Dr. Strange


Movies

51 to 100 of 410 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

Hopefully they will not.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Aaron Whitley wrote:
Misroi wrote:
I still wish the Eye of Agamatto was the Reality gem, and that's how Stephen's able to perform "magic."
I know there is some speculation that it might be the Soul gem.

I'd really rather it wasn't. Or at least, if it is, it's not the main source of Strange's "magic". Let him actually be a Master of Magic, not just a guy with a powerful gizmo.

Unfortunately I think they're going to try to tie it with the whole Stones of Power meta-arc they've been working with from the first of the Marvel movies.

They can do that and make it work. As long as that's not 'how Stephen's able to perform "magic."' If it replaces the Eye of Agamotto as one of his tools, that's fine by me. If he's not actually using magic of his own, but just powered by a gem that would go a long way to ruining it for me.

I don't think they'll take that route. It raises the question of what Mordo would be using, if nothing else.


Hama wrote:
Hopefully they will not.

I'm pretty sure they will... they've been heavily pushing it in almost every one of the sub-franchises... the Casket of Winters in Avengers and Thor, the Power Stone in Guardians of the Galaxy, as well as the Infinity Gauntlet itself in the same movie.... and of course old Stoneface Himself.

Sovereign Court

Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Wong keeps getting reinvented in the comics.


Why do they always cast Brits in these roles?

There isn't an American actor who can play this character?

Pretty sure I can predict the kind of response this sentiment will evoke here, but it is something I've thought for a while.

Why is it Thor, Wolverine, Loki, Superman, the Joker, Batman (for god's sake), House (come to think of it) are played by UK or Australian actors?

Does this revolving door go both ways? I can turn on the TV and see English actors in American television shows. I can hear UK accents in many commercials (try going an hour or so watching TV and noticing when this happens, it occurs more often than you think).

I'm definitely not an expert on British TV or whatever the current condition of their film industry. But I'm pretty sure that American actors do not appear on British TV shows regularly, or get cast in movies made by their filmmakers.

So why is it that I appear to be the only one ever bugged by this sort of thing?

Once upon a time you'd see the occasional actor like Chaplin, Flynn, Price, Dietrich (well she was German), appear in US films.

But we produced lots of stars like Bogart, John Wayne, and a slew of others.

Now it seems like we make movies so we can cast British actors in the lead role.

In the end it is all about the money. And this flow of money seems to go in one direction only.

I have every confidence that an American actor could have played Loki, Thor, this role as Doctor Strange, any of the ones I've mentioned.

Instead American actors get frozen out of lead roles, and the career enhancement and lucrative aspects of the whole thing.

And for what? Moviemaking is different than it was; overseas gross may be more important than domestic for... the films that actually make money (Pacific Rim and Fast and the Furious I'm looking at you). But the UK is a very minor market in that. The money is made in countries where the actor's dialogue is being dubbed anyway.

Be a hard google, but I'd be surprised if the money American TV and movies make from the UK market is even a burp in a whirlwind. (Since my impression is the BBC doesn't air our shows at all, any UK commenter can correct me if he wishes). There sure doesn't seem to be a UK entity like PBS, that goes full bore on the Anglophilia, just with a fixation on American culture

So why do we continually have to cast people with this particular accent?

And trust me; we have more people who could plausibly play Thor or Superman from a physique standpoint than the UK could imagine. And that is with our obesity problem.

This just doesn't seem like it is a fair arrangement to me. And I shed tears for the American whose light and career never dawned because this Cumberbatch guy was cast in a role that could have gone to that obscure forever American actor who is still waiting tables.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Chris Evans, Paul Rudd, Chris Pratt, Robert Downey jr, Mark Ruffalo, Edward Norton, Samuel l. Jackson, great god...I can see...all British...

edit: The'occasional foreign actor' list is far larger then you might think and includes the likes of Cary Grant, Brigitte Bardot, Rod Taylor, Richard Burton, Julie Andrews, Johnny Weissmuller, Arnold Schwarzenegger and others.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not like the characters of Thor and Loki are actually American...


