Stupidity: Harry Osborn quite literally inherited the company his father founded. Presumably he owns or controls a majority of the stocks, because he was appointed CEO by his father and nobody questioned him. However, one of his employees can just instantaneously fire him from his position. We don't know the precise rules and internal regulations of Oscorp, but it's safe to say that this is not how company hierarchy works, especially considered that no charges are pressed on Harry and everyone would be out of a job (including Menken) if the circumstances were public - like having created a monster and waterboarding a guy in their basement.
Sammo
9th Feb 2022
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Traditionally, CEO's can be fired if the company board votes them out of their position. (Something similar actually happens to Norman in the 2002 film.) While Menken doesn't specifically say this is what happened, he did frame Harry for covering up Dillon's "death," so we can safely assume that there was some sort-of emergency vote to remove Harry in the meantime as part of his power-play. (It'd honestly just be a waste of screen-time to show it.) Additionally, given the allegations against Harry (covering up a death), who would believe him if he came forward, anyways? Also, Electro is being waterboarded in a different location (Ravencroft Institute), not the Oscorp basement.
The thing is, the Raimi movie set the situation up properly. Norman was dealing with the board members in the meeting with the military already, and the business situation was addressed in a short scene that made clear a power play for profit. He was the boss, but not a monarch, and they don't "fire" him showing up with the guards anyway. The 'board' scene in TAS2? Harry treats everyone like lackeys and mentions that everyone will 'work' for Felicia; he bosses everyone around appearing to have inherited the position. It is mentioned that to depose the already ill and scandal-ridden Normal from his post would have needed legal action. Extra emphasis is given by Menken about any scandal going to hurt the company. Even if he had in mind to use Harry as scapegoat from the getgo, as I said, it would hurt the company terribly (going by the logic of the movie first and foremost), and he pulled off an amazing powerplay using incriminating evidence against Harry recorded an hour earlier and that he couldn't realistically share without destoying the company. It was damaged so heavily by an employee going rogue, what about the new CEO going nuts to the point of being kicked out, whatever the reason was? Lastly yes, Ravencroft appears to be part of Oscorp, so I simplified there. Of course yes, the throwaway "you're fired' line saves time, but the situation struck me as contradictory.
I can definitely understand where you're coming from, so I'll just say I think this is probably an agree to disagree situation. I feel like it's easy enough to explain away any contradictions or holes with some conjecture (I think like it ultimately comes down to the movie just not wanting to bog itself down explaining every detail), but the way the movie presents it is indeed a little over-simplified and janky. So I totally understand your take.
22nd Dec 2017
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Other mistake: After Electro gets the two cables on his chest, his clothes do not burn and have no marks. (00:58:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Actually they do burn, since they emit smoke very noticeably. They don't show marks, true. One could argue that Electro does pretty weird things with his clothes in general in this movie, since he has underpants resistant to anything and his clothes of choice stay with him even when he switches from pure energy to solid form, but make of that argument what you will.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Corrected entry: Richard Parker tries to connect the Ethernet cable to his laptop at the beginning of the movie to upload a file. There was no in-plane internet 15-20 years ago.
Correction: Richard Parker worked for Oscorp, so, we can assume that they had all kinds of advanced technology 15 years ago.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Continuity mistake: During the battle with Green Goblin, when Gwen Stacy is falling through the clock tower, there are dozens of gears and other pieces of various sizes falling with her. However, when she lands, only a few small gears and pieces land alongside her - all the other debris that were falling have seemingly vanished. (02:01:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That part of the scene is SO dark that it's really hard to tell; they do show some gears and pieces land after she does and there are some gears and pieces next to her when he walks to her. I wouldn't say there's none, but I'd say it does seem a disproportionately low amount considering how many giant gears were falling.
Given that even you admit in your correction that the number of gears seems disproportionately low (which it is - we only see a few small pieces landing when there were dozens and dozens of pieces in different sizes falling), I think amending the wording through a word-change is a better option than trying to correct the mistake itself. Because there is still a mistake here. Going to go ahead and do that after I post this response. (Might take a few days to change, though).
5th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Corrected entry: The laptop Richard Parker is using looks too modern for a 20 year old video. Models like that were only released pretty recently. We could've assumed that Oscorp is a brilliant industry and they invented such laptops, but it says "Sony Vaio" on it.
Correction: If the first film took place around the year of its release (2012), based on Peter's age when he is left by his parents (he appears to be at least 4 or 5 years old, if not slightly older), it would mean the scenes with his parents took place in the very late 90's/early 2000's. Not quite "20 years ago." And the computers/laptops his father used all appear to resemble late 90's/early 2000's computers. (Obviously the more expensive ones, but they appear to be more-or-less correct to the timeframe.) Sony Vaio was also around at that time.
Correction: As the previous correction said, I concur that the timeframe appears to be correct; the newspaper and internet stories Peter looks up set the events regarding Peter's parents and their disappearance in 2002, the FBI file is dated 2/22/2002. I can't identify precisely the model of Vaio used, it does have the aesthetics of their 700 series (the PCG-745 is nearly identical, for instance) and they were available before the turn of the century.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.