Discussion Film / DoctorStrange2016

I agree with your analysis that Stephen Strange was targeted because of his potential to be a problem in the future rather than actually knowing magic as of Winter Soldier and I agree with your proposal to remove the entry.

For future reference, it's usually good etiquette to post the discussion first and wait a day or so for responses/discussion before moving on with your changes rather than making the change first and then opening a discussion.

Indeed, it usually is. However, looking at the scope of the tropes description and the inaccurate ideas presented in the removed entry, plus the fact that it wasn't presented on that tropes page, it seemed clear that it just wasn't a real example.

However, I also would just like to point out that my idea for posting a discussion wasn't for the suggestion of the removal but rather so that people who might make a similar mistake have a reference for it in the future. But I do think you have a good point and perhaps I was being a bit hasty, but I still stand by how I handled it in this case, though I don't plan on making a habit of it. I prefer adding my insights over removing mistakes.

It doesn't really. The trope calls for targeting "anything recognizable enough that by destroying it, you can show the world that you mean business." The trope even provides examples like "the Pyramids, the Eiffel Tower, the Taj Mahal or the Westminster Clock Tower".

In the movie, while the Hong Kong sanctum is of importance to the secret society of guardian sorcerers, everyone else in that world will think of it as just another building.

Really wouldn't count.

Hard to say.

Back in Oct 2017 a troper with the id Lemmy_Koopa9999 potholed this same video link into several tropes like Monumental Damage, Just Here for Godzilla and the Nightmare Fuel page often stretching the example to fit the inclusion of the link. It's the action of an Entry Pimp which is not necessarily a bad thing but the added examples that included the video link were generally not a good fit for the tropes and were removed.

Giving the question the benefit of the doubt, I would say it's not really a strong demonstration of Scenery Gorn. That trope is intended to bludgeon viewers with a lavishly detailed depiction of absolute hell on earth, or scenes of complete and utter destruction and deprivation.

I would say, at best, it's a very downplayed example. The zealots' target in the movie was just the Hong Kong Sanctum, not even the city of Hong Kong itself. So mostly, you have a few blocks of devastation due to collateral damage from the wizard war.

In addition, external links aren't particularly encouraged due to the administrative effort of monitoring and cleaning up links that go dead over time, especially if the example could be made without the need for the link in the first place.

Having seen the video in question, it's undeniably fun to watch, but I wouldn't say it's essential for a Scenery Gorn example.

While you are right, the target is the sanctum only, other similar clips show the "dark dimension" bursting out of the sanctum, destroying it in the process and possibly collapsing a huge skyscraper. It is shown vapourising other tall buildings (though to be honest, it's more like a Battle Discreetion Shot). In other words, the target is the sanctum, but the result of it's destruction causes much more damage. (You can briefly see a massive skyscraper collapsing, some taller apartments in the background falling down or being vapourised). Not only that, but it it mentioned that the dark dimension would spread.

I rewatched the clip and its focus is on the street battle and with a shot of the sanctum collapsing. Then I watched the battle scene again straight from the movie.

I feel two things:

1) The clip is too limited in focus to really capture the scope of Scenery Gorn so even if an entry for this trope were added, I don't think a link to the clip is appropriate.

2) Because of the time reversal at play, much of the destruction is shown being undone so I don't even think the battle is good representation of Scenery Gorn as a whole.

Judging by the definition given on the trope page, a big part of the trope is the idea that the work is referencing an earlier work, which we know for a fact is not deliberate with Doctor Strange and Thor. That said, the current entry on the page does have an interesting idea about how the two have inverse themes, and one could make the argument that Thor's more traditional space fantasy genre is countered by Doctor Strange's weird horror-fantasy genre.

I don't think it's the best example, but I don't think it's a bad example either. I think if it could be fleshed out a little more it could count.

Not bad, but not very telling without context for those not having seen the movie.

Personally, I would favor the exchange "I am... Strange", "Well, who am I to judge..." between and Strange and Kaecilius.

"but not very telling without context for those not having seen the movie"

Good point. I like your idea better.

The full, exact quote is this:

On second thought, it might be a bit long and klunky.

Just remove the first two exchanges, like so:

Thinking about it more, I think this might be better:

The Ancient One: Arrogance and fear still keep you from learning the simplest and most significant lesson of all. Dr. Stephen Strange: Which is? The Ancient One: It's not about you.

Although the Mister/Doctor/Strange quote is good too and I think either is better than the current one.

The exchange with Kaecilus lacks a bit in context. This last quote might give a better feel of the movie.

I'll change it then.

The filmmakers deliberately crafted the narrative in a way that prevented Mordo from being called by his name in the comics, so it seems like a workable example to me.

I guess that makes sense...I'll give it a few hours anyway though. In case anyone else wants to comment on Mordo .

I agree with the OP. Neither "Baron Mordo" nor "Doctor Strange" was a codename. Therefore crafting the narrative to avoid one of those two and keep the other is not this trope - straight or averted.

I don't know of any reasons why you can't

Seems likely.

Wait, the movie was confirmed to happen in 2016? Where? The Avengers' base of operations is no longer the tower (which the movie shows to be still in perfectly good shape, despite Age of Ultron), and Strange was one of the targets for Project Insight.

I thought showing the tower (as well as Strange's conversation with Thor in the stinger, that has subtle implications to some time having passed since the end of the movie proper, with Strange seeming to be more accustomed to his role) was a clever way to establish the movie as happening earlier than Captain America 2 at the latest, but apparently not.

Derrickson confirmed it in his AMA, in addition to other things like the phones and cars being just a little too modern for 2014. Strange was a target for Insight because he was a brilliant and famous neurosurgeon with strong opinions, and thus was a potential threat to HYDRA.

Indeed. Civil War aside (which, due to context clues is set in the spring of 2016), all of the released Marvel TV and movies have covered up to Christmas 2015 (with Daredevil season 2 running from summer to Christmas of 2015 and Luke Cage taking place during that). It's clearly winter in Doctor Strange (well, once the action gets going midway through and they get back to New York), so it's probably set sometime around January or February of 2016. The two stingers take place months after the film, according to dialogue in both of them, bringing the MCU to the present day, in the fall of 2016. And since Spider-man: Homecoming takes place in the fall (it is about high school homecoming after all), that appears to be where the MCU is at, timeline wise.

This feels like a clear enough reference that it belongs on the page, even if it's a Mythology Gag instead of a Continuity nod.

It's not a Mythology Gag, because that's to the work the film is being adapted from, i.e. the Doctor Strange comics. A good Continuity Nod entry would be saying that the patient's accident shows people are still attempting to copy the Iron Man armor as they were in Iron Man 2.

This does make me wonder, how exactly is the test pilot operating cutting edge military technology not a "high profile" patient? The only explanation I can think of is that it would be kept secret as a matter of national security, but if that was the case, how are two people with no official involvement in the case casually discussing it over the phone?

... can you name a test pilot that's flown in the past 40 years?

By that logic, soap opera actors would take precedence over, say, NASA engineers. Or most CEOs of billion-dollar companies. The cases Strange is shown to consider taking clearly aren't because of the name recognition of the patient.

Just got back from seeing the movie a second time, and it was definitely an Air Force Colonel. And all the Iron Man suits are experimental. I don't remember the pilot's age being mentioned. The studio might have changed it in post, overriding the director/writer.

So i saw the movie finally. OP's point is actually wrong... He didn't reject the case because it wasnt high profile, but because it was too easy. Strange says he could do it... But so could 50 other doctors.

Given how pessimistic everyone was about Rhodey's ability to walk, "too easy" doesnt seem like it fits.

^^ I dont get your point. Im not saying that those spotlight people should get preference, but i am saying that is what "high-profile" means.

Yeah, the general theme of trying to get the villain to give up by Save Scumming is not enough to link to Undertale. Needs to be a more explicit reference, like Strange asking if Dormammu wants to "have a bad time" or something.

"I've spent so many years, peering through time... looking for you."

Might be The Chosen One in that Strange is the specific person of destiny, or it might be The Unchosen One in that they were looking for anyone to be their hero and Strange ended up rising to the challenge. Personally, considering Strange's origin in the comics, the latter seems more likely, but at this point I think the trope would be fine with what info we have.