My own completely speculative thoughts:

Maybe Baron Mordo ISN'T a villain in this movie, but starts out in friendly rivalry with Strange. Having a character go from good guy to bad guy over multiple movies hasn't happened yet in MCU movies, and would be an interesting plot thread to see over the course of 3 movies (which I would guess is the number of films planned for Strange.


feytharn wrote:

Chris Evans, Paul Rudd, Chris Pratt, Robert Downey jr, Mark Ruffalo, Edward Norton, Samuel l. Jackson, great god...I can see...all British...

Uh huh. And do they get roles in UK film productions or television shows?

Dark Archive

In and old interview Kevin Feige said Benedict Cumberbatch is a 'Doctor Strange' fan.


sunbeam wrote:
feytharn wrote:

Chris Evans, Paul Rudd, Chris Pratt, Robert Downey jr, Mark Ruffalo, Edward Norton, Samuel l. Jackson, great god...I can see...all British...

Uh huh. And do they get roles in UK film productions or television shows?

Do they actually want them? I'd hazard that all of them make more than enough money from US films to want in on the likely smaller budgeted UK productions.


I'm looking forward to the film but I think should they invoke Clark's third law to explain Strange's magic then the film will be significantly ruined in my eyes. Might still be a good film though.

As for the increased use of British actors there's a number of reasons. One is wider market appeal - by casting David Tenant in Jessica Jones the series got a lot more attention in the mainstream media over here. These films will be targeting a more global audience then the comics ever did and so benefit in progressing away from 'America is the centre of the world'. Another is that British actors tend to be cheaper then American actors and apparently there is a perception that Brit actors are better behaved and less concerned with being 'on top' and so work better as part of an ensemble. (source: BBC article "Why are British actors playing Americans?").


Decimus Drake wrote:
These films will be targeting a more global audience then the comics ever did and so benefit in progressing away from 'America is the centre of the world'.

So... casting a brit in a movie helps sell tickets in the Latin markets, Eastern Europe, or Asia? Can't believe that one. Maybe in India.

As for the rest of that "America is the centre of the world," well I don't think that is relevant at all. To paraphrase a commercial that aired on US television a few years ago "That's not how this works; that's not like anything works."

People don't buy tickets because cultural sensitivity or something is being shown in a movie and exemplified by casting. They buy them because the flick has action, and speaks in the international language of booms and boobs.

For the smaller sectors of the movie going public in any nation that isn't swayed by the above, the ones you would think might well be amenable to the pitch you are envisioning...

Well again, it doesn't work that way. Actually a kind of insolent cultural arrogance seems to be a better sell.

After all Americans can't seem to get enough of Victorian era England. The rest of it... well anything that happened after WWII doesn't seem to be particularly interesting to them. (or to the rest of the world honestly)

The part where you guys got all sensitive? Not that marketable. It's all Churchill, lace, colonialism, and handlebar moustaches. Fifty years from now odds are whatever form of movie or video serial set in the UK will involve... Churchill, lace, colonialism, and handlebar moustaches. Not the David Cameron or Tony Blair era.

Decimus Drake wrote:
Another is that British actors tend to be cheaper then American actors and apparently there is a perception that Brit actors are better behaved and less concerned with being 'on top' and so work better as part of an ensemble. (source: BBC article "Why are British actors playing Americans?").

This kind of baffles me. I'm going to see if I can google some articles on this. Really can't understand why a British actor would be cheaper than an American one. An American would really turn down a role in a big budget film, because it only pays "UK" wages?

As for the rest of that... no unreasonable people or prima donnas from the UK? Got it.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Another thing is that British actors tend to be much better at American accents than American actors are at British accents from what I've seen. Not sure if why but seems to be the case.


My problem with the infinity gem concept... is that they will HAVE to lose them.

Vision WILL lose his gem... Strange WILL lose his Amulet... The Gauntlet WILL be formed.

For what little is gained by combining these artifacts into the gems... we essentially lose or nerf a character something fierce before Thanos shows up.


phantom1592 wrote:

My problem with the infinity gem concept... is that they will HAVE to lose them.

