Doctor Strange 2: Can [[SPOILER]] be redeemed after the movie?

[gurkle]

No someone should hire Deadpool to kill her lol

TBH if Deadpool killed her it would at least be better than the movie's Villain Sue portrayal of her as someone who can beat everyone without breaking a sweat.

One of the many things the movie got wrong about Wanda is exaggerating her power level to the point that no one can beat her, when in the comics she's always been someone who has to use her powers creatively to beat people who are more powerful than she.

It's kind of impressive how it got her so wrong in so many different ways.

[GenericUsername]

TBH if Deadpool killed her it would at least be better than the movie's Villain Sue portrayal of her as someone who can beat everyone without breaking a sweat.

One of the many things the movie got wrong about Wanda is exaggerating her power level to the point that no one can beat her, when in the comics she's always been someone who has to use her powers creatively to beat people who are more powerful than she.

It's kind of impressive how it got her so wrong in so many different ways.

It comes from people not realizing she wasn't using her own powers in AD/HoM.

[MichaelC]

Engaging in slave trade for god knows how long.(Also to a place where people fight to their death.)

Yeah, she's a murderer many times over, and an especially heinous one since the slaves she sold would have been forced to fight to an often agonizing death. Effectively, she's guilty of murder and torture. But it was off-screen so she gets to be Queen of Asgard, even if that's basically a glorified Mayor position at this point.

[Frontier]

Yeah, she's a murderer many times over, and an especially heinous one since the slaves she sold would have been forced to fight to an often agonizing death. Effectively, she's guilty of murder and torture. But it was off-screen so she gets to be Queen of Asgard, even if that's basically a glorified Mayor position at this point.

And Clint Barton gets to be the Punisher and retire/celebrate Christmas with his family like it never happened, really.

[QuinnFillory]

Here’s another article about the double standard with Wanda:

https://www.cbr.com/doctor-strange-2...uble-standard/

[Triniking1234]

Here’s another article about the double standard with Wanda:

https://www.cbr.com/doctor-strange-2...uble-standard/

lol What the heck is this?

Wanda didn't think her actions were that different, which is why she felt compelled to keep using the Darkholdin Multiverse of Madness

The Avengers time-travelled to save half of the lives in existence and it cost the lives of two Avengers.

Wanda used the Darkhold for selfish reasons and was willing to kill an innocent teenage girl and anyone else who wanted to stop her.

[gurkle]

Wanda used the Darkhold for selfish reasons and was willing to kill an innocent teenage girl and anyone else who wanted to stop her.

In "WandaVision," it seems obvious that she's using the Darkhold because it's the only source of information on how to control her powers (and no one mentions it's known for corrupting people, just that it has information on her power); that's what the line "I don't understand this power, but I will" sets up.

Of course the makers of this movie ignored that, just like they ignored the scene where she thinks her kids are in danger, but the movie never says why she opened the Darkhold, just like it never says why she no longer cares about Vision. It's a mess. We don't have any motivation for anything she does in the movie.

I do agree "double standard" is a stretch though. The problem with the treatment of Wanda is that no other hero would spend a whole movie as an evil psycho; they show that this could happen to Strange, but of course they would never, ever do that to our Strange, and so of course he's able to mostly avoid what happened to Wanda. Throw in their adaptation of the sexist "Wanda is dangerous because she wants babies" Bendis story, and there's plenty of sexism there.

But yeah, what she does is worse than anything a hero has done in the MCU; they should never have made her do it, because it's sexist and mean-spirited. The fact that they use "evil book makes her evil" as an excuse is just lazy.

[ETMike1988]

Comics: Finally Wanda redeemed herself in The Trial of Magneto
Meanwhile in the Movie: "Can Wanda be redeemed after Doctor Strange 2?"

[gurkle]

Comics: Finally Wanda redeemed herself in The Trial of Magneto
Meanwhile in the Movie: "Can Wanda be redeemed after Doctor Strange 2?"

I used to say Feige isn't as bad as the comics editors and when he adapts a comic story, he usually changes it to avoid character assassination.

But as with so many other things, Wanda is the first exception. Feige thought it was incredibly important to character assassinate her.

