is Superman's lack of a decent rogues gallery the Silver Age's fault?

One of the very likeable things about Mark Waid's current version of the Legion is that they are most definitely doing everything they can to change the status quo of their era.

It's funny, my knowledge of the DC/Superman universe still comes mainly from some collectible cards given away with Weetabix in the late 1970s, so I am still FASCINATED by the whole Kaldor in a bottle thing, or Lori Lemaris, or any of the lamer villains I remember reading about on them.

Is it a thing with Luthor, say, that he has been done badly in the films - portrayed as a bit of a joke - so people do not think of him as a serious villain?

I don't know if he was ever portrayed very seriously ANYWHERE until Elliot S. Maggin's Last Son Of Krypton.

are you saying that in your neighbourhood banks being robbed is the status quo?

maybe I didn't articulate well enough:
Fingeroth, speaking in generalities about action heroes, asserts that the Hero emerges when the status quo is threatened, takes necessary action to preserve s/q, then recedes until the next threat. The Action Hero ARCHETYPE (Fingeroth notes that Batman and Punisher are exceptions to this--though Batman and Punisher are part of the CENTRAL Action Hero Archetype of the last, what 35 years? Dirty Harry, Death Wish, Rambo, etc.) is essentially a reactive character, while the villain (in the Lex Luthor/Dr. Doom worldbeater archetype) is the one instigating change/revolution.
In a serial adventure series, the hero has to essentially remain static (though, Spider-Man was a dambuster on this rule), in order to always be there, ready to face the next threat. Therefore the dynamics of the series are provided by the villains. Fingeroth talks about Stan Lee talking about Bullpen sessions and how discussion of villains was always the key thing.
Though, thinking about it (and typing about it), it occurs to me that the change didn't really come from the villains as characters, the change manifested itself in the villains. IE, Doc Ock changes into the Vulture becomes Sandman, etc. The hero is constant, the villains are inconstant.

and, yeah, Fingeroth totally makes some remarkable leaps of logic, even mentions FASCISM!, which all seems a lot less novel in the post-ILC univorn.

Are depth of backstory and depth of rogue's gallery inversely related? Just wondering.

but in spidey's world street crime IS the status quo! and indifference to it is what got his uncle killed!

Also, surely Luthor, as a bloated billionaire plutocrat, is also the status quo?

Who are you calling a bloated billionaire plutocrat!

yeah... luthor... kingpin... they all run game in comic book world.

We need a hero who not only rebels against the status quo but also against the band Status Quo.

That is a rockist position.

Surely it's anti-rockist as Status Quo were rockin' all over the world, requiring an international coalition of superheroes to stop their nefarious deeds? Much like Millenium but with a pub rock group instead of the Manhunters.