HOME TRAILERS RELEASE DATES PODCASTS REVIEWS POSTERS INTERVIEWS BOB $TENCIL NEWS FEEDS ABOUT APPS

LATEST NEWS

Rhys Ifans Playing Villain The Lizard in Sony's New Spider-Man!

by Alex Billington
October 13, 2010
Source: The Wrap

The villain is revealed. The Wrap is reporting tonight that British actor Rhys Ifans, who was officially cast in an "unknown" villain role a few days ago, will actually be playing Dr. Curt Connors, better known as The Lizard, in Marc Webb's upcoming Spider-Man reboot (confirming a rumor from earlier this year). Well, this must really suck for Dylan Baker, who played Dr. Connors in all three of Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films and was waiting for his chance to play the reptilian nemesis. The Wrap apparently confirmed with separate sources that Venom will not be in the movie and The Lizard is indeed, at least one of, the primary villains.

Andrew Garfield stars as Peter Parker, while Emma Stone will play Gwen Stacy. We're still not sure if Mary Jane Watson, Peter Parker's primary love interest, is in the movie at all, as casting has switched from both sides, saying at one point that she would be in it, then switching to say that she wasn't (and that it was only Gwen). Other than these basic details, including that Ifans is playing the villain The Lizard, there's not much more we know about this new Spider-Man reboot. But with production set to start later this year, details are obviously going to start working their way out slowly, as the script is probably no longer a secret anymore. Spider-Man will hit theaters in 3D on July 3rd, 2012. Stay tuned for more! Good choice for a villain?

Explore tags: Hype, Movie News, Opinions

ShriekoftheVulture

uh, why are they remaking a series not even ten years old again?
Connor

for the same reason they're making the bourne series again. also, this'll be cool. i always wanted to see the lizard, but we got sandman instead. one of the reasons why spiderman 3 sucked. anyway, tl;dr: good choice on villain.
IceFilm

As soon as I saw his picture in the Harry Potter stills, I somehow knew it would be Dr. Curt Connors/ The Lizard. This is such a smack in the face to Raimi's Spider-Man for teasing us for all those years. I'm getting pump a bit!
Spider94

next problem,how are they gonna pull of a creature like the lizard and make it seem realistic? the lizard isnt a character like the hulk were you paint his skin green and there u go lol im afraid right now they might use to much cgi or special effectson the lizard,they could have gone for a more realistic villian;electro,vulture,rhino,y
Spider94

#2 sandman was the one of the best marvel villians ive seen,thomas church pulled him off real good,to bad he was in the wrong movie though
Jimmy Love

Sony advertise your film for what it is, it is not a new spider man! it is a desperate last ditch effort to keep the rights, it is The SONY SPIDER
Outlaw

Dylan Baker only played Curt Connors in Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. Dr. Connors was just name-dropped as firing Peter for being late to work in the first Spider-Man movie. /useless_trivia
Movieguy

Didn't Raimi get fired by sony because he wanted to do the lizard and the company thought it was too scary.
Kubrickian

He would have made a better Vulture.
max s.

after spiderman 3 i haven't really been following this, then i saw andrew in social network, then i thought hey maybe this might be good, then they bring in the lizard. oh hell yeah this shit is gonna be sick!!!! (althogh the news with tom hardy being in batman 3 is much more exciting)
N.

@ 8 No it was because they thought it was to cartoonie and they wanted a villian with a face they didnt think the audeince could relate to a villian like the lizard! So they decided on Venom instead Oh yeah makes perfect sense and then give Topher Grace more screen time when he's Venom so everyone can relate to him more! Great job Sony!
N.

@ 8 again! And no he didnt get fired from that!
tra la la la la di da

Ugh...while this is great and the idea is great, the Spidey choice is still horrible. I actually liked Toby until 3 and that wasn't his fault he played an emo douche.
talli

they should have really announced this yesterday, because the news of Tom Hardy being in the new Batman just blows this out of the water
LINKFX

super meh.
DRM

WHAAAAAT? Then why'd they say "No" to Raimi doing the Lizard?!
Jericho

@8 11 12 and 16. it was Vulture not Lizard....
Mark

So, Sony got into a huge fight with Sam Raimi because he wanted the Lizard to be the villain for Spider-Man 4. They made him choose a new villain, didn't like his new choice so Sam Raimi walked out on Spider-Man 4 and the series gets rebooted... with the Lizard as the villain. I'm confused.
Jedi

"@8 11 12 and 16 AND 18. it was Vulture not Lizard…." Updated.
jah p

@14, There will never be a superhero movie that will ever be as good as the acting talent that's gonna be in Batman 3 Period!! So I agree!!
o Toxin o

They'll never get the Spiderman movies right, or any Marvel character for that matter , i gotta wait 5 more years to see maybe a decent Venom ? After waitin forever to see him get shafted in 3 i'm no where near lookin forward to this but at least we have Nolans Batman movies and soon to be Superman.
Matt

