And then he grew a beard, bit on a wooden boat, headed north, found a woman, had a son, burned his wife and has her axe that he can recall back to his own hand.
Back in the day, the "multiverse" (Flash 123) is what drove me away from most of the comics for awhile. It is fun at first. Then you realize anything can happen. Anything. There is always some trick going on and eventually you realize one other thing. Nothing really matters. You cannot trust anything to be cannon. It isn't real. It's all like some stupid trick. A "whoopsie", this isn't real! You are correct. It becomes tiresome and I worried when our classic heroes started running into this concept.
I think the problem is not so much with the lazy Wokewood sycophants and the phrase "We've already tried every possible plot", but that the audience and critics repeat it after them and believe it. Including, Dave Cullen. He believe that showrunners can't create anything new, because they tried every possible option, but with Star Trek, we see that this franchise hasn't changed its recipe for 50 years. Therefore, most people's complaints are not about the plot and logic of the world (because they basically did not change) but because "its bleak and gloomy". I.e. it is not the content of the show that confuses them, but its mood. Same goes to Marvel and DC. They haven't tried anything new in 50 years. Even raceswap and genderswap isn't new, as well as crossovers. They plagiarize each other's ideas all the time, and Kirby originally worked for Marvel. But pseudo-nerds are still looking for some kind of difference between two identical twins. Anyone with the help of brainstorming will be able to come up with a dozen new ideas that have not appeared anywhere or have not received decent implementation. Hollywood sycophants are not capable of this, because they have no brains and they are all in an unnatural relationship with each other, called the "Albanian Steering Wheel".
P.S. Marvel and DC are not opposing each other, they are in a fake competition, in fact they have no opposition and will shake hands behind the scenes like the parties of Donkey and Elephant.
I remember former Doctor Who actress, Jenna Louise Coleman in a TV interview saying, that the great thing with a show like DW, is that you could do anything. This is something that annoys me because it's like saying you can create established rules like Time Lords not being able to choose the next body they regenerate into but Time Ladies could. This has now been screwed up because it's now been established that they can not only regenerate into different ethnic races (something I'm perfectly on board with) but the opposite sex. I don't mind something new being introduced into the mythology of a series if it works, and adds something fresh and new to it, but not when it contradicts something that has gone before or is just a convenient, lazy plot device. This is what's going to or is happening with both the MCU and DCU franchises, although with DW it was done more in the name of diversity and politics rather than making money however, there is still a similarity in terms of creative laziness and relying on cheap plot devices.
There is one fundamental flaw in all alternate universe stories - the same people exist. What that means is that in each universe since the birth of humankind, every single couple has hooked up at least once to produce the same children. None of the character's ancestors failed to meet, didn't get along, or even died before having the opportunity to sleep together at least once to produce that character. My own parents had a story that could've easily resulted in my not being born. My dad was planning on proposing to his girlfriend (more out of family pressure than anything else) when he met my mom by chance. He got a job for a short time as an insurance salesmen and sold a policy to her sister (my aunt), becoming friends in the process. He and another friend of his decided to visit her when my mom was visiting her. In an alternate universe, my parents wouldn't have met, so me and my brother wouldn't have been born, etc. Think of all the couples in the history of the world that have similar stories.
Yeah. The problem is that the universes and people are not different enough. For example, the spidermen have the same name and know people with the same name with relatives who have the same name. No universe has Parker with his parents? Or with his moms name? Or the spider biting someone else? Or a trillion different variations. Or where the Nazis or confederacy won? Their worlds and lives are remarkably similar.
That’s just not true if you’ve read any comics dealing with the multiverse. There are plenty of universes with variations of the characters where they are definitely not the same people, don’t have the same motivations, nor do they go through the same events. But if there truly is infinite diversity across infinite universes then variations of the same people is also a thing that could occur. It’s also a way to drive the plot since you’re seeing alternate lives of characters we know. It wouldn’t have the same impact if you’re telling a Spider-Man story and he travels to nothing but a bunch of other universes where there are no other Peter Parkers and/or no Spider-Man.
I don’t like multiverse/alternate universe writing. But you are actually incorrect. The implication isn’t that ‘all universes’ result in you being born. However, with an unlimited number of universes existing simultaneously, several do. Admittedly there will be more where you do not than there are those that you do exist but even so it would be possible for an alternate reality version of you to meet the version from our reality.
That’s exactly what they would do once they realize they need a Tchalla BP back. They will simply snatch another alternate into our reality and become stranded.
I think we have a Schrödinger's T'Chala here, if he had been recast, people would assume it would've been better to avoid doing that. They should've used the multiverse to find a version of those films that is actually good.
The "Ship of theseus" Issue is something that will afflict any franchise that plays with different iterations of the same character across a multiverse. Is it just their superpowers Or special abilities that make these characters? If different versions of a character go through different experiences and arcs, can they be called the same character.? What makes Sylvie a Loki? Is it just her powers or her lineage. Man my head hurts.
It's really a case by case situation and a 50/50 split of what's makes the character the character, for an example Peter Parker gets bit by the spider and becomes Spider-Man, he still is Spider-Man but the thing that has been established to makes him the Spider-Man we know is the death of Uncle Ben, as shown in other version of the character like in the 90s animated series there was a version of Spider-Man that never lost Uncle Ben so he never fully took the whole great power comes great responsibility to heart and as such never grew past his own ego to the point of being pretty full of himself and living life like a celebrity with his identity known to the public.
I thought it was neat when DC was playing with a lot of legacy characters. Some of them were similar in world view and powers (consider Barry Allen to Wally West as the Flash) and others seemed to have almost nothing in common (Dan Garret, Ted Kord, and Jaime Reyes as Blue Beetle.) Sometimes they were just squatting on the name, but other times they really did some fun stuff with the idea.
