In The Multiverse Of Madness Spoiler Discussion Thread

[Donner]

So is Wanda dead or...?

 

[Johnny Richards]

Eh, I don't get bogged down in things like that. Movies are movies, comics are comics, etc. So the movies call itself 616 now, that doesn't invalidate the comics books. They are 2 different things regardless

People at both by IMAX screenings cheered when "616" was revealed to be the MCU's designation. Not sure why anyone would think that's a bad thing or better yet expect the MCU not to be designated as 616.

 

[Detective Conan]

So is Wanda dead or...?

No. she isn’t dead, at least not in the permanent sense.Some speculate that she’ll make her return on the Agatha Disney Plus show. Nothing has been confirmed, but she is definitely coming back.

People at both by IMAX screenings cheered when "616" was revealed to be the MCU's designation. Not sure why anyone would think that's a bad thing or better yet expect the MCU not to be designated as 616.

I mean, even Spider-Verse, Peter B. Parker’s universe was designated as 616, and that clearly isn’t actually the same comic book 616 Peter Parker. 616 is just something that refers to the prime/main universe of a continuity’s multiverse. Nothing more. The movies and comics exist in different branches of the multiverse as far as I see it. So it’s fine.

 

[herolee10]

I don't know about anyone else, but I felt like I was watching two different films that were combined into one (Doctor Strange 1.5 and Scarlet Witch 1). Doctor Strange pretty much got the BvS treatment where he was left in the shadows of another character.

Despite appearing in six films now, Doctor Strange still finds himself struggling in all of his confrontations. Also, I really don't know how Marvel plans on introducing the next big threat in a believable fashion. They made Wanda/Scarlet Witch so OP in this film that it's difficult to believe anyone else could be portrayed as a bigger threat than her to the whole Multiverse.

 

[SirStrangefolk]

Also, I really don't know how Marvel plans on introducing the next big threat in a believable fashion. They made Wanda/Scarlet Witch so OP in this film that it's difficult to believe anyone else could be portrayed as a bigger threat than her to the whole Multiverse.

If we're getting a bunch of stuff with Incursions/Kang/Doom/Beyonder I think that can be a bigger threat.
But also, I don't see why every threat should be bigger than the last. That just causes power creep and such. Better to just have a good story than to worry about constantly trying to raise the stakes further.

 

[herolee10]

If we're getting a bunch of stuff with Incursions/Kang/Doom/Beyonder I think that can be a bigger threat.
But also, I don't see why every threat should be bigger than the last. That just causes power creep and such. Better to just have a good story than to worry about constantly trying to raise the stakes further.

If Wanda comes back later on, then how do they make the likes of Kang/Doom/Galactus into serious threats if she's capable of defeating all of them without much effort?

 

[psylockolussus]

I wonder why they cut the “Things just got out of hand” line that was in the trailer.

Because things just didn't get out of hand?

 

[Batmannerism]

Yeah. She was real selfish when she crushed Vision's head or released the town at the end of WandaVision.

In response to your comments on selfishness:

She destroyed the mind stone because Vision begged her to, and it was the only real option -

given Thanos getting the stone meant total defeat for everyone and death for half the universe ( including Vision). It was kind of a choice between Vision dying at her hands and Thanos' plans being thwarted, and Thanos killing Vision and taking the stone - not really a viable option, and either way, Vision was going to die.

When something is your only option, taking it isn't selfless.

She released the town..... she was the person who enslaved and tortured them for weeks, because she couldnt deal with grief. That is an extremely selfish thing to do. Letting them go isn’t an act of selflessness.

In Dr Strange &MOM she's willing to kill America Chavez ( to obtain her power) and anyone who tries to stop her so that she can be with children that aren't hers ( which suggests she's willing to kill her other selves) Wong suggests shes a threat to the entire multiverse.

All of this for what ? Not to save anyone or avert a catastrophe, but because she wants her fantasy back. To me, this is a selfish motivation.

In terms of manipulation:

Tony and Vision tried, did not work. Agatha tried, again did not work. Who has pulled it off?

We only see her and Strucker in scene together once. We do not know how much control he had of her. There is little basis upon which to form any view as to whether he was able to manipulate her or not.

At Ultron's behest she incapacitated the Avengers and sent an enraged Hulk into a populated area.
The only reason she stopped doing Ultron's bidding was that she became able to read his mind when he uploaded a chunk of his consciousness into the android body that became Vision. She saw that his plan meant the extinction of humanity, and that changed her mind about doing his dirty work.

Up until that point she was successfully manipulated by Ultron.

Not sure what you're referring to with Tony and Vision trying to manipulate Wanda. Tony and Vision tried to confine Wanda to the Avengers compound during the events of Civil War. Not sure that could be characterised as manipulation- but if it is, its a pretty low level manipulation, and not very subtle. Personally, I'd describe it as confinement.

Agatha. Well, Agatha was quite successfully manipulating Wanda, feeding her delusions during the events of WandaVision, until she confronted Wanda directly and the Scarlet Witch was just too powerful for her to handle.

Some have suggested that the Darkhold manipulated Wanda - hard to say, its a book rather than a being but much like Tolkien's ring of power it has the ability to corrupt. After taking the Darkhold she certainly committed more and more heinous acts. If corruption could be considered a form of manipulation, by shaping someone's personality, then the Darkhold was very successful - as the ill-fated Illuminati found out.

Ultimately, Wanda decided to destroy the Darkhold, which is a noble act - because her other self's children rejected her, rather than out of remorse for the mass murders or other prior misdeeds. But in a sense we can say she finally broke free of its control.

To assert that people's attempts to manipulate Wanda simply didn't work is problematic, because manipulation isn’t an either or proposition.

Ultron, Agatha and the Darkhold were all
were partially successful in manipulating Wanda.
It is correct to say that she eventually broke free from being manipulated ( in particular with Ultron and Agatha)

 

[SirStrangefolk]

If Wanda comes back later on, then how do they make the likes of Kang/Doom/Galactus into serious threats if she's capable of defeating all of them without much effort?

1. With the Darkhold destroyed some of her abilities that came from that will be gone or lessened, such as how she lost her abilities to view the multiverse and to dreamwalk when Sara destroyed the Darkhold.
2. At least initially she just won't be there when the next villain attacks. For now she's "dead", and might take a while for her to show up again. She's not in contact with the Avengers and will presumably isolate and hide herself, etc. so if Doom is planning something or Galactus is going to arrive she probably won't be aware of it until it's already being dealt with.
3. It's likely she'll be holding back when we next see her. If she does any reflection whatsoever she'll realize that "I can do whatever I want" is not a great philosophy if you want to keep people around that care for you or even trust you. She presumably doesn't want to be the "scary witch" that the other universe's Billy and Tommy saw her as forever.
4. She's a bit of a glass cannon. She's incredibly powerful, yes. But her body isn't any stronger than a regular human afaik. If an enemy knows they're dealing with her, they'll find a way to take her out swiftly before she's even fully aware that she's in danger.
5. She's very emotional and not particularly strategic. She can be manipulated and outplanned.

 

[metaphysician]

In what way was Wanda brainwashed in AoU? Ultron lied to her about his intentions, but he didn't control her at all. And she and Pietro volunteered for Hydra's experiments as a path to getting revenge on Tony Stark. And also didn't really follow Strucker's orders very well, anyway.

In this case "indoctrinated" would be the better term, in the sense that she clearly had been indoctrinated by Hydra. It wasn't a very tightly controlling indoctrination, but they definitely were using "We are your friend, we are your source of opportunity, the enemy is Stark, the enemy is the Avengers" as a leash to direct their superpowered test subjects. Which is why her deeds in AoU *were* something Wanda needed to redeem herself for, because they were something for which she *did* bear moral culpability ( if slightly diminished due to circumstances ).

This does beg the question of "So why *weren't* they far more tightly controlled, via either much more intense indoctrination or outright brainwashing?" After all, we do know Hydra is good at indoctrinating loyalty, and has outright brainwashing tech. I can think of a couple plausible answers, though, most of which revolve around "Maybe they tried using completely brainwhacked test subjects, and all of them died horribly". I mean, we know the experiments had a high fatality rate, and we know that there were ultimately playing with the Mind Stone so a psychoactive element is perfectly reasonable. I can easily imagine that there first test run might have been with fanatically loyal Hydra die hards, and they all died. Not wanting to waste such loyal minions, they then did the second test run with random people they'd ran through the brainwashing machine, and *they* all died. Eventually they switched to using non-fanatic non-brainwashed volunteers, on the theory of "maybe their mental state matters, so lets focus less on absolute loyalty and just go with people we can mostly count to not immediately turn on us".

 

[AvengerPA]

So is Wanda dead or...?

Michael Waldron says that her fate is left ambiguous. He says he hopes she is not dead.

 

[metaphysician]

If Wanda comes back later on, then how do they make the likes of Kang/Doom/Galactus into serious threats if she's capable of defeating all of them without much effort?

The obvious answer would be "Because she's not actually capable of defeating them without much effort"? Even aside from everything else, a returned Wanda won't have the Darkhold powerup, because she destroyed that on a multiversal level. Her doing that is also a convenient excuse to burn out her powers to whatever desirable extent, especially in combination with "traumatized from having held the Darkhold and done horrible things" and/or "nearly died under a literal mountain". My guess is that, if and when she returns, her general power level will be somewhere around "Avengers movie Wanda", which is still extremely powerful, but easily manageable as one player amongst many.

( And frankly, even at the peak of her Darkhold power, I'm not at all sure that would let her do much of anything a Galactus who is presumably equivalent to a Celestial, or to Kang who can be attacking in the past with a resource base from the future all while never even in the same universe as her. And Doom is Doom, if anyone could pull out something like "an army of robots covered in magic-negating runes" its him. *cough* )

 

[InCali]

So is Wanda dead or...?

I don't think so, but only because she's a popular character. The fact that she's a loose cannon is a big part of what makes her so interesting (to me anyway).

As far as where where Strange goes next, the first credits scene gives us a clue. I would say that the events of DS2 could lead to Dormammu. Maybe we'll see The Mindless Ones, Eternity, etc.? I think the 3rd movie will be like a mushroom trip.

 

[Asr]

Who was Charlize Theron's character supposed to be? That mid-credits cameo lost me since I'm not very familiar with every Marvel character.

 

[Bayne]

Who was Charlize Theron's character supposed to be? That mid-credits cameo lost me since I'm not very familiar with every Marvel character.

Clea, Sorceror Supreme of the Dark Dimension and traditionally the love of Dr. Strange's life.

 

[InCali]

Who was Charlize Theron's character supposed to be? That mid-credits cameo lost me since I'm not very familiar with every Marvel character.

Clea, Sorceror Supreme of the Dark Dimension and traditionally the love of Dr. Strange's life.

Dormammu’s niece and the daughter of Umar. This opens up some really cool storylines from the early Doctor Strange comics. Plus, if Charlize Theron is going to be in MCU, by definition, it’s a good movie.

I believe Clea was at times sorcerer supreme, but Dormammu was clearly the most powerful ruler of the dark dimension.

 

[Havok83]

So is Wanda dead or...?

Thats what the ending led us to believe. She'll likely be back but for all intents and purposes, she's dead

Dormammu’s niece and the daughter of Umar. This opens up some really cool storylines from the early Doctor Strange comics. Plus, if Charlize Theron is going to be in MCU, by definition, it’s a good movie.

I believe Clea was at times sorcerer supreme, but Dormammu was clearly the most powerful ruler of the dark dimension.

She's currently the Sorcerer Supreme in the books falling the death of Dr. Strange

If Wanda comes back later on, then how do they make the likes of Kang/Doom/Galactus into serious threats if she's capable of defeating all of them without much effort?

what makes you think it would be without effort? Do you know how powerful the likes of Kang, Galactus and/or Doom are in the MCU?

