Dr. Strange's Multiverse of Muddled Cultural Messaging Is a Warning Sign for MCU's Future
Magical religion, demonic possession, corrupting power; has Marvel jumped the shark with the new Dr. Strange movie?
“I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
-Jesus
***SPOILERS AHEAD***
Trapped in an alternate universe and on the run from a murderous witch, Dr. Strange and gang jump through a portal where they find the magical Book of the Vishanti, hoping the knowledge it holds will help get them out of this pickle.
The Strange series has always been awash with religious imagery, like the Buddhist trappings of the order he affiliates with and the spiritual considerations of the methods he employs—think OBE (out of body experiences) in the first Dr. Strange movie. A Tibetan monk even consulted with the actors on set of Strange #1.
The sequel, however, takes things even further.
The Book of the Vishanti is suspended atop an otherworldly column that is, upon close inspection, not so otherworldly. The book is adorned with shooting rays of light and encircled by twisting columns. The imagery is straight out of Roman Catholicism.
The accents behind the book are a duplication of a monstrance, in which a consecrated Eucharist wafer is displayed for adoration.
The twisting pillars surrounding the Book are a copy of Bernini’s Baldacchino, a 17th century ciborium covering the altar at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, beneath which is likely buried Simon son of Jonah himself.
But the appropriation of purely religious symbolism, as it is used to characterize good versus bad magic in the film, quickly veers into full spiritual action. The Darkhold, which is the evil opposite of the Book of the Vishanti, is used by the Scarlet Witch who summons the powerful knowledge held within to perform trans-universe possession.
Yes. Trans-universe possession. He who commands the power of the Darkhold can possess one’s doppelganger in another reality.
I suppose spiritual possession is in keeping with being a witch, but it is striking to see real-world spiritual elements on display in a superhero film. It was intriguing in the first film with OBEs; it’s a little shocking in the second with possession. It’s even more striking when Doctor Strange, who is lauded for not being like the semi-evil or outright evil Doctor Stranges of other universes, actually uses the Darkhold himself.
But he doesn’t just take possession of any old Doctor Strange in another universe, he possesses a dead Doctor Strange, which is arguably more ethical…lol.
On the one hand, a commandeered corpse offers great entertainment value. Think Men in Black or Weekend at Bernie’s. On the other hand, as someone who is very much aware of the realities of demonic possession and channeling, it’s difficult to find value in or even stomach the film’s value system and flippant attitude toward these matters, especially when it seems to hold spiritual belief and moral culpability in high regard.
For whatever reason, there are also spirits of the damned in the film who appear out of nowhere to claim the soul of anyone who possesses a dead body. By the multiverse’s logic, it is a crime to take possession of a dead body but a-ok to possess a living being. Strange gets around this by somehow exercising control over the angry spirits and using them to fight the Scarlet Witch.
I’m seeing entertainment value, but I’m not seeing the moral value here. Is it too much to ask for both in a superhero film?
Strange does grow a third eye at the end of the movie like his evil counterpart in one of the alternate realities he visits. This creepy Joe Rogan eye could be a consequence of using the Darkhold, so there may be a negative repercussion playing out in the film’s value system here. But it may simply be what the third eye generally represents—awakening and spiritual enlightenment. Yikes.
Regardless, it is difficult to square a (supposedly) morally better Doctor Strange who uses the same damnable practices the witch uses. Scarlet Witch even calls him a hypocrite. Well…yes. Yes he is.
The act makes him no better than the supposedly more evil Strange on display in the first few minutes of the film who is willing to sacrifice America Chavez for a better outcome. The film’s explanation is that our universe’s Strange is the multiverse’s moral better but that he’s still the same old kooky Strange up to his old rule-bending tricks like using grimoires to animate the dead.
My point is that if this Strange is so great a superhero, he wouldn’t need to engage in morally bankrupt and soul-twisting acts. Maybe he’s tempted to do so, but he wouldn’t actually do it. But in this film he goes full witchcraft and is rewarded for doing so. It would be like Harry Potter using the three forbidden spells and everybody’s like YAY!
