|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:"Magic" is a wayyyyyy too vague and ambiguous super power for a protagonist to have without a pretty thorough explanation on the extent and limitations of their abilities and you can't really do that in a montage. You might be able to do it for someone who was a lovely wizard with severe limitations (like Harry Dresden) but you can't do it for someone as powerful as Dr Strange. The MCU has always operated by limitless plot devices and powers indistinguishable from magic. The only thing that magic being "too vague" causes is that audiences might wonder a bit what a character can do and cannot do, which is really irrelevant unless you're really afraid of having to answer questions from your non-comic reading SO or something. Jonny_Rocket posted:Also, how is the MCU "running in place" when it's just setting up an important character moving forward? If there's one thing the Marvel Cinematic Universe is good at, it's developing and establishing their main characters in their own movies so that when it comes to crossovers (like the Avengers) or sequels (like Civil War), you're more invested in the individual characters. Characters and universes are just tools for storytelling. Being invested in characters is just being invested in their stories, but the MCU story has been pretty paltry. We're still awaiting the climax of Thanos maybe trying to conquer the Earth or the universe. Despite the many hours spent in this world, it's turned out pretty ho-hum. Like GotG introduces mountain-sized world-destroying space gods into the universe, but they're relegated to a short cameo. Bucky is cardboard compared to that. There's that adage that stories should be about the most interesting time in a character's life. Maybe in the case of the MCU, the story should be about the most interesting part of the universe. There's mountain-sized space gods, but they're telling a story about Bucky Barnes. Does Doctor Strange finally get around to telling a story with mountain-sized space gods? BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 12:36 on Oct 29, 2016 |
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
The big difference between Stark and Strange is that Tony Stark doesn't really change, he decides to do some good instead of selling weapons but he is essentially the same character. Stephen Strange is really arrogant and a bit of an rear end in a top hat and changes during the movie, in that sense he is more like Thor. One of my favourite things from this movie is early on when Strange gets sent through this almost psychedelic sequence, i would have liked a bit more of that, but otherwise i really liked the movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
The Doctor Strange/Iron Man parallel might come into play depending on what stories Marvel decides to add to the MCU. Stark's strong disbelief in magic does become an important part of his character development in the comics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Just seen this film, it's loving fantastic! It falls into an incredibly narrow set of films that I would actually recommend seeing in 3D. (I think the only other two would be jackass 3D and The Green Hornet). Definitely feels like they're setting him up to be the protagonist of the Marvel Universe. Seriously though even if you loving hate Marvel fills, there's stuff happening visually here that hasn't happened in film before. It's loving bonkers but managed to seem coherent and consistent in it's utterly brazen weirdness, a lot of people have spent a lot of time coming up with rules for the weird poo poo. Any and all 'making of' stuff is going to be utterly fascinating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
A question about the 3D: is it a lot of depth of field stuff or are they pushing things out of the screen toward the audience. The reason that I'm asking is that I can see the depth of field stuff pretty well, but pushing "out" from the screen makes me see double images.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
No Hoary Hosts, 0/10 would not watch again. In all seriousness, this was a solid movie with some incredible visuals. Really glad I decided to splurge on IMAX tickets, it seems like it was made with that in mind.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Comic book trash for children.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
I just came back from watching the movie in glorious 3D. Awesome visuals, loved the End Credits song, Cumberbatch is still my celebrity crush, and I got a bit of vertigo in a few scenes. It's a shame there's no IMAX in my city.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
I really liked it. In addition to the visuals, I think it completely succeeded with the establishment of magic and it's world building. Cumberbatch is good and it's convincing that Strange is absolutely a major player in the world in his own right moving forward rather than just another guy who could be +1 to the Avengers roster. The Stan Lee cameo is a really bad one, just lovely and interrupts a major scene in an intrusive way. They need to just stop doing these already. The post-credits scenes should absolutely have had their placement swapped - the mid-credits one is one of those throw away types you can tell was directed by someone else and the actors are just kind of phoning it in, while the one you have to sit through the whole long rear end credits for is very obviously part of the movie proper and more important. Random Stranger posted:A question about the 3D: is it a lot of depth of field stuff or are they pushing things out of the screen toward the audience. The reason that I'm asking is that I can see the depth of field stuff pretty well, but pushing "out" from the screen makes me see double images. It's all depth of field stuff, I don't think there's any "object comes out towards the audience" things at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Seemlar posted:
In another few years they will. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Seemlar posted:The Stan Lee cameo is a really bad one, just lovely and interrupts a major scene in an intrusive way. They need to just stop doing these already. Look at how wrong this person is.  Just saw it, no 3-D, but given how some sequences turned out, I may be convinced to splurge on the extra money to see it again in 3-D. I'm kinda divided on the action sequences: I understand that they didn't want it to just be Strange and the other wizards just going "Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!" all the time and the whole portals and fractals are really nice. But c'mon, at least give me ONE sequence where he shoots energy bolts/balls from his hands.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
Seemlar posted:It's all depth of field stuff, I don't think there's any "object comes out towards the audience" things at all. Frankly I think we could use more 50s-style things-coming-at-the-screen 3D. Godzilla was pretty great in 3D but some atomic hellfire washing over the crowd would've taken it to the next level.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 05:51
