MARVEL'S Doctor Strange - November 4, 2016*

It's rare, but it happens. Famously, Robin Williams bitterly complained about getting low pay from Disney for Good Morning Vietnam, saying, "You know why Mickey Mouse only has four fingers? It's because he can't pick up a check!"

Abracadabra: Disney, Robin Williams Quit Feud»

The studio later sent him a $1 million Picasso painting as a bonus. But Williams came back at them again after only getting paid $75,000 to do the voice of the Genie in Aladdin, only to see the movie go on to make a whopping $500 million. Eventually, they gave him much larger salaries for several projects as compensation. Williams' experience also prompted other Disney actors to start demanding a percentage of the (real) profits once the movie went past a certain milestone number. You might not get any dough if the movie tanked or "only" made $400 million, but after that, they start giving the actors $100K here and $500K there. It's said that between toy merchandise, video games, and movies, Mike Myers made somewhere north of $50M on the Shrek movies.

Mike Myers Tops 'Forbes' List of Highest-Paid Voice Actors »

There are precedents for studios coming back and giving the actors, writers, and directors "good faith" bonuses just to keep them happy and available for sequels and other projects. Almost every TV actor (for example) is locked into a 3- or 5-year deal for a new TV series, but if the show is a big hit, they almost always renegotiate, throw the old contract out, and give everybody substantial raises. If you have an angry actor working for the original deal, it does nobody good -- bad for the show, bad for the network, bad for the actor.

I think comic book artists are a prime example of creators who have been grossly taken advantage of by the system. Marvel and Disney are heinous corporate employers who tend to ignore those people after they make movies like this. Giving Ditko $1 million for Dr. Strange would probably represent one week of income from Paraguay. But Ditko is such a proud man, very political, and considers himself to be highly moral, he'd most likely tear up the check.

 

Yes, but in those cases they are not truly giving away "something for nothing" in the sense that they are trying to buy goodwill from the actor, or prevent the actor from publicly bad-mouthing them or their product. Since Ditko is not going to speak publicly or do anything to draw attention to himself, and they don't need his goodwill for future projects, they would truly stand to gain nothing by giving him cash. I don't know Hollywood like you do, but certainly the cliche is that no one gives away something for nothing in that world. I suppose if they gave him some money they could try to publicize what they were doing, to make themselves look like nice guys and get some positive press. But Ditko would certainly throw a wrench into that by refusing to give interviews or in any way publicly acknowledge he'd received the cash.

I don't think he'd tear up the check. Ditko's position seems to be that he believes he's already been paid for the work (via his original page rate) and that therefore he isn't entitled to anything more than that. Hence, he won't take any action to try to get more money. But I believe he would accept money from them if it was offered unsolicited and with no conditions attached to it. A few years ago Jim Shooter had a blog post where he talked about Ditko, and he noted that in the early 80s Ditko said he didn't believe he was entitled to royalties for reprints of his older comics work or any other profit participation, but that "if Marvel chose to be generous" he would accept the money. I suspect he'd have the same attitude in this case.

Below is the relevant portion of what Shooter wrote, describing Ditko's position. Ditko is indeed a fascinating character. It's not that he doesn't like money, it's just that there are many things he's not willing to do to get money, things that most people in his position would do:

"First, Neal brought up the notion that the Guild would see to it that justice was done for founding father creators who had built Marvel and DC—restitution, back royalties, participations…. In particular, he cited Steve Ditko, who was present, and told how the Guild would champion his cause and make Marvel set right the unjust way it had treated him.


Steve spoke up. I will make no attempt to quote him here, except for one expression he used. If my characterization of what he said is inaccurate, then I apologize and stand ready to be corrected by Steve, if he so chooses.


Steve said that he was an adult when he did his work for Marvel in the sixties, that he knew what he was doing, that he understood the way things were done at the time and he accepted the terms. He agreed to the deal, or the standard terms that were in place then and he would not renege. If Marvel chose to be generous, fine. But he would stand by the choices he made. And, here comes the quote, he wasn’t going to let the Guild use him as a “poster child.”"

 

I have my tickets for the flick next Friday. This is the first time I've ever done this for a movie. My girls have really enjoyed the Marvel flicks and my girlfriend's son is also a big fan of what has come before. Me? Doc Strange (and Conan) were the only two comics I was into when I was a pup so this was the one on the list of upcoming Marvel flicks I circled some moons ago.

