THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 Director Marc Webb Reveals Yet Another Villain

     February 3, 2014


Things are not looking good for Ol’ Web-Head in Marc Webb’s upcoming superhero sequel, The Amazing Spider-Man 2.  We already know that Spidey (Andrew Garfield) will be surrounded by villains, Jamie Foxx’s Max Dillon/Electro likely chief among them.  Just when it seemed as if our web-crawling hero already had his hands full, another villain has been revealed.  We’ll keep the potential spoiler until after the jump.

The film also stars Emma StoneDane DeHaanPaul GiamattiFelicity JonesChris Cooper, and Sally Field.  The Amazing Spider-Man 2 opens in 2D, 3D, and IMAX 3D on May 2nd.  Hit the jump for more.

bj-novak-the-amazing-spider-man-2News of a newly revealed villain comes courtesy of the director himself,  so you can clearly cross this one off the rumor list.  Here’s a look at Webb’s Tweet from earlier today:

Marc Webb ‏@MarcW Almost shot ASM2 in B+W til @bjnovak‘s (A. Smythe) promo for his excellent book ONE MORE THING beat me to it: …

For the more casual Spider-Man fans, this “A. Smythe” moniker probably requires a little explanation.  It’s not much of a stretch to presume that Novak’s character is one Alistair Smythe, a once-wheelchair-bound scientist who developed (or technically, inherited) a series of robotic Spider-Slayers. This confirms what we’ve suspected about Novak’s character ever since he briefly commented on his role a couple of months ago:

I’m in a couple of scenes. Yeah, I was never told whether or not I could say. I can say that I work at Oscorp. And I am someone from the comic books, someone from the original. So, yeah, I’m somebody. I wouldn’t say I’m pivotal, but I’m not an extra, either.

Now, in the comics Smythe eventually suits up himself and becomes the Ultimate Spider-Slayer.  I doubt we’ll see Novak do much more than tinker around with the killer bots, at least for this movie.  Giving Spidey plenty of mindless drones to bash certainly does allow for an uptick in the destruction, but at this point, what he really needs is another helping hand.



    i bet he develops the mechanical rhino suit

    • Heather Stephen


      ◣◣◣ ◣�◣◣ ◣◣◣ ◣◣�◣◣ ◣◣◣Still, not nearly as excited by this as by Captain America 2.

      • Overheten

        I hope you get destroyed in prison.

      • Overheten

        I hope you get destroyed in prison.

    • doctor_robot

      ok… that was pretty funny.

  • Davis

    He’s just looking to make a mediocre bloated movie isn’t he?

    • AngelsandDemons1

      People will pay to see it either way..

  • axalon

    Marc, just get one villain working first. We don’t need 40 of them, seriously.

  • Julio Navas

    Apparently, Marc Webb hasnt seen Spider-Man 3.

    • Merlin235

      Spider-Man 3 had its own issues. The fact that there were three villains didn’t hamper it as much as how poorly they developed them.

      • Lex Walker

        Are you really not seeing the connection between having three villains in a 2.5-hour movie and none of them being developed enough? That was one of Spider-Man 3′s biggest issues.

      • doctor_robot

        are you 12? how many characters were in pulp fiction, boogie nights, crash, lord of the rings… and so on? what do you think this is… a terrence malick film? for christ sake, we’re talking about a damned comic movie. these are villains. villains we’re already acquainted with. how much character development are you looking for?

        and he’s only being “introduced”. can’t wait till you guys start flipping out over the sinister six, when they “jump into action”.

      • Lex Walker

        The thing about ensemble movies like Pulp Fiction, Boogie Nights, Crash, and even Lord of the Rings (which really solved by the problem by being a 9+ hour trilogy) is that instead of developing any one character, they give us basic templates that are developed a little with the expectation that so much else is happening you won’t care and that it won’t affect the story. By contrast, a superhero film is essentially Good Guy vs Bad Guy. Yeah, other characters fill out the frame, but most of the attention is spent developing the Good guy and the Bad Guy. This isn’t news. Well-written bad guys make the hero’s movie better. When the bad guys are underwritten, the final conflict feels deflated or inconsequential (ie Spidey 3).

        Also, you aren’t qualified to speak for “we”. Very few people outside of comic geeks know Electro or Green Goblin all that well.