These are the kinds of questions that should be asked by a writer who wants to ensure the multiverse isn't just a gimmick. It's also why I'm not inherently put off by the multiverse concept; because as long as the writing is good, I do recognize these as distinct characters.
It is like looking for your real earth, like finding true love or the holy grail. It can be fun, how much work love, and creativity is poured into the project.
There’s also an element of cowardice involved. When writers and directors know they’re dealing with multiversal concepts, they feel empowered to make radical changes while hiding behind it and claiming it’s no big deal because they’re not touching “the original character”.
I wouldn't quite call it cowardice, but that's because I think it's more likely that the multiverse provides writers with a device to explain all the changes they're ORDERED to make, or the agenda they're told they have to promote.
I don’t mind it if it’s done well. I really liked Spider-Man. But I don’t want to see it overused as a gimmick to get them out of a corner the writers put them in.
I haven't watched any superhero movie since the first Doctor Strange (I wanted to quit with a good one), but to me this idea actually sounds fun! Also: many people hate the M-She-U; what's wrong with nostalgia then? Lots of people would love to see the Hulk being mindless again and all other famous superheroes also in their own traditional role again, instead of...you know: dead 'n stuff.
@@IBTU So? What's wrong with giving people something they enjoy? And I thought the story was coherent. The other Spidermen weren't brought in just because. They had a purpose and archs.
@@MarcelNL I do not know. I fear things that I like being remade in the current year. I can't stop thinking about how Hollywood will just spit all over the original characters and turn then into depressed or idiots or depressed idiots. All to elevate their shinning new characters.
Loki can be anything? Woman, Old dude, Alligator... Every Wanda Maximoff is a Scarlet Witch who had kids with Vision and all share the same body (actress) Every Peter Parker is a Spiderman, although they have different bodies and different lives. Adding Into the Spiderverse: Every Spiderman can be: another Peter Parker with same body (MoM) or anything: Miles Morales, Gwen Stacy, a korean girl from the future, a noir detective from the past, a pig (Loki)
A trend I've definitely noticed with the use of the multiverse, particularly in mainstream movies, is that a lot of writers just kinda dip their toes in it without trying to fully understand or explore it - and as a result their stories often don't hold up to any scrutiny (both NWH and MoM being prime examples). It's an incredibly abstract concept with limitless implications that too many creators try to just gloss over; I'm pretty sure the only movie I've seen where it really felt like they actually _got it_ is Everything Everywhere All at Once
Even though I love NWH, there is so much you could nitpick about the way the multiverse stuff worked in that movie. Very little of it makes sense if you think about it too much.
Have you watched the ws anderson resident evil movies? The continuity is so screwed up that it might as well be a multiverse. In a movie/series/book/game the author decides what happens he does not need a reason for anything he can just do it, the point is if the viewer belives it matters through continuity, not having "clones" replace dead people, ect.
There are some really great multiverse-stories. Michael Moorcock is probably the guy who brought the idea of multiversal heroes into popular fiction. Sailor on the Seas of Fate, his Elric story, is definitely worth a read, in which Elric meets other, parallel versions of the Eternal Champion (himself). The Star Trek original series dealt with the concept in an interesting way with evil versions of the Enterprize crew, and The Next Generation had a great multiversal story with Yesterday's Enterprise. The TV show Fringe also dealt with the multiverse in a pretty enjoyable way, for the most part. In comics, Jonathon Hickman's Incursions storyline, which lead into his Secret War event, is probably the best it's been done in modern comics. There are real stakes in these stories, and real consequences for the alternate folks that don't make it. Grant Morrison's 'Multiversity' series of books is pretty great, too. So we know it can be done and done well, with real stakes. That said, the way Marvel is going about it just isn't that great. First of all, other versions of you would still look like you, for the most part - you from Parallel Earth #616 wouldn't look like Andrew Garfield. Building a story centered around the multiverse should be better thought out than having a character who can hop over to Earth #2 to discover a world where we all evolved from dinosaurs or whatever. Marvel seems to be doing 2 things: Trying to up the ratings with older, more popular versions of characters, like Toby and Andrew. They also seem to be trying to build towards the Secret Wars storyline. They're just not doing a very good job of it.
Not necessarily the idea of them looking exactly like you just comes from what we think it would be like, but there is a possibility of having distinct features due to a number of universal differences.
@@gangofheroes Sure, there would be parallels where you had a scar, or maybe a version where you had red hair, or a version where you were overweight, or a version where you were a body-builder, a version of you with darker skin bc that earth's atmosphere is thinner, and on and on and on. But many, many versions would look just like you. Imagine all the possible worlds created just by crushing an ant or not crushing it, going left and not right, breaking up with a gf or not breaking up with her. Making different choices is at the heart of many good multiversal stories, so it makes more sense when other versions would be played by the same actor, when thinking about a film on the topic. Even the evil versions of the Enterprise looked like themselves. A version of you that's not mostly you is just another dude with the same name.
Thank you for saying this. Ppl think the multiverse is a terrible concept because their only point of reference for the multiverse is Marvel & DC, and because of the MCU success, now everyone is just copying what Marvel is doing. Micheal Moorcock made a great use of the concept, and there are many series like those by Stephen Baxter, Dark Tower, or Kill Six Billion Demons who do it correctly. Multiverses, like ANY scientific theory can be fantastic for fiction. I mean, ppl literally had very little issues with them back in the 70s-90s, with classic Marvel/DC.