 

I saw it this afternoon, I thought it was terrific. One of the most entertaining two hours I have spent in the cinema for a while. At the end of the showing, the audience applauded, which doesn't happen a lot in Britain, I can tell you.

I will try to avoid any, but my review may contain mild spoilers

What I loved most was what the rather inept trailer cannot hope to convey: the film has lots of humour and a lightness of touch that contrasts with the dark, magical subject matter . The characters use humour to cope with mind-blowing experiences that have shattered their conception of reality.

The humour recalls the approach of Guardians of the Galaxy - like that movie, Doctor Strange also has several references to classic rock which should delight and surprise members of this forum (so no spoilers from me).

I really enjoyed the focus on Stephen Strange's journey - he is a broken man who goes in search of healing and finds himself called upon to help save and protect humanity - he is obviously uncomfortable with this and makes his distrust known. This wasn't part of the original Marvel origin story, as I recall.

The movie also is not afraid to portray Strange as arrogant, self-pitying, even brutal. In one scene he is as nasty as any villain might be, leaving several audience members drawing breath sharply and shaking their heads.

There is a scene in which Strange rages in self-pity and Western arrogance and insults the Ancient One, who then takes him on a journey through 'the multiverse' - this is just stunning, even for cinema goers sated by CGI special effects.

Can't say more without spoiling it for you. If you are interested, by all means go along. I really hope it performs well at the box office, and I can't see why it wouldn't. I'd like to put it in my top three Marvel feature movies, but that is a pretty crowded place, with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, the first Iron Man, Guardians of the Galaxy, and maybe an Avengers, but Doctor Strange is an engaging and entertaining movie by any standards.

Make sure you stay right to the end of the credits. And watch for the great Stan Lee cameo, because it only lasts a few seconds.

 

Excellent review.
Just as well you mentioned spoilers.

 

Thanks!

I really want to talk about the visual aspects of the film given its origins in the Ditko pages, but it is not fair when so many people have not had a chance to see it yet.

The movie was released this week in Britain to take advantage of the half-term school break. Not really a younger kids' attraction, but given the mixed welcome it has got before anyone at all had seen it, I would imagine Marvel are giving it every chance it can.

Fingers crossed and it does well so we get to see Doctor Strange 2, where he takes on _________ again !

 

Discuss?
Ya gotta wait like my earlier post.
But, it was brilliant, nuff said.
Benedict Cumberbatch was made for this strange role.

 

That is very high praise indeed. I'm really looking forward to this movie, and I really, really liked the three movies you named.

 

Why are U.S. films getting released now in the UK before here? Grrrr....I can't wait!

 

Well, for this film, the main star is from England.

But you are right. Seems like most blockbusters get released overseas first before the U.S.

Rogue One is also getting released overseas a day or two before it is released here.

 

I have zero interest in whatever Marvel malarkey surrounds Superhero #46 (kind of looks like a "Shadow" ripoff, ancient Tibetan secrets revealed!), but I'm anxious to see this for Cumberbatch. He's the reason I'll go. I'm sure he'll elevate the material -- I hope -- but mainly because he's just so weird...

 

A little understanding and familiarity with the source would benefit you. One of the best marvel titles and not your typical superhero fare. You didn't read any comic books as a kid? When I studied screenwriting the structure of some of the best Marvel comics reflected the dramatic structure (even though he didn't care for them) that my instructor Richard Walter tried to communicate to us. Granted, these films can fall into cliche but at their best they manage to combine interesting themes, dramatic conflict in an entertaining package. Most may not be "Vertigo" or "The Godfather" (both of which transcend their own genre confines) but it doesn't need to be.

I think you're confusing this with other superhero films as it's quite a bit more than that and evidently Scott Derekson does a terrific job inverting expectations of the format. Go in with an open mind.

 

Yup, weird alright, and very strange.

 

Saw it, one of the best Marvel films; @rikki nadir's review is spot on.
A great, great cast makes the difference. Ejiofor, Cumberbatch, Swinton, McAdams rock. Unfortunately (for me, at least) one of my fave actors, Mads Mikkelsen, doesn't really get much screentime and, imho, his talent is underused in this otherwise excellent movie.
More good news: it's brilliantly edited; not too short, not unbearably long or bloated, almost perfect, running-time wise. Oh and talking about great acting, the cloak steals the show
Loved the "drive safe" message. I believe the writers borrowed some ideas from Nolan but, what the heck, wonderful stuff to see on the big screen. I won't add much more. Fellow SH.tv members: do yourselves a favour and go to see this film; and stay for the two "bonus" scenes after the credits.