      • JBug

        I agree with your point, but I still don’t think SM3′s lack of development of its villains was the main problem. 3 villains, 1) green goblin was developed over 3 films, which I’d say is enough character arc. 2) Sandman was developed over the entire film with an appropriate character arc and he was tied to the first movie. 3) venom’s issue was more than he was poorly developed with a crappy final product than it was him being underdeveloped. The symbiot and brock were being developed throughout the film.

        The main issue was poor casting, volatile acting, and a garbage script. Overall botched opportunity. I don’t think it was underdeveloping the villains.

      • Lex Walker

        No it wasn’t totally devoid of villain development, but there’s not as much as there seems. Sandman was really only developed in about three scenes: Running from the cops, sneaking into his old home, and his moment of closure at the end, To call that “development” is generous, since it was really just setting him up as a stock “misunderstood” criminal. Don’t be fooled by the “This is the man who really killed your uncle”, that was retroactive story telling meant to borrow some emotional heft from two films back when the characters weren’t as ridiculous. That was Sandman’s story, it was just tacked onto his. And we learned more about the symbiote than we did Brock; all we know is he cheated to get ahead and got caught. That’s not character development, that’s just a shoehorned plotpoint to introduce the character quickly. Harry is really the only developed villain the film had, but he became a ridiculous mess who was impossible to take seriously.

      • JBug


      • doctor_robot

        spider-man 3′s problem is that it was a mess. and that it followed 2, a superior film to the 1st one. we’ve seen this happen over and over again. it was sloppy film making. it had nothing(or very little) to do with how many villains they had. and, if it was because of too many villains… then that’s on raimi. he should have been able to handle that load. i think it had more to do with how they were used… like you said, “underwritten”. but at the same time… that doesn’t mean that you need to have a character study film on goblin or whoever. and then there’s venom… a whole other ball-game.

        i just don’t feel that the number of villains determines if it’s going to suck or not. also, it appears to me that this flick has 1 primary baddie, a secondary(maybe to be built up), and a cameo. bj novak won’t be suiting up for this one. i just don’t see the problem, or what all the freaking out is about.

        “Very few people outside of comic geeks know Electro or Green Goblin all that well.” – honestly, i have to somewhat disagree with that. most people may not know their exact origins off hand, but plenty non-comic geeks are quite aware of who the green goblin, doc ock, and the rest of the biggies are. i have an 8 year old who knows just about every villain(more than i do) of spider-man, bat-man, super-man, avengers… and so on. and he’s never read a comic book. not yet, anyway.

      • Lex Walker

        Whoa, Whoa, I never said that the number of villains determines a movie is going to suck, my point, which kicked this off, was that in the case of Spidey 3 it was too many villains in a crowded movie with not enough time spent developing any one of them. It’s not an inherent problem of having three bad guys in a film, it was simply the case in that film. Yes, it’s Raimi’s fault for not doing it properly, but it’s also the fact that there are that many in the first place that allows that problem to occur. You’re attempting to argue using extreme ends of arguments. I didn’t say superhero films should be villain character studies, I’m arguing that villains, like any other worthwhile character, needs time to develop in the story, not an entire film of their own.

        And I didn’t say people don’t know who Doctor Octopus is. I specifically said Electro and Green Goblin. Doc Ock is one of the most well known Marvel villains just because of his appearance. By contrast, Green Goblin is incredibly generic (he’s a guy in a mask on a flying doohickey), and Electro is pretty obscure by comparison (similar to the way most of Iron Man’s rogues are – as many people probably know Electro as did Whiplash before Iron Man 2). Of course your kid knows them. Has your kid watched cartoons? Duh. Guess what? Most adults, aka the general public who actually buys the movie tickets, don’t. This isn’t common knowledge no matter how much you insist it is.

        Come on, how many Straw Man arguments are you going to throw into this discussion?

      • doctor_robot

        i could try a few more. :)

      • Lex Walker

        Well, work doesn’t end for another hour and twelve minutes. do you have 72 minutes worth of Straw Men?

      • AL

        green goblin is and always has been spidermans # 1 villain. the majority of people that know who spiderman is know who the goblin is. there is nothing generic about him. don’t lump the general public in with you just because you don’t know the characters ( flying doohickey ? really ? ) and i happen to to know more adults that watch cartoons than don’t, especially the ones that have kids.

      • Lex Walker

        Sorry, I grew up on the cartoons and comics, I’m well aware of who he is (doohickey was in the words of the average person, or would you just prefer “flying thing”?) And no, ask the average person on the street is and they’ll likely have no clue. You’re kidding yourself if you think you know more adults that watch cartoons than don’t. Ha.

