What Is Wrong With The Villains In THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

What Is Wrong With The Villains In THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2

Why the villains in ASM2 come up short and represent a worrying trend in modern blockbusters.

Editorial Opinion
By thecomic - Apr 26, 2014 07:04 AM EST
Having watched the Amazing Spiderman 2 I am left with a dissatisfied taste in my mouth. In a franchise that includes a villainous group called the Sinister 6 you would think that the ‘goodies’ and ‘baddies’ would be clearly defined that their motivations would be obvious. For me the film failed to give us villains, instead offering up a mixed bag of powered beings who had a tenuous gripe with each other. For me the blurring of these lines makes for a weaker screenplay, and film. This film is part of a trend in which villains are watered down and pitted against darker heroes. Villain actors stating “this guy I’m playing isn’t really a villain”, is fast becoming a cliché. And, for me, the genre is becoming all the weaker for it.
 
I think that villains fall into 5 catagories, The Bad Guy, The Manipulator, The former good guy on a path to redemption, The misunderstood villain and the psychopath. Villains provide two things, they enable us to live out our own dark fantasies – for example D Fens in Falling Down or they give us someone to loathe as they test the hero and we cheer when the hero eventually overcomes them, Game of Thrones Joffrey springs to mind. Lets have a look at Spiderman’s villains and see how they measure up, staggeringly there are examples from all 5 categories to be found in the movie.
 
The Bad Guy – The Bad Guy is exactly that, someone who is a criminal, someone who is bad simply because they are. In this film the bad guy role is filled by Rhino. We have no origin story, no glimpse of his motivation. He is a bad guy, nice and simple. Other movie bad guys include Toht from Raiders of the Lost Ark, he’s following orders and he enjoys doing it, he’s just bad. In ASM2 however Rhino is only portrayed as unsuccessful, he is a neutered bad guy. The plutonium heist at the start of the movie is easily foiled and at the end of the movie he waits patiently whilst a small boy is removed from his rampaging path, We only see this bad guy in terms of failure, we don’t see him defeat security guards as he pulls off his heist, we don’t see his daring prison escape, we only see him fail. A bad guy who only fails and who is sensitive to the safety of an 8 year old isn’t very scary. This villain doesn’t really test the hero, so we don’t cheer at his defeat, although we do s[racial slur] when he has his trousers pulled down. Look at Toht in Raiders of the Lost Ark, we don’t see an origin or motivation for him either however he is a scary guy, ruthless, cruel a man who enjoys his work a little too much. Toht is a man who, despite being physically far inferior to Indiana Jones, gains the upper hand more than once. When he is defeated at the end, we cheer.
 
What’s the fix? Show Rhino actually doing something other than growling “Spidah maaaan!” have him kill some cops or security guards, have him shoot Spidey in the leg. Given that a large plot device is Peter’s ability to rapidly self-heal an early wound inflicted by Rhino would establish this power and show that Rhino posed a threat. This gives us greater satisfaction when he is captured and then greater fear when he reappears. At the end of the movie have him attempt to kill the small child and have Spidey rescue the boy, again Rhino is shown as genuinely dangerous and the audience is left wanting more when the credits roll.
 
The Manipulator, the manipulator is a person of vision someone who wants to remake the world in their own vision, often their internal morality makes them believe they are doing good, often seeking to impose order, lesser manipulators look to increase wealth. In Star Wars this is Emperor Palpatine, in Raiders its H1tler. The manipulator is often only seen briefly, in Raiders we don’t see H1tler at all however, we know the man from history and so the audience understands who Indy is ultimately up against, in Star Wars we see the Emperor fleetingly in Empire Strikes Back. As someone who we see is the boss of Darth Vader again the context is enough to tell the audience this is not a man to be messed with. In ASM2 the Manipulator is Norman Osborn. The problem here is that Norman is not shown as an evil person, misguided yes judging by his appearance and treatment of Harry. The problem is we don’t actually see him give an order, or do anything other than tell his son that he is dying and his son is also ill. We only see Norman in the context of failed father and in the propaganda videos. We do see nefarious actions of Oscorp employees, i.e. the assassin in the flashback at the start of the film. However we also see Oscorp directors framing Harry. Given we are neither shown nor told Osborn’s evil, we only have circumstantial evidence of his guilt we don’t actually know that Norman knew of or sanctioned any of the evil acts seen in ASM and ASM2. Like H1tler we can suppose this is the case from our history with the character. Unfortunately H1tler is a much better known person that Norman Osborn to any general audience so the shorthand in Raiders is more successful. Given that I also know Norman Osborn to be a purple hood wearing goblin, and not a dying man with long fingernails and a USB stick, the character is portrayed differently enough for me to genuinely not be sure if this Norman Osborn really was pulling the strings. And if it wasn’t Norman, but was the shadowy figure in the hat, then we also haven’t seen him do anything of consequence or been shown why he is doing what he is doing. I have spent 5 hours in the ASM universe and I don’t know who is responsible for what. Bottom line, being poorly in bed for two movies isn’t very scary.
 
