Alex Kurtzman says Amazing Spider-Man 2 will answer first film’s questions

Expect the parents issue to be explained

One of the main gripes about The Amazing Spider-Man, was the way in which Marc Webb’s film went to great pains to ask questions about the mysterious disappearance of Peter’s parents, only to drop them again without supplying any answers.

However, it seems that said questions will be investigated in full in round two, with screenwriter Alex Kurtzman explaining how those issues will resonate in the sequel.

“It’s interesting,” says Kurtzman, “because the first movie asks all these questions and what I loved about it in so many ways is that it didn’t answer them. Part of what we were drawn to and intrigued by was wanting to know the answers to a lot of those questions.

“The villains emerge from a lot of unanswered questions at the end of that movie and none of them are random at all, they are all tied together by a theme, an idea, and I think they come from our curiosity about what was going on in the life of Peter Parker and his parents.”

The last thing we discovered about the pair was that Richard Parker’s research prompted he and his wife to flee the city abruptly, but the details of that remain blurry. If we were to guess, we’d suggest that Oscorp and Norman Osborn will be heavily involved…

Directed by Webb and co-starring Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone and Jamie Foxx, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 will open in the UK on 18 April 2014.

How do you think the mystery will be explained? Share your theories, below!

Comments

    • illkillyoulast

      Sep 23rd 2013, 11:24

      the first question i want answered is why bother making a remake five mins after the the first trilogy?

      Alert a moderator

    • apo1978

      Sep 23rd 2013, 12:15

      @ illkillyoulast - haha beat me to it! Don't worry, I hear he comes back as The Amazing Re-Boot Man...

      Alert a moderator

    • Indianabones

      Sep 23rd 2013, 14:02

      I think it's an easy answer, We needed a better (I'm not using the word Superior;) Spiderman film than Raimi's! He got somethings right, but not a lot! Spiderman 1 isn't that great of a movie (should have had Gwen and also had the correct Ending with the Goblin), Spidy 2 is actually pretty good apart from MJ! awful casting and the Character is so far from MJ she should have been called someone else! and is there any reason for me to mention the god awful (power ranger goblin) Spidy 3?

      Alert a moderator

    • spid2411

      Sep 23rd 2013, 15:30

      Spider-man 2 was excellent - the train fight sequence was stunning. The first one was mediocre mainly because they messed up the Green Goblin (make him a goblin, not a guy in a silly power rangers suit) and the third one was a mess because of the now customary studio interference/too many villains. The problem is ... the reboot appears to be following the same trend. The first one was merely ok but had a rotten villain (the lizard looked stupid) - the second one looks excellent but now they are talking about a third one with tons of villains (which ruined Raimi's third one). So really it seems pretty pointless - the Marvel/Sony films don't understand how important the villains are. If you get them wrong, the film is instantly forgettable (which is why the other Marvel stuff is s**t - no good villains)

      Alert a moderator

    • timboyer

      Sep 23rd 2013, 21:30

      All this talk that Spider-Man 3 was ruined by too many villains. It wasn't. It was ruined by poorly used villains and bad casting. There have been plenty of comic book movies that have had three or more villains and have been successful (All of the Dark Knight movies and X-Men 1 and 2). The bigger issue is how do you use those villains and who do you cast. Venom/ Eddie Brock were horribly cast. Also, the decision to make Sandman the actual murderer of Uncle Ben was a bad decision. Couple those with some really odd ball scenes (dance numbers, hip thrusts) and repetitive themes (seriously, another Mary Jane kidnapping?) and those are the reasons that Spider-Man 3 sucked. It wasn't because of too many villains. It was due to bad writing and decision making.

      Alert a moderator

    • spid2411

      Sep 24th 2013, 8:35

      timboyer - it was badly written but it WAS also due to having too many villains. The reason it differs from the Dark Knight films is that although they also had several bad guys, those characters were an integral part of the narrative in each film. In Spiderman 3 they just forced Venom in because the studio wanted to sell dolls. So it was both terrible writing and a desire to have as many villains shoved in as they could (in what way could you connect the Sandman with Venom??) with no regard for how they fitted into the story. As for the bit when they made Peter Parker go "dark" by making him look like a camp goth with eye shadow and his top shirt button undone - give us a break.

      Alert a moderator

    • QuietLife

      Sep 24th 2013, 12:52

      My first question is: "Why did you cast such an annoying, permanently gurning fool such as Garfield?"

      Alert a moderator

    • Indianabones

      Sep 24th 2013, 13:26

      I thought he was really well casted! to me as a huge comic Spidy fan I thought he suited Peter Parker so much more than Tobey Maguire

      Alert a moderator

    • vincevega

      Sep 25th 2013, 10:28

      @QuietLife, agree with you, bad casting choice. i think they tried to find an "anti-hero" type of...

      Alert a moderator

    • vincevega

      Sep 25th 2013, 10:30

      spid2411 - no it WAS not due to too many vilains (apparently putting things in caps make people right).

      Alert a moderator

    • spid2411

      Sep 25th 2013, 12:06

      vincevega - YOUR VERY CLEVER AND really funny..

      Alert a moderator

    • patriciahanson

      Oct 1st 2013, 19:29

      upto I saw the bank draft which had said $9704, I accept ...that...my father in law woz like truly making money part time on their apple labtop.. there sisters roommate haz done this for under seven months and just now took care of the mortgage on their villa and bought Jaguar E-type. check... url.ℳn/23bb7d0

      Alert a moderator