      • AL

        and you’re kidding yourself if you think that little kids don’t make their parents watch cartoons with them and learn the characters. you apparently don’t have children. And yes I DEFINEATELY know more adults that watch cartoons than not. you must know some very dull people.

      • Serge

        it’s interesting to know that you know adults that still watch cartoons, but come on. objectively, most adults just don’t obsessively follow comics or watch cartons like that. that doesn’t make them dull, that makes them average, and the studios rely on ticket sales from average people like that more than niche subcultures of devoted fans.
        what made spiderman 3 unsuccessful was how inaccessible and cluttered it was. a lot of that was due to the fact there were too many villains, and average moviegoers who weren’t acquainted with these characters could not connect with them. by average people i mean not your adult friends that watch cartoons but mainstream moviegoers looking for an entertaining flick

      • Jon

        If you are going to the movies to see Spider Man, chances are you are familiar with the comic in the first place. If not, chances are you’ve seen the previous trilogy, therefore don’t need a big rundown on Green Goblin as his story has already been told. I think as a comic book fan, a spider man fan in particular, THIS is what Spider-Man is SUPPOSED to look like: alone, outmatched, outgunned, surrounded by enemies that are either smarter than him, stronger than him,or both. He’s the most outmatched comic character in all of comics, that’s his appeal.

      • Serge

        i totally agree with you. i think there is, on some level, a familiarity to a premise of characters like the green goblins. you also nailed the whole idea of what makes spider-man so appealing (the fact that he’s always the outnumbered underdog, in terms of villains and in terms of life problems).
        but i still think it’s poor filmmaking to retell a story without giving at least some origin or development. charles dickens’ “christmas carol” has been adapted a ton of times, and almost evey movie establishes who the characters are and what motivates them, even though audiences are very familiar with them in 2014. i think it would cheapen the new franchise to rush these villians. villains like sam raimi’s the sandman would probably have benefited from more exposition. there’s nothing wrong with writing good characters

    • ItsjustMe

      They have addressed the spider-man 3, crammed with villains, situation on multiple occasions. They have said that the main villain is Electro, and that the others will only be there for extras. I mean damn the first movie wasn’t so good because it lacked enough/better action, along with other issues, but now that they give us an exciting movie people bitch because of prior movie fuck ups. In all actuality Spider-man 3 sucked because it was executed very poorly, the writing was bad, the whole movie was rushed, They didn’t want venom in it at all but Sony pushed for it. This movie seems like it was executed a lot better, I don’t know about you guys but if we can get more villains in a movie than 1 and make it work then I’m all for it. Spidey was constantly facing more than one enemy, why not adapt that to the screen. It’s like saying a sinister 6 team up is a bad idea…how the fuck could it be, its sinister 6, if it wasn’t for them pushing boundaries than we would have another shitty spider-man series. If you are a true fan of Spider-man you should be happy with what they are trying to bring to the table.

      • Pop Ninjas

        Pushing boundaries?? So far they’ve proven they can’t develop 1 villain in a movie, so forgive me for being skeptical of them getting 3 of them right

  • Publius

    I’m gonna guess Paul Giamatti’s Rhino will not have much screen time at all. It seems like Act 1 has Spidey meeting Electro in the middle of a battle, so presumably that’ll be where Giamatti comes in. As for the Goblin… yeah, no idea, maybe he/they vacillate between friend and enemy? Still, not nearly as excited by this as by Captain America 2.

    • eternalozzie

      yes .. with super bucky (face palm)

  • yrulaughing

    Sony really should just give in and admit that despite their plethora of villains, they only have the one hero, Spider-Man, which isn’t enough to build a massive film universe around.
    Make a deal with Disney and let him join the Avengers.

    • Rocketboy1313

      Actually Spiderman has a lot of anti-heroes and potential sidekicks that they could put in. Spidergirl, Black Cat, and Prowler are all in there, they just don’t know how to market them. Sort of like the WB and Batman, they can do Batman… And don’t really know what to do with the rest.

  • YodaRocks

    This reboot of Spiderman was a bad idea in first place and the built-up to this movie is only reinforcing it.
    This Spiderman is shallow. His supposed “coolness” looks nothing but goofy to me. The previous Spiderman series might have had some serious differences from the comics but at-least they made sense. In this new series there is no depth to any of the characters.
    This second installment of reboot will be a clusterfuck of villains and dry action sequences, nothing else.

