Doctor Strange - Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Special Effects

Marvel, I know every once in a while some really good character stuff comes out. We're talking the effects of PTSD on a super hero, the delightful 'band of losers' theme in guardians (and really there was excellent writing in there. a smile at a troll doll informed more about two characters than 10 minutes of exposition would have), and the best supporting cast ever in a superhero movie in Ant Man.

But then this good stuff was crammed into 15 minutes of Civil War and Strange is an explosion fest. This sort of vapid focus-grouped removal of deeper content isn't sustainable, just ask DC.

I want to see it but it is too bad.

We have seen enough origin stories. Mutants and inhumans no longer need one. Dr. Strange however needs SOME exposition. It should have been a relatively brief scene told in reflection. I would want to sense that Strange is not some Luke Skywalker novice that nearly became a Jedi between meals for Han and Leia. I would want the movie starting out with him being the Sorcerer Supreme.

Then, the only limitation is the imagination of the writers. The guy travels through dimensions and fights fiery demon over-lords of nether realms. Makes Thor look like brick layer by comparison.

Whenever I read a Review that's goes on like this, I can't help but wonder what EXACTLY the Reviewer wanted to see. Did you go into this Movie expecting it to be a heavy drama about a surgeon coming to grips with being unable to continue to be a surgeon or what gives?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your position, but I can't shake the feeling that you wanted this Superhero Movie to not be a Superhero Movie, which is a weird sentiment.

Considering that the movie had to sell us both on Doctor Strange's character and the fact that magic coexists with the aliens and future tech that are already present in this cinematic universe, I thought it did a really good job. Frankly, I don't think that audiences are particularly fatigued by the fact that this is an origin story. It was formulaic perhaps, but I do not think that is an envelope that Marvel has to push when it comes to new characters.

I think my only gripe (well, a small one anyway) is that this origin is firmly established after the events of Civil War. Thus Strange is more of a newcomer to this superhero thing, whereas the scope of his role almost makes it feel as though he should have been at this longer than anyone. But again, just a minor nitpick.

But yeah, the special effects blew me away. :P

No mention of how Mads Mikkelsen played the villain role? Aww.

Kinda reminds me of that 90s film The Shadow with Alec Baldwin and Tim Curry where he had to learn mystical powers in Eastern lands to meld other people's perceptions.

Mahorfeus:
Considering that the movie had to sell us both on Doctor Strange's character and the fact that magic coexists with the aliens and future tech that are already present in this cinematic universe, I thought it did a really good job. Frankly, I don't think that audiences are particularly fatigued by the fact that this is an origin story. It was formulaic perhaps, but I do not think that is an envelope that Marvel has to push when it comes to new characters.

I think my only gripe (well, a small one anyway) is that this origin is firmly established after the events of Civil War. Thus Strange is more of a newcomer to this superhero thing, whereas the scope of his role almost makes it feel as though he should have been at this longer than anyone. But again, just a minor nitpick.

But yeah, the special effects blew me away. :P

The events of his training and defeating the villain take place before Civil War.

I think my only gripe (well, a small one anyway) is that this origin is firmly established after the events of Civil War. Thus Strange is more of a newcomer to this superhero thing, whereas the scope of his role almost makes it feel as though he should have been at this longer than anyone. But again, just a minor nitpick.

[quote]The events of his training and defeating the villain take place before Civil War.

No they don't, infact you can tell they don't because right before his car crash he is given a list of potential patients by an associate and one of them is Rodie (an airforce colonel with spinal injuries received whilst using a powered suit, or something close to that) which he in turn dismisses.

My understanding was that the movie was meant to be part of phase one but due to Cumberbatch having other work commitments it got sidelined.

Fischgopf:
Whenever I read a Review that's goes on like this, I can't help but wonder what EXACTLY the Reviewer wanted to see. Did you go into this Movie expecting it to be a heavy drama about a surgeon coming to grips with being unable to continue to be a surgeon or what gives?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your position, but I can't shake the feeling that you wanted this Superhero Movie to not be a Superhero Movie, which is a weird sentiment.

