Who is the best live-action Lois Lane?

[Andrew NDB]

Let's take it to the polls!

[Autbot_Benz]

I enjoyed the Superman and Lois version. Probably will like the Superman movie one.

Amy Adams was the worst

[Barkworm]

Kate Bosworth was the worst, she was so bland, I don't remember anything about her Lois. Amy Adams was also not great.

I haven't seen the new one but I guess Margot Kidder was the best. If "best" equaled "hottest", it would be Teri Hatcher without a doubt.

[Andrew NDB]

Kate Bosworth was the worst, she was so bland, I don't remember anything about her Lois. Amy Adams was also not great.

Agreed on Bosworth. And Adams was fine, but they got her "too old," and she was aging like milk at that point when she's supposed to be like the young firecracker/opposing point to Clark.

[ZariusTwo]

Erica, mostly because in her story, she grew and earned her spot in Clark's life at a time where he was fawning so much over Lana.

[TheUltimateBum]

She's not on the poll, but Noel Neill. I think she is the only one that works 100% for me as Lois. I also enjoy Phyllis Coates, Bitsie Tulloch, Rachel Brosnahan and Erica Durance, but I think Noel is just on another level overall.

Other live-action Lois actresses I didn't found outstanding or they just got on my nerves (Margot Kidder in particular I found so grating).

[ToTheNines]

I voted Brosnahan. The movie was alright, but she was probably the best thing about it other than the Kents.

[Andrew NDB]

I voted Brosnahan. The movie was alright, but she was probably the best thing about it

Absolutely! She was born to play that role.

other than the Kents.

NOOOO!!!

[ToTheNines]

Ah, c’mon.

They’re not what I picture when I envision my ideal DC universe, and Gunn was kind of playing on the humor (of course) of making them simple folk. But basically every scene they were in choked me up. And the home video montage at the end was absolutely perfect, but their casting had no bearing on that.

[TheUltimateBum]

Probably the best thing about it other than the Kents.

I dunno. She and the Kents were great, but they were no Krypto or Guy Gardner (now that's pitch-perfect IMO).

Casting for me ranged from meh (none of Lex's cronies really left an impression on me, even the super-powered ones I found kinda generic) and wasted potential (I want to like Nicholas Hoult and he does great whenever he loses it, but the performance is just all over the place) to solid (Lois, the Kents, Hawkgirl, Terrific and Metamorpho fit their roles well), but Nathan Fillion was the one casting choice that I can honestly say was perfect.

[ToTheNines]

I just got back from seeing it today, so I’ll post all my thoughts in the Superman thread and not hog up the Lois thread, but yes Fillion as Guy was an absolute riot. Pretty ironic that he was always the main fan-cast for Hal for ages and even ended up voicing him a few times, but he ends up nailing Guy like that.

Krypto… eh. I’m a huge dog person and can’t say I didn’t enjoy him in this, I just never cared for the concept of a super powered Kryptonian dog. Kinda breaks the verisimilitude and feels too goofy.

[TheUltimateBum]

I just got back from seeing it today, so I’ll post all my thoughts in the Superman thread and not hog up the Lois thread, but yes Fillion as Guy was an absolute riot. Pretty ironic that he was always the main fan-cast for Hal for ages and even ended up voicing him a few times, but he ends up nailing Guy like that.

Krypto… eh. I’m a huge dog person and can’t say I didn’t enjoy him in this, I just never cared for the concept of a super powered Kryptonian dog. Kinda breaks the verisimilitude and feels too goofy.

In all honesty, I never thought he was truly fitting for Hal. I prefer a standard Hal to have a deeper voice than what Nathan has (Gerald Mohr and Michael Rye I felt are more what I want from Hal, and even Dermot Mulroney and Steve Blum feel closer to how I picture him). The only ones that I let slide are Christopher Meloni and Josh Keaton because they play a younger Hal who is kinda starting as a Lantern. But yeah, when Fillion was cast as Guy, I thought 'Yeah... that's more fitting', and of course, I watch the movie and he pretty much steals it. :tlol:

Nathan as Guy is the perfect blend of voice, appearance and character.

And about Krypto... comics always have a bit of a goofy side to it, so I think he works nicely and I found him rather adorable.

[Autbot_Benz]

Ah, c’mon.

They’re not what I picture when I envision my ideal DC universe, and Gunn was kind of playing on the humor (of course) of making them simple folk. But basically every scene they were in choked me up. And the home video montage at the end was absolutely perfect, but their casting had no bearing on that.

At least the Kents in this movie are better than the miserable not Kents in Man Of Steel. :lol:

[ToTheNines]

As much as I loved Man of Steel, yeah that was no good. And that movie spent a lot of time dwelling on the Kents, whereas their role in “Superman” is brief.

[Andrew NDB]

As much as I loved Man of Steel, yeah that was no good. And that movie spent a lot of time dwelling on the Kents, whereas their role in “Superman” is brief.

Well if you liked that, you must love how much time with the Kryptonian parents was cut.

[ToTheNines]

Well if you liked that, you must love how much time with the Kryptonian parents was cut.

I think if you’re going the route of making Jor-El and Lara evil, then the less time spent exploring Krypton the better. Again, not my ideal take on Superman at all, but I suppose the script made it work.

Makes me wonder how Zod could work in this universe. I guess functionally the same, but he probably would have been allies with Joe-El. Except why would he have been imprisoned in the phantom zone?