The Amazing Spider-Man Forum

• Add

I was surprised to see a thread didn't already exist for this. Needless to say, spoilers will follow.

Well, that was quite a vague credits sequence. Was it Norman? Was it just showing that Curt is still going crazy? Or was it the incredibly obscure character Sundown? Speak your mind!

If I had to guess I'd say that there's a fifty percent chance that that character was just a nameless employee working for Norman Osborn (Osborn is tied in there in some way but I don't think that was him), and if that's the case I don't know if we'll actually see that specific character again. However, seeing as how this franchise wants to focus more on the science side of Spider-Man, if that was a named character, then my money is on The Jackal.

Man, I missed this scene because I didn't wait. What happened? I'm not going to go see it again.

@k4tzm4n: The IMDB cast list identifies the man in the shadows as Norman Osborn. No idea whether that's official.

@Sandor said:

@k4tzm4n: The IMDB cast list identifies the man in the shadows as Norman Osborn. No idea whether that's official.

I made sure to watch the credits in the movie to see if they identified him, and nobody was listed as Norman Osborn, they just listed him as "Shadowy Figure" so it's not official.

It could be 50/50 if that was real or just Connors being mad. I don't think it's Osborn who we are told is dying so I doubt he wants to go outside. Maybe it's the Jackal like @obscurefan said or perhaps one of the Smythes. Alistair Smythe was in The Amazing Spider-man Game maybe that was his dad. Fighting the Spider Slayers could be a easy way to make a physical villain.

Rhys has confirmed that it's not Osborn.

It's Richard Parker. They confirmed it wasn't Norman Osborn and no one else would make sense.

I new that scene was coming and I totally expected to be able to call the villain but I have no idea who that was. I sorta thought it was Osborn but apparently not. Exciting!

This is totally out of left field, but seeing as how he does a disappearing act it might be Mysterio, not the main Earth 616 version we all know with the fishbowl head, but more like the Ultimate version of him where he's more of a man of mystery (although I'm still betting its the Jackal).

Did anyone else think that scene ended really weirdly? There's no real punch at the end, it just kind of stops in what feels like mid-scene, then fades out awkwardly. All it really needed was like a smirk or a laugh from the man in the shadows.

@TheSouthernDandy said:

I new that scene was coming and I totally expected to be able to call the villain but I have no idea who that was. I sorta thought it was Osborn but apparently not. Exciting!

yeah I assumed it was Osborn. But i guess this means it's Richard Parker.

@ashogo said:

Did anyone else think that scene ended really weirdly? There's no real punch at the end, it just kind of stops in what feels like mid-scene, then fades out awkwardly. All it really needed was like a smirk or a laugh from the man in the shadows.

it was poorly done.

@VioletEyedDragon said:

It's Richard Parker. They confirmed it wasn't Norman Osborn and no one else would make sense.

I don't remember Peter's dad sounding like Freddy Kruger. Seriously though why would it be Richard Parker? Are we assuming he's in disguise? Why can't it be a new character? Not trying to flame just interested in why you think this.

Personally I think it's Mysterio but that's utterly baseless with only the fact that he get's in and out of the room all... mysterious like...

@ThePhantomStranger: his dad just disappeared and they must be going somewhere with that whole plot line. and i don't think it would make sense to introduce a whole new character like that without any hints of what he might be like.

i would love to see mysterio in one of these movies, though. he is one of my favorites.

My shot in the dark is the Chameleon, based upon a couple of ideas. First, in the comics, the Chameleon worked for Harry Osbourne to try and create androids of Peter's parents in order to discover the true identity of Spider-Man. With the film putting much more emphasis on the mystery behind Peter's parents, I wouldn't be surprised to see a story line where the Chameleon and the Green Goblin use Peter's longing to learn more about his parents in order to figure out who Spider-Man really is.

Secondly, the film seems to go out of its way to reveal absolutely no features of the mysterious man. While this could simply be to obscure the identity for now, I believe that by playing up the facelessness of the character, they are in turn alluding to the Chameleons ability to change his appearance at will. I refuse to believe that he is hidden just so the film makers can play coy with the audience. The point of the after credit scenes is to get the movie watchers excited about what sequels may come. For example, (and I am well aware that this may be a poor example because it is a different film and studio entirely) The Avengers made it very clear who the villain will be in the eventual sequel, and by doing so, have already planted the seeds of Avengers 2 in the minds of man excited individuals. I just can't see Sony Pictures, Marvel, or anyone else involved passing up an opportunity to hook people into a second Amazing Spider-Man film so quickly and easily.

Finally, and while this may just be pure coincidence, the Chameleon first appeared in The Amazing Spider-Man #1, back in 1963. I really don't see Sony or Marvel revisiting a villain that was in the previous Spider-Man trilogy and this little nod to an original member of the rogues gallery could work well.

Also, while sort of on topic, did anyone else think that the mysterious figure sounded like Martin Short? Did anyone else think the same or is that just my Canadian bias kicking in?

I'm going to guess that it's Morbius. Marvel brought the Lizard back into one of Spider-Man's arcs leading up to this movie's release and they plan to start a new arc involving the Lizard that will also have Morbius in it (source: http://www.comicvine.com/news/marvels-big-san-diego-comic-con-announcements-all-in-one-place/144947/).

Marvel intentionally shined a light on the Avengers characters in comics due to their movies coming and they plan to do the same for Guardians of the Galaxy now, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is their way of indirectly confirming it to be Morbius.

Also, the game based on the movie is touted as having a story that takes place after the movie's storyline and it features Morbius. "Michael Morbius appears in The Amazing Spider-Man video game (based on The Amazing Spider-Man).[40] He is biochemist who is forced by corrupt Oscorp executive Alistair Smythe into creating Rhino. In a discussion between Spider-Man and Dr. Curt Connors, it was mentioned that Michael Morbius was studying bats as a means to cure his rare blood disease. He is mocked by his fellow employees for being reclusive, hence his nickname "Morbius, the Living Vampire"." (taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morbius,_the_Living_Vampire, go down to "Video Games")

It seems like it could "add up" to being him.