Doctor Strange In the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

I couldn’t care less about the America character. Might be the worst character in a Marvel film yet.

I thought Xochitl Gomez did what she could with the lacking material that was given to her. The problem was the writing. She didn't have much to do other than functioning as a literal living MacGuffin. If she had been given more development or had more of an active role to play in the story, that would have been much more interesting.

 

[Robert Crawford]

No. She just turned 16 10 days ago - that woman is clearly not 15.

And I don't see a strong resemblance between that woman and XG anyway.

Well, I do, anyhow Patrick answered my question.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Here is Gomez' IMDb page with her previous credits. As far as I know, I haven't seen her before this film.

Xochitl Gomez | Actress

Known for: Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, The Baby-Sitters Club, Gentefied

www.imdb.com

I think she demonstrated in this movie that she is talented, and I hope they give her a more substantial role in future films.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I don't like this multi-verse stuff because they can simply kill off one super hero then bring them back from another verse. I guess I'm getting too old to keep up with these storylines.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I don't like this multi-verse stuff because they can simply kill off one super hero then bring them back from another verse.

I think it would be a problem if they start doing that over and over again because it would lower the stakes. But as is usually the case, it depends on the quality of the writing and what they do with the alternate character.

if the movie is written well, the multiverse concept presents narrative opportunities to have multiple versions of characters meet each other and examine their choices and differences. Spider-Man: No Way Home and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse both used the concept really well, and so did the Loki Disney+ show.

Outside of Marvel, Everything Everywhere All At Once is another recent example of knocking the multiverse concept out of the park.

 

[Chris Will]

Spider-Man: No Way Home and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse both used the concept really well, and so did the Loki Disney+ show.

Spider-Verse did it better because we got Spider-pig! I really wanted him to show up in No Way Home.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I don't like this multi-verse stuff because they can simply kill off one super hero then bring them back from another verse. I guess I'm getting too old to keep up with these storylines.

I intend to watch this picture at some point. What intrigued me about it was it is said to be a cross between a horror film and a superhero picture. The clips I have seen don't look that great and I read a primer on the film that was like having to learn a whole bunch of new vocabulary just to watch this. So, my guess is, I probably will have little understanding of what this one is about.

Anyway, in my reading about this picture I basically learned what the "multi-verse" is for these movies. It is essentially a never-ending recycling center that allows all other films made about these topics to be tied together in some way and allows you to have multiple versions of the same characters. So, in each different universe the characters can be other things, so male in one universe, female in another, different races in different universes, good or evil depending upon the universe, and really, yes, the big issue with these films is it creates an environment where characters never die...they just respawn like a video game. So, there are literally no stakes, the characters don't really matter because they exist in never-ending multiples, and they can just put anybody in a costume to play any character.

I mean, this diminishes the appeal of watching these films, at least for me, even more than before. It does seem like a dream scenario for the people that want to keep pumping these films out though. No matter what you do in each story, it is basically pointless because you can retrofit whatever you want onto it at the end.

It is sort of hilariously stupid in a way and I saw a clip of a bunch of actors that had all played Spiderman over the years all sitting around chatting in a Spiderman film because I guess they are all just Spidermen from different universes and somehow they all met in whatever universe they were in at that moment.

So, still curious how they handle the horror/superhero mash-up but this looks like the picture is mostly about using the multiverse gimmick to just pump out more and more sequels.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Writer Michael Waldron discusses his story decisions:

‘Doctor Strange 2’ Screenwriter Defends Wanda’s Evolution, Talks Cameos and His ‘Star Wars’ Script

'Doctor Strange 2' writer Michael Waldron explains Wanda's surprising choices, how those big cameos happened, and other burning questions.

variety.com

Spoiler

He originally considered having Wanda break bad later in the film, but decided they needed her there from the start.

"There was never a way to service her fall from grace properly as a supporting character in the movie because there had to be a separate antagonist," he explained. "And it also felt like we were leaving the biggest bit of fun on the table for somebody else. And, truth be told, having watched and experienced and studied 'WandaVision,' I felt like she was at the point, in possession of the Darkhold, where she was ready to break bad."

The above statement about WandaVision ending with her in possession of the Darkhold lines up with the way I saw it.

"My interpretation of 'WandaVision' is that she confronts her grief and she lets go of the people she has under her control, but I don’t think she necessarily resolves her grief in that show, and I don’t think she resolves her anger. Maybe she’s able to say goodbye to Vision, but I think she’s really just fallen in love with those kids. I think that all of those hanging threads are the things that the Darkhold preys on when she gets the Darkhold from Agatha."

Again, pretty much exactly as I interpreted her state of mind and fall and the role of the Darkhold itself in that process.

Asked about her ultimate fate:

"I think that’s up for interpretation. She made some kind of sacrificial act that destroyed the Darkhold in every universe, which is protecting Wanda in every universe from being seduced by the Darkhold. Whether she’s dead or not remains to be seen," the writer ponders. "I know what it’s like to love characters and to not want them to be gone and to hate when they do bad things. But that’s that’s part of the fun of watching stuff and getting swept up in it."