At least he didn't dismiss it as bad only because it was a Superhero Movie. I'm looking forward to seeing it in IMAX for maximum tripiness. And I can understand why the movie didn't throw everything about magic at the audience; in this universe of super science and alien tech, we have to be EASED into magic, which was only touched upon in the THOR movies. You know, to compare and contrast, science vs. magic. That's a classic trope.

It was a fun and visually impressive movie. It never really comes into it's own however. The plot was tight and proficient where I think it would have been better to slow down and build it's magical world more.

I think Christine Palmer should have had 1 less scene not more. The movie really didn't need a love interest to work and it felt rushed enough that I'd rather we get a little less mundane and some more strangeness in it.

The message was very confused also and the after credit scenes were a little jarring.

Is Benedini Cumberlini any good in this? I've been [i]real/[i] lukewarm towards seeing this since I think he's got the acting power of a wet towel, and 'decent visual effects' isn't quite the selling point needed for me to sit through something he's the main character of.

Laughing Man:

[quote]The events of his training and defeating the villain take place before Civil War.

No they don't, infact you can tell they don't because right before his car crash he is given a list of potential patients by an associate and one of them is Rodie (an airforce colonel with spinal injuries received whilst using a powered suit, or something close to that) which he in turn dismisses.

Nope, That's not him, that's the Guy who got his back spun in one of Hammer's Iron man suit knock-off from Iron-Man 2.
-The Ancient One asks Strange how did he became a genius surgeon? His answer was Years of Study and Practice. This line is not to be taken lightly.

I personally was a tad disappointed by the magic on display in the movie. No Crimson Bands of Cytorakk, just magic energy linr things. I'm guessing we'll see more eventually.

The timeline was confusing as well, but it works.

Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mordo has me hoping that Loki won't be the only good Marvel villain in the MCU forever.

Because Doctor Strange is relatively unknown to the non-comic universe, an origin story suffices for him. Its not as if he's Spidey and everyone knows the "great power... great responsibility" Yoda-ism from Uncle Ben or radioactive/genetically altered spider-bites. Now beyond that? I haven't yet seen the movie, but I'm going on Monday.

Y'know, it's weird. Usually I agree with Marter's comments, but not the score. This time, I agree with the score, but not the comments.

Anyway, detailed my thoughts elsewhere, but for me, it's the best MCU film I've seen, and one of the three I consider to be genuinely "good," rather than "average."

The movie was damn good for a single viewing. My biggest gripe with it is that while this movie is about mages, the combat felt more like "magical kung-fu" than anything actually magic-ish.

Mister K:
The movie was damn good for a single viewing. My biggest gripe with it is that while this movie is about mages, the combat felt more like "magical kung-fu" than anything actually magic-ish.

Yeah, that is one of the points that I feel that they've missed an opportunity on. But I feel that it's more of a deliberate choice than a "they can't do it". I also can't imagine how good an action scene without turning into wizards LARPing at each other.

Nope, That's not him, that's the Guy who got his back spun in one of Hammer's Iron man suit knock-off from Iron-Man 2.

I doubt it, ignoring the fact that the director of the film has now stated that we shouldn't read to much in to the phone call, i.e he's not saying who it is, the time line doesn't match. Right at the start of Dr Strange you see the post Avenger's fully repaired Stark building that alone suggests that the time line for Hammer's guy just doesn't add up.

So while it may not be Rhodie the time line certainly doesn't add up to Hammer's guy either.

Fischgopf:
Whenever I read a Review that's goes on like this, I can't help but wonder what EXACTLY the Reviewer wanted to see. Did you go into this Movie expecting it to be a heavy drama about a surgeon coming to grips with being unable to continue to be a surgeon or what gives?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your position, but I can't shake the feeling that you wanted this Superhero Movie to not be a Superhero Movie, which is a weird sentiment.

No, he's complaining that Marvel follows a boring, rigid formula for their movies that makes them all feel the same, and if someone tries to exert some creativity then they get fired. He's saying that, while the movie has its moments, it's the result of a lot of focus testing and business shenanigans.

