Comic-Con Review: Doctor Strange

Posted by Kevin Carr (kevin@filmschoolrejects.com) on July 28, 2007

There was a time when comic book adaptations were either high budget studio pictures (like Richard Donner’s “Superman” or Tim Burton’s “Batman”) or cheesy cartoons for the Saturday morning audience. It wasn’t until the 1990s that television animation actually surpassed the feature films in originality, creativity and faithfulness to the original source material.

While there have been cartoon adaptations of everything from “Spider-Man” to “The Fantastic Four,” they still hold onto the Saturday morning style. They may not be as cheesy as the original “SuperFriends,” but they were still made for a younger audience. With the advent of DVD, these cartoons have been put together in collections, which is great for a comic book or cartoon fan like me. However, a gap has remained between these television series and the big-budget feature films.

Marvel Studios and Lionsgate are trying to close that gap. They’ve released two “Ultimate Avengers” films and an “Ironman” adaptation, direct to DVD. Building on this success is these releases, Marvel Studios has given us a classic character that needs more exposure, Doctor Strange.

One of the things I noticed about the choice of Doctor Strange as the latest installment in this series was that it can serve as a potential launching point for feature films. Honestly, how many mainstream people had ever concerned themselves with Ironman before the Jon Favreau’s adaptation started getting buzz on the internet? Was the “Ironman” animated feature a way to test America’s palate?

These direct-to-DVD films do this. And with the roaring success of the Harry Potter series in both books and cinema, is it possible that the folks at Marvel Studios are searching for the logical superhero crossover? If Doctor Strange grew up in Britain, would he have gone to Hogwarts?

I know that’s going to offend die-hard Doctor Strange fans. However, it makes sense from a marketing standpoint. Regardless, fans of the original comic book series need not worry. There hasn’t been an attempt to Potterize this character. It’s decidedly different. I’ve never really read the comic, so I don’t know if any of the mythology has been trampled (but judging from the reaction of the fans in the Comic-Con screening audience, things are fairly well intact.

But perhaps I’m the key market for this film. I love comics, and I love animated films. “Doctor Strange” is definitely an origin story, so it caught me up on the characters and universe in which the good doctor lives. Sure, there were parts of the film that had nods to the original characters and even the previous animated features from Marvel and Lionsgate. However, I never felt lost, and it was great to see a new, gritty vision of comic books on film.

“Doctor Strange” has crisp animation with strong, rich backgrounds. There’s a serious care taken to the art without softening things up with too much computer work. Character design felt true to the comic book art feel, providing a grown-up style that didn’t rip off from anime.

However, the most noticeable thing about this version of “Doctor Strange” was the intense action. The movie opens with an explosive sequence with sorcerers battling a demon in the middle of a city. This isn’t sanitized violence, but it’s not over-the-top either. People die, and blood is shed, but it’s not exploitative. However, it’s enough for the fans of the Marvel faire from the 60s to appreciate the darker side of the comic book art.

Read more articles by Kevin Carr