    • A-man

      Sooner it comes out the better though, my friend.

      Let Sony lay waste to its hope for a potential franchise – they just don’t have the clout, or the money, to create anything more than another trilogy. And I think even by then (as with the 3rd Raimi Spidey film), most if not all of the steam will have left the train leaving them chugging out a lifeless fourth entry (if they’re “lucky.”)

      Besides, Marvel’s Cinematic Universe and DC’s soon-to-be combined franchise-Universe are probably going to corner the market in superhero-blockbusters so thoroughly that Sony and Fox will give up soon enough. Selling those characters back to Marvel at a nice, tidy sum.

      It’s all a money game… Shame we have to suffer though all the derivative PG-13 nonsense because of it though. Bring on Guardians of the Galaxy, I say, and let’s see if Marvel can do something truly unseen and inventive in the genre before now! – Bring on Superman Vs. Batman and let’s see if DC can present something as entertaining as the Avengers was on first watch – And bring on Age of Ultron, let’s see if Whedon et al can make good on the promise of all their hardwork up ’til now.

    • Brandon

      “In this new series there is no depth to any of the characters.”

      You’ve seen one movie, genius. How are you judging character development for the second movie. Based on a trailer?

      • YodaRocks

        The first movie is where character development should have been paramount. It doesn’t take a ‘genius’ to fathom this idea.
        And going by your response, you seem to be exactly the type of person because of whom sub-par movies are successful.

    • Kevin

      He has a backstory, an arrogant personality, complicated relationships with other characters, and yearns to find out more about his parents. You can say you didn’t like the first movie (neither did I), but you cannot say there is no depth to his character.

      • JBug

        The depth comes off as commercial and insincere due to average to poor execution on the director’s part. Everything about this movies screams “look at me, I have depth!”. Unfortunately, the harder they try, the more obvious it is they are failing. Raimi went simple and tried to accomplish one-two character themes a movie, without regard for making the plot big enough for 5 films.

        Also, the action/effects were way better in SM2 than TASM.

  • Jan

    I’m still living in 2008, getting pumped about Anne Hathaway as Black Cat and John Malkovich as Vulture in the upcoming Spider-Man 4. Also, I can’t wait for The Dark Knight this summer, trailer looks good!

    • yrulaughing

      Iron Man was so good, I bet the sequel’s going to be amazing!

  • MJ

    They are making the number one mistake of superhero sequels — including too many villains. I would have hoped that Roberto Orci had learned this lesson?

  • The Flobbit

    And we certainly need ONE MORE villain…

    • DoobieDave

      The actor said he is only in a couple of scenes and is not pivotal, so just calm down already…this is just a very misleading headline on Collider’s part. I totally called it that he would be playing Smythe.

  • eternalozzie

    It makes sense for him to be there … he’s one of oscorp’s mad scientists historically

  • Merlin235

    To be fair, it doesn’t sound like he has a large role. I don’t know if I’d include this as another ‘villain’. His character might not be kind but I’d be shocked if he had more than 5, 10 minutes screen time.

    • rgmadd7

      He’ll probably have a minor role. The Sam Raimi movies were all good. At one point Spiderman 2 was said to be the greatest superhero movie to date. I do not understand why people cut them down so much. If you didn’t like the nerdy family oriented peter parker that tobey Maguire portrayed, then your not a real spider man fan because that’s who peter parker was when he was in school. As far as action, there is not a better fight scene in any movie I’ve seen in the past 10 years than the one between spidey and the green goblin at the end of the first spiderman movie. I fell asleep during the new movie. I watched it again later, and it definitely had elements to the parker story that were left out of the older films. And it did have a lot of good things to offer. One thing I did not like as a long time spiderman fan and comic reader was the way they decided to flash everything up. Why does he need a skateboard? So stupid. He’s supposed to be awkward and nerdy and a bit goofy. I will admit that spiderman 3 was worse than the first two but I do agree that that was the fault of the studio insisting on adding venom and pressuring Raimi. I think they should have introduced the symbiote costume and Eddie Brock but left venom for a fourth movie. Sam Raimi has nothing to be ashamed of the studio on the other hand ruined a good thing by being too damn greedy and rushing the writing process. You cant force a good flick. Raimi had other villians in mind as well as actors to play them. As to the overall feel of the old Spiderman movies a lot of people say they felt weird. It’s a story about a guy who gets bitten by a radioactive bug, its supposed to be a little strange. P.S. Cap2 looks awesome! Super excited about Guardians of the Galaxy! If you don’t like Bucky or Rocket you can go suck one.