 

[jayembee]

Spoiler

I thought they did take her character growth into account.

And then, like pretty much everyone in real life who's had severe trauma, she backslid. Addicts, PTSD victims, etc. - they don't get better - they struggle for the rest of their lives, and most falter at some point (or are one bad day from faltering).

What people seem to be forgetting, or ignoring, is that at the end of WandaVision, we saw Wanda continuing to peruse the Darkhold. So while she might have intended to not embrace the Dark Side again, she was succumbing to it in the process.

On edit: Of course, I got there a day late and a dollar short...

 

[jayembee]

If there are truly infinite universes for every possible branching off point, then by definition there are infinite universes where Reed Richards looks like John Krasinski, infinite universes where Reed Richards does not look like John Krasinski, and infinite universes with no Reed Richards at all.

Exactly. The whole point of a multiverse is that whatever can happen or be, there's a universe for that. I was surprised that people were constantly telling Dr. Strange that he "is just like all of the other Stranges and can't be trusted". I was waiting for him to point out that the existence of a multiverse means that not all Stranges (or anyone else) are the same.

 

[jayembee]

Agree that the MCU projects don't have to connect all the time.

I don't get the prior POV that it's pointless to watch any MCU project that doesn't link to the others.

I mean, the comics rarely really linked to each other - they told standalone stories.

Why does everything MCU need to be connected?

Simple answer: they don't.

Back in the day, I used to embrace the everything-is-connected mentality. That started to wear off over time. At the point where everyone began complaining that the movies weren't acknowledging Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and the Netflix shows, and that those productions were "officially non-canonical", my attitude became that if you want the productions to be linked, then consider them linked whether it's "official" or not. If you don't want them linked, consider them not linked. The shows are good (or bad) regardless of whether they're synched with the films, and changing their link status isn't going to make them better or worse.

 

[jayembee]

We watched it and enjoyed it. Mid-tier Marvel for me.

Same here. But I'd also say that it's "mid-tier" for me only because there are a dozen or so MCU films that I like better, not because I wasn't thrilled by this one.

 

[jayembee]

Spider-Verse did it better because we got Spider-pig! I really wanted him to show up in No Way Home.

"Spider-pig, spider-pig, does whatever a Spider-pig does..." -- Homer Simpson (The Simpsons Movie)

 

[jayembee]

I intend to watch this picture at some point. What intrigued me about it was it is said to be a cross between a horror film and a superhero picture. The clips I have seen don't look that great and I read a primer on the film that was like having to learn a whole bunch of new vocabulary just to watch this. So, my guess is, I probably will have little understanding of what this one is about.

Anyway, in my reading about this picture I basically learned what the "multi-verse" is for these movies. It is essentially a never-ending recycling center that allows all other films made about these topics to be tied together in some way and allows you to have multiple versions of the same characters. So, in each different universe the characters can be other things, so male in one universe, female in another, different races in different universes, good or evil depending upon the universe, and really, yes, the big issue with these films is it creates an environment where characters never die...they just respawn like a video game. So, there are literally no stakes, the characters don't really matter because they exist in never-ending multiples, and they can just put anybody in a costume to play any character.

I mean, this diminishes the appeal of watching these films, at least for me, even more than before. It does seem like a dream scenario for the people that want to keep pumping these films out though. No matter what you do in each story, it is basically pointless because you can retrofit whatever you want onto it at the end.

It is sort of hilariously stupid in a way and I saw a clip of a bunch of actors that had all played Spiderman over the years all sitting around chatting in a Spiderman film because I guess they are all just Spidermen from different universes and somehow they all met in whatever universe they were in at that moment.

So, still curious how they handle the horror/superhero mash-up but this looks like the picture is mostly about using the multiverse gimmick to just pump out more and more sequels.

Sounds like you should just walk away.

While I can understand why you think the multiverse is a "gimmick to just pump out more and more sequels", you're forgetting that Marvel can do that with or without a multiverse. I mean, they've been doing it for the over a dozen years now without one.

The concept of the multiverse, whether in comics or otherwise, is nothing more than an exploration of "the road less traveled". More often than not, I'd say, it's used to show a dystopian view, where maybe the hero is a villain instead. An easy example would be the Star Trek episode "Mirror, Mirror", where instead of being part of a good Federation, Earth rules an evil Empire.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Simple answer: they don't.

Back in the day, I used to embrace the everything-is-connected mentality. That started to wear off over time. At the point where everyone began complaining that the movies weren't acknowledging Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and the Netflix shows, and that those productions were "officially non-canonical", my attitude became that if you want the productions to be linked, then consider them linked whether it's "official" or not. If you don't want them linked, consider them not linked. The shows are good (or bad) regardless of whether they're synched with the films, and changing their link status isn't going to make them better or worse.