@@jmgonzales7701 it depends, if they are willing to really kill off the main character and they are not afraid to make it the most complex story in fiction while it all makes logical sense and is not a story where it is a bunch of copies of human / humanoid versions of the main character and their friends it could be amazing. but the people who use the multiverse format are mostly just trying to use it for a plot device instead of it just being and there is a big difference between them. only story I can think of which did it semi well is Homestuck. every other series fell flat on it face. the multiverse format literally has infinite potential but no one uses it. marvel is the biggest example of an utter failure in this area I can think of. they screwed themselves over in this genre back when they made spider man and the hulk, the entire world should be a hulk or a spider man or a sandman, but instead there are only a few, if they can't make the universe they honed in on for decades make sense, the multiverse story they are trying to cram in there is always going to be a stupid story.
@@blacklivesorblackvotes2985well that really depends. Alot of those characters are pop culture icons and they will always be used. If there was no multiverse then no more supes,batman, spiderman etc.
The multiverse concept has been around in the comics at least since the 1980's and likely earlier. It's a bit jaded to think that because we've had a few years of multiverse film content out there that all the stories possible have been told when then whole point of a multiverse is infinite possibilities. The problem isn't the multiverse as a plot device much like the problem with super hero films isn't the concept of super heroes being played out. If comic books can mine that well since the 1930's without running out of stories to tell, the film industry can as well. The problem lies with the lack of creativity coming out of Hollywood right now. It's writers and producers who lack the scope of vision to create films that push the boundaries they've set up for themselves. They're afraid to experiment or iterate on the billion dollar formula (beyond of course the ham-fisted injection of identity politics at every turn). There's decades of fresh, diverse material to be crafted out of the concept of super hero's within a multiverse, the comic book industry has proven this. Hollywood is just failing to read the blueprint that's already been laid out before them.
@@Sigilstone17 farther back. The first use of Multiverse in fiction was “The Flash of Two Worlds” from the early 60’s where earth-1 flash and earth-2 flash meet.
I think the multiverse concept is a tool that's neither good nor bad. It just matters how it's used. I think it's mostly being used poorly but has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, audiences will already be tired of it by the time someone has the courage to do something really interesting with it.
The problem is that the multiverse is a very unwieldy tool. Perhaps it can be used well, but only with an exceptional amount of skill. If we're comparing the multiverse to a tool, it's a lot less like scissors or even a chainsaw and a lot more like a fighter jet.
@@HSuper_Lee The way i see things is that multiverse stuff is treated more as a gimmick in mainstream media. It's not even a tool at this point. I think that multiverse stories can be stronger and more poignant if they explore the themes and emotional consequences of the existence of multiverses. Maybe focus on the nihilism and the search of one's personal meaning in an existence where nothing matters because everything is happening at the same time. Maybe use the multiverse as a parable of one's reconciliation with his own past actions by comparing them with an alternate timeline where everything was different. In other words, use the multiverse as a way to explore our reality with it's pains and challenges instead of drifting away into pointless fantasy.
@@eksprolek2924 it's one thing if the story is setup as time travel or multiverse from the get-go, but to introduce it as a deus ex machina after a long saga is no bueno.
It depends on how well its done. You have to both plan it out really carefully and make sure that there are clear consequences to screwing around with stuff like this Sadly, they really haven't done that very well. As, from what we have seen so far, aside from Multiverse of Madness's vague ending and NWH's plot there are no real consequences to this
Doctor who managed to make time travel interesting for most of its time on screen but they made strict rules to prevent bullshit from happening, that does including not being able to interact with a past incarnation but that only went out of the window recently
I am writing a story where characters travel to alternate realities. However, in this story, these devices are extremely limited in that they can only take you to a few specific universes, and they are completely different than ours. The first universe is one where humans progressed technologically at a much slower rate due to natural disasters. Basically, they are still hunters and gatherers. The other universe is where humans progressed at a much faster rate and are much more technologically advanced. The other universes are ones where earth is either uninhabitable or doesn't exist. That's it. It will not be characters meeting alternate versions of themselves, but alternate versions of humanity.
They literally had two 007s in the last film. And why does James Bond have to be their BIRTH name? Makes perfect sense to create a fake identity for such an agent.
It’s basic economics: The more of something you have (Like having an unlimited number of the same character) the less valuable each character is. If spider person #1 dies there will be others to take their place. Ultimately, this is about laziness. It’s just easier to create the same character over and over again with a slightly different story. It makes the entire thing worthless…like having an unlimited supply of gold.
I enjoyed DC's Crisis On Infinite Earths. It was the first of its kind with regards to collapsing the multiverse. Deaths were actually impactful as well. Edit: I should clarify that I was referring to the comics.
@Dustin Neely Not sure I follow. Crisis completely streamlined DC's multi-verse problem and was able to keep that canon for more than 25 years. Not sure what more you could ask for in a cross over event.
crisis on infinite earths was basically a reset button because it was bullshit with multiverses. they reset it to one consistent timeline and moved on but unfortunaly they cannot help themselves and did multiverse bullshit again
Even though I enjoyed seeing the three Spider-Men team up, I think the multi verse idea is flawed. The studios do seem to be slowly realising the woke messaging is losing them money and bringing back legacy characters and actors is jumping on the member berry train.
@@RoddThunderheart I didn't say wokeness ties into No Way Home, but the big studios in general seem to be slowly realising going down that path is losing them money.
Time travel and multiverse is like a big cake you only eat for special occasions. But if you eat it all the time, it’s no longer special and you’ll get sick of it.
The Three Doctors do not come from a different universe though, just different time periods of the Doctors own timeline. The 3rd Doctor story Inferno however has the Doctor going to an alternate Earth with different Sgt. Benton, Liz Shaw and Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart.
