Did 'The Amazing Spider-Man' Lose Some of the 'Untold Story' DNA?

July 5, 2012
Source: Bad Ass Digest

The Amazing Spider-Man

Audiences were already skeptical of another take on everyone's favorite wallcrawler in The Amazing Spider-Man just five years after the last installment of Sam Raimi's successful and memorable film trilogy. However, the studio seemed to have locked down a smart way of selling the hero with the "untold story" tagline that appeared on the poster and in the trailers. But now that the film is in theaters, it seems like not much is different in the new origin story of how Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) becomes Spider-Man. Thankfully, the internet has come through to follow the breadcrumbs on this path that seems to disappear.

Obviously, if you haven't seen The Amazing Spider-Man yet, you may want to stop reading, because there will be rampant spoilers throughout this entire post. Since the film has been released, there's been plenty of praise for the action, special effects, and especially for the perfect cast, including amazing chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone. But most of the complaints have come in the form of plot holes, a far too familiar origin story and a lame villain with unclear motivations, especially after a certain figure, perhaps more integral to the film's plot, simply disappears. Let's dig into the details, courtesy of a smart and meticulous breakdown by Badass Digest.

Perhaps the biggest plot hole in the film comes after Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), with the assistance of Peter Parker, figures out a new formula to merge lizard DNA with other species in order to help them regenerate cells and heal themselves, something important to Conners who is missing his right arm. Once a lab mouse shows promising results, Connors' superior Rajit Ratha (played by Irrfan Khan) wants him to jump straight to human trials and threatens to can Connors if he doesn't follow through. There's allusions to a similar stand that Parker's father took which may have led to his demise as well, but no more details are given. Here the thread to Parker's past and the different origin story to his becoming Spider-Man begins.

However, after Connors decides to test the new formula on himself, he learns Ratha is already on his way to a veterans hospital to test the formula on a different subject. Before he can stop him, Connors transforms into The Lizard and wreaks havoc across the city trying to stop Ratha. But after an action sequence on the bridge and a failed attempt by The Lizard to kill Ratha, the character disappears from the film forever, with no further mention of his involvement with Parker's parents. So how does this tie in to the supposed "untold story" of Spider-Man?

Well, it has been said that the new origin story would have seen Peter Parker being turned into Spider-Man not just by a simple spider bite. In fact, apparently Peter was originally supposed to have something inside of his DNA that activates after the spider bites him. This is why there's so much tension between Connors and Ratha, and an unsolved mystery behind the disappearance of the Parker parents. This would explain why his father had spider diagrams and one kept under glass in his torn apart office in the beginning of the film. Essentially, Peter's father made it possible for his son to become Spider-Man, but only likely after being forced to by Oscorp, more specifically Ratha. But what evidence is there of this?

A commenter at Superhero Hype posted this compilation of images from a cut sequence (that still made it into trailers and clips) featuring some sort of confrontation between Spider-Man, The Lizard and Ratha in the makeshift sewer lab, a scene that likely takes place after the bridge action:

The Amazing Spider-Man Deleted Scenes

That looks like the perfect place for an exposition filled scene for Peter to learn about the true origins of his newfound powers. Plus, this is where lines from the trailer like "If you want the truth about your parents, Peter, come and get it!" The problem is that Peter never really learns any truth about his parents. This is also where Ratha was supposed to die, but there was no way to have the scene in the film without keeping the genetic origin storyline as well. My question is why was it so necessary to cut this plot line? Did the studio deem it too strange for audiences? If anything it would have improved the plot holes in the film and made for a much more interesting franchise reboot. Badass Digest dives even further into this mystery, so check out their full analysis on this "untold story" and several other plot problems over there. Otherwise, what do you think about this DNA debacle? Would you prefer the "untold story" elements? Discuss!

Find more posts: Feat, Hype, Movie News



This reeks of some of the storyline elements from Ultimate Spider-Man dealing with the Venom symbiote. The Venom symbiote in the Ultimate universe actually doesn't come from space, but is an organism designed by Richard Parker and Eddie Brock Sr. to help attack cancer cells. The only problem was it was tied directly to Parker and Brock DNA, so it would only work if the subject had that DNA present, hence the Venom suit only working for Peter Parker and Eddie Brock. I always thought this concept for Venom was a better take honestly. You would no longer have cancer, but you would be a homicidal super villain.