Was kinda waiting to see if @Wayne_j ever explained why a lack of interconnected content made those standalones "pointless".

 

[TravisR]

I intend to watch this picture at some point. What intrigued me about it was it is said to be a cross between a horror film and a superhero picture. The clips I have seen don't look that great and I read a primer on the film that was like having to learn a whole bunch of new vocabulary just to watch this. So, my guess is, I probably will have little understanding of what this one is about.

My recommendation would be to not sweat the continuity or motivations or cameos because they've all been set up in other TV shows and movies (which is totally fair). You'll be able to see who the good guy is and who the bad guy is and follow the plot so just sit back and enjoy the Sam Raimi elements in this movie.

 

[TonyD]

I’m at the theater.
About to enter the Multiverse of Madness.
Imax 3D

 

[jayembee]

By the way, Colin, you were right. The IMAX 3D was terrific!

 

[TonyD]

Holy Sh!t

This movie was unbelievable.

The 3D was tremendous.

More when I get home.

 

[Sean Bryan]

I intend to watch this picture at some point. What intrigued me about it was it is said to be a cross between a horror film and a superhero picture. The clips I have seen don't look that great and I read a primer on the film that was like having to learn a whole bunch of new vocabulary just to watch this. So, my guess is, I probably will have little understanding of what this one is about.

Anyway, in my reading about this picture I basically learned what the "multi-verse" is for these movies. It is essentially a never-ending recycling center that allows all other films made about these topics to be tied together in some way and allows you to have multiple versions of the same characters. So, in each different universe the characters can be other things, so male in one universe, female in another, different races in different universes, good or evil depending upon the universe, and really, yes, the big issue with these films is it creates an environment where characters never die...they just respawn like a video game. So, there are literally no stakes, the characters don't really matter because they exist in never-ending multiples, and they can just put anybody in a costume to play any character.

I mean, this diminishes the appeal of watching these films, at least for me, even more than before. It does seem like a dream scenario for the people that want to keep pumping these films out though. No matter what you do in each story, it is basically pointless because you can retrofit whatever you want onto it at the end.

It is sort of hilariously stupid in a way and I saw a clip of a bunch of actors that had all played Spiderman over the years all sitting around chatting in a Spiderman film because I guess they are all just Spidermen from different universes and somehow they all met in whatever universe they were in at that moment.

So, still curious how they handle the horror/superhero mash-up but this looks like the picture is mostly about using the multiverse gimmick to just pump out more and more sequels.

The multiverse concept can certainly be abused like you say, but it can also be used for some very interesting storytelling. It's all in the execution. If traveling between universes is portrayed as something that is easy for everyone and their brother to do, and it is just used as a gimmick without any dramatic weight to it then sure it loses its appeal.

But in the three instances when the Marvel Cinematic Universe has dealt with the multiverse so far (Loki, Spider-Man: No Way Home, and Doctor Strange In The Multiverse of Madness), all have been stories that have had significant weight and consequences for our fictional characters and universe.

***WARNIG - SPOILERS FOR LOKI BELOW***



Loki established that there was originally a multiverse and when a man discovered its existence he (and his many variants from across multiple universes) tried to use their shared knowledge of the different universes to improve their worlds, but some variants were more hungry for power and this ultimately lead to devastating a war between them across the multiverse. All universes were ultimately destroyed except one, and He Who Remains set up a system to monitor the potential branching off of new Universes throughout all time to ensure a reality where his war-like variant(s) emerge never comes into existence. Establishing what he called the "sacred timeline". The story culminated with an event that allowed all branches of the multiverse to re-grow throughout all of time. Thus portending the coming of another great multiversal war.

In Spider-Man, without getting too much into specific spoilers, the dealing with other villains and heroes from other universes (yes, past cinematic incarnations of the property) was handled with significant weight and resulted in great tragedy, loss and sacrifice for the protagonist, essentially losing everything as a consequence of the multiversal dealings and what needed to be done to set things right.

***WARNING - Potential Light Multiverse of Madness SPOILERS BELOW***

And in Doctor Strange, messing with the multiverse is presented as something that can have dire consequences for individuals and entire universes. Traveling between universes is not a common or easy thing to do. Thus the existence of one unique individual in the entire multiverse who can travel between worlds at will is the driving force of the story. Her life is in danger both from the antagonist (who wants this power to be able to go to another universe where certain tragic losses could be regained) and potentially from the protagonists as well (who want to prevent the potential universe destroying "incursions" that can occur when the multiverse is messed with). The consequences of the story are fallen and corrupted heroes, destroyed universes, and potential for further corruption and universal destruction.

So Marvel's use of the multiverse concept so far has all been done in interesting ways that had dramatic weight for these stories (if you are invested in them). It's a story device they've now established in their fictional universe, so I'm sure it can be overused or used poorly in some future story if not careful, but it's been handled well so far. And I'd also say that it's not just something they're using to be able to do whatever they want with no consequences but rather they are definitely "going somewhere with this".