The character is in line with what audiences want to see now, which is a more modern, psychologically realistic concept of Lex Luthor.
His motivations are multifaceted; he has a way of using language that’s specific to the way his mind works; he struggles with interesting philosophical dilemmas like that of the individual having too much power, even if that individual is using that power for good.
For instance, Superman has so far been using his powers to do some good, but is it safe to have someone like that walking the streets? It’s great that all of this happens in the context of a very exciting superhero movie.
He reminds me of one of those characters in old Greek theater who very explicitly state the philosophical dilemma at hand and put it in a way that feels in line with that character’s interests and voice.
He speaks in broad themes and ideas: That’s what makes the character very theatrical and yet authentic. This is the kind of role actors really like to play because you don’t feel like it’s a problem if you color outside the lines.
I can be as funny as I want to be in the context of my character behaving poorly, and I can be as sad as I want because the character’s also going through real internal conflict.
Take it as far as you want and be as theatrical as you want to be – it’s all correct.”
Eisenberg es un buen actor y lo ha demostrado en multiples ocasiones ¿creo que su Luthor tendra problemas a pesar de ello y se llevara mas palos que aplausos? la verdad, si, pero mas por culpa de enfoque general que por algo que se le deba achacar a el cuando llegue el momento de achacarselo a alguien
ResponderEliminar