 

[Wise]

No more young looking Jokers.