Vision WILL lose his gem... Strange WILL lose his Amulet... The Gauntlet WILL be formed.

For what little is gained by combining these artifacts into the gems... we essentially lose or nerf a character something fierce before Thanos shows up.

Which is fine if the gem is the Eye equivalent. Much less so if it's the thing that lets Strange do "magic".

Scarab Sages

On the prevalence of British (or other nationality) actors - I could give two shits less, as long as the person can act and they don't have to change the story too much to accommodate a certain actor.

On whether the Eye will be an Infinity Stone - I hope not. The fact that they didn't put any of the stones in Antman gives me hope they'll do the same here.


thejeff wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:

My problem with the infinity gem concept... is that they will HAVE to lose them.

Vision WILL lose his gem... Strange WILL lose his Amulet... The Gauntlet WILL be formed.

For what little is gained by combining these artifacts into the gems... we essentially lose or nerf a character something fierce before Thanos shows up.

Which is fine if the gem is the Eye equivalent. Much less so if it's the thing that lets Strange do "magic".

One of the cool things about Thanos and the gauntlet is that he's more powerful then EVERYONE.

That loses a LOT if he steals everyone else's powers and they have to fight him at half strength.

Besides... Ancient one, mordo, Strange.... they can't ALL be using a gem at the same time... There's GOTTA be magic.


phantom1592 wrote:
thejeff wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:

My problem with the infinity gem concept... is that they will HAVE to lose them.

Vision WILL lose his gem... Strange WILL lose his Amulet... The Gauntlet WILL be formed.

For what little is gained by combining these artifacts into the gems... we essentially lose or nerf a character something fierce before Thanos shows up.

Which is fine if the gem is the Eye equivalent. Much less so if it's the thing that lets Strange do "magic".

One of the cool things about Thanos and the gauntlet is that he's more powerful then EVERYONE.

That loses a LOT if he steals everyone else's powers and they have to fight him at half strength.

Besides... Ancient one, mordo, Strange.... they can't ALL be using a gem at the same time... There's GOTTA be magic.

Exactly. If Strange is the Sorcerer Supreme and he also has the Eye of Agamotto, which happens to be an infinity stone, that's cool. Thanos takes it from him and he's still the Sorcerer Supreme.

OTOH, if he's only a sorcerer because he's got the infinity stone, then it all falls apart.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Article on CBR Seems to indicate that a) Strange has his own powers and b) the eye may be the time stone.

Important part.
“He does cast spells, which in the comics have very sort of tongue-twisty fun names. We don’t want to shy away from that, because that’s what makes Doctor Strange Doctor Strange," said Feige. "He has a Cloak of Levitation that allows him to fly, but he doesn’t fly like Superman or like Thor. It’s almost got a consciousness of its own, this cloak, which, again, gives us a superhero with a red cape -- which we’ve seen a few times -- but allows us to do it in a wholly unique and wholly original way. He can create these mandalas of light that he can use as shields and he can use as sort of weapons. He can create portals that will open before your eyes that he can step through and go to other places around the world. And frankly, even in this film, we’ll only touch upon what a lot of his powers are.”

and

“In this film, the Eye is a very important relic that can be quite dangerous if used in the wrong hands, because it has the ability to do any number of things, the most dangerous of which is, it can sort of manipulate probabilities," said Feige. "Which is also another way of saying, ‘screw around with time’ -- which is part of our story.”


My dr. Strange knowledge is admittedly limited, but didn't he cast only a handful of spells(a of a, b of b, etc) and rely on magical gizmos for everything else?


Freehold DM wrote:
My dr. Strange knowledge is admittedly limited, but didn't he cast only a handful of spells(a of a, b of b, etc) and rely on magical gizmos for everything else?

No. He does a lot of casting. He's got the Eye, which varies from mostly stripping away illusions to a superweapon depending on writer/era, the Cloak of Levitation, which is pretty much what it says on the box though he can also manipulate it remotely, and the Orb of Agamotto, which stays home and mostly gets used to detect threats and do research.

