Dr Strange 2: In the Multiverse of Madness (Spoilers)

[Stalker0]

That's a pretty terrible take on it. Both of those are mass murder oriented villains.

Hang on a minute. Sword is never shown as "mass murdering", they are a military oriented arm of the government. If you had your standard movie where the police were dealing with a guy who held 100 people hostage in a bank, and the police were able to snipe the guy and save the hostages.... no one would think the police the villains of that story or mass murderers.

Agatha.... the only people we have seen she murdered was the covenant that tried to kill her. Now could she be a mass murderer, sure I could believe it, but we haven't seen that.

 

[billd91]

Hang on a minute. Sword is never shown as "mass murdering", they are a military oriented arm of the government. If you had your standard movie where the police were dealing with a guy who held 100 people hostage in a bank, and the police were able to snipe the guy and save the hostages.... no one would think the police the villains of that story or mass murderers.

Agatha.... the only people we have seen she murdered was the covenant that tried to kill her. Now could she be a mass murderer, sure I could believe it, but we haven't seen that.

I quoted you - you used THANOS and ULTRON as your examples. That's like comparing the dispute over Northern Ireland's markets between Britain and the EU with the genocidal war between the Nazis and Soviets. There is literally no reasonable comparison there.

And as far as SWORD and police sniping hostage takers in a bank, if you think sniping someone who has shown no actual inclination of putting the lives of the hostages at risk is acceptable, that's really problematic.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

And sure, the character of Dr Strange in the beginning of his first movie is not a hero either...that's the point. He has to go on the journey, learning to deal with his arrogance and focus on the greater good. Even into MoM, we see various Stranges that have gone too far, and become villains in their own right. What helps keep our Dr Strange on the heroic path is that he opens up to Christine and America, relies on them for help, and sees how his obsession could lead to the dark side if he keeps pursuing it, so he doesn't push too far.

But at the end of the day, Dr Strange risks himself to save the world...its a heroic act. Now is that character flaw still there....absolutely. Could it lead to a fall in the future....absolutely. Just as Wanda's power and grief have always been ways she could fall. The difference is....Wanda did fall, Strange hasn't.....yet.

That's what makes the hero's path so difficult, its not a one and done. These heroes have to STAY heroic, that's the real challenge in the narrative.

We went across the multiverse and met bunch of different Stranges. And they ALL read the Darkhold.

 

[Mallus]

hehe we can argue morality of other characters in another thread if you like. Wanda is hardly the only case where this issue occurs, but I wouldn't call it "par for the course". It happens more often than it should absolutely.

I was partially kidding. I thought someone would reply "Charles Xavier was no prize himself!". Child endangerment is practically his brand.

Seriously, though, I think people swinging between good and bad in comic book stories is fundamentally a positive thing (exaggerated as it must be, given the context). It's honest.

 

[Thomas Shey]

You mean taking the super dark evil book and immediately diving into it? (and that's not even the movie, that's wandavision)

You mean the only source of magical knowledge she has, that as the viewer you have a frame of reference that tells you how bad it is that she doesn't? I mean, yes, she has reason to believe its not good, but has no idea of the relentlessly corrupting nature of it because she doesn't know anything about magic.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Just like Doctor Strange does?

Strange is much more careful with it (at least ours is); but then, he also has immensely more information about it than she does. What she knows about it comes from brief conversations with Agatha, who isn't exactly a trustworthy source.

 

[Thomas Shey]

We can argue how low Wanda got in this show, and how much her acts can be forgiven, but to call her the hero of the story is simply not true.

To be clear, I'm not arguing she's the hero of this; I'm simply arguing that "villain" in this case has a serious lack of nuance. Her volition is compromised every step of the way by trauma and a malign magical outside influence. During Wandavision I'd argue that throughout most of the series she's simply under a psychotic break, and by the time of the the movie, the Darkhold has had its way with her for weeks or months.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Also we can point to the beginning of MoM, which is several years after the events of Wandavision. Has Wanda shown any remorse, did she try to help the people she hurt in any way?.....nope, zero, zilch. If we had seen that, we could at least go with the remorseful character that becomes a hero again....but nope we don't get that either.

I have to point out the crowd had made it abundantly clear they wanted nothing more to do with her at the end of Wandavision. When someone you've harmed tells you pretty much outright to leave them the hell alone, that's what you do.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Why are we talking 616 Wanda? We delving into her status in the comics now?

That's the term they're using for the core universe in the MCU too; the alternate universe Christing Palmer uses it.

 

[Stalker0]

I have to point out the crowd had made it abundantly clear they wanted nothing more to do with her at the end of Wandavision. When someone you've harmed tells you pretty much outright to leave them the hell alone, that's what you do.

What every drug addict is told...you make amends. And if that is standing in front of them so they can rant to you about how nasty you were to them....so be it.