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:I am completely down for a Rocket & Groot two-hander That's completely insensitive to, like, 2 people in this movie you bastard! But yes, I enjoyed this movie and thought the visuals were great. I especially liked the biome-doors in the Secret Sanctum and the fight in the rebuilding Hong Kong was badass.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:Frankly I think we could use more 50s-style things-coming-at-the-screen 3D. Godzilla was pretty great in 3D but some atomic hellfire washing over the crowd would've taken it to the next level. My theory is that most people don't like things coming out of the screen because the effect actually works and their ego just doesn't like it. Like trying to act as though a scary movie isn't scaring you or a dumb joke isn't making you laugh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Does the movie create defined limits and rules for Strange's magic? One of the major things in the film is that EVERYBODY is either breaking/bending the rules of magic or are fine with it being done "for the greater good", which generally means they're being hypocritical ESPECIALLY The Ancient One. Except for one particular character who becomes increasingly distressed (in a dramatic sense, it's not played for laughs) about it because they are a true believer, took everything they were told at face value, and strongly base their values/sense of self on it. This leads to a sequel hook. Edit: Figured I better add more spoiler tags. Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Movie is good and definitely worth watching if a little by the numbers with a super generic villain as some of the other posters have said. It's not the most original origin story but it does it well enough, especially with the gorgeous visuals and fight scenes that it doesn't really matter. The fight scenes are basically what Avatar the Last Airbender should have been which is a bunch of people using the elements/magic to supplement their martial arts. I couldn't find it in 3D but it seems like it'd be worth going back to watch it there. The main thing I didn't like is that we don't really see a lot more sorcerors fighting especially with magic. We see a lot of characters doing magic and doing martial arts but it doesn't feel like any of them are responding to the end of the world type stuff or can cast a traditional fireball or whatever. The closest we get is a scene where Wong tells a bunch of people/cameos to choose their weapons wisely but thats it. It would have been great to see that fight play out or a reason why it ended up just being Wong standing alone outside the sanctorum. Like, where are all the other masters? There's basically only three bad guys here and you have a whole school of magicians. Gyro Zeppeli posted:You missed an important part of the first scene. The version I watched didn't actually have this. It was just Thor saying he's looking for Odin and Strange standing up saying he'd help
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
Kegslayer posted:The version I watched didn't actually have this. It was just Thor saying he's looking for Odin and Strange standing up saying he'd help I believe Strange says (paraphrased): "Loki is dangerous and you've brought him to New York, you say that if you can find Odin you will all go back to Asgard which means you (and more importantly Loki) will no longer be in New York, so I'm going to help you find Odin!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:One of the major things in the film is that EVERYBODY is either breaking/bending the rules of magic or are fine with it being done "for the greater good", which generally means they're being hypocritical ESPECIALLY The Ancient One. Except for one particular character who becomes increasingly distressed (in a dramatic sense, it's not played for laughs) about it because they are a true believer, took everything they were told at face value, and strongly base their values/sense of self on it. This leads to a sequel hook.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Yeah he says He'll help look for Odin so they will leave, but he didn't say leave permanently. It was along the lines of "We are here to find Odin, then we'll go back", "Oh, then, I'll help."
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
AirRaid posted:Yeah he says He'll help look for Odin so they will leave, but he didn't say leave permanently. This makes no sense, given how Thor II ended.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:The film ought to explain WHY breaking these rules is so terrible. Well with (Ending) Stranges trinket and the Ancient One's BS they are directly channelling Dormamu's power from his universe potentially attracting his attention. That's a bad thing to happen given what happens when he's brought down on purpose
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
R-Type posted:This makes no sense, given how Thor II ended. I think Loki banished Odin to Earth like Thor in the first movie. He looks like a homeless guy in all the set photos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
I felt like there were hints of a good movie in here but all of the attempts at comic relief fell completely flat. An over serious po-faced movie would've been better, since it would at least have been consistent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Are the visuals that everybody is praising better than the ones in the trailer? Because I have seen a couple of trailers for this and honestly I wasn't wowed by the inception stuff or the bit where Doctor Strange flies through a buncha floating crystals. If I didn't find that stuff that enjoyable/interesting, am I going to enjoy the rest of the magic in the film?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
I love the post credit scenes because of course Strange could help with that. Note how in Thor 1 and Avengers 1 visages of Loki appear to manipulate people on earth via opening/closing reflective surfaces. His line in Avengers about how there are paths to earth besides the Rainbow Bridge.  I think the only way that could give a more "see we really did have this poo poo locked down years ahead of time" impression is if they get Hugo Weaving back for Ant-Man 2. EDIT Spoilered I guess kinda sorta, it's not that big. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Red Bones posted:Are the visuals that everybody is praising better than the ones in the trailer? Because I have seen a couple of trailers for this and honestly I wasn't wowed by the inception stuff or the bit where Doctor Strange flies through a buncha floating crystals. If I didn't find that stuff that enjoyable/interesting, am I going to enjoy the rest of the magic in the film? There were good looking things, but the Inception stuff looked awful compared to Inception, and the entire ending CGI clusterfuck looked terrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:The film ought to explain WHY breaking these rules is so terrible. They do! There are lengthy arguments about it between characters!