That's pretty much it for the iconic stuff. He's used other magic gizmos as plot devices from time to time.

At least in the classic version, which I think is pretty close to the current one. He's been revamped with different power sets a couple times, when writers didn't know what to do with him.

He's actually in a lot of ways one of the best examples of a high-level PF/D&D caster around.


Mm. Okay.

Dark Archive

thejeff wrote:
Which is fine if the gem is the Eye equivalent. Much less so if it's the thing that lets Strange do "magic".

I also hope 'not' for the Eye as Infinity Stone, although it *could* be handwaved that the stone merely helps to unlock the potential to manipulate reality / see into other dimensions, etc. and that once it's 'awakened the third eye' or whatever, the magician can continue to learn and do magic without it. (Although the magicians should be able to awaken other magicians without it, eventually, perhaps through a harder process, so that we can have magicians appearing both pre- and post-Infinity Stone.)

That said, the whole Thanos/Infinity Stone focus, IMO, is one of the weakest parts of this whole MCU thing, and one of the things I loved about Ant-Man is that had nothing to do with the 'crossover event' of magic McGuffin bling. As connective tissue, it's done it's work, but I'm really not the biggest Thanos fan (since he's gotten all tangled up with characters I like even less, like Q, er, the Beyonder) and some pretty Elric of Melnibone level angst.


Set wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Which is fine if the gem is the Eye equivalent. Much less so if it's the thing that lets Strange do "magic".

I also hope 'not' for the Eye as Infinity Stone, although it *could* be handwaved that the stone merely helps to unlock the potential to manipulate reality / see into other dimensions, etc. and that once it's 'awakened the third eye' or whatever, the magician can continue to learn and do magic without it. (Although the magicians should be able to awaken other magicians without it, eventually, perhaps through a harder process, so that we can have magicians appearing both pre- and post-Infinity Stone.)

Or the Stone has nothing to do with unlocking magic. It's just another magic tool Strange has. Probably the most powerful. Maybe a thing that it's the responsibility of the Sorcerer Supreme to protect as well as use.


Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.

It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.

Sovereign Court

Can you provide a link? Because that would then be two infinity stones shown in one movie.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.

Really? I don't think that was even hinted at, but I don't remember the first Thor movie that clearly.

As far as I can tell, there was:
Tesseract - Space Stone (Cube in Cap 1 & Avengers among others)
Scepter - Mind Stone (given to Loki by Thanos)
Aether - Reality Stone (Thor 2)
Orb - Power Stone (Guardians)

The Soul & Time gems haven't shown up yet - though it's now hinted that Strange has the Time one.

It would kind of make sense for the Casket to be one, since all the other mysterious powerful artifacts seem to be, but they haven't treated it as one.

Sovereign Court

Just checked. The casket is not an infinity stone.

marvel wiki wrote:

The Casket of Ancient Winters

CasketOfAncientWinters-Thor

The Casket of Ancient Winters

The Casket is powered by a limitless supply of magical energy. When used, it releases a blast of powerful arctic weather that is capable of freezing anything in its path; killing humans and immobilizing Asgardians. The Casket can only be used and handled by a Frost Giant; anyone else who attempts to open it would be burnt by the powerful cold aura that surrounds it. Its magic is also strong enough to temporarily disrupt the powers of Odin.

The Casket was used by the Frost Giants in an attempt to take over the Nine Realms, starting with Earth in the realm of Midgard. When the Frost Giants are defeated by Odin, the All-Father takes the casket back to Asgard for safekeeping. He later displays it to his two young sons; Thor and Loki, when he is telling them stories about the war with the Frost Giants.

Prior to Thor's coronation as the new king of Asgard, the Casket is almost stolen by several Frost Giants who have managed to enter the vault. The theft is sensed and stopped by Odin who calls the Destroyer to kill the thieves.

Later in the film Loki discovers that he can handle the casket without being harmed. He uses it most notably to freeze Heimdall. The casket also temporaily disrupts Odin's magic; causing Loki's true Frost Giant physical charactaristics (blue skin and red eyes) to appear.

