Subscribe to our RSS Follow us on twitter Visit our facebook page Subscribe on youtube

The Amazing Spider-Man 2: Poster & Synopsis

amazing-spider-man-2-poster-2013

Ahead of the first trailer on Thursday, a full synopsis and poster for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has been released.

We’ve always known that Spider-Man’s most important battle has been within himself: the struggle between the ordinary obligations of Peter Parker and the extraordinary responsibilities of Spider-Man. But in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Peter Parker finds that a greater conflict lies ahead.

It’s great to be Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). For Peter Parker, there’s no feeling quite like swinging between skyscrapers, embracing being the hero, and spending time with Gwen (Emma Stone). But being Spider-Man comes at a price: only Spider-Man can protect his fellow New Yorkers from the formidable villains that threaten the city. With the emergence of Electro (Jamie Foxx), Peter must confront a foe far more powerful than he. And as his old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, Peter comes to realize that all of his enemies have one thing in common: OsCorp.

Related posts:

  • HenryWho

    Can’t wait for the trailer! Although i don’t like that Robot Rhino look, much prefer Cross Species Rhino!

  • Sharaz_Jek

    3 villians at once? Didn’t they learn anything from Spider-Man 3? I’m really worried this will turn out to be one big mess :(

    • lp229

      I share you concern. While Spider man 1 and 2 of the original run were great films, 3 overstretched itself and suffered for it in terms of quality.

    • Calebxy

      Spider-Man 3′s problem wasn’t that it had three villains. Its problem was that it had a terrible script. :P Many other films have had multiple films yet been brilliant. Nolan’s Batman trilogy, for example, has many villains per film, yet most agree that it’s an amazingly good trilogy.

      And anyway, the director of this film has confirmed that the main villain will be Electro. Rhino has little more than a cameo, apparently, and the Green Goblin will almost definitely turn up towards the end. I fully trust that the writers know what they’re doing.

      • Sharaz_Jek

        Well, to me one of Spider-Man 3′s main problems (aside from the inconsistent tone and a Chicago-style dance number) was that each villian wasn’t given proper time. Especially Venom (my favorite Spiderman villain) being tacked onto the end for just 30 more minutes.
        Amazing Spiderman already failed with the Lizard in the first one, so I find them now taking 3 at once very concerning. And if they are only camoes/appearing at the end, why put them in the poster?
        The Nolan Batman films only had 2 each, with one as the main antagonist (And the inclusion of Talia heavily weakened Bane’s impact at the end).

        • Calebxy

          True, and that’s because it had a bad script. A good script would have been able to handle all three of them well.

          I thought TASM was brilliant, including the Lizard’s role. Dr Conners was given enough time for us and Peter to become emotionally connected to him, and he got plenty of time as the Lizard (three fights against Spider-Man, as well as other scenes).

          Batman Begins had Ra’s al Ghul, Scarecrow, and the Mafia boss person (or whoever he was). The Dark Knight had The Joker, Two-Face, and a scene with Scarecrow. The Dark Knight Rises had Bane, Talia, that person who thought he was in charge of Bane, and a scene or two with Scarecrow (though I’ll grant you that that doesn’t really count).

          Again, the reason Spider-Man 3 was a terrible film was because it was a terrible film, not because it had three villains

          • Sharaz_Jek

            I really didn’t like how they handled the Lizard. Dr Conners goes from well-meaning, morally challenging character to murdering, power-hungry king of reptiles within a single scene, just to save Spiderman at the end for no real reason. There was just now character development with him. Compare that to for example Harvey Dent in The Dark Knight: with him you see how he slowly turns, how his psyche is being broken by the joker’s actions. From scene to scene you see the progression from Harvey Dent towards Two-Face. In Amazing Spiderman, it was an instant switch without explanation.
            In addition to that I also did not like Andrew Garfield as Peter Parker either (not his performance, but more how the script portrait him)

          • Calebxy

            The reason for his sudden change was the drug. The actor even explained that he was planning him like an addict, who felt powerful with the drug, and wanted to share that power with others. The reason there was no character development was because there wasn’t any. His character wasn’t changing – he was just under the influence of the drug. The character of Dr Conners has never actually become evil in any interpretation, as far as I’m aware. He’s merely had his mind turned vicious and insane after injecting himself. That’s how his character is supposed to be. It’s no fault of the film.

            However, I admit that his change back to being good at the end was quite bizarre and unprecedented.

          • The Administrator

            I think it’s worth noting that the three villains in ASM2 will all be connected. All their origins will be tied with Oscorp and it’s almost definite that Norman Osborn will be introduced as a sort of mastermind controlling the other two villains from the shadows. Spider-Man 3 had no connections between any of the villains hence why it didn’t work very well. As all three villains in Amazing Spider-Man 2 are connected, it will feel less cluttered and messy.

          • Calebxy

            Indeed. The writers have said that all the characters are in this film for a reason, and I trust they know what they’re doing.

    • dalekjack

      I liked Spiderman 3. :-(

Follow

rss twitter youtube facebook