I actually enjoyed the film. My brother wanted to see it. It was better then I thought it would be. Even I acknowledge that that's just because I like wizards more then iron men, though. It's not great, it's not terrible, it's just sort of forgettable. It's a Marvel movie. If you like their other movies, you'll like. If not, you'll hate it. It won't be changing any minds. But, given the money those movies make, it doesn't really have to.

Laughing Man:

Nope, That's not him, that's the Guy who got his back spun in one of Hammer's Iron man suit knock-off from Iron-Man 2.

I doubt it, ignoring the fact that the director of the film has now stated that we shouldn't read to much in to the phone call, i.e he's not saying who it is, the time line doesn't match. Right at the start of Dr Strange you see the post Avenger's fully repaired Stark building that alone suggests that the time line for Hammer's guy just doesn't add up.

So while it may not be Rhodie the time line certainly doesn't add up to Hammer's guy either.

Haven't seen Strange yet, but Dr Strange is namedropped as one of the powerful individuals Hydra wants to eliminate in Winter Soldier, which means him becoming the Sorcerer Supreme has to take place before then, middle of Phase 2.

Eh, the day Marvel feels the need to stop using time-tested plot formulas to make their films is the day the franchise starts circling the toilet. Face it: the MCU isn't successful despite its predilections, but because of them.

It's a good movie. It doesn't drag. The dialogue doesn't bog down with obvious exposition or narrative. There are clever and funny bits. The visuals are creative and interesting (though I suspect I'm glad I didn't see it in 3D; all the perspective-switching and kaleidoscope-like effects probably have given me a headache). It sets the stage for Strange to be a credible and distinctive presence in the Marvel Universe, and by and large it doesn't fall into the "magic can do whatever the plot needs it to" trap, which is no small feat- one not infrequently failed badly by its source medium.

It's far less "formula" than any of a dozen movies out right now, except in the ways that most of Marvel's successes are formulaic- a certain balance of action to banter to character development, a leanness in developing relationships that usually works to the movie's benefit, and a certain number of spectacle set-pieces that make for talking points when the movie is over ("Dormammu! I'm here to bargain!")

Bluntly, I'm inclined to say that fatigue with superhero blockbusters as a whole is hardly Dr. Strange's fault. It's a perfectly good showcase of what it is, and even if it wasn't equipped with nine digital effects teams (I believe that was the final count, I started laughing at that point in the credits) the dialogue and performances would still be well above par, for any movie in any genre.

SupahEwok:

Laughing Man:

Nope, That's not him, that's the Guy who got his back spun in one of Hammer's Iron man suit knock-off from Iron-Man 2.

I doubt it, ignoring the fact that the director of the film has now stated that we shouldn't read to much in to the phone call, i.e he's not saying who it is, the time line doesn't match. Right at the start of Dr Strange you see the post Avenger's fully repaired Stark building that alone suggests that the time line for Hammer's guy just doesn't add up.

So while it may not be Rhodie the time line certainly doesn't add up to Hammer's guy either.

Haven't seen Strange yet, but Dr Strange is namedropped as one of the powerful individuals Hydra wants to eliminate in Winter Soldier, which means him becoming the Sorcerer Supreme has to take place before then, middle of Phase 2.

Further evidence of the guy being the dude in Iron Man 2 is that either the director or the writer (can't remember which one) has said that it isn't Rhodey. Also, if I'm not mistaken, it was referred to an accident with experimental armor tech, so it really is more likely the Iron Man 2 guy.

Further evidence of the guy being the dude in Iron Man 2 is that either the director or the writer (can't remember which one) has said that it isn't Rhodey.

The Director said that it was neither of them and that you shouldn't read to much in to the details of that phone call.

Okay the movie takes place at the earliest mid 2015. Skipping everything else the easiest way to tell is the car he has his accident in, a Lambo Huracan a car that didn't go to market until at least the middle of 2015.

There that was easy wasn't it. Mind you saying that with Agents of Shield taking a walk in to the same areas as Dr Strange they could turn round and mention it something about him which would give us a better more exact date.