Scarab Sages

thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
My dr. Strange knowledge is admittedly limited, but didn't he cast only a handful of spells(a of a, b of b, etc) and rely on magical gizmos for everything else?

No. He does a lot of casting. He's got the Eye, which varies from mostly stripping away illusions to a superweapon depending on writer/era, the Cloak of Levitation, which is pretty much what it says on the box though he can also manipulate it remotely, and the Orb of Agamotto, which stays home and mostly gets used to detect threats and do research.

That's pretty much it for the iconic stuff. He's used other magic gizmos as plot devices from time to time.

At least in the classic version, which I think is pretty close to the current one. He's been revamped with different power sets a couple times, when writers didn't know what to do with him.

He's actually in a lot of ways one of the best examples of a high-level PF/D&D caster around.

And, as I recall, he also had a ton of mystic tomes to draw upon, some of which were powerful artifacts, such as the Darkhold and the Book of the Vishanti.


Aberzombie wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
My dr. Strange knowledge is admittedly limited, but didn't he cast only a handful of spells(a of a, b of b, etc) and rely on magical gizmos for everything else?

No. He does a lot of casting. He's got the Eye, which varies from mostly stripping away illusions to a superweapon depending on writer/era, the Cloak of Levitation, which is pretty much what it says on the box though he can also manipulate it remotely, and the Orb of Agamotto, which stays home and mostly gets used to detect threats and do research.

That's pretty much it for the iconic stuff. He's used other magic gizmos as plot devices from time to time.

At least in the classic version, which I think is pretty close to the current one. He's been revamped with different power sets a couple times, when writers didn't know what to do with him.

He's actually in a lot of ways one of the best examples of a high-level PF/D&D caster around.

And, as I recall, he also had a ton of mystic tomes to draw upon, some of which were powerful artifacts, such as the Darkhold and the Book of the Vishanti.

He didn't have the Darkhold - other than possibly as a temporary caretaker, but he did have a library of tomes. Most of the time, those weren't used directly in fights, but for research on enemies or rituals.

Scarab Sages

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.

That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Scarab Sages

thejeff wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
My dr. Strange knowledge is admittedly limited, but didn't he cast only a handful of spells(a of a, b of b, etc) and rely on magical gizmos for everything else?

No. He does a lot of casting. He's got the Eye, which varies from mostly stripping away illusions to a superweapon depending on writer/era, the Cloak of Levitation, which is pretty much what it says on the box though he can also manipulate it remotely, and the Orb of Agamotto, which stays home and mostly gets used to detect threats and do research.

That's pretty much it for the iconic stuff. He's used other magic gizmos as plot devices from time to time.

At least in the classic version, which I think is pretty close to the current one. He's been revamped with different power sets a couple times, when writers didn't know what to do with him.

He's actually in a lot of ways one of the best examples of a high-level PF/D&D caster around.

And, as I recall, he also had a ton of mystic tomes to draw upon, some of which were powerful artifacts, such as the Darkhold and the Book of the Vishanti.
He didn't have the Darkhold - other than possibly as a temporary caretaker, but he did have a library of tomes. Most of the time, those weren't used directly in fights, but for research on enemies or rituals.

Yeah, I know he had it at one point, since he used it to inadvertently resurrect his brother as a vampire, but I couldn't remember if it was ever taken from him.


Aberzombie wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.
That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Where else were you going to keep it? Entrust it to the Humans?

Sometimes the only choices you have are between two bad ones.

And you need a point of failure to set up the plot for the next movie.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

ooooh....

If Strange does well enough a Netflix/ABC series similar to The Darkhold Redeemers maybe with Frank mixed in from the Nightstalkers/Tomb of Dracula thown is possible.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.
That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Where else were you going to keep it? Entrust it to the Humans?

Sometimes the only choices you have are between two bad ones.

And you need a point of failure to set up the plot for the next movie.

But they specifically said "We shouldn't keep this one so we don't have 2 in the same place." Which makes no sense if they already had 2.

