Earlier this week, MTV published an article featuring quotes from Marc Webb about the new take on Peter Parker and his path to becoming Spider-Man. Webb told MTV that Spider-Man's origin would be resolved over the span of a few films and details surrounding his origin would be slightly altered. Let's break down what he had to say:
1. No Wrestling Career
This was, for whatever reason, a big deal to fans. Sam Raimi used this take on Spider-Man's origin and it seems as though many fans have come to believe that this was an integral part of Stan Lee and Steve Ditko's origin story; it wasn't.
For whatever reason, people seem to think that the events depicted in Spider-Man 1 was how it happened in the comics. However, what really happened is that a television producer was so impressed with Peter's ONE AND ONLY wrestling match, that he invited him onto his television show for an appearance. THIS television studio, NOT the wrestling arena, is where Peter encountered the thief that would eventually kill Uncle Ben. He didn't run into the thief after being denied his pay from a wrestling promoter. This fact renders the lack of a wrestling scene entirely useless, along with the arguments and complaints surrounding it.
2. Radioactive Spider? Maybe, Maybe Not?
This is the most overblown issue with this film I've seen thus far. Must everyone be reminded that the spider from Spider-Man 1 wasn't radioactive either? It was "genetically enhanced".
Radioactivity was a big buzz topic in the 60s and was thought of as magic. Thus, Stan Lee used this as a reason for Peter's transformation. Genetics are now a much more sensible and (I use these words lightly) scientifically accurate way to approach superhuman transformation.
I've seen a lot of theories for what this might mean. I've seen people mention that the spider might burrow itself in Peter's skin...
Nope. Stupid. Next.
I've seen another theory where people believe that Peter will be experimented on as a child...
No. Ang Lee's Hulk tried that and failed. Next.
My favorite theory, in terms of stupidity, is that Richard Parker tests things on himself and "passes" the spider traits down to Peter.
Good God. Where to begin?
For one, why in the hell would Richard Parker's serum that he was testing on himself ever give Peter the ability to climb walls or the ability of precognition? That's right, it wouldn't.
Secondly, in order for Richard to pass traits down, he'd have to have displays of the characteristics as well. Not only would this ruin Spider-Man, knowing that there was one before him, but it wouldn't make sense anyway seeing as Richard would never get run out of town by Oscorp (presumably) if he could just beat the ever living hell out of anyone in his way. Now before you go on saying "But hey! What about recessive traits!?" Recessive traits exist when the trait has been passed down for multiple generations. If Richard tested these things on himself, he'd be the first generation to pass these traits, therefore he would need to show signs of them himself.
This is how it will work:
The Spider will be a genetically enhanced spider. That's it. The twist comes in the sense that Richard will have either worked on those spiders directly, or the enhancements that those spiders eventually receive. It's a nice touch, but not nearly as ridiculously outlandish as these asinine theories.
3. Uncle Ben's Relevance?
Now, this is the first and really only complaint that holds weight for me. I too was, and still am, slightly skeptical of how Uncle Ben is seemingly being treated. Tolmach and Webb intially made it seem as though Uncle Ben was being brushed aside so that Peter's parents would maintain prominence in Peter's character development. However, upon further review of trailers, clips, set videos, and quotes I'm not worried that's what will happen.
Many people have been taken aback by the fact that Peter will start crime fighting prior to the death of his beloved Uncle. While I don't necessarily disagree with this confusion, it will essentially accomplish the same thing.
Peter will begin his crime fighting career as an arrogant and ignorant crime fighter. He'll fight who he wants, when he wants and will likely be reckless which will explain the NYPD not being a very big fan. As a result of this recklessness, Peter will likely go out for a night of crime fighting, but call it quits to relax. Thus, he sees a thug fleeing from a corner store, having stolen some goods, but will ignore it because of being tired, or just simply not feeling like going on a chase. Soon after, his Uncle will be killed, influencing him to do what's right at all times, no matter how he feels about it, or whether or not he feels up for it.
Voila. Not so bad is it? Didn't think so. However, what really boggles my mind is this:
First, people complain because they don't want to see the origin again, but then, once the origin becomes differentiated enough to make it fresh and new, people complain about that. Make up your mind guys.