Ryan M. Holt on Jul 5, 2012


Reeks is right. If they bring Venom in I'm out.

Agent13 on Jul 5, 2012


they practically did, i looked him up on wikipedia and in the ultimate universe Eddie Brock Sr. put Venom on in the plane and accidentally caused the plane crash....

Jericho on Jul 5, 2012


totally agree with these potholes

Chaka on Jul 5, 2012


Those scenes will probably be in the spiderman special edition DVD or better yet exclusively for bluray limited edition

BinaryChaos on Jul 5, 2012


I think it was and excellent told story better then raimis the plot made better sense better action better plot more detail in characterization to peter parker stayed true to the comic book I gave it a 10/10

matthew siler on Jul 5, 2012


How was it better? There was zero emotional weight to Uncle Ben's death. They never spend any time on how that impacts Peter or Aunt May. You never get a sense of Peter's guilt afterwards. There is almost no time spent building Aunt May, Uncle Ben, and Peter's relationship. A sudden change to all of that should've been impactful, but it wasn't because this film was just going through the motions of the origin. The film tries so hard to be darker but once the lizard comes out with his mad scientist routine it becomes incredibly campy. Raimi managed to maintain his desired tone throughout. The untold story angle would've given this film the reason it exists because it wouldn't be the exact same story told again.

John Heuer on Jul 5, 2012


because its been done before so why do all that crap again?, the relationship didnt need tp build up for the movie because you saw it right there in your face how well it was. and this is actually a more believable death scenario. no emotional goodbyes, no drawn out death, you get shot and you are more likely going to just die right there....especially you are at his age... and you got a realistic look of a human mutated with lizard DNA...its like the Duh Factor.....

Jericho on Jul 5, 2012


So because it's been done before, it's ok to do it poorly? I don't even remember how it was handled in the first, I'm saying that as we see it... it's crap and devoid of any impact. Every character is thinly drawn so no one registers as a real person. Garfield and Stone act their asses off to make up for the fact that the script is awful. After Uncle Ben is gone nothing feels different and characters basically act like nothing happened. Peter goes looking for the killer but never seems to be emotionally devastated by the events like a normal person would. We can only infer that he is upset because of his actions (looking for the killer) but it doesn't go anywhere. Also at no point is it ever addressed if Peter blames himself. It would be a pretty big character motivation if he blames himself. As for the Lizard, if they wanted to make it seem more "real" then his motivations should've been something people can relate to or at least understand. Him trying to transform everyone into lizards so people aren't weak is a terrible idea. It barely makes sense and all that I could gather was that they would turn back into humans eventually anyway because he keeps going back to a human form. The whole problem with this movie is that it only covers characters and plot lines superficially enough that it's barely coherent. There's no depth given to anything, so you don't care and you see nothing unique on display.

John Heuer on Jul 5, 2012


that's pretty much it yeah. and systematically going vigilante on people who even LOOK like the guy who shot the uncle doesn't look like he was emotionally devastated in his apparent blaming of himself? even thrashing Flash suddenly against the lockers?...what world are you on? and as for the not really his reasoning was pretty obviously simple to use for the movie *blame early comics* and he made a permanent variant the last time *hence why he tried to spread it on New York* but it was reverted with the cure... you missing this point is slowly discrediting you in your understanding of the movie....

Jericho on Jul 5, 2012


Those moments were all motivated by the script, not because we actually believed the character was truly upset and angry. I don't know what you're saying in the second paragraph, you might want to revise it.