Why do you think the Casket is a Stone? Which one do you think it is? Do you think everyone else has just missed the clues you picked up on?

Scarab Sages

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.
That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Where else were you going to keep it? Entrust it to the Humans?

Sometimes the only choices you have are between two bad ones.

And you need a point of failure to set up the plot for the next movie.

You miss the point. Why would you say, in giving away the Aether to someone else for safekeeping, that it was dangerous to keep two Infinity Stones in close proximity when (if your theory regarding the Casket of Winter being one of the stones), there already were two stones in close proximity?


Personally, I'm fine with Strange using an Infinity Stone in this movie, especially if using it helps him better understand his developing powers. He can then lose it in the whole Infinity War crossover.

And then in Doctor Strange II, something can set him on the trail to finding the Eye of Agamotto (which isn't an Infinity Stone) as he further develops his knowledge & powers toward an eventual confrontation with Dormammumumumumu. Loki Hiddleston can pop in too (hopefully Awesome Facial Hair Bro can just be a cameo.).

Sovereign Court

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.
That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Where else were you going to keep it? Entrust it to the Humans?

Sometimes the only choices you have are between two bad ones.

And you need a point of failure to set up the plot for the next movie.

As I pointed out in my previous post, the casket is most certainly, not an infinity stone.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hey guys ...

We can postulate and figure out where the other gems are by looking at the movie release schedule.

and

This is a little more complex.


sunbeam wrote:
Decimus Drake wrote:
These films will be targeting a more global audience then the comics ever did and so benefit in progressing away from 'America is the centre of the world'.

So... casting a brit in a movie helps sell tickets in the Latin markets, Eastern Europe, or Asia? Can't believe that one. Maybe in India.

Quote:


“We were in Kathmandu, we were shooting in some of the public areas, and the crowds that turned out for Benedict weren’t like anything I’ve ever seen in 30 years in the business,” said Newirth. “It was like the Beatles showed up after 'The Ed Sullivan Show.' He did one thing one day where he just popped his head out of a window just to say ‘Hi’ to the fans and it just erupted into just love and adoration. There were girls that were crying and hugging each other when they saw him go by. It was really remarkable.”

From http://www.ew.com/article/2015/12/30/doctor-strange-benedict-cumberbatch-ka thmandu


So how did it happen? I mean he became adored in Nepal?

The link under the name Cumberbatch, had this association:

"The answer lies in Cumberbatch’s teenage years — specifically when the 19-year-old Brit spent time teaching English to Tibetan monks in the state of West Bengal in eastern India. “It was a very unfair exchange,” says the Sherlock star. “Basically, they taught me reams, fathoms, more than I could possibly begin [to teach them]. I became interested the meeting point between Western logic and Eastern mysticism.”"

That's not really the kind of thing that's going to make you a celebrity a few years later.

And looking at his filmography... well I dunno. Cant' say I have insight into the heart of Nepal, but it seems a stretch to me that movies about Charles Darwin's dark night of the soul, or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_%28film%29, are going to lead to this:

"there were girls that were crying and hugging each other when they saw him go by. It was really remarkable.”

Maybe I don't get Nepal, but this seems like a wee bit of a stretch. So how did it happen? Is it because he has already had a number of roles in movies? Roles which someone else could had, and gotten notoriety for?

Or is there some unique quality of his Englishness, that just resonates in this part of the world?

As for some of the better known movies he has apparently been in, like Star Trek: Into Darkness, an American could just as easily have been cast. And used to advance his career, not to mention pocketing the cash.


Is there some particular reason Hollywood should be restricting itself to American actors, and only looking elsewhere when there is a strong reason?

As for why you're more likely to find British actors in American movies and TV than vice versa it could be as simple as the US industry being the big time.


Why not?

Look you guys seem to think that being an actor is some kind of innate talent or the result of years of hard training that only a few gifted people can master.

It's not. Sure you have to work at it, but we have lots of people here who live in LA, do the side job thing, do community theater, work out to be buff, etc.

To take the case of Thor, I have no doubt that there are more than a few 6'4" or so buff bodies in LA that could handle that role.