There is a time and a place for multiverse stories, even cross-franchise stories. “Assimilated^2”, a crossover between Doctor Who and Star Trek TNG, was a story crafted using common threads that allowed the two to blend together (specifically, it was the 11th Doctor, with Rory and Amy, landing the TARDIS on the Enterprise’s holodeck sometime after Wolf-359, with the two groups teaming up to face an alliance between the Borg and Cybermen). It was written to play to the compatible elements, by writers who understood enough about both franchises to make the merger work.
HISHE (How It Should Have Ended) keep pointing out how once Endgame had time-travel invented, they could use that to solve most problems since and after Endgame
Remember in Star Trek Voyager when Harry Kim died and they just replaced him with an alternate timeline version and never mentioned it again, good times
I wrote a short story for soundbooththeater called "Crossverse" about a dimension hopping researcher. Good fun, and one of the themes I explored was how the deaths of other versions of people might affect survivors. It's far too easy to cheapen life.
It is what happens if you have "clones" that are effectively the same. If have alternate versions you have to make them different from each other. Characters are not people just facades of people if you want the viewer to care you have to make them convincing.
Honestly, the multiverse thing has been a major thing for comics with both Marvel and DC using it for decades...hell, it even came into play in Spider-Man TAS as a major thing.
Dave, Having read comic books since I was a child, I had a long-time appreciation for the multiverse, but it is a concept that has been abused. DC Comics introduced the concept in 1961 to explain how the Silver Age versions of The Flash/Green Lantern/etc. could co-exist with their Golden Age counterparts who had ceased publication in 1949. It worked because these the Gold and Silver Age Flashes (Jay Garrick and Barry Allen) were different characters with different origins and histories, but things became dicey when DC introduced Golden Age copies of Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman as those characters' publication histories remained uninterrupted.Then DC introduced more Earths as it absorbed characters from defunct companies like Fawcett, Quality, and Charlton, which made continuity convoluted to the point where the company collapsed its multiverse into a singular universe with the original 1985-6 Crisis on Infinite Earths. It is a long and complicated topic as DC continuity has undergone several retcons and reboots since then, including the return of the multiverse in 2006. The concept of the multiverse is not inherently bad, but it comes down to execution. I even use a multiverse in my novel series, but try to keep it contained to two worlds to keep the story focus. You hit the nail on the head when you said that it's a manifestation of Hollywood's growing laziness and diminishing creativity,
The multiverse has been around for a very long time. The problem isn’t the multiverse. It’s Hollywood’s use of it. Both DC and Marvel have used it for decades and decades and are some of the best story arcs.
I wouldn't be surprised if the main villain of another whatever-number-of-phase-is-next was the multiverse itself and the main goal would be to "close the gap" and return everybody to their universe.
I feel there is a real horror element lost to the multiverse concept. Imagine a horrible alternate reality where the worse case scenarios happened? You end up in another reality where the heroes died and the vilians plans succeeded? I'd like more stories like that.
I think xeelee sequence had something like this with the galaxy size ring that was essentially a giant portal to another universe as well as a means to save all bayronic matter in that universe.
I thought Multiverse of Madness would be exactly that. Strange facing off a world where things went wrong. I remember that sucky Arrowverse crossover where they faced a NAZI ruled earth. The execution sucked, but the idea could work. The Avengers or whoever facing an earth where Loki won. Hell, even facing the consequences of messing up while winning in Endgame. So much potential they haven't explored. Because of them, there is a timeline where Loki vanished and Hydra thinks Captain America is one of them. Because of them, there's a timeline where Thanos no longer exists (remember they killed a Thanos from another timeline). I think focusing on different timelines rather than a multiverse per se would have kept everything more cohesive while maintaining the importance of consquence. Tony had a dream where all the Avengers died. Explore that! Yes, Loki is back! But how does that timeline's Odin feel about that? I'm just blabbering by now, but you get the idea
@@rmhartman Good example. If I was Spider-Man and I got thrusted into a reality where I'm the bad guy, or I died, or the whole world has turned to shit, I'd be horrified to know such a reality exists and I'd be worried of anyone following me back to my reality. I feel if we got a good balance or stories like that the multiverse concept wouldn't be so controversial.
The animated Justice League series did something like that. Where the Flash died and the League became authoritarian figures. Was kinda neat to see the heroes in a darker light.
Multiverses have quickly become even more of a writing trap than time-travel. Just as time travel has historically been used by bad writers to attempt to cover up for their own failings, multiverses now serve the same function, but with even more disasterous results. Time tavel was bad enough, but multiverses have opened the door to a whole new level of incompetent writing.
I’m writing a story with a multiverse concept, except it’s not a cheap way to fix something I didn’t like, only as a world building tool. The characters sometimes face alternate versions of themselves but usually as as treat for that part of the story or it’s actually part of the plot, like introducing a new threat that was previously original to a different verse When a character is killed off, even in a multiverse, the rest of the cast should be feeling emotions throughout. Yes, they literally exist on infinite planes of existence but the idea is they’re gone from their original home forever. Another copy taking their place is almost saying neither the writer nor the in-world characters gave a f***, like the Flash show “It’s cool if he died, we’ve got another one” 👍
I highly recommend reading “The Gods Themselves” by Asimov. Very interesting way of introducing the concept of multiple universes existing alongside each other.
For me the multiverse theory plot line has A LOT to offer but people really can fuck it up especially those who don’t think about cause-and-effect(hack writers). But it could be an amazing tool to use for a stand alone what-if type story.