To its own detriment, the film upholds possession and controlling souls as legitimate tools for fighting evil, side-by-side with an embarrassing preoccupation with LGBTQIA+ themes. The lead actress, Xochitl Gomez, plays a character (America Chavez) whose long lost parents are two women who get sucked into another universe when her powers accidentally kicked in. The scene with the two moms induced more than one groan in the theater.
Chavez actually wears a pride/trans/POC combo flag pin on her jean jacket the entire movie, and stitched or printed on her jacket is “Amor es amor.” She’s a walking talking token the entire movie, and my assessment here is bolstered by the fact that Xochitl is either not a very good actress or that the script gives her no substance for her to develop her character. She’s critically important to the storyline, and yet she’s just…there.
Benedict Cumberbatch, responding to the fact the film was banned in Saudi Arabia for homosexual depictions, reflexively said Chavez’s portrayal in the film “isn’t tokenism” since she’s gay in the comics. That’s a slip of the tongue because after all, Saudia Arabia doesn’t care if it’s tokenism or not; they don’t want any of it, period. But American audiences certainly do care about tokenism and understand the way tokenism hurts a film. Cumberbatch knows how it might play to us, so he’s doing a bit of priming.
SIDE NOTE: China seems to be more concerned about a split-second appearance in the film of a newsstand owned by The Epoch Times because of its ties to Falun Gong, which China says is a shameful presence in the U.S. because it spreads homophobic ideas “contrary to present-day U.S. mainstream values.” So yeah.
It’s increasingly difficult for me to say Marvel isn’t jumping a multiverse of sharks. As someone who just goes to see these movies for fun and is hardly interested in the cultural conversations that swirl around them, something must still be said for the noticeable drop in quality here and for the cultural influences that could be identified as culprits.
Doctor Strange 2 is a sometimes enjoyable mess with a disjointed script and competing agendas. Doctor Strange himself is difficult to pin down. Is he likable? Annoying? Good? Bad? He’s certainly no Tony Stark.
With the exit of Robert Downey Jr., in fact, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has suffered a great loss. His Stark/Iron Man character was immensely likable, immensely flawed, and immensely redeemable. His character arc is exciting. It is sown in dishonor and raised to honor. It reflects the story woven by the Master Storyteller.
Strange, on the other hand, is generally unlikable, morally bankrupt, and has a character arc that finds new lows to tread instead of soaring to superhero highs. For example, when he learns to control the spirits of damnation who have come to take him away for practicing evil magic, we learn that the only thing that can overcome the consequences of his trespass is wielding and using enormous power.
This is not the way of Gandalf, a wizard who sacrifices himself at the bridge of Khazad-dûm for his companions, but rather the way of Voldemort, who takes possession of Professor Quirrell who tells young Harry Potter “There is no good and evil, there is only power.” I fear Doctor Strange might agree with that statement.
Doctor Strange of reality 616, our universe, which happens to be the number of the beast in some manuscripts of Revelation 13 (okay, I’ll stop now, though it is true), and the wider Marvel Cinematic Universe are destined to further inject religious magical elements and spiritual superpowers down the line, and if they result in such a drop in quality as we’ve seen here, there is reason to dread the future of the MCU.
These elements became more pronounced when Moon Knight made its debut on Disney+ this spring, in which possession and subservience to Egyptian gods takes a central role. The main character, a Jewish man named Marc Spector with multiple personalities, serves an Egyptian deity named Khonshu who sometimes possesses him. It all has to do with a crisis of identity, I guess.
Personally, all I can think of are the kinds of gods that God made a mockery of during the Exodus and declares his judgement upon them.
"...on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments. I am the LORD." (Exodus 12:12)
In the show, a couple dead bodies get possessed, though the possessor, an Egyptian Hippopotamus deity named Taweret, doesn’t have to deal with a bunch of spirits of the damned attacking her for it. In the MCU, it’s rules for me, but not for thee.
And that makes everything happening in the MCU simultaneously more unpredictable and less exciting. How exciting can watching a sport be if you don’t know the rules and subsequently find out there aren’t any? This is the direction in which the MCU is sprinting.
I’m good with seeing heroes that sometimes get mistaken as villains since that makes for good stories, but in the world of Doctor Strange, he’s looking more and more like a villain who’s being mistaken for a hero in a world that is unable to tell the difference between good and evil. That’s reason enough to be pessimistic, regardless of which universe you live in.