People seem to dislike the idea of a new Spiderman, but I think it's not too bad. The series was starting to jump the shark a little bit. I think this new series needs to kinda be like the new Batman series is to the old one. The old one was classic and good, but was increasingly getting worse as the series went on. Batman Begins then kicked off the new era of Batman and it is FANTASTIC. Part of the element that made this possible was REALISM. I think if realism is introduced into this series, it has potential to be better than the original, which will be hard given Lizard, but not impossible. As long as it's not a Twilight version of a high school Spiderman and is a little darker, this can beat out Raimi's, with all due respect of course.
o Toxin o

i agree with #22 i just don't think it will go that direction.
Cracky

I know this is really negative.. I know.. But I want this to bomb so bad. God damn this is so unnecessary. But I do really like Rhys Ifans.
DoomCanoe

man i wanna see the hob goblin so bad i also wanna see Gwen Stacy break her fucking neck while Peter tries to save her probably the best thing in a Spiderman comic yet... not because she died, but because of how it changed Spiderman
Chris

Oh, I hope there's just *one* villain in the new film. When they split the attention between multiple bad guys, the whole thing is watered down and nobody gets the attention they deserve. Did we learn nothing from the Batman films in the 90s?
Jimmy Love

I for one DO NOT want a batman Spider man How fucking retarded is that! Dark tones work for dark characters, neither peter nor spider man are dark characters, unless they did that in ultimate's but that crap doesn't count. I cant wait to NOT go to this movie.
ryderup

I hope the first films ends with MJ at peters door with that "Tiger" line. Then set up the rivalry and the death of Gwen in part 2. Build up Norman Osbourne in this one and have him become Green Goblin in the second. Set up Doc Ock also and have him in the third. Then, part 4-6 should be about the sinister six. So they should use "minor" villains like Electro in theese films before the SS. Yep. Part 6 could end with Peter and MJ getting married. Then part 7-9 could be a Venom saga
LetterJ13

People .... I think the lot of us think Sam Rami's original Spiderman was so good because it reopened our world to Super Hero movies. But to be honest, Nolan's take on Batman blew the whole Spiderman series out of the water and will continue to set the bar in excellence, no matter how many times you reheat Spiderman / Peter Parker. Spiderman's downfall are the potential villains he combats, because they're unrealistic. This is where Spiderman #3 messed up so badly. A guy who can turn into and manipulate sand? Really? No way you can go 2 hrs on that character alone. So they add two more popular villains (Harry and Venom) to the mix to beef up the weak storyline, thus taking away from their individual storylines that could have been told in separate films. Too many villains in one film only dirties up the storyline waters. And who's fault is this? It's all on Sony. They should have trusted Rami. The best Spiderman storylines are where the villain is directly involved in Spider's everyday life experiences. That's why Green Goblin and Dr. Octopus worked. The first two films established Dr. Connors as a huge part of Parker's world. Using the Lizard in part 3 would have been an easy lay-up for moving Rami's franchise along. And, hello? Villains are supposed to be scary. Yes, I realize that I made the point above that I wanted the villains to be realistic. But I can be more easily swayed into believing that science can screw up genetic mutation and turn over-eager scientists into lizards, than I can accept anomalies where science accidentally turns a man into sand. Sandman is a great cartoon / comic book character, but in the end became only a great 5-minute action sequence in a live action film. I pay good money to see a 2-hour villain. Lizard can be a whole 2-hour story, all his own. So can Harry Osborn. So can Venom. You just have to get the story right. Nolan's Batman franchise gets this point. Perhaps Sam Rami did as well? But Sony screwed it all up for him and the amazing cast he had for the franchise when they tried to over stimulate their audience with several villain storylines. I don't know who Nolan will pick to be the next nemesis for Batman to take down, but I will have enough faith in him not screwing up the end game storyline to his Batman franchise. I don't anywhere near the trust in Sony to do any better with their reboot, and more than likely, won't rush out to see it.
1544K

oh..wow...the lizard...and a reboot....sooooooooo excited /sarcasm.
DuirMan

I think Rhys Ifans looks a little reptilian-like already, so there's that. I'm curious now though, has Emma Stone done a death scene before?
quazzimotto

My real beef is with Marc Webb directing, and the casting? First, what has Webb done to warrant filming a primarily action-based movie? He's only made one other feature length film (500 day's of Summer, which was good IMO, I did enjoy it), but other than that, he's done an episode of the Office and some music videos...what a resume. As for the cast? I like each actor but I don't like their roles in this movie. Emma Stone is great, but I don't see her as Gwen Stacy. She would be a far better Mary Jane IMO. Not sure about Andrew, I think he could be okay, but he's supposed to be 16 right? He looks like a Senior at best, if not already in college. Logan Lerman was a better fit if they're going for a younger Spider-Man. And finally, Rhys Ifans? I dunno, I guess if they stick with the comic book it could work, but that is the "iffiest" choice I've seen made so far. Not going to hold my breath. Marvel hasn't impressed me since X2.
bozo

Just... no.
jd

The reboot's happening whether we like it or not, and we can all agree that its good that at least efforts are being made to separate it from the previous time the series was done, like having an unused villain. Worked out well the last time a reboot took this approach, with Nolan having scarecrow as the villain of batman begins.
KING

SONY is retarded.... really is.. everything that they have said they wasnt gonna do, they are doing... loyalty aint nothing in hollywood.
Mark

@19, no, it was the Lizard, then Sony turned it down and said to find a new villain. Raimi then decided on the Vulture, Sony didn't like this either. Raimi wanted to be able to have control of the film like he did with Spider-Man 2, but the studio wanted to retain the control they had with Spider-Man 3. So Sam Raimi walked, not wanting a repeat of that experience.
Nethanel

it doesn't matter who's the villain, just keep it at villain per flick.