I think the only way these kinds of things can work is if you cross over unrelated properties. No Batfleck vs Battinson, no Brandon Routh Superman v Jesse Eisenberg Luthor. It's much more interesting to see Batman wake up in New York during The Invasion in 2012 Avengers, or have Butcher (from The Boys) follow compound V to Bane, or even go beyond only dealing in comic book characters. The next person to roll a 5 or 8 gets stuck in Jumanji hunted by Kraven the Hunter; Blade the Daywalker gets stranded in the vampire world of Daybreakers; have Thomas Wayne come back as The Crow on the twentieth anniversary of his and his wife's murders only to come to odds with Batman, who he doesn't realize is his son. At least this way, we can be invested in these new people and new events without undermining original characters and past events. The problem with multiverse and time travel stuff is that they were created to be redo buttons on stories and/or characters, which is why they never have stakes. You have to keep things permanent, repercussions and all, because it's supposed to mirror life, which is nothing but making decisions and dealing with whatever happens. You take that away, or make it so nothing sticks, and the stories and lives of these characters no longer matter because they can literally be replaced by a similar variant quickly and easily.
I think it plays into the constant need to lean into member berries. How better to do that than actually have the things you loved. Don't just try to get you to remember them... actually give you the thing you loved. Logical progression. Totally terrible but logical.
DC and Marvel have literally done comic crossovers before multiple times. They even co-owned an imprint called Amalgam Comics where DC and Marvel characters were combined into new characters.
Multiverse just allows for reboots and allows Marvel to throw things at the wall to see what sticks and then say all the bad movies to be alternate universes that are still canon and therefore must seen for continuity
The Multiverse can be done completely well and establish consequences. As a long time comic book fan the concept has told a mass variety of exciting stories and confirms the facts that infinity means infinity. There are good examples of it being done well: Turtles Forever (The TMNT Crossover) , The Crisis Events in DC & The DC CW Shows, Into The Spiderverse, Spider-Man No Way Home , many comic events, books, lore: Star Wars, Ghostbusters, DC & Marvel especially, MCU Doctor Strange, & Everything Everywhere All At Once. Dr.Strange in The Multiverse Of Madness was a pretty poor example that did establish but had a lack luster story that could’ve been fixed regardless of the multiverse’s use. The real problem in current entertainment isn’t the multiverse or time travel, those are interesting story devices that can always work depending on the execution the real problem lack of care for storytelling, characterization and modern wokeness. "So social issues I try to get in in the background, or underlying a plot, but never to the point of letting interfere with a story or hitting the reader over the head.” - Stan Lee As the indefatigable 92-year-old superhero conjurer and Marvel Comics chairman emeritus sees it, fan backlash up until this point hasn't so much been spurred on by racism as much as unyielding fealty to the source material. "They're outraged not because of any personal prejudice, Lee says. "They're outraged because they hate to see any change made on a series and characters they had gotten familiar with. In Spider- Man, when they got a new actor, that bothered them, even though it was a white actor. I don't think it had to do with racial prejudice as much as they don't like things changed." “I wouldn't mind. if Peter Parker had originally been black. a Latino, an lndian or anything else. that he stay that way. But we originally made him white. I dont see any reason to change that. It has nothing to do with being anti-gay, or anti-black, or anti-Latino, or anything like that. Latino characters should stay Latino. The Black Panther should certainly not be Swiss. I just see no reason to change that which has already been established when it's so easy to add new characters. I say create new characters the way you want to.” -Stan Lee GROTH: How did you feel about communism then? KIRBY: Oh, communism! That was a burning issue. It was an outrageous issue. To be termed a communist would damage your whole family, damage your whole world- your friends wouldn't talk to you. I'm talking about other people -because I wouldn't go near the stuff. Sure, I was against the reds. I became a witch hunter. My enemies were the commies -I called them commies. In fact, Granny Goodness was a commie, Doubleheader was a commie. STAN'S SOAPBOX “This month we're gonna yak about something that has nothing to do with our mags! Over the years we've re ceived a zillion letters asking for the Builpen's opinion about such diverse subjects as Viet Nam, civil rights, the war on poverty, and the upcoming elec tion. We're fantasmagorically fiattered that our opinion wouid matter to you, but here's the hang-up: there ISN'T any unanimous Bullpen opinion about any thing. except possibly mother Iove and apple pie! Take the election, for exam ple. Soine of us are staunch Demo- crats. and others dyed-in-the-wool publicans. As for Yours Truly and a few others, we prefer to judge the person, rather than the party line. That's why we seek to avoid editorializing about controversial issues not because we haven't our opinions, but rather be cause we share the same diversity of opinion as Americans everywhere. But. we'd like to go on record about one vital issue we believe that Man has a divine destiny, and an awesome re sponsibility the responsibility of treating all who share this wondrous world of ours with tolerance and re spect judging each fellow human on his own merit, regardless of race, creed, or color. That we agree on and we'll never rest until it, becomes a fact, rather than just a cherished dream. Excelsior, Smiley.” GROTH: How did you feel about the Senate Subcommittee Hearings? Did you think that was a witch-hunt, or did you think there was any validity to the public's concern? KIRBY: I didn't feel one way or another about it. I was only hoping that it would come out well enough to continue comics, that it wouldn't damage comics in anyway, so I could continue Working. I was a young man. I was still growing out of the East Side. The only real politics I knew was that if a guy liked Hitler, I'd beat the stuffing out of him and that would be it. GROTH: Were you very political? KIRBY:I wasn't then. I was very concerned with comics. I'm political now. I knew this much - that everybody voted Democrat down my way. If you were poor, you voted Democrat and if you were rich you voted Republican. STARLOG: We all noticed the lack of women in the Star Wars trilogy. Are you go- ing to bring more women in for future Star Wars films? LUCAS: Well, what of Princess Leia? When you're making a war film, how are you going to put women in it? Think of other war films, think of The Longest Day, those films. Well, it's your galaxy; I have to go with the rest of the world. And still make it believable. I'm not sure how many women will be in the rest of the films; that's the kind of thing that plots dictate. What would Star Wars have been like if Han Solo had been a woman? “Still others picked up on Lucas's Vietnam allegory, though Lucas, wary of politics, publicly disavowed any and all sociopolitical theories and quashed any speculation on the deeper meaning of his film. For Lucas, it was enough that Star Wars could be merely entertaining-and entirely the point.” "Star Wars deals with the essential problem: Is the machine going to control humanity, or is the machine going to serve humanity? Darth Vader is a man taken over by a machine, he becomes a machine, and the state itself is a machine. There is no humanity in the state. What runs the world is economics and politics, and they have nothing to do with the spiritual life." - Joseph Campbel From "PW Interviews Joseph Campbell, by Chris Goodrich" Publisher's Weekly (August 23, 1985, p.74-75) Great storytelling is what’s important. The Stories that aren’t political at all and are based on good writing, good characters , deeper lessons, morals and entertainment as well as the stories that do have political elements but are more focused on an engaging story,a well thought out lesson or idea behind it and interesting characters are the stories that make great entertainment. As my film teacher taught me Art before politics, always. The story & characters comes first whether the politics are subtle, secondary or completely non existent.
The "alternate timeline" thing is merely one of many types of multiverses that can exist. There's multiverses in which they don't share temporality, meaning every single universe has different worlds, different characters (not alternate versions of the same characters), different laws of physics, rules and principles, etc. If we focused more of "spacial type multiverses" instead of "temporal type multiverses", it'd make for many interesting stories. Imagine, you leave a universe with planets and galaxies to find yourself in a flat plane universe where it's like one endlessly expanding planet, where things like gravity don't exist or act differently. I love multiverses, idc what anyone says, but you only truly appreciate them when you read more than just the mainstream crap because they seldom use them correctly. When it's used as a wonderful exploration through the many layers of your fictional cosmology (which I love studying) you see it as more than a hapless tool for money. A good example is Micheal Moorcock's work, KSBD, Manifold Series, and many more.
I don’t mind crossover stories if they’re done right. No Way Home was done right BIG TIME!!! Call it lucky. Call it desperate. I thought it was awesome!!!!
I think that I can speak for just about everyone, I no longer care about any Marvel or DC movie. Marvel just won't stop and DC keep punching themselves in the dick. Enough already, have an original idea.
I could see a new Stark that's rambunctious, still parties crazy, and such. Ending up in the formerly Downey world. Learning of the shoes he's now brought in to fill, where you intro a new actor, to make something of it. But, if they do the Kang / TimeShift stuff, expect Downey and Evans to return. As they're in his comic book plots. So are the F4, which are sorely needed.
The multi-verse concept is an entertaining idea, but I agree that it’s being utilized more as a plot device rather than part of an actual creative, storytelling motif. Let’s be frank other franchises have done the parallel dimensions multiple universe concepts before my favorite example is Stargate SG one. they dabbled in the Multiverse and several of its episodes across multiple seasons and it was entertaining but they never let it overstay. It’s welcome. They also did a great job of having it makes sense in universe. Marvel on the other hand, Jess uses contrived McGuffin’s or space magic, and Wala the Multiverse exists.
To be fair, multiverse has been a thing in tv and movies for a very long time. Start Tek did it with the evil version of the crew, Star Trek TNG did it as well. There is also Into the Spiderverse. You has Sliders tv show that was a version of it too.
Its a neat concept, that can make for interesting stories with competent writers, but it removes all stakes and consequences of stories of bad ones. A theoretical multiversal threat is beyond the comprehension of most people. If one death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic, an infinite is incomprehensible. It ironically makes the stakes too low when they are so high.
The Lego Movie had crossover characters from LOTR, DC, and Star Wars. No multiverse, just one kids toys scrambled together. But it still felt to me like a cheap gag.
When I heard all the buzz around all 3 Spidermen in the latest film, it sounded interesting but seeing it happen looked like a mistake and something that should never be. It somehow cheapened all of them and they came off as a bunch of Spider-Man toys in a sandbox. It’s just gotten silly now but I fear it’ll get worse before it gets better.
I'm sorry, what? You didn't have a blast seeing the three Peters interact and join forces? And how did it cheapen them? (not antagonizing you, just curious)
@@owenogletree6374 No, and when they were all sitting around and getting emotional about their experiences, that made it even less interesting for me. Really not interested in seeing 3 Spidermen cry in group therapy.
I really enjoyed how The Rising of the Shield Hero handles the multiverse, especially in the light novel: heroes are being isekaied into other worlds, with waves of monsters, who are actually the result of a malevolent goddess smashing different universes together for her own amusement, and to feed on the chaos that it produces. It's a surprisingly fresh way to use this trope.
Well, in _Shield Hero_ there's very little inter-universe travel. There's the 'heroes' being summoned (and honestly, it was neat that they introduced alternate universes early in a seeming throwaway when all the heroes came from different versions of Japan), and there's where the realities actually interpenetrate.
I wish these characters and stories would go the way of open source software where communities of fans could contribute to the development of beloved classic characters. (Or I guess future generations will reap the benefit of ‘public domain’.)
Plucking superheroes out of their universe to serve in the multiverse can be subverted: remember that superhero is no longer in his home universe to save the day... so that universe will suffer whatever evil fate the superhero is no longer there to avert. Rinse and repeat a few times and you've got a collapsing multiverse with dire consequences, and a storyline completely different from the mere "gang together to save the multiverse" thing.... since the ganging together IS the problem.
I am reminded of the comic-book line known as "Ultimate Marvel." Began in 2000, the idea of Ultimate Marvel was to have a new version of the Marvel superheroes that ran parallel with the established Marvel continuity, known as Earth 616. The Ultimate Marvel was an attempt to invite new readers that would have been otherwise scared away from the decades of continuity from Earth 616. Joe Quesada, who was then Editor-in-Chief of Marvel, said that Ultimate Marvel and the original Marvel would not meet in some sort of multiverse story crossover. He said that the two universes will not cross over as that would signify that Marvel had "officially run out of ideas". Guess what, when Ultimate Marvel characters started having cross-overs with the original Marvel characters, Ultimate Marvel quickly went down the tubes.
I don't mind the concept of a Multiverse mashup. As a viewer or reader you get to peek into those different universes and we've all had those what if this happened ideas. As long as it's not done to death which is exactly what they are doing right now then I'm okay with it. And just so you know the Millennium Falcon did Aid the USS Enterprise E at the Battle of sector 001 she is in the background
Funny you mention the Marvel and DC thing. In the comics there was an "Amalgam event" where the two had various heroes and villains merged from both sides to create a new character. For example, Batman and Wolverine were mashed together to create Logan Wayne who is the hero Dark Claw. To this the villain counter part is a combination of Joker and Sabertooth creating Hyena. Marvel later on did a similar thing (called Warp world) where only Marvel characters got merged with other Marvel characters, and an example from that would be Soldier Supreme the fusion of Captian America and Doctor Strange.
I've never been too against the multiverse concept, but I've never been *for* it necessarily. I think it can be a very useful macguffin that leads to very interesting plots like some of the better executed instances of the Spider-verse. However, a lot of things just don't use the multiverse macguffin well enough, and it ends up just like you say. Nothing matters because there's always another universe where it did or didn't happen to fix oopsies. For me it works for No Way Home because these are three iterations of the character who, while they are VERY similar, we've come to be emotionally invested in each of them individually. This way the stakes still exist. If one Peter were to die, we'd feel that just as hard.
I wanna see Chris Evans play all of Fantastic Four's Johnny + Captain America + Jake from Not Another Teen Movie in the same film. I'd watch that for at least... 10 or 15 minutes. No I wouldn't pay for it but as mentioned I would give a little of my most precious asset (time).
They are however some limitations to the MCU Multiverse (like people not being able to live in another universe of their own, otherwise it will cause incursions). Probably done to prevent things like it seeming plausible variants could replace dead superheroes.
i used to watch your stuff back in the day, and it was always entertaining but you've really grown up and gotten wiser, more balanced and concise, so propps man
I'd strongly recommend Larry Niven's sci-fi writing, generally. If you can find it online to read, look up "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" for a superhero-related analysis. =^[.]^=
I liked Spiderman: No Way Home quite a bit, but I wish they had found a better way to introduce the multiverse rather than having Dr. Strange look like a bumbling idiot.
To me one of the reasons I prefer Manga and european comics, since (so far and I hope it stays that way) they haven't treated their franchises that way. If something important it means a lot more and has a bigger impact, while with american comics they can just undo it by using the "multiverse" thing. Recently tried to get back on american comics and I just couldn't get into it, even though I liked lots of the topics and elements in it. Even within the same book the style would change drastically each chapter, which can make it hard to differentiate some characters especially when there are two or multiple characters that look the same. With Manga; it is usually the same artist doing all of the chapters with series that go one for many many books. If an artist is sick or passed away, they sometimes even train a new artist to draw in the same style to continue it. And once a series is over its over. And even if there is a continuation, they use different characters or use side stories with the existing characters. Another thing I never liked when they created an entire family of characters with the same powers (Superman, Spiderman, Venom, etc).
I hate multiverses and time travel in movies, because they essentially allow for anything to happen and be explained away by "science" and techno babble. Before they essentially use "because magic" as a basis for the story, they should put limitations on it from the get go, so these concepts allow for consequences and not just an easy way out of any problem for the protagonists. Even manga has been doing this for decades. You create a fantastical concept, then you add pros and cons to it, so the public can understand the challenges the character goes through.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
When time travel and multiverse is brought up, everything is inconsequential. No event has any impact.
I would like to add into that bringing back characters from the dead.
Have you ever watched 'Primer'?
That’s another reason I don’t like Endgame. It cheapens the darkness and impact of Infinity War.
@@Dr.Harvey That film is such a mindfuck.
@@king_julian327 yeah, but it's consistent.
If everything counts, nothing counts. Teal'c in Stargate SG1 had the right attitude "Ours is the only universe of consequence!"
*because it's the place where we keep all of our stuff*
Teal'c is the goat.
True, the issue is to keep it in one main universe.
Some of the best dry humor in a series/character.
And then he grew a beard, bit on a wooden boat, headed north, found a woman, had a son, burned his wife and has her axe that he can recall back to his own hand.
Back in the day, the "multiverse" (Flash 123) is what drove me away from most of the comics for awhile.
It is fun at first. Then you realize anything can happen. Anything. There is always some trick going on and eventually you realize one other thing. Nothing really matters. You cannot trust anything to be cannon. It isn't real. It's all like some stupid trick. A "whoopsie", this isn't real!
You are correct. It becomes tiresome and I worried when our classic heroes started running into this concept.
I think the problem is not so much with the lazy Wokewood sycophants and the phrase "We've already tried every possible plot", but that the audience and critics repeat it after them and believe it. Including, Dave Cullen. He believe that showrunners can't create anything new, because they tried every possible option, but with Star Trek, we see that this franchise hasn't changed its recipe for 50 years. Therefore, most people's complaints are not about the plot and logic of the world (because they basically did not change) but because "its bleak and gloomy". I.e. it is not the content of the show that confuses them, but its mood. Same goes to Marvel and DC. They haven't tried anything new in 50 years. Even raceswap and genderswap isn't new, as well as crossovers. They plagiarize each other's ideas all the time, and Kirby originally worked for Marvel. But pseudo-nerds are still looking for some kind of difference between two identical twins. Anyone with the help of brainstorming will be able to come up with a dozen new ideas that have not appeared anywhere or have not received decent implementation. Hollywood sycophants are not capable of this, because they have no brains and they are all in an unnatural relationship with each other, called the "Albanian Steering Wheel".
P.S. Marvel and DC are not opposing each other, they are in a fake competition, in fact they have no opposition and will shake hands behind the scenes like the parties of Donkey and Elephant.
How many times are they going to kill Superman before you cotton-on that you're being hoodwinked... AGAIN?
I remember former Doctor Who actress, Jenna Louise Coleman in a TV interview saying, that the great thing with a show like DW, is that you could do anything. This is something that annoys me because it's like saying you can create established rules like Time Lords not being able to choose the next body they regenerate into but Time Ladies could. This has now been screwed up because it's now been established that they can not only regenerate into different ethnic races (something I'm perfectly on board with) but the opposite sex. I don't mind something new being introduced into the mythology of a series if it works, and adds something fresh and new to it, but not when it contradicts something that has gone before or is just a convenient, lazy plot device.
This is what's going to or is happening with both the MCU and DCU franchises, although with DW it was done more in the name of diversity and politics rather than making money however, there is still a similarity in terms of creative laziness and relying on cheap plot devices.
It can be fun, if done properly.
There is one fundamental flaw in all alternate universe stories - the same people exist. What that means is that in each universe since the birth of humankind, every single couple has hooked up at least once to produce the same children. None of the character's ancestors failed to meet, didn't get along, or even died before having the opportunity to sleep together at least once to produce that character.
My own parents had a story that could've easily resulted in my not being born. My dad was planning on proposing to his girlfriend (more out of family pressure than anything else) when he met my mom by chance. He got a job for a short time as an insurance salesmen and sold a policy to her sister (my aunt), becoming friends in the process. He and another friend of his decided to visit her when my mom was visiting her. In an alternate universe, my parents wouldn't have met, so me and my brother wouldn't have been born, etc. Think of all the couples in the history of the world that have similar stories.
Not really as there are alternate universe stories that do showcase certain characters never being born due to small and drastic event changes.
Yeah. The problem is that the universes and people are not different enough. For example, the spidermen have the same name and know people with the same name with relatives who have the same name. No universe has Parker with his parents? Or with his moms name? Or the spider biting someone else? Or a trillion different variations. Or where the Nazis or confederacy won? Their worlds and lives are remarkably similar.
That’s just not true if you’ve read any comics dealing with the multiverse. There are plenty of universes with variations of the characters where they are definitely not the same people, don’t have the same motivations, nor do they go through the same events. But if there truly is infinite diversity across infinite universes then variations of the same people is also a thing that could occur. It’s also a way to drive the plot since you’re seeing alternate lives of characters we know. It wouldn’t have the same impact if you’re telling a Spider-Man story and he travels to nothing but a bunch of other universes where there are no other Peter Parkers and/or no Spider-Man.
@@choreomaniac well it was noted that the spell brought people who knew Peter Parker was Spider-Man, so they would have to have the same name.
I don’t like multiverse/alternate universe writing. But you are actually incorrect. The implication isn’t that ‘all universes’ result in you being born. However, with an unlimited number of universes existing simultaneously, several do.
Admittedly there will be more where you do not than there are those that you do exist but even so it would be possible for an alternate reality version of you to meet the version from our reality.
It is used as an excuse to justify trash writing.
And trash characters(trashy versions of well written characters as well)
Soooo true.
Basically this. And highlight how lazy a lot of Hollywood writers have become.
Exactly. Nailed it. The people doing this shouldn't be in the business. Once is enough.
How would you do it?
Honestly, I wish they had used the multiverse plot device to recast Black Panther.
They could have just recast him and have no one acknowledge it in the film or a throwaway line like Iron Man 2.
Given how shity is the sequel it wouldn't surprise me if Marvel already prepared script down those lines
That’s exactly what they would do once they realize they need a Tchalla BP back. They will simply snatch another alternate into our reality and become stranded.
But how would they be able to market the shit out of his death to make this into an event?
I think we have a Schrödinger's T'Chala here, if he had been recast, people would assume it would've been better to avoid doing that. They should've used the multiverse to find a version of those films that is actually good.
" . . . people with eventually get TIRED of it."
Oh Dave, THAT milestone was passed LONG ago.
The "Ship of theseus" Issue is something that will afflict any franchise that plays with different iterations of the same character across a multiverse.
Is it just their superpowers Or special abilities that make these characters?
If different versions of a character go through different experiences and arcs, can they be called the same character.?
What makes Sylvie a Loki? Is it just her powers or her lineage.
Man my head hurts.
It's really a case by case situation and a 50/50 split of what's makes the character the character, for an example Peter Parker gets bit by the spider and becomes Spider-Man, he still is Spider-Man but the thing that has been established to makes him the Spider-Man we know is the death of Uncle Ben, as shown in other version of the character like in the 90s animated series there was a version of Spider-Man that never lost Uncle Ben so he never fully took the whole great power comes great responsibility to heart and as such never grew past his own ego to the point of being pretty full of himself and living life like a celebrity with his identity known to the public.
I thought it was neat when DC was playing with a lot of legacy characters. Some of them were similar in world view and powers (consider Barry Allen to Wally West as the Flash) and others seemed to have almost nothing in common (Dan Garret, Ted Kord, and Jaime Reyes as Blue Beetle.) Sometimes they were just squatting on the name, but other times they really did some fun stuff with the idea.
These are the kinds of questions that should be asked by a writer who wants to ensure the multiverse isn't just a gimmick. It's also why I'm not inherently put