Quote:
Originally Posted by Deberg_1990
So someone actually did some research and determined that Sony actually did some last minute recutting the past few weeks and took out the "Untold Story" of Spidey which they had been advertising. Sounds like they got cold feet at the last minute not wanting to upset fans.
http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/w...ng-spider-man/
"Months ago I told you guys that I heard rumors that The Amazing Spider-Man would be making a simple, but huge, change to Spider-Man’s origin. No longer would the spider bite change Peter Parker into a superhero. Rather, the spider bite would activate something already within him that would make him a superhero.
This is not reflected in the final movie. Sort of. The hints of it are still there, and when you add in deleted elements that snuck into the marketing you can see the shape of the thing where it once existed.............." |
That actually would make more sense to me within the context of this story. If Peter's father was supposed to be this brainiac scientist, it would make sense that either a.) Peter accidentally was exposed to something while younger, or b.) his father purposefully exposed him (maybe as a way to cure Peter of some childhood ailment). It always seemed odd to me that "a" radioactive spider could do this to just one person. In this film version, the room was chock full of spiders. One bit Peter. So you mean to tell me that none of the other spiders, either accidentally or purposefully (human experimentation), bit any of the scientists or workers? If there was something within Peter waiting to be triggered, then it would explain why he alone developed such spiderpowers.