What’s the fix? Show Norman Osborn actually ordering the Parker’s deaths, even the assassin saying “Norman Osborn has paid me a lot of money to ensure you don’t survive this flight” or something would show that it was Norman was pulling the strings. Alternative fix show Norman talking to an employee or just someone who isn’t his son, show him explicitly doing something bad or enjoying seeing one of his schemes bear fruit. Maybe Norman could have pointed Harry in Peter’s direction looking to get hold of Peter’s blood the easy way?
 
Next up, the former good guy on a path to redemption, it appears that this is Harry Osborn. Harry is described in the film as Peter’s best friend, although they haven’t seen or communicated with each other from ages 11 – 20, and this is in the age of smart phones, facebook and e mail! Harry’s motivation is that he is ill and wants the cure. Our good guy is shown being powerful in a board meeting before skimming stones with Peter. However he is soon ranting that Spiderman won’t help him and is then quickly framed and foiled by other directors. Resorting to desperate measures he transforms into the goblin, his only act is to battle Spiderman and kill Gwen Spacy. The trouble with Harry’s arc is that he isn’t ever really a good guy, his motive is quite selfish, he wants to save himself, his urgency to do so makes little sense given his dad died at 63 and his friendship with Peter and ‘betrayal’ by Spiderman are briefly contrived plot points.
 
The fix? Don’t have Norman die, have him manipulate Harry into trying to save him. Norman states that Harry is smart, perhaps Harry can detect that the board aren’t desperately trying to help Norman. This makes Harry’s boardroom conflicts meaningful and his desperation to obtain the cure quickly, for his dying father, more credible. Harry working with Peter & Gwen in secret, science geeks he knew from school, makes sense. Have this relationship occur over time and Harry’s fall and ultimate blaming of Spiderman and his murder of Gwen makes sense. Once Harry is incarcerated it can be revealed that Norman was using him, which would make the dysfunctional father son relationship all the more twisted and reveal Norman’s true evil. Given the Peter/grave scene in the film showing the passage of time a few seconds of montage could easily illustrate that Peter, Harry and Gwen have been looking at a cure for several months. In addition this could be how Peter gains access to his father’s video, keeping it to himself and therefore actually betraying Harry. This fix shows Harry to be essentially good, desperate to save and please his father after his exile, his ultimate transformation is a tragedy and his murder of Gwen, someone who had lied to him, would make more dramatic sense. This also puts Harry on a collision course with Norman, earning him his redemption, which we also didn’t get in ASM2.
 
The misunderstood villain in this film is Electro, other misunderstood villains include Frankenstein, The Hulk or even Elsa from Frozen they are often hideous or powerful characters who draw attacks, they cannot control their power and descend into conflict, usually in self defence. This is Electro, he gains powers, scares everyone in Times Square, gets attacked by police and before you can say rubber socks he is on a rampage. The trouble is that being misunderstood is only one element of the character. He is also on a revenge mission because his power plant plans were stolen from him, and he is obsessed with Spiderman who he blames for the actions of the trigger happy policeman. Max’s transformation into Electro is simultaneously sympathetic and unsympathetic. He is a pathetic character you feel sorry for, but then his talking to a Spiderman who isn’t there in a scene that is reminiscent of Norman Bates in Psycho. His rationale for attacking Spiderman and wanting to take all the power from New York makes little sense. Electro’s transformation changes him from misunderstood villain into our fifth category Psychopath. Like Rhino, Electro is quickly captured and incarcerated only to transform into little more than a henchman (bad guy) later in the film. The Dark Knight’s Joker works as a psychopath because he doesn’t have an origin, imagine the joker having Max Dillon’s sequences before applying the makeup prior to the bank robbery scene from the Dark Knight would totally undercut his menace.
 