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:There were good looking things, but the Inception stuff looked awful compared to Inception, and the entire ending CGI clusterfuck looked terrible. Actually it looked stunning, the whole film was fantastic visually, and I really loved it. Paint by numbers, maybe, but fun and absolutely hilarious in parts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
Holy poo poo! Dr. Srange was like what would happen if MC Esher dropped LSD at the Shaolin Temple! 5 out of 4 stars!
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 13:16
|
|
|
Was pretty good I thought. Your usual Marvel film stuff, only it's magic in this one. Actors all did a good job, even if the villain was a little lackluster. I guess the real antagonist is Dormammu though, and he was cool. Humour was hit and miss, but some of the good bits were very good. Really great special effects though. As in what they did with them. Dunno about technically because i know nothing about that, but great to watch when it went all fancy. e: also the fractal hands e2: the cloak was cool too. very magic carpet from Aladdin, now I think about it McDragon fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Oct 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Doctor Strange needed to differentiate mystic combat from regular Avengers-style superhero combat, and they did it in a clever way. Sorcerers warp the battlefield itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
I only really noticed one piece of camera work that I really appreciated; when he's trying to get the bullet out of the patient's head, the camera shakes uncontrollably until he asks the guy to cover his watch. That was a nice touch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
I thought this movie was somewhere between bad and very bad. It felt as if all the budget went into the special effects of the few reality-warping action scenes (which did not seem to be particularly well done themselves), leaving the rest of the movie looking cheap and occasionally drab. This was most evident in the scene where Tilda Swinton dies. We're treated to her hologram speaking platitudes against a slow-moving yet dull storm background. It felt closest to the aesthetic of a bible verse image macro. The storm and the branching lightning could have evoked a couple things — Swinton's calm within the storm, the brief but quickly branching nature of the future — but instead it just seems to hang limply in the background. The reality-warping scenes were probably meant to be the movie's centrepiece, but they just weren't very good. When combined with the way that Marvel shoots action — i.e. quick cuts to obfuscate that the actors cannot actually fight — the reality-warping just seemed to be separate from what was going on around it. They wanted the fancy fights, they wanted to show off the fancy effects, but they could not show the effects and the fight at the same time. This led to action scenes that seemed scattered and unfocused. Also I found Cumberbatch's Strange to be pretty tepid, like his character from Osage County was trying to affect his Sherlock Holmes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
Dead Kelly posted:When combined with the way that Marvel shoots action — i.e. quick cuts to obfuscate that the actors cannot actually fight — I don't know. Looking at the behind the scenes and extra-takes and poo poo, the action can look quite good sometimes. I think it's more to do with trying to not lose the audience's interest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Dead Kelly posted:= It was weird. They were clearly going for a kaleidoscope-esque affect, but it just looked kinda cheap and tacky.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:It was weird. They were clearly going for a kaleidoscope-esque affect, but it just looked kinda cheap and tacky. If you called this movie's aesthetic a geocities-era photoshop you wouldn't be entirely wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
I liked it. Although, end-credit scene spoilers, I did not like Mordo screwing over that one disabled guy at the end. How's a guy meant to survive in America with that kind of disability stopping him from work? I feel it went against the movie's general image of injured people healing, too. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Kal-L posted:Look at how wrong this person is. I think that's a bad idea. The marvel films work on an action level because everyone has some kind of visceral link to the action, whether it's thors hammer and the big lightning cracks when he hits poo poo or iron man's suit or whatever. I was always wondering how they were going to make a dude who waves his hands and magic happens work in an action movie and the answer was of course to make it just a little closer to bending ala avatar combined with the fractal stuff. That little whip thing, the villains excellent ethereal weapons, and the shields people used? Very cool. If he just starts flinging fireballs around that's veering very close to scarlet witch who is pants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
What if House, but magic powers I really enjoyed this, especially the fun ending "DORMAMMU! I've come to bargain!". The comments above make me want to see it in 3D now, and now that I've seen it once, I can pay more attention to the background stuff. The accusation of whitewashing before the film came out does have some validity. For a film set mostly in Asia, there are only two characters of Asian origin, and only one of them actually speaks or does anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 11:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
The idea is that sorcerers are an international bunch and draw people from all ethnicities. The only bad whitewashing in the movie is the white mugger who tries to steal Strange's wristwatch. A white mugger in Nepal?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 16:22
|
|