Jeremy Irons & Jesse Eisenberg join Batman Vs Superman

News Simon Brew 31 Jan 2014 - 18:09

It's definite: Jesse Eisenberg is Lex Luthor and Jeremy Irons is Alfred in Batman Vs Superman...

A major piece of casting news has just come in for Warner Bros and Zack Snyder's upcoming Man Of Steel sequel, provisionally known as Batman Vs Superman. In fact, two pieces of casting news.

Firstly, Jeremy Irons is to take on the role of Alfred in the new film. Alfred was last played by Michael Caine, and by the late Michael Gough before him.

The really big news though is that Jesse Eisenberg is to be Lex Luthor in the new film, and you'd assume a few films afterwards too.

To quote Zack Snyder in the official Warner Bros statement: "Lex Luthor is often considered the most notorious of Superman’s rivals, his unsavoury reputation preceding him since 1940. What’s great about Lex is that he exists beyond the confines of the stereotypical nefarious villain. He’s a complicated and sophisticated character whose intellect, wealth and prominence position him as one of the few mortals able to challenge the incredible might of Superman. Having Jesse in the role allows us to explore that interesting dynamic, and also take the character in some new and unexpected directions".

We suspect Jesse Eisenberg will have less hair on his head within a few weeks.

Of the casting of Irons, he said that "As everyone knows, Alfred is Bruce Wayne’s most trusted friend, ally and mentor, a noble guardian and father figure. He is an absolutely critical element in the intricate infrastructure that allows Bruce Wayne to transform himself into Batman. It is an honor to have such an amazingly seasoned and gifted actor as Jeremy taking on the important role of the man who mentors and guides the guarded and nearly impervious façade that encapsulates Bruce Wayne".

Batman Vs Superman lands on May 6th 2016. Let the internet meltdown commence. At least Ben Affleck will get the night off...

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

I'm not gonna criticise it. I'm not gonna say it's gonna be awful. All I'm gonna say is that these guys have missed out on some great opportunities here.

I'm really not expecting much from this movie.

"We should cast that heisenberg guy."

Interesting. Wouldn't have thought of Eisenberg in a million years myself, but am intrigued to see what he does with the role.

As for Irons, so long as there's no dialogue about incestuous gay marriage tax loopholes, I'm sold.

THIS!

Maybe this is all a lie, and they meant to say Heisenberg rather than Eisenberg...

Interesting im curious cant see Eisenberg playing Lex as a really terrifying bad guy all I can see him doing is annoying Superman, could be brilliant or could be terrible either way Im definitely going to be buying a ticket to see this movie.

The casting choices intrigue me. I love to see actors surprise me in roles I normally wouldn't associate them with. That's why I haven't thrown a hissy fit over Ben Affleck as Batman like most.

SNAP!
I did not see this coming!

Starting to wonder if the casting of Superman vs Batman is a Nolan-esque level of Inception

I'm excited all over again

ummmmm. LOLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!

Eisenberg is going to get the brunt of the criticism. If anybody has any problem with Jeremy Irons, they should just leave.

As for Eisenberg, definitely not my first choice. But as I think about it, it could work. Luthor is a smart, very egotistical, buisnesman. That's the core of the character. And Eisenberg in TSN played that role very well

Irons as Alfred, well here's the thing, does that now mean that... could a father not marry his son?

Eisenberg would not have been on my short list to play Luthor. He's actually wouldn't have been on any version of a long list either. I could swallow...begrudgingly...the idea of Affleck being Batman long, long, long before I can swallow the idea of Eisenberg playing an iconic villian like Lex Luthor.

Mark Strong would have been a far, far better choice if he had been in contention. He can do a bald villian, his voice has gravitas, and just his acting demeanor would fit very well with portraying Luthor.

It's good casting I think, and that because of TSN of course. A real genius becomes a billionaire. A comic book genius becomes a billionaire... but is envious of the superpowered people surrounding him. Count me as intrigued. JT for Brainiac. Psych

I'm waiting for the film where he marries his own son...

Okay, Ben Affleck as Batman I can sort of understand but Jesse Eisenberg as Luthor? This casting makes literally no sense.
As always i'll reserve judgement till i've seen the movie but it's a bit of a bizarre choice given the Mark Strong/Bryan Cranston rumours we've had for months.

A very good point I came across.

Jesse Eisenberg as a self-centred spiteful millionaire whose main asset is his incredible intellect, which possibly places him above others but in turn alienates him and makes him do bad things?

Can't see it.

At least give him a chance, he's more than good enough an actor

Whoever cast him probably thought the social network was based on a true story. Totally unrealistic.

JT for Flash!

Now that I can see.

I could buy into the idea of the real Mark Zuckerberg playing Lex Luthor, long before I could buy into the idea of the actor who portrayed him doing it.

The question is: how does Eisenberg look bold?

Also, does anybody remember the last time Jeremy Irons played the friend/ally/mentor role? I believe it was in a disasterious big budget fantasy movie adaption with dragonriders. Cause for consern?

Well, he's quite brave at the end of Zombieland.

I'm not certain about this

I see what you did there.

Bald! I mean bald.
Sorry.

No that was The Dark Knight Rises.

NEWSFLASH::: In a surprising turn of events, Marvel have just cast Dr. Strange and his loyal servant Wong:

Andy Samberg and Michael Macdowell!!! Hit the jump for more

A copy of a copy, huh? Good point.