John Heuer on Jul 8, 2012


This version of Lizard had jack to do with the comics, so you can't blame those for his lacking motivations, nonsensical plan, or the fact that a 17-year-old Gwen Stacy is a science whiz and the only one who can synthesize—in eight minutes—an antidote to something Connors had *just* come up with in his sewer lab (and was unstable anyway). Boy, it hurts even typing this.

irrenmann on Nov 16, 2012


The focus of the film was different and had an added realism compared to Raimi's version. In the previous series, Peter accidentally kills a villain and then chooses to become a superhero out of remorse for the death of his uncle. Raimi did a great job in displaying trauma as Spiderman's major motivation, but glossed over the transformation of the angry kid looking for revenge to the superhero. This film focused on a kid that wanted revenge and not justice. It wasn't until his views were challenged by Captain Stacy did he really see what he was doing wrong. It was at this point he actually saved someone opposed to fighting the bad guy. The film isn't about his relationship with his uncle, but his growth as a person. The movie never dwells on the death of the character, but does add little bits of character quirks to show an impact. An example is Aunt May unable to sleep and Peter's anger and lack of discipline. I thought the lack of self loathing was a bit refreshing than the previous series, but it doesn't mean that Spiderman won't show signs of remorse. As more people die around him, he will most likely develop more of those elements.

champs on Jul 5, 2012


I loved the movie except the death of The Illusi...I mean, Uncle Ben. The greatest line in comic book history was completely left out, unless my kids were talking too much and I missed it. Sure, Peter went on a angst-filled rampage looking for the star tattoo, but that was forgotten after dinner.

Stavi on Jul 5, 2012


kinda, he didnt say it in the exact words since he was in the middle of a verbal spanking..

Jericho on Jul 7, 2012


thats why the make sequels to clear plotholes or to make more money.

mr.enigma on Jul 5, 2012


agree with matthew

mr.enigma on Jul 5, 2012


When I read the part where his father is the one that makes it possible for him to become spider-man. I get flashbacks to the abortion know as The Hulk

Drew on Jul 5, 2012


Exactly. Stupid imo. I like it that it was just a freak accident.

Adrian on Jul 6, 2012


I really enjoyed the film immensely...especially the 3-D feeling of being him...but to lose the untold plot halfway seems to drop what he is after and focus on love with gwen. Lacks go even further as hes in high school and no sign of harry or mary jane yet norman osborne clearly needing help...the reason for trials...maybe its freshman year but he grew up with mary jane next door. but it was a great experience though connors scene in credits leaves u wondering what the?

rick on Jul 5, 2012


unless im the only one who actually reads posters, if we all look at the image below the article title you will see the poster states 'the untold story...BEGINS!' and with a sequel coming its safe to say to hold the griping until we see what the sequel will entail.....

Jericho on Jul 5, 2012


true, but still we should have had those scenes in the film.

Kerr Robinson on Jul 6, 2012


7/10 Good Spiderman but Not Amazing . Sequel would be better definitely I think Avengers increased my appetite. Spiderman 2 stay the best of series still (for me) I really like see Dr.Octopus & Lizard again (I don't know how it possible) I waiting so long to see SCORPION as enemy. I hope so he be next villain.

Ehsan Davodi on Jul 5, 2012


Play the game. It's a decent "sequel", if a bit Raimi-esque.

Stavi on Jul 5, 2012


I'm not gamegoer , occasionally play , spiderman games are weak. I want this two in one movie against spiderman or one of them beside the scorpion. I think Lizard & Scorpion beside eachother become very interesting

Ehsan Davodi on Jul 5, 2012


They probably cut it because that is exactly what happened in Ang Lee's Hulk. And I assume this cut sequence took place after the fight in the high because Peter went down in the sewers after the Lizard, who wasn't wearing a lab coat when he went down and not long after came out of the sewer wearing lab coat like he is in the above picture. And I loved the movie btw

Jurassic_Max on Jul 5, 2012


Wow that is exactly what I had in my mind. Never read any Spider-man comics so I don't have any prior knowledge. It just didn't make much sense that Oscorp would have these spiders that would turn people into superheroes without there knowledge.

Brice Gilbert on Jul 5, 2012


Okay, but I totally called this 3 months ago @GeekTyrant. It was just so predictable. Still a lame movie though. Proof:

Yonix (Remco) on Jul 6, 2012


I think I'm gonna go fap.

Fappy on Jul 10, 2012


Why give everything away in one sitting when they can save almost everything for the sequel(s) and still have one heck of a movie? The planned idea wil go ahead. If they were gonna change things at the last minute promotional posters woud be much easier to change than actual footage. This fim has pretty much sold the sequel aready.

SpideyUK on Sep 1, 2012

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram