I’m committed to a spoiler-free review, but this is a difficult movie to properly discuss without giving away certain plot elements. If you do care about spoilers, my first suggestion is stay away from Twitter, but also definitely go see this film. It has some serious flaws, but also an energy and personality unique to modern blockbusters, and that is thanks to director Sam Raimi.
The film follows the further adventures of Benedict Cumberbatch’s Dr. Stephen Strange, master of the mystic arts. Strange saves a young girl—America Chavez, played wonderfully by Xochitl Gomez—with abilities to traverse different realities, who is being relentlessly pursued by inter-dimensional demons. Strange enlists the help of Wong (Benedict Wong) and Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) to determine who is after America, and why—questions that take them from our universe and beyond.
Scott Derrickson (director of Sinister and the first Doctor Strange) was slated to return for this sequel and amicably parted ways with Marvel over the usual creative differences. Marvel mega-producer Kevin Feige quickly tapped long-time friend Sam Raimi, famous for the Evil Dead and Tobey Maguire Spider-Man trilogies, to step in. Raimi was a savvy replacement: whenever a director leaves a movie, it casts a swirl of doubt around the project, and Raimi’s reputation and horror bonafides calmed fears and brought a new enthusiasm for the Marvel sequel. The biggest question was if Raimi, a notably stylistic director, could push through the Marvel machine and impart his special imprint. I’m happy to report that whatever else you may think of this movie, it is a Raimi joint through and through, and increasingly-so as the film progresses. The first 30 minutes resembles standard Marvel spectacle before becoming more and more Raimi’s baby, culminating in a thrillingly bonkers third act.
Raimi’s horror background is on full display, especially his canny ability to thread terrifying sequences with a tongue-in-cheek camp. This movie is far scarier than I ever thought Marvel would allow, with legitimate jump scares and extended horror sequences. Marvel has flirted with other genres in the past (Captain America: The Winter Soldier’s political thriller winking), but this is Marvel’s first proper foray into horror. (That said, this isn’t Saw. The violence and gross-out moments are intense, but only by Marvel’s standards, and are presented in a stylized, campy way. There’s been some recent debate over if this movie is stretching its PG-13 rating. That’s frankly ridiculous and I’m surprised Variety even gave space for a columnist to suggest that. If you’re wondering if you should take your seven-year-old to this movie, there’s a helpful age range right there in the rating itself to help you out.)
The execution and style from Raimi are the best elements of the film, but the movie stumbles over an underwhelming plot and confusing characterizations. It might be a deal breaker for some viewers, depending on your ability to switch off your brain to convoluted plot mechanics and just enjoy the ride. While Raimi has fun with the creepier elements of the Doctor Strange mythos, the movie plays it far too safe with the opportunities granted by the concept of the multiverse. If you choose a title as campy as The Multiverse of Madness, and hire Sam Raimi to direct a script by Rick and Morty’s Michael Waldron, there better be some wild, multiversal shenanigans exploding across this movie. The worst thing that could have happened for this film is to release one month after a truly mad multiversal trip in Everything Everywhere All At Once (one of the best movies of the year). That film takes greater, more satisfying creative and storytelling risks on a fraction of the budget. I don’t blame Raimi or Waldron for this; I understand this movie has to serve several corporate masters, but if you’re going to dangle this mad cap concept in front of us, do weirder shit!
The sweaty plot is only forgivable because Raimi makes a meal out of the majority of the sequences. I can extend some grace to the writing process because this film underwent extensive reshoots thanks to COVID-19 reshuffling and some odd studio machinations. Multiverse of Madness was supposed to be released before, and lead into, Spider-Man: No Way Home, but when Marvel pushed back its release slate, Sony (who owns the rights to Spider-Man and works with Marvel to share the character) held firm, likely wanting to take advantage of the Christmas release window. This decision required last minute rewriting, retooling, and reshooting for both films. I don’t want to completely wave off all of Multiverse of Madness’s problems on behind-the-scenes drama. Franchises of this size are regularly reshuffled and rewritten, oftentimes on the fly, and it can work so well that we would have never known (like the Bourne trilogy or Mad Max: Fury Road). But the seams are showing and the biggest sin of the film is its handling of character arcs, particularly Wanda Maximoff.
Without revealing too much of Wanda’s path in this story, her characterization felt inconsistent with her trajectory over her last several film and television appearances. It’s not at total odds with where we left her at the end of last year’s WandaVision, but to make the leap for this film, the audience must assume a lot of off-screen character development. She’s in a completely different emotional state, so that when we meet up with her in this story, her choices make her feel like a completely different character. Her arc isn’t the issue—I actually think, conceptually, her path in this film is fresh and exciting; the problem is the connection of ‘where she was’ to ‘where she is’ needs more fleshing out and logical throughline. Without it, Wanda’s entire arc is jarring, and, depending on how invested you are in her character, can unravel the entire movie.
In fact, because of the lack of connectivity with previous characterizations, this movie almost works better as a one-off adventure. Anecdotally, I know several people, with little knowledge or care about the grand Marvel storyline, that walked into this movie with no preconceived notions and loved it more for it. But part of the magic, part of the elevator pitch for this Marvel cinematic experiment, is that character relationships and history matter. The reason 2019’s Avengers: Endgame works so well isn’t the visual effects or action sequences; it’s that audiences have spent the better part of a decade investing in these characters, and that film saw the careful conclusion to years-long character arcs. So it might seem like an eye-rolling nitpick to criticize Multiverse of Madness over this, especially because the movie is still very fun in spite of these issues—but Marvel’s strength is the connectivity of its characters and stories across years and media, and when that doesn’t work, the other cracks in the Marvel formula (ugly color grading, overlong sequences and runtime, etc.) are far more distracting.
But I should give more credit where it’s due. For one, I was worried Multiverse of Madness would buckle under the weight of obscene fan service. The tease of the multiverse meant the possibility of dozens of cameos from previous non-Disney Marvel enterprises, and instead of an actual story we’d have an exercise in 50 characters walking on screen to wave, say a catchphrase, and mug for five seconds while the theater audience stands and applauds. This movie does have its share of surprise appearances, but not at the expense of the larger story. It effectively has its cake and eats it too, devoting much of those surprises to a section of the movie where it does serve a narrative function (and is obviously a fun nod to long-time fans), but doesn’t burden or drag the film. It perhaps doesn’t incorporate fan service as elegantly as, say, Avengers: Endgame or Spider-Man: No Way Home, but props to it for delicately threading that needle.
Another pro worth mentioning is that the movie isn’t overlong. Clocking in at roughly two hours, the movie has a healthy pace, hurtling from sequence to sequence with the occasional explainer thrown in to tie it together. We have some obligatory story set-up and exposition-dumping early on to ensure fair-weather audiences aren’t too confused by the convoluted plot ahead of them—but once the film is done throat-clearing, Raimi pushes us headlong into a horrifying, bizarre, inventive thrill ride.
Some Marvel fans will have their expectations deflated walking out of this movie. (To some extent, I echo their concern that the recent slate of Marvel properties have felt aimless.) The scope of Multiverse of Madness is much more self-contained than what has been teased in the marketing (which is Marvel’s fault, frankly). And while some may be upset that this doesn’t blow open the larger story of the Marvel universe, I appreciated a smaller scale that wasn’t just a parade of cameos and teases for the next 15 years of Marvel movies. It does try to keep its story focused on the handful of key characters and their emotional storylines, but it ultimately struggles to convey its theme, message, or consistent character arcs, which is disappointing. Where it does succeed is as pure entertainment: Raimi stages sometimes-shocking, sometimes-horrifying, and always-thrilling sequences throughout the film, taking full advantage of the mystical toy chest at his disposal. The gleeful chaos culminates in an extended finale that was so charmingly ludicrous, so thoroughly Raimi, that it nearly washed away the head-scratching narrative choices. However, if the box office totals of Multiverse of Madness and Spider-Man: No Way Home result in Sony giving Raimi carte blanche for a belated Spider-Man 4 with Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst, I will never say another negative thing about this film for as long as I live.
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is currently playing in theaters. It runs 126 minutes and is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, frightening images and some language.