The only thing I really disliked is the new Marvel Studios intro logo; thankfully it lasts about 30 seconds.

 

I saw Doctor Strange yesterday on Imax in 3D. We had to travel to do so, but so glad we did.

It is fantastic beyond belief. I am a fan of the good Doctor comics from the silver age and I had three items on my checklist: the cloak of levitation, the all-seeing eye of Agomotto and the hoary hosts of Hoggoth. Well, I got two out of three! Good G-d already!

The trip through the multiverse was absolutely mind blowing. This film is a respectful and pretty much accurate homage to the days of Lee and Ditko. Cumberbatch and Swinton are perfect for their parts and Dormammu was just great. Lots of laughs too. The Pink Floyd song was a real blast - I won't say which one it was but it wasn't the one I had anticipated!

Just go and see it. Marvel are back on a roll with Guardians, Deadpool, Civil War and this.

 

I've seen it twice now and I have to agree - a very entertaining 2 hours of motion picture goodness indeed. Benedict Cumberbatch was brilliant playing the arrogant Stephen Strange and his supporting cast all were splendid as well. Film contained a fine balance of humour and all the magical and mysticism you could poke a stick at. And even Strange's Cloak of Levitation was a scene stealer too.

Both post-credit scenes were entertaining not to mention Stan Lee's 'hilarious' cameo! Might go see this again, with the IMAX in mind.

 

Yeah, quite a trippy Marvel movie that puts all the CGI from Inception into the opening scene alone. Then raises the bar afterwards.

Never got why the bad guy looked like Alice Cooper, though.

--Geoff

 

Yeah. Cloak, very old school Walt Disney that scene.

 

Why Doctor Strange shares its psychedelic DNA with Pink Floyd »

 

I saw the film last night and thoroughly enjoyed it (as did my 20 year old daughter!). Being a huge Ditko fan, I've been waiting for this ever since the very first Spiderman movie all those years ago and it didn't disappoint. The master stroke has been the casting Cumberbatch in the lead role and as usual, his handling of drama and comedy works perfectly.
It is must-see in 3D and perhaps the best use of that technology to date (and I don't like 3D movies usually). It's a thrill to see all the Dr Strange paraphernalia come into the story and the Ditko signatures that appear here and there.
The Multiverse sequences are stunning and I'm looking forward to more adventures within those domains. That aspect could have been more developped and I hope that they do later but this film looks more like a priming for Strange's later participation in The Avengers series as it is very strong on action and combat. The magic itself isn't soft and dreamy (as it was in Ditko's original comics), it is crackling with raw power.
Like the other more recent Marvel films (Deadpool, Antman, Thor, Avengers) there are plenty of hilarious spoken and visual gags and doses of auto-derision which enhance the entertainment.
I do have one or two little gripes about the film but I'll save them till later so as not to spoil.
May the light of Vishanti shine upon you!

 

Great review.
Pleased you enjoyed it.
"Gripes"?
I could nitpick a couple of things myself.And of course the tell tale sign if it's a great movie imo is the repeat viewing factor. Dunno why the US has to wait longer to view it. I guess the money is in Europe/Asia.

 

Wonderful article, thx!

 

Before coming across this thread,i wouldn't have even known who Doctor/Mister Strange [slight spoiler there] was.
so I went in with nothing to prejudice my opinion.
I enjoyed the film,the main character and the supporting character of Wong.
Things just went past a bit too fast for someone not knowing anything about the Marvel character.It felt as if it needed a bit more fleshing out with more character and story development.
Maybe and extended version [which now seems par for the course] would help more with someone in a similar situation as myself.

 

Gosh, I didn't like the looks of the trailers at all but all this high praise is encouraging.

 

Damn near a rave review from Deadline:Hollywood today:

‘Doctor Strange’ Review: Mind-Blowing Effects & Great Cast Make This Comic Book Movie A Marvel »

I'm off to see a screening tonight and will report back. This is a rare case where I'm going to see it in 3D, because an acquaintance of mine who worked on the film specifically told me to.