The fix? Pick an Electro origin and stick with it, either he is on a mission to get revenge on Oscorp – if so show his plans being stolen and show that recovering them is his objective. If he is just an ordinary guy in an accident show that, show an ordinary person, much like Peter, just end up on the wrong side of the law, maybe have him redeemed at the end by helping Spidey defeat the Goblin therefore becoming a hero and avenging himself on Oscorp. Or have him be a psycho, an electrical wizard that Oscorp tolerates because of his intellect but that everyone steers clear of because he is clearly unhinged. Or have him be obsessed with Spiderman and being a hero have him try to help and cause chaos leading to his showdown with Spidey – his hero. Instead of capturing Electro so early on have him escape, test his powers, have everyone think he has been defeated but he hasn’t. Just don’t show him held in captivity.
 
I suggest that the following slight changes would make for a better film and more credible character motivations. Electro could get his revenge before being defeated, Harry endures a terrible fall at the hands of his manipulator father and Rhino is a credible scary villain.  
 
The need to make villains more understandable in recent times includes
 
1, Zod being genetically engineered to seek/protect the codex and undervalue human life
 
2, Trevor Slattery’s Mandarin being a stunt to cover up a Killian’s extremis mishaps
 
3, Khan being a manipulated weapons specialist when he was once a crazed, but charming dictator
 
4, Bane being a manipulated henchman instead of a tactical genius
 
5, Loki being a more likeable chap than anyone else in the Thor movies
 
I’d love to see a return to villains like Toht, Khan (TWOK) or Burke (Aliens), I don’t want to feel sorry for every villain that Spiderman punches in the face.. The reason for this is simple, every day on the news I see stories of real evil, comic book heroes are a direct response to the fears these bad people engender. Sometimes I’d like to cheer and see proper evil defeated properly it may not be reality, but then neither is getting spider powers by being bitten by a spider, its called fantasy for a reason.
THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Returns To Theaters On Monday With A Less-Than-Spectacular Box Office Haul
Related:

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Returns To Theaters On Monday With A Less-Than-Spectacular Box Office Haul

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Star Dane DeHaan Talks NO WAY HOME Rumors And Whether He'd Return As Green Goblin
Recommended For You:

AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Star Dane DeHaan Talks NO WAY HOME Rumors And Whether He'd Return As Green Goblin

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Odin
Odin - 4/26/2014, 8:49 AM
You do kinda have a point.
Tainted87
Tainted87 - 4/26/2014, 9:00 AM
There's definitely more than the five categories, but I definitely agree - we need to see the bad guys do it because they're just evil bastards.

You know what's HILARIOUS with a capital 'H'? This all started in CBMs with 'Batman and Robin', as Mr. Freeze was made far more sympathetic to the point of being a puppet - only turning to crime and terrorism because of his wife's condition.

Not long after, we had Magneto as a well-intentioned extremist, with a bunch of unsavory henchmen. Following that, Doc Ock did it all because his wife's death made his mind susceptible to manipulation by an uninhibited artificial intelligence; Sandman did it all for his sick daughter; Two-Face being broken down to revenge and clinging to some form of order in his coin.... and you've got it from there.

This even followed into Doctor Who of all places, with nearly each and every one of the Doctor's enemies being pushed to madness, programmed to madness, doing what they have to in order to survive, or having a different moral standard (like how we see killing animals as different from killing humans). Even the MASTER was turned into a programmed psychopath with a traumatic childhood.

The whole idea of "not so different" has been taken to a greater level.
thecomic
thecomic - 4/26/2014, 9:04 AM
Omega, just saying a villain being a villain because they are evil would make a refreshing change. Khan especially didnt work for me the attempt to make him sympathetic didnt work. Loki is great in thor 2 but melekith was so so poor.
thecomic
thecomic - 4/26/2014, 9:17 AM
@tainted, I agree re the categories, and also sub categories of the ones I list. I was framing the editorial around amazing Spider-Man 2 just because it has so many villains and, in my opinion, handles them ALL so badly. As you say the trend stretches as far back as B&R where, had the film not been so bad, it could have been seen as innovative. In Thor we have a villain who intends to wipe out the universe and yet he is less scary than the fratellis in the Goonies. The Loki Thor team up should have been a real sign of just how badass Melekeith was, instead I hardly remember him being in it. At the risk of repeating myself the quest to make electro sympathetic just gives us multiple motivations for his behaviour, none of which wash.

Thanks a lot for reading and for commenting
AC1
AC1 - 4/26/2014, 9:28 AM
The only one that kind of makes sense is Harry and Norman, your version would have probably worked better (if they'd just revealed that Norman was actually alive and that Harry was in on it, but then OsCorp wouldn't have fired him).

