I know fans get behind whatever movie they're hyping is doing before release and for about a year afterwards (example: Dr. Connors is divorced? Cool and realistic!), but this argument is just silly.
A man turning into a lizard monster is believable. Him having torn clothes on is not?
A boy being able to move like a spider from a radioactive bite is realistic, but a torn lab coat crosses some versimilitude line?
IT should be there because it is part of his iconic look. Like Venom needs fangs and a tongue, Doc Ock wears sunglasses, Joker wears a purple suit with green hair and The Kingpin is bald. It's just a definitive part of the character's iconic look. YOu take it away, the character becomes a generic movie villain--in Lizard's case a giant reptilian monster from a B sci-fi movie. Besides, like The Wolfman from last year, the iconic look gives a humanity to the monster of what's been destroyed and makes him more visually interesting to watch.