I'm just going to leave this here.

Not so much that, as it would be a "real business villain" playing an "onscreen business villain".

I gotcha. Long as it ain't the Donald. That'd be Batman and Robin level of campiness. And crappiness.

I agree, but all Trump has to do is to remove his hairpiece to get in character,lol

I don't know if that'd be better or worse. Probably both and neither.

The movie is going to be epic. The cast of Jesse as Lex will add a realistic, unpredictable and fresh breathe to the character. Just Wait and See.

At first I was all like, 'Irons? lol'.

But then I was like 'Eisenberg? wut'.

I like Eisenberg but I'm going to need convincing.

Is Kevin Feige doing the casting at D.C.?
Eisenberg is the worst actor of the last 10 years. When you think of who they could have had, I realy don't know what they are thinking :-(

They are definitely taking some major risks with the casting of this movie, I hope I'm wrong but this feels like a step too far.

Does anyone else feel that this is kinda going the Superman Lives route? In the wft-are-they-doing-with-this direction.

The movie was crap, but Irons made an excellent Brom

I wonder if Jeremy Irons has married his son yet?
And a baby face Luther, to boot.

Oh the vagaries of casting decisions.

Eisenberg is certainly an odd choice. Genuinely intrigued to see what they do with him though and, if anything has me excited for BvS after the drab Man of Steel, this is it.

You sir, hit the nail on the head. I can't stop laughing..

Concern! You mean concern.
Lol sorry.

Haha thats razor sharp, nice one.

I'm not a English native speaker, stop hitting me! :-p

Very, very bizarre casting choices, especially for Luthor! That doesn't mean they won't work out, though... See Michael Keaton, Heath Ledger, etc.

Feige kills in casting. I do not know what you are talking about. Marvel movies seem to hit the nail on the head everytime when selecting actors for their roles.

Fiege and everyone else at Marvel are doing an amazing job, what I was implying is that the only explanation for such a terible casting decision is that Fiege gone in there in disguise in a deliberate attempt to sabitage D.C.'s film. Shame I had to explain that but I here to help :-)

I would have liked to have seen Lex played by someone with a darker edge, and a few lines on his face, like he's weighed down and persecuted by his own intellect, and everyone else on the planet is just in his way, holding him back. I think Eisenberge is just going to come across as a spoiled brat. The only positive I can see coming from this is that we're going to see Superman punch Jesse Eisenberg in his expressionless face and hopefully snap his neck :-)

the casting of Eisenberg as Luthor and Affleck as Batman are the only reasons I am still slightly interested in Batman Vs Superman.

could be worse, could be Michael Cera as Michael Cera, I mean Luthor .. and Michael C Hall as Brainiac natch. Better yet no more Luthor in favor of Superman just getting his ass beat by a number of huge aliens for 95 minutes and then by Batman using Kryptonite for the other 35. Or Snyder could top Watchmen's odiousness and lose ground by adapting The Dark Knight Strikes Again scene for scene Snyder had me for most of Man of Steel, and it's still his best film for me, except for the fact that the Clark Kent disguise is thrown out the window since Lois already knows he's Superman so she'll become somewhat of a female Ben Urich at DC, guarding his secret from her publisher her entire life

What now?

The casting is the least of this film's problems. Launching a series off the back of such a poorly written first entry tops that list. Imagine if The Avengers followed the so-so(and wtf was that ending?) Hulk film. Because that's where we're headed. I didn't believe anyone could feasibly live on that awful John Carter of Krypton planet, let alone share the same universe as Batman (and the rest). Second problem is knowing all the useless character threads they tried to form Meh of Steel's character around (last natural born child blah blah blah) won't be expanded upon because of the move toward an ensemble. Just looking at the cuts made to The Avengers proves this, any potential character development (Captain America in particular) was left on the cutting room floor.

So cast Danny Dyer as Robin for all I care. Then reboot the hell out of it.

just free association ramblings from a long time comic book nerd ... except about michael c hall, he'd kill as Brainiac and he's done with Dexter

Thanks. Yeah I ramble too, I just don't know much DC lore. Definitely agree about Michael C. Hall. I remember Brainiac from the 90's Superman cartoon, and I can definitely see Michael C.

Hall.

No one in the internet has said this at all in the past couple of days. NO ONE.

I personally don't have a problem with them going for a younger Luthor - I get the whole idea of the villan being more "culturally relevant" blah blah Mark Zuck blah blah so long as he's as effing ruthless, conniving and downright nasty as he is in the funny books.

But Jessie Eisenberg? Really? Nothing against the actor per se (he delivers decent performances IMO) but to me that seems like lazy casting.

Still, at least the production and DC aren't shy about taking chances, well they need to really don't they? ;)

If there wasn't already a Brit in the Supes role, I'd liked to have seen Ezra Miller (We Need To Talk About Kevin) give Luthor a shot.

You know when someone tells a joke and then someone else comes along and explains the joke? That's you.

You must have a lot of time to waste if you needed to tell me that. I feel for you.

Don't waste your precious time "feeling" for me, Henry. You have jokes to explain.

Ha, my time is far from precious. If I have time to "explain" jokes (which I really didn't consciously realise I was doing), surely you should be able to understand that.

If you're prepared to waste your time telling me who I am, what I'm doing and what I should do...well...that's what you should be doing.

willy wonka meme: you're so mature, telling every one how mature you are.

Sponsored Links