[MaximoffTrash]

In "WandaVision," it seems obvious that she's using the Darkhold because it's the only source of information on how to control her powers (and no one mentions it's known for corrupting people, just that it has information on her power); that's what the line "I don't understand this power, but I will" sets up.

Of course the makers of this movie ignored that, just like they ignored the scene where she thinks her kids are in danger, but the movie never says why she opened the Darkhold, just like it never says why she no longer cares about Vision. It's a mess. We don't have any motivation for anything she does in the movie.

I do agree "double standard" is a stretch though. The problem with the treatment of Wanda is that no other hero would spend a whole movie as an evil psycho; they show that this could happen to Strange, but of course they would never, ever do that to our Strange, and so of course he's able to mostly avoid what happened to Wanda. Throw in their adaptation of the sexist "Wanda is dangerous because she wants babies" Bendis story, and there's plenty of sexism there.

But yeah, what she does is worse than anything a hero has done in the MCU; they should never have made her do it, because it's sexist and mean-spirited. The fact that they use "evil book makes her evil" as an excuse is just lazy.

It's not so much of a double standard, more like lack of narrative favor in the first place.
A lot of characters don't get this kind of treatment in the first place.
Again, golden boy and the expendable wretch.

[Triniking1234]

There is no double standard tho. That would imply Wanda and the Avengers committed the same actions which they didn't. The article's author and Marvel need to go back to Literature 101.

[gurkle]

There is no double standard tho. That would imply Wanda and the Avengers committed the same actions which they didn't. The article's author and Marvel need to go back to Literature 101.

Agreed. Some people took the "you break the rules and become the hero..." line seriously when it's just a standard villain line, pretending they're no worse than the hero when they clearly are.

The problem with the movie is making her do all these terrible things and with such a poor excuse for her total personality change. But that's sort of a meta problem. In-universe she's obviously worse than any other hero has been so far.

[MaximoffTrash]

There is no double standard tho. That would imply Wanda and the Avengers committed the same actions which they didn't. The article's author and Marvel need to go back to Literature 101.

Do you read what I typed, I said it's not a double standard.
It's the treatment they receive in the first place.
AKA the narrative will make sure certain characters won't ever be put into those awkward situations in the first place. So they won't even need the favor of double standard later.
The double standard we talk about is
Character A and B do the same thing but got treated differently.
The situation I talk about is:
Character A got sloppy writing that has no care for the character's image what so ever, but character B won't ever get that kind of writing in the first place.

No one asked Tony Stark the question of "hey, what about those who died indirectly from the snap? Our plan doesn't cover them" in Endgame.
The narrative won't suggest their actions are anything less than understandable.

[MaximoffTrash]

Agreed. Some people took the "you break the rules and become the hero..." line seriously when it's just a standard villain line, pretending they're no worse than the hero when they clearly are.

The problem with the movie is making her do all these terrible things and with such a poor excuse for her total personality change. But that's sort of a meta problem. In-universe she's obviously worse than any other hero has been so far.

It's the cheap "we are the same" villain line that doesn't even make sense in most contest.(Sometimes it literally boils down to we both kill stuff.)
In this particular case, it's cheap lips service someone will hail as "pointing out double standards" in a bloody movie that stuffed one of the main character full of sexist tropes.
You cannot claim to be the savior of a plague when you caused it in the first place.(And they didn't even handle the plague well.)

[Triniking1234]

Do you read what I typed, I said it's not a double standard.
It's the treatment they receive in the first place.
AKA the narrative will make sure certain characters won't ever be put into those awkward situations in the first place. So they won't even need the favor of double standard later.
The double standard we talk about is
Character A and B do the same thing but got treated differently.
The situation I talk about is:
Character A got sloppy writing that has no care for the character's image what so ever, but character B won't ever get that kind of writing in the first place.

No one asked Tony Stark the question of "hey, what about those who died indirectly from the snap? Our plan doesn't cover them" in Endgame.
The narrative won't suggest their actions are anything less than understandable.

I know my comment was right after yours but I wasn't replying to it. My bad.