 

[CaptainWagner]

Yeah, I hated the post-credit scene, but mostly because it ruined Raimi's ending. Instead, they could have shown Clea watching Strange through some sort of portal in the Dark Dimension, establishing who she is and where she's from, before she's heads off to retrieve him. That would have accomplished the same things without undercutting the last shot of the actual movie.

 

[Havok83]

Yeah, I hated the post-credit scene, but mostly because it ruined Raimi's ending. Instead, they could have shown Clea watching Strange through some sort of portal in the Dark Dimension, establishing who she is and where she's from, before she's heads off to retrieve him. That would have accomplished the same things without undercutting the last shot of the actual movie.

yeah it was a big WTF and has to be one of the worst post credit scene from any of the films bc of what preceeded it

 

[TeeKay]

Hmmmmmm.... i kind of agree and kind of disagree with you there.

Fair enough. Also thank you for being civil and not hostile.

Does she end up as a villain in MOM, absolutely- but overall she's a complicated character, who does both heroic and monstrous things.

I guess we can say that the Darkhold certainly amplified her negative aspects.

I think that was the case as I was watching the movie. It reminded me of what the scientist in CA:TFA said about the serum amplifying what's already there. I took it as that with Wanda because Strange does use the Darkhold at the end and while there's consequences to him using it, I doubt it corrupted him.

Its tough, because in AOU she's on a revenge trip, and sets an enraged Hulk loose in a populated area, which probably resulted in hundreds of casualties. Her actions are villainous, no question

Sure, she's manipulated by Ultron, but she still does some pretty nasty stuff. She does draw the line at wiping out humanity, which is why she starts helping the Avengers, and after that she acts heroically for a while - and shows genuine remorse for accidentally killing those Wakandans in Nigeria ( Civil War).

I agree with all the above. My post wasn't directed to you tbh but my main point was Wanda was introduced in the MCU as a villain. And tbh, I only know surface level stuff about Wanda when it comes to the source material but from what I know, yeah she's unhinged, emotional and makes irrational decisions. After she killed Vision in IW, I knew it was all downhill from there.

Later she helps the Avengers fight Thanos and sacrifices Vision for the greater good, because he asks her to - kind of got the feeling that if he hadn't, she would never have done something like that simply for the greater good itself.

Of course she cant deal with the grief and enslaves a town - straight up villain move there.

I agree. She truly did love Vision and if I can project here, I think if Thanos hadn't used the time stone in that moment, do you think she'd have been a villain regardless? I mean she had to see him die again after killing him and that just adds to her trauma.

I think she was always gonna go down that route anyways. Now with the X-Men in the MCU (depending on how soon they introduce them), it's pure chaos from here on out.

I think Wanda's biggest flaw is selfishness and being overly emotional. She'll do heroic things as long as she feels good about it, and it aligns with her interest but she's kind of weak - that she's easily manipulated and when things are difficult she'll use her powers to do whatever makes her feel better, and isnt really willing to accept responsibility for the consequences of her evil actions.

Ditto. Well said. I mean she was cold af in this movie goddamn.

All in all I'd say Wanda is a very relatable and complex character because she's deeply flawed and capable of both good and bad ( really bad) actions. I mean, most people given that kind of power would probably misuse it as Wanda does.

Her arc is definitely an interesting one, and she's probably the best developed character of phase 4.

Agreed with all of this. I can see people having problems with the character and her arc but to say it's not well established or she did a 180 I totally disagree with those people.

Do you think they'll give her a redemption? I hope not. She needs to be a villain going forward. There's no coming back from what she did in MoM.

A brainwashed villain though. My take on her is that she has always been somewhat fragile psychologically and it started with the early brainwashing. I think she's "basically" a good, caring person (although the good part rather split), but is a loose cannon when things get difficult. Her compass is kind of screwed up.

With Ultron and Strucker I agree, she was brainwashed. At this point she's too far gone. She needs to stay a villain.

 

[InCali]

I wonder if they might shelve her until X-men? I kind of think she’s too popular of a character to wait that long.

 

[Havok83]

With Ultron and Strucker I agree, she was brainwashed. At this point she's too far gone. She needs to stay a villain.

but why? I can understand not wanting her to be a superhero again but why should she remain a villian? What would even be her motivation?

I wonder if they might shelve her until X-men? I kind of think she’s too popular of a character to wait that long.

She'll likely pop up in Agatha's show in some capacity

 

[Batmannerism]

If Wanda comes back later on, then how do they make the likes of Kang/Doom/Galactus into serious threats if she's capable of defeating all of them without much effort?

Good point. After something is

Fair enough. Also thank you for being civil and not hostile.

Does she end up as a villain in MOM, absolutely- but overall she's a complicated character, who does both heroic and monstrous things.



I think that was the case as I was watching the movie. It reminded me of what the scientist in CA:TFA said about the serum amplifying what's already there. I took it as that with Wanda because Strange does use the Darkhold at the end and while there's consequences to him using it, I doubt it corrupted him.



I agree with all the above. My post wasn't directed to you tbh but my main point was Wanda was introduced in the MCU as a villain. And tbh, I only know surface level stuff about Wanda when it comes to the source material but from what I know, yeah she's unhinged, emotional and makes irrational decisions. After she killed Vision in IW, I knew it was all downhill from there.



I agree. She truly did love Vision and if I can project here, I think if Thanos hadn't used the time stone in that moment, do you think she'd have been a villain regardless? I mean she had to see him die again after killing him and that just adds to her trauma.

I think she was always gonna go down that route anyways. Now with the X-Men in the MCU (depending on how soon they introduce them), it's pure chaos from here on out.



Ditto. Well said. I mean she was cold af in this movie goddamn.



Agreed with all of this. I can see people having problems with the character and her arc but to say it's not well established or she did a 180 I totally disagree with those people.

Do you think they'll give her a redemption? I hope not. She needs to be a villain going forward. There's no coming back from what she did in MoM.




With Ultron and Strucker I agree, she was brainwashed. At this point she's too far gone. She needs to stay a villain.

Yeah, usually I'm civil. I got a bit carried away earlier just because this film really pissed me off and....shall we say that there are some differing views on how logic functions.

Anyway, as far as redemption for Wanda......again I'm kind of torn, but I'm leaning towards "don't "

On one hand shes done such terrible things, with pretty much no remorse, that I question whether redemption is possible. It would have to be self sacrifice to stop a threat even bigger than herself.

If she really is dead, then I dont think her scales quite balance but she died doing something noble ( kind of like Darth Vader)..

Bringing her back undermines this sacrifice, and thus undermines her redemption

Also In Dr S MOM, Wanda's crimes at Westfield are just glossed over, but after that she murders....well a lot of people. She really was on a villain trip, but the film didnt seem to want to make her own it.

From a writing point of view, this is a very easy problem to solve.

Let the Scarlet Witch Wanda STAY DEAD. The next time we need Wanda to appear have one of the alt universe versions stand in.

Those characters never committed any atrocities that we know of, but have the essential traits of Wanda that we all like. That she cares about family first, and can be loving and kind.

The evil Wanda stays dead so her sacrifice to destroy the Darkhold means something ( if you dont lose anything theres no sacrifice).

So, no need for a fraught redemption story.

Sadly, the writers of MOM werent that smart - the WandaVision writers certainly weren't.

I mean there was an incredibly important character missing : Vision. A perfect ending would have been Strange finding Vision and letting him talk Wanda down - much like in the first Dr Strange film, he can't overpower his enemy, so he has to be clever instead.

That would have worked.

 

[Batmannerism]

but why? I can understand not wanting her to be a superhero again but why should she remain a villian? What would even be her motivation?


She'll likely pop up in Agatha's show in some capacity

The way I see it, she is a villain. Shes enslaved a town and then brutally murdered hundreds of
people.

How do you come back from that in a meaningful way ?

Her self sacrifice at the end of MOM at least is an attempt. Having her walk away after that undermines the sacrifice.

 

[Detective Conan]

You’ll never believe who was supposed to originally play that character in that movie.

Spoiler

Daniel Craig was supposed to be Reed!

This actually even further makes me think Krasinski as Reed is nothing more than a one and done cameo.