Electro was handled very well in the movie; a thoroughly lonely guy who gets a taste of self-value and respect only to have it all torn away from him again, and is then simultaneously driven mad and given incredible powers. Electro, in the film, literally embodies the notion of 'power hunger' - he craves acknowledgement and respect and the 'power' he never had as Max Dillon, and then after his transformation he becomes power hungry in the sense that he also begins to crave, and begin feeding on, electricity.

As for Rhino, he's never been an 'evil' character, he was always either a thug who'd been manipulated into much higher levels of crime than he expected, or someone who wanted to just get the job done. He's never been a truly murderous character, certainly not enough to even threaten a child, and only resorts to that level of violence if he deems it necessary (such as with Spider-Man, who is a constant obstacle). He's stupid, he's got a hell of a temper, but he's not a monster.

And I'm wondering how well aquainted you are with Spider-Man's villains? Because very few of them are evil for the sake of being evil. You have the likes of The Lizard, sometimes Electro, and The Scorpion who go bad because their transformations drive them insane; Doc Ock is similar but he's also an ego-maniac; there's Rhino, Shocker, Mysterio, Chameleon and Vulture who are pretty bad, self-made villains but who aren't outright evil and do have limits, and are mainly concerned with getting rid of Spider-Man so they can commit petty crimes without interference; Sandman is somewhere in-between, in that he's mainly concerned with petty crime but his transformation makes him worse; there's Kraven The Hunter who's not necessarily a villain but he wants to prove that he can beat Spider-Man; there's Venom and Alistair Smythe who want revenge on Spider-Man; the only truly evil villains I can think of who are just evil for no reason are Norman Osborn (even before becoming the Goblin) and Carnage/Cletus Cassidy.
thecomic
thecomic - 4/26/2014, 9:48 AM
@AC1 thanks for reading and commenting

I don't agree that electro was handled well, but if you think he was that's your opinion and so for you he was.

As for familiarity with Spider-Man I have read some spidey books and I get that he has a rich and complex rogues gallery. But I maintain that, for me, true to comic origin stories or not, neutered sympathetic villains who never actually seem to do anything evil is getting very old.

Norman Osborn does nothing evil in two movies
Electro possibly kills some of the workers at the power plant but all we see is a single smoking hand, the only other person he actually kills is his torturer.
Harry/goblin knocks out a couple of guards and kills, although not explicitly, gwen, her death is almost an accident.
Rhino doesn't hurt or injure anyone.

The worst villain in his film is the guy holding up the liquor store! I'm not saying I want a body count but some actual villainy would be nice, As I say I'd like spidey to punch someone and for me to think "yes!" instead of "it's such a shame it came to this".
crushercreel23
crushercreel23 - 4/26/2014, 10:12 AM
McNyagano
McNyagano - 4/26/2014, 10:31 AM
Harry is the villain of TASM2 and will be the main villain for all the films to come. He was the manipulator in this film, he was the catalyst in Gwen's death and he's the one behind the creation of the Sinister 6. I don't even know where Norman is gonna fit in all of this. Electro did nothing for me. And Rhino was just LOL. Good read though.
McNyagano
McNyagano - 4/26/2014, 11:20 AM
@Batz

Electro was the main villain up until the Times Square fight. After that, Harry took over as the central villain of the film.
AC1
AC1 - 4/26/2014, 11:25 AM
@thecomic I see, I thought you were referring more to the motivations of the villains rather than the actual threat they pose. In that case, I agree with you that they actually do very little damage (especially considering that there are two of them) but I suppose that's a consequence of their motives revolving more around revenge against Spider-Man rather than causing damage elsewhere.

As for Rhino, especially given his appearance in the final scene of the film, I get the feeling he doesn't really count as a 'villain' in this film, but rather as a set up for The Amazing Spider-Man 3. He was a nuisance more than anything, or perhaps even a distraction intended to draw Spider-Man's attention. Rhino is little more than a thug in a high-tech suit, and he works best as such. Perhaps he's just very bad at being a bad guy.
MercwithMouth
MercwithMouth - 4/26/2014, 8:44 PM
Entertaining read...

I do love the way you invented categories for villains, and had none of the villains for into your interpretation of each category. You complain that the villains are too complicated, and too simple, your ideas to fix them are to make them more complicated, or to simplify them. You talk of Norman being the manipulator, and have an issue that you don't know that. When, his story may not be over. Did you know Ward was Hydra before they told you? No, it was revealed when it was relevant.

I understand you have issues with the interpretations of the villains in TASM2, but it seems you're just upset because you would've done it differently. Nothing you described came off as a poorly executed villain, but as an interpretation you didn't agree with.

