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

[Colin Jacobson]

Colin, you were right.

This should be your mantra!

 

[TJPC]

The multi-universe is an old concept for television. Twenty years ago or so I think, I used to watch a show with my then 15 year old daughter called "Sliders" which dealt with the hero getting lost and trying to get to his prime universe. He traveled through a red means go universe, and a universe where teenagers had ghetto blasters pumping out opera etc.

 

[TonyD]

Anyway.

Spoilers below



Yeah I really enjoyed this movie. Had a blast following along with things going on with the multiverses that we saw.

When Strange and America fell through the Star Portal and blasted through maybe 20-25 multiverses I tried but couldn’t keep up with all the alternates.
One was a cartoon but it wasn’t the same as the What If cartoon-verse.

The 3D was some of the best I’ve ever seen at a movie theater.
It was used aplenty throughout especially great in the home-verse of the Good Book, sorry can’t remember went it was called.

My head exploded when Reed Richards showed up, quickly followed by two more heads exploding. After being giddy as all when I saw RR I was practically in shock when he was shredded by Wanda and his head popped.
I think I might have some slight ptsd after seeing that happen

I did not expect any of that to happen so quickly with the Illuminati

The Cameo by Bruce was a riot. Didn’t realize it was him right away but very quickly figured it out. Raimi has been kicking the crap out of Bruce for nearly 40 years in movies now.

Does America have a superhero name?

Elfman is a perfect team-up with Raimi so I’m more then happy he used him for this.

It’s amazing to me how Marvel, with very few misfires, continues to knock it out of the park.


4.5 out of 5

 

[TonyD]

P.S.
The imax I went to played the wrong file and didn’t show any of the previews in 3D then the movie started and still wasn’t 3D.
Someone went down so after a few minutes they restarted the movie so no Avatar preview in 3D.

 

[Sean Bryan]

The multi-universe is an old concept for television. Twenty years ago or so I think, I used to watch a show with my then 15 year old daughter called "Sliders" which dealt with the hero getting lost and trying to get to his prime universe. He traveled through a red means go universe, and a universe where teenagers had ghetto blasters pumping out opera etc.

I used to enjoy Sliders quite a bit.

I also always think of FRINGE when the concept of alternate universes is brought up. I loved that show. Been rewatching one episode a week since late last summer. So good.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Does America have a superhero name?

I’m vaguely familiar with the character’s nature and back story but haven’t ever read anything with her in it. Doing a quick search I see that she has gone by “Miss America”

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

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".

Yes, I have not seen the new Dr. Strange but I did see the first one. I read what was a "primer" on this new film and was sort of blown away by how much it entailed and all the references to so many different things. There was mention of the "primary" universe which was universe 467 or 688 or something. I was wondering how they chose the primary universe and how it was a number that high. It basically seemed to promote the concept that there were just hundreds or a limitless number of universes meaning there were hundreds or a limitless number of these characters varied as they are in each universe.

So, as a writing concept I saw this doing two possible things. One it gives you an endless opportunity to shift the stories around in a variety of ways, this I see as interesting and potentially good. The second thing though I see as a weakness, or a bit of a trap, which is that you undermine the dramatic stakes for the characters/story. If there are hundreds or a limitless number of these characters existing in an endless number of universes, well, then if you kill off a character in one universe what does it matter? Particularly if the characters have the ability to crossover from one universe to the next.

Obviously, I can't comment on how they have used this concept yet but I have always felt one of the things you need to remain conscious of when writing a superhero story is trying to make sure the story has dramatic stakes for the characters. I have found this to be a major weakness in some of the films I have seen. That the primary thrust of these pictures can be all the neat effects and set pieces and there is no real dramatic pull.

This becomes more of an issue to contend with when you can just kill off anybody and another one of the same character can stroll right in from another universe. It does solve an issue for something like Black Panther, where the actor that played him has passed but now you can have another Black Panther from another of the many universes just take over.

I see this as advantageous as well to the people that make these films because the actors themselves have their value diminished further because you just can swap out an actor because you can just bring in a new guy/gal from another universe.

So, to me it can work either way, as a positive if you are really creative or as a negative. I'm just sort of viewing it from that standpoint.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Here's a positive review from Mark Kermode, who I enjoy listening to:

 

[jayembee]

The 3D was some of the best I’ve ever seen at a movie theater.
It was used aplenty throughout especially great in the home-verse of the Good Book, sorry can’t remember went it was called.

The Book of Vishanti.

There was another interesting old Marvel reference that used in a completely different context, but has a relationship with an upcoming Marvel film.

The place Wong took Wanda to that was the "home" to the Darkhold was called Wundagore. Back in the 60s, in the Thor comic, Wundagore was the home of the High Evolutionary, who was something of a Dr. Moreau, creating various genetically enhanced beings. One of them was a being known as "Him". Him later evolved into Adam Warlock, who is the character played by Harry Styles in the tag scene of Eternals and should be in the upcoming Guardians film.

 

[jayembee]

Yes, I have not seen the new Dr. Strange but I did see the first one. I read what was a "primer" on this new film and was sort of blown away by how much it entailed and all the references to so many different things. There was mention of the "primary" universe which was universe 467 or 688 or something. I was wondering how they chose the primary universe and how it was a number that high. It basically seemed to promote the concept that there were just hundreds or a limitless number of universes meaning there were hundreds or a limitless number of these characters varied as they are in each universe.

!Warning! !Nerd Alert! !Warning!

The "prime" Earth is Earth-616. This was established back in the 1980s, actually. Marvel hadn't really done much in terms of a multiverse at that point (other than the Squadron Supreme, but that's another story). The multiverse that we all know and love came about in a story in the British Marvel titles at the time, started by David Thorpe, and continued (and amplified) by Alan Moore. The storyline involved the adventures of Brian Braddock, a.k.a. Captain Britain, and introduced a multiverse where each universe had a different versions of CB who all had different hero names: Captain UK, Captain England, Captain Albion, Captain Airstrip One(!), and so on. In this storyline, the Earth of Captain Britain was designated Earth-616. When Marvel in the US started doing more with the multiverse concept, they kept that designation.

As for why the prime Earth has such a "high number", my suspicion is that it was meant as an antithesis to DC's multiverse. DC's was introduced in the early 60s, in a story called "The Flash of Two Worlds". The Flash, Barry Allen, unknowingly transports himself to another Earth where the Flash is Jay Garrick (the original Flash of the 1940s comics). Presumably because of the tradition of a discoverer getting to name what they've discovered, Barry called his world "Earth-1" and Jay's "Earth-2". Earth-2 became the home of the characters (versions of current ones or unique) created in the 1940s. Eventually, more and more Earths were established until DC decided they had to simplify things again and published a mini-series called Crisis on Infinite Earths, that reset the DCU into only a single timeline. Ever since, DC seems to reboot things back and forth about every 5-10 years.

Anyway, there are some who've criticized the idea that the (then) current heroes got to be on Earth-1, while the earlier heroes got relegated to Earth-2, as if that made the current characters more important (which one could argue they were). So I suspect that Marvel (or, at least, Alan Moore) designating the prime Earth as "616" was a way of seeing the prime Earth as not especially important in the grand scheme of things. Or, at least, no more important than any other Earth.

So, as a writing concept I saw this doing two possible things. One it gives you an endless opportunity to shift the stories around in a variety of ways, this I see as interesting and potentially good. The second thing though I see as a weakness, or a bit of a trap, which is that you undermine the dramatic stakes for the characters/story. If there are hundreds or a limitless number of these characters existing in an endless number of universes, well, then if you kill off a character in one universe what does it matter? Particularly if the characters have the ability to crossover from one universe to the next.

Obviously, I can't comment on how they have used this concept yet but I have always felt one of the things you need to remain conscious of when writing a superhero story is trying to make sure the story has dramatic stakes for the characters. I have found this to be a major weakness in some of the films I have seen. That the primary thrust of these pictures can be all the neat effects and set pieces and there is no real dramatic pull.

It certainly is a built-in weakness to any story or character arc that runs a long time. I know from reading comics for decades that it's very unlikely that any major character will die, no matter how dire the circumstances they find themselves in might be. If they do manage to die, like Superman did in the 1990s, they'll find a way to "get better".

But this isn't just the case of superhero comic book characters, as I just said. Dracula would constantly get staked (or exposed to sunlight) and disintegrate, and then pop up again, right as rain, in a sequel. Godzilla dying in the very first film didn't stop his appearing in numerous sequels. And do you really think No Time to Die will be the last we've seen of James Bond?

At any rate, the multiverse (in the comics) has never -- to my knowledge/memory -- been used to bring a character back from the dead by introducing an exact duplicate from another universe. A different version, perhaps, but then, Marvel has killed off Tony Stark and Vision, and written off Steve Rogers, and it's clear that T'Challa won't be back. They might be replaced by other characters assuming their hero identities, but that's another issue.

This becomes more of an issue to contend with when you can just kill off anybody and another one of the same character can stroll right in from another universe. It does solve an issue for something like Black Panther, where the actor that played him has passed but now you can have another Black Panther from another of the many universes just take over.

You're looking at this too narrowly. They don't need to have another Black Panther from another universe take over. "Black Panther" was never one single person. T'Challa's father was Black Panther before T'Challa was. In the comics, T'Challa's sister Shuri took over the role for a while. Pretty much anyone can be a new Black Panther; they don't need another Earth for that. They can just do it at a whim, just to shake things up.

I see this as advantageous as well to the people that make these films because the actors themselves have their value diminished further because you just can swap out an actor because you can just bring in a new guy/gal from another universe.

Again, not necessary. Steve Rogers is "retired" as Captain America. The next time we see Captain America, it's not going to be Peggy Carter on Earth-538 playing Captain Carter as a new "version" of the character. Sam Wilson (The Falcon) is the new Captain America.

And trust me, if an actor is "swapped out" at any point in the future, it's more likely because they want to move on from the role. I'm sure that Marvel is happy not to be paying Robert Downey Jr. millions of dollars going forward, but some very popular super-hero stars -- Chris Evans and Hugh Jackman, to name two -- have stepped away for their own reasons. They certainly weren't pushed out.

Besides, the studio can just recast if they really want to. Or just reboot. Josh Trank's Fantastic Four used a completely different cast than the Tim Story's previous films. We've had three different Spider-Men within a 15-year period without any (at the time) multiverse being involved. Hell, there are two different, concurrent Spider-Men in the comics at the moment.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

Him later evolved into Adam Warlock, who is the character played by Harry Styles in the tag scene of Eternals and should be in the upcoming Guardians film.

I don't think that's quite correct. Isn't Adam Warlock being played by Will Poulter? I think the Harry Styles character is named Eros, or something like that,

 

[Malcolm R]

As an aside, I've read two recent books by mainstream authors that have incorporated elements of the multiverse concept: Dean Koontz's "Elsewhere", and Preston & Child's "Bloodless" (a Pendergast novel).

So the idea seems to be a popular current trend across media.

 

[jayembee]

I don't think that's quite correct. Isn't Adam Warlock being played by Will Poulter? I think the Harry Styles character is named Eros, or something like that,

You're right. Eros (a.k.a. Starfox). My error. I got the two mixed up. Probably because the character with him in the Eternals tag scene was Pip the Troll, who had been a companion of Warlock's.

 

[jayembee]

As an aside, I've read two recent books by mainstream authors that have incorporated elements of the multiverse concept: Dean Koontz's "Elsewhere", and Preston & Child's "Bloodless" (a Pendergast novel).

So the idea seems to be a popular current trend across media.

It's been around for quite a while in the SF field. The two most obvious being Keith Laumer's Imperium series (and, oddly enough, the protagonist is also the main character in Laumer's non-SF prequel, Embassy) and H. Beam Piper's Paratime Police series.

As an aside, I still have a hard time thinking of Dean Koontz as a mainstream writer. He was writing science fiction in the 60s, and it was only in the 70s (suspiciously after Stephen King and Anne Rice made horror a thing) that he moved into published-as-mainstream horror, and thrillers and such.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Elizabeth Olsen says she has never met one of her apparent scene partners in this movie.

Spoiler

Elizabeth Olsen ‘Never Met’ John Krasinski Despite ‘Doctor Strange 2’ Battle: ‘I Don’t Know Him’

Spoilers below for “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness.” Perhaps the most shocking moment in “Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness” is when Elizabeth Olsen&#…

variety.com

 

[Josh Steinberg]

That’s not surprising in a prepandemic environment when these movies have so many moving parts that assemble the whole, and doubly so in a pandemic when shooting an actor or actress alone in a green screen environment with a small crew might be the most practical way of getting a scene.

 

[Ross Gowland]

It's been around for quite a while in the SF field.

Yes, John Wyndham used it in his 1961 short story Random Quest, filmed a decade later as Quest For Love.

 

[Thomas Newton]

The idea of alternate timelines also featured in Larry Niven's short story "There's a Wolf in My Time Machine."

 

[jayembee]

The idea of alternate timelines also featured in Larry Niven's short story "There's a Wolf in My Time Machine."

And "All the Myriad Ways", among others.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The Pitch Meeting nails most of my problems with the movie. The video contains spoilers if anyone reading this still hasn't seen the movie yet.