Laughing Man:
Skipping everything else the easiest way to tell is the car he has his accident in, a Lambo Huracan a car that didn't go to market until at least the middle of 2015.

And it sounded nasty didn't it? My buddy drove one on a track when we were in Vegas and it was glorious up close. I went with the 458.

And it sounded nasty didn't it? My buddy drove one on a track when we were in Vegas and it was glorious up close. I went with the 458.

Damn that's a tough choice but I would probably go with the 458 as well then again I was lucky enough to drive a 360 Modena round Knockhill so a Lambo would be something a bit different.

It's very amusing watching people bend over backwards to defend the originality of what feels like the hundredth superhero origin in the last decade, and not even the first of Dr. Strange.

How many of you are honestly suprised by Marvel films anymore? I doubt that anyone in here is honestly that uninterested, that dopey, that the whole thing isn't pretty obvious from an early stage. These films are enjoyable, but they're all formula, just executed better than almost anything else going.

It doesn't make them bad. It makes them safe. That's what Marvel does. The same effects, the same colour grading, the same direction. Pull too far in your own direction, they'll get someone else, and leave not a trace of your signature cinematography on the thing. They're not bad films, they're kind of the definition of well made blockbusters today, but eventually for some folk, that gets old, and you want to see something with more personality, something that takes enough of a risk that it breaks the mould in a fantastic new way. Just because it's a "superhero film" doesn't mean that you can't have characters that are more multidimensional, that you can't pose interesting questions, that you can't approach things from a slightly unconventional angle.

He gave it 3.5 stars out of 5. That's a pretty good score, and recommends that you go. I mean, what more do you want? He's feeling superhero fatigue. This is like the 8th superhero origin in Marvel, and it's based on a pretty damn simple story, which they didn't go out of their way to make more interesting. Like the man said, good, not great. If you want to be great, you can't just deliver the most polished film. There has to be something special or especially worthwhile underneath.

What's underneath this one? Marvel needs a new film, Dr. Strange is an important Marvel character, they haven't adapted his origin yet. The character development comes from Ebeneezer Scrooge and the philosophy comes from the Karate Kid. The film didn't "need" to be made (Not that any film needs to be made), it's just they're going to keep making them, stacking phase on phase, until people stop going. Stories? Conclusions? Arcs? Character Development? That runs the risk of killing the golden goose.

I rather enjoyed the movie and while I have complaints about things such as it being another origin story and some of the end-movie stuff, I still think it was a solid film. I do hear a lot of people complaining that marvel is being safe and that is bad, but while I don't totally disagree, I think they are making the right call here. For one, they don't need to step up their game when their rival is as incompetent as DC is, and actively know they may well shoot themselves in the foot trying to be too different than what made people like them. And they know the formula works well and people enjoy it. They push outwards in smaller ways (such as this one's visual effects, or Antman's more comedy-centered feel, or Guardians less known group) and seem to take what works with them as they progress. A smaller scope of trial and error working through a reliable and steady steam of quality movies is probably the best business plan hollywood could be counted on doing.

It was a pretty fun movie to watch, with some smart moves taken from other Doctor Strange stuff.

I kind of like the origin story from the animated movie a bit better though. In the movie Strange is an arrogant surgeon who can back up his talk with ability. Same with the animated one, but his reason for being cynical there was better explained with him becoming such a great surgeon to save his little sister, who had a brain tumor that all the doctors said was inoperable. So Strange decided to try and save her himself. You can guess the results.

It's kind of an overdone trope, but it does add a fair bit of pathos to his character in that it gives him a powerful bit of motivation to be cynical about going out of his way to help people since when he (the greatest surgeon of his time) tried to save his only family member, he failed, and part of his arch is not just putting others before himself, but also accepting that he can't/couldn't save everyone and that there are some things simply beyond him.

Granted, that lesson does become a bit questionable as he becomes MUCH more powerful latter on, but it's still interesting.

Anyway, looking forward to seeing Thor, Strange, and The Hulk/Banner in Ragnarok! >:D

 

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.