And Rhino is just a setup for future movies. They don't need to flesh out every single character's entire backstory. He's a cameo, and a character that will likely be expanded upon in the Sinister Six movie. All TASM2 was doing was showing A small part of his origin, and letting the audience know that there are multiple threats in the Spideyverse.
MightyZeus
MightyZeus - 4/26/2014, 10:19 PM
This was an interesting read and i like the fact you placed each villain into different categories if you notice that half of those villains share a common theme of manipulation. Harry in TASM 2 only managed to manipulate Eelctro and used him to take charge of the Oscorp but his plans quickly changed when he wanted to get the cure for his disease.

I was also tired of seeing The Riddler story in these super hero films, where a character is obsessed with a hero or a person and that person or hero let's them down and all of a sudden they become villainous. I just wanted something different and more effort placed into Max's character. Hopefully there will be better written villains in TASM 3.
thecomic
thecomic - 4/26/2014, 10:53 PM
Hi @Merc

Thanks for reading and commenting.

Firstly, I am not "upset" it's an editorial not a suicide note! I'd rather watch good movies than mediocre ones but in the grand scheme of things it's not that big a deal. :)

Secondly I don't ask for any of the villains to be more complicated, the first rule of cinema is "show and not tell" in the case of Norman Osborn we are neither shown nor told that he is evil, that he is the one pulling the strings. Asking to be shown what he is doing is not a request for greater complexity its a request to be allowed to engage with the character. You use Agent Ward from AOS as an example, I don't watch AOS but presumably in he entire season of that show Agent Ward has been doing things? He has been saving people, expressing opinions, telling stories about himself. The revelation that he is a Hydra agent then surprises the viewer because they were not expecting it. Your use of this character as a example makes my point for me. Had Agent Ward been handled the way Norman has been handled in ASM and ASM2 then we'd have occasionally heard the name "Agent Ward" 3 or 4 times in episodes 1-10, in episodes 11-19 we would have seen Phil Coulson visit Agent Ward for a scene or two in hospital. Then when he was revealed to be a Hydra would audience members be as shocked by the revelation? Or would they say "oh yeah, I think this guy was that Ill guy four episodes ago". In addition the Agent Ward arc has taken place over 9 months, the Norman Osborn arc(assuming there is one) started in 2012 wih a name check, and then followed with a scene in 2014. If the next Spider-Man is released in 2016 that's a four year wait for a pay off on a mention, for the main villain it's too slight.

The films initial logic does not portray Osborn as the big bad, someone to be feared, he's the ill/ dead CEO of Oscorp. Yes I know from the comics that he is bad, but if I need to do homework to understand the movie then the movie is unsuccessful. Not every person who watches the movie will know who and what Norman is and having watched two Spider-Man movies featuring the character they still don't.

For me he high point of the movie is Spider-Man saving e bus load of people in Times Square and rescuing the people on the stairs from electrocution. The reason is that I understood the stakes, I witnessed the save and in my head I celebrated Spidey's success. I think it's a shame that the film's climax with electro failed to deliver a similar moment.

A film like Raiders of the Lost Ark is a perfectly executed action adventure, it's a film I have watched dozens of times and a film I will watch dozens more times. But for conversations like this one my, relationship with ASM2 is over because I didn't find it satisfying.

Bottom line is, based on the film text, I don't really see any villains in this film, I dont understand Harry's motivation, I don't understand Electro's motivation, I don't feel that anyone in New York was in jeopardy. Gwen's death was sad yes,but from a story point of view it didn't really mean anything, it seemed quite a random act to try and bring some meaning or consequence to a film lacking in substance and drama. I can fan fiction the blanks and wait for revelations in future movies to make these movies meaningful, but as far as I am concerned ifI have to do that then clearly the movie wasn't good enough to stand on its own merit.

As for Rhino setting up he Sinister 6, again I think it fails, a villain who cares about child safety midst rampage isn't very... Sinister. Did Darth Vader wait for all children to be evacuated from Alderaan?

Thanks again for commenting hopefully ASM3 and the spin offs will blow us all away!
Trickwil
Trickwil - 4/29/2014, 9:48 AM
They ruined Dark Knight Rises by making Bane into this puppy love shmuck. For me it destroyed the film. But yeah, Spiderman is like Batman and Robin in that they just threw too many villains at us and don't let us breath, also none of them look anything like their alters from the comics their stories are nothing alike. It's depressing more than anything.
CapitanAmerika2
CapitanAmerika2 - 4/29/2014, 6:16 PM
@thecomic: God you really need to read comics more and watch movies more. Hulk and Elsa from Frozen are not misunderstood villains you dumby. I do not take this article seriously at all because of that statement.
View Recorder