      • Brandon

        Spider-Man 3 was NOT “good”..
        I am a HUGE Spider-Man fan, but it was atrocious.

      • Jack Reacher

        Certainly better than what we got now.

      • eternalozzie

        I am tire of being called “not a real fan” by people who like the watered down power ranger Raimi movies … Doc Ock was the only thing Raimi got right in those terrible movies.

      • poo

        I liked goblin on the first but yeah agreed. no web shooters really sucked.

      • poo

        I liked goblin on the first but yeah agreed. no web shooters really sucked.

  • James Thompson

    Pretty sure they’re setting up the sinister six. I’d say the only way they could make this good is by not developing the villains in all honesty. We need screen time for all the parts where Peter struggles with his identity, Gwen, etc. and I’d rather see all that with a vague idea of why the villains are what they are, rather than knowing every little detail about the villains and seeing nothing about Peter.

    Do we really care that much about the villains’ backstory? The fact that they work for Oscorp is enough for me.

    • Michaels

      Somebody speaks sense… at last!

  • DNAsplitter

    I don’t mind them introducing Smythe to set up his character up in future films, which seems to be the case as he’s only in a few scenes, but still this film has way too many villians. Having more than two becomes a tough juggling act that’s hard to pull off. Rhino, Electro and Green Goblin will be interesting to see done correctly in one film. My thoughts is that Rhino is just some opening scene villian that will be easily captured only to reemerge in a later film (hopefully w a different look – fingers crossed the classic version) w the main film dealing primarily w Electro and having Green Goblin come in at the end.

  • Steven

    I’ve had craps less stinky than this film.

  • Melwing

    I think it’s clear that there is only ONE villain for this film: Marc Webb.

    • JBug


  • cezar211091 .


  • Dmula

    What an idiot they could have made 3 more films if they split up the villians,some bodies going to need to step in and help him,hopefully marvel just gets the rights soon and Spider-Man can be in an avengers movie

  • Christian

    I’m not feeling the tagline. “His Greatest Battle Begins.” What’s part three going to use? “He Thought His Greatest Battle Had Begun, But This Time It’s For Real!”

  • JBug

    I heard a rumor that Spiderman was going to be in this movie as well.

  • doctor_robot

    i’m wondering what the average age is on this thread. smh

  • Overheten

    S3 was only bad because of the amount of time that was wasted on the boring drawn out love triangle nonsense…. then they threw in Gwen Stacy…

    oh… AND

    Then they threw in the dance number…

    oh.. AND

    Then the one man in the entire world who could make Spidey turn to evil JUST SO HAPPENS to fall into a scientific thing- becomes the Sandman AND yes- he JUST SO HAPPENS to be the REAL dude who killed his uncle.

    Then Peter Parker’s nemesis at work JUST SO HAPPENS to walk into the same church at the EXACT moment that Spidey is tearing off the suit with the church bell sonic sounds so JUST SO HAPPENS to fall onto the dude below.. he becomes Venom.

    About as exciting as when Batgirl became Batgirl in Batman and Robin- she JUST SO HAPPENED to find the Batcave (just like Robin did) and Alfred JUST SO HAPPENED to expect this to happen. So he made her a Batgirl outfit.

    So here we go again with all these new Spidey villains that JUST SO HAPPEN to have something to do with Oscorp.

  • Michaels

    I don’t see the problem with the increasing number of villain as long as their inclusion makes sense and is not forced for extravagance. If it’s written well, I say, why not add more…. The DARK KNIGHT had Joker, Harvey Dent , Scarecrow and the entire Gotham mob. They could have put the Penguin in with the mob and it would have made complete sense. Their part in the movie may be very small and (as I suspect) to simply set them up for future movies. Most importantly, what needs to be understood is that these movies are playing off the history already set-up from the original trilogy, effectively telling the story differently… so the need for major introduction for every villain is unnecessary. #Imjustsaying

  • shane willett

    Thing about Spiderman and Batman is there endless people who want them dead and another group that want the two locked up, so it’s safe to put as many villians you can without it feeling forced, do ti!

  • videogamesaremoreentertaining

    We all want to see Venom and Carnage and the syndicate

  • ken

    everyones forgetting there was a villain group called the sinister six. that fought spidey multiple times.kraven is even supposed to be in the game released with the movie. so i just feel thats where all this is be damned happy if it does