And as Honest Trailers said about the guy who played Superman in the Man of Steel remake, "He has the acting range of a crumpet."

You see I just can't buy that a country of 300+ million people is incapable of producing actors who could fill the roles that have been given to these guys.

And as for why it matters? It matters to me. When I see a role that could easily go to an American, and would enable them to have the career they have dreamed of...

Well I have my fellow American's back, no questions asked, no quarter given, and no apologies uttered. Sucks to be you Cumberbatch.

Incidentally I did some googling on Nepal and movies. Looks a whole lot like a bunch of Bollywood stuff (like I was expecting). Really drawing a blank on what aspect of Cumberbatch's career made him a household name in Nepal.

Though to be fair, you can't blame these guys for taking what is freely given. Seems to me we need different people calling the shots when it comes to casting and film making.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Given?
You don't think they had to go to a screen test? You don't think there was an interview process?

Ridiculous.


Kryzbyn wrote:

Given?

You don't think they had to go to a screen test? You don't think there was an interview process?

Ridiculous.

What's your point? The hand of god is going to reach down and give someone a big paycheck and put them in the spotlight.

Or I suppose what you are saying is that actors from the UK are much better than ones from the US.

A point I don't believe, and believe even less the more reading I do on this.

There are actually a number of articles (as the fellow above mentioned) about this, going back a few years now.

There is also a Key and Peele skit about this (which is hard to find actually, not on youtube apparently), called "British Thug Life," in which an actor who is actually from the streets finds the director much prefers another actor from the UK. For the type of role which was pretty much his life story.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I really don't understand what the main issue here is with Cumberbatch playing Stephen Strange, sunbeam, other than "He's a limey!" I'm actually hard pressed to come up with an actor better suited to play Earth's Sorcerer Supreme than Cumberbatch. I won't argue that Benedict wasn't on a short list, but I'm sure there were other names. We just won't hear about them because they got the person they wanted.

But, I'll let you make an alternative casting here. Which American actor would you prefer seeing in the title role instead?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
sunbeam wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

Given?

You don't think they had to go to a screen test? You don't think there was an interview process?

Ridiculous.

What's your point? The hand of god is going to reach down and give someone a big paycheck and put them in the spotlight.

Or I suppose what you are saying is that actors from the UK are much better than ones from the US.

A point I don't believe, and believe even less the more reading I do on this.

There are actually a number of articles (as the fellow above mentioned) about this, going back a few years now.

There is also a Key and Peele skit about this (which is hard to find actually, not on youtube apparently), called "British Thug Life," in which an actor who is actually from the streets finds the director much prefers another actor from the UK. For the type of role which was pretty much his life story.

My point referred to the casting process. Look up how it works.


thejeff wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Hama wrote:
Casket ow Winters isn't an infinity stone.
It is now. in terms of the movie franchise it's discussed as one of the items of power in the infinity set. It's just simply currently in the shape of a mystic casket. Kind of how like each segment of Dr. Who's Key of Time took on other forms.
That....doesn't make a lick of sense. The casket was being kept in the Asgardian Vault. They then acquired the Tesseract, which is also (presumably) kept in the vault. At the end of Dark World, when Sif and Volstagg bring the Aether to the Collector, they say they can't keep it in Asgard because it isn't wise to have two Infinity Stones in the same place. So why would they have kept the Tesseract if the casket was one of the stones?

Where else were you going to keep it? Entrust it to the Humans?

Sometimes the only choices you have are between two bad ones.

And you need a point of failure to set up the plot for the next movie.

But they specifically said "We shouldn't keep this one so we don't have 2 in the same place." Which makes no sense if they already had 2.

Why do you think the Casket is a Stone? Which one do you think it is? Do you think everyone else has just missed the clues you picked up on?

Because Thanos is involved. And that's the only set of items he's interested in. I'm also fairly sure that the movie's interpretation of the Infinity stones is going to differ vastly from the classic story. No Adam Warlock for instance.

51 to 100 of 410 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Movies / Dr. Strange All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.