Lex Luthor in Superman II

Post Reply New Topic

Looking back was Luthor really necessary in Superman II. I mean don't get me wrong, he's funny in the movie but seeing as how General Zod was the main villain in the movie, Luthor was kinda pushed into the sidelines and at Zod's mercy like a wimpy disney Villain sidekick, which is kinda funny in a way. But plotwise I think the movie would have still been good without him. I guess he's not completely useless as he did lead Zod to Lois Lane and later the Fortress of Solitude, but truth be told he's there mostly for comic relief. Still I like seeing him in the movie but I can't help but wonder if the movie would still be good if wasn't in the movie. There was even a period of time when I forgot he was in the movie. Remember when he entered the white house, well everytime I watch that scene I forget he was in the movie moments ago as he was off screen for a long while.

Now that you mention it, I had forgotten Lex was in the sequel until just now, it has been years since I've seen that film. I remember watching both the original and sequels in the theater, loved the first one and the second was great simply because it was Superman and I was about 8 years old, the third and fourth films were just bad, especially the fourth. In my opinion the second film could have been fine without Luthor, I never was a big fan of the Hackman/Beatty duo and think the comedic relief detracted from the film which had great villains in General Zod, Non, and Ursa.

Luthor and Otis were great in the first one, but they didn't get to do much in the second one. Luthor just hoped to benefit from Zod's invasion.

The only "purpose" Lex Luthor served in that story was a convenient way to trick Zod and his goons into being stripped of their powers by Superman. Superman knew Luthor would betray him in an instant and used that to his advantage.

So, having him bust out of prison, hook up with Zod and Co. in Metropolis, etc. became essential to the story.