Skip to main content

Doctor Strange takes us to the Next Dimension


          Marvel doing a Doctor Strange movie shows a heap of confidence. They’ve already got a universe full of superheroes, intergalactic civilizations and anomalies, and even Norse gods. Now they’re throwing magic into the mix. That’s a lot of sci-fi concepts to juggle. Is this new addition to the Cinematic Universe too alienating?
          Doctor Stephen Strange is a brilliant neurosurgeon who delights in taking on challenging medical procedures to satiate his enormous ego. But after he is injured in a car accident and loses the use of his hands he desperately searches for a way to heal himself. His search eventually brings him to Kathmandu and a mystic known as the Ancient One who opens his eyes to the powers of the astral plane, multiple dimensions, and the magical properties of the universe in which she trains him alongside her senior student Mordo. But of course, there’s an evil sorcerer called Kaecilius on the loose who must be stopped before he permanently destroys time as we know it.
          Though it’s title may suggest otherwise, the basic story of Doctor Strange is nothing out of the ordinary. It’s the hero’s journey without much variation. The style it’s attempting to capture is likely Christopher Nolan. There are shades of Batman Begins in Strange’s tutelage with this mysterious cult as well as Inception (especially in the visuals) with a touch of humour that proves often welcome and fun -you can thank consultant Dan Harmon for that.
          Benedict Cumberbatch is very good as Doctor Strange. He starts off as quite an unlikeable physician, very similar to Gregory House (Cumberbatch seems to be going for a Hugh Laurie kind of American accent too and it’s not very convincing). He’s rude, egotistical, and incredibly arrogant which I like. Even Tony Stark had some redeeming qualities before he became Iron Man, but this guy really doesn’t. Of course he matures as the film goes on, not only looking the part fantastically but it struck me late into the film that this is unlike any performance I’ve seen from Cumberbatch. And accent aside he pulls it off fairly flawlessly. His 12 Years a Slave reunion with Chiwetel Ejiofor is great too. Their chemistry is so terrific. And it helps that Ejiofor is such an amazing talent. You buy the comradery between Strange and Mordo as well as Mordo’s intense dedication to his craft. Tilda Swinton despite the controversy surrounding her casting is very good as the Ancient One looking a lot like Aang from Avatar the Last Airbender. But she conveys a sense of timeless wisdom very well. And if you want to see another great performance from Swinton as an immortal figure, I recommend checking out Orlando. A surprising stand-out among the cast though is Benedict Wong as the protector of the magic books. His deadpan performance is really fun and he makes for more than a decent foil for Strange. However once again we have a great actor, in this case Hannibal’s Mads Mikkelsen, playing a very uninteresting villain. With more focus Kaecilius could have felt like a genuine threat, but his entire characterization screams “minor comic character”. Also, Rachel McAdams serves no purpose but as a really forced love interest for Strange. Their relationship is in no way compelling, and the movie probably wouldn’t have fared any better or worse without her.
          The grandest star of Doctor Strange though is the special effects. This is by far Marvel’s most visually impressive movie to date! The constant bending of reality is expressed through stellar surreal imagery, patterns, and tricks of the eye. It’s massively creative what they’re able to do by twisting conventional settings. There’s one extended scene where Strange is first being exposed to this grander dimensional plane and it’s like the vortex sequence from 2001: A Space Odyssey if Dave the astronaut had taken acid beforehand. The effects on other aspects of the film are pretty good too, like Strange’s signature cape and the astral forms that various characters have to take on in certain moments, but the visual extravaganza of what the magic in this world is capable of is a pure marvel. Pun intended.
          This film is certainly an outsider when it comes to Marvel which I appreciate all the more. There are naturally a few references to other movies, but very much like Guardians of the Galaxy and to a lesser extent Ant-Man, it’s trying to be it’s own unique film and it really succeeds in that. The performances, but especially the astonishing visuals unmatched by anything in Marvel, make this a movie that accurately represents its title. Doctor Strange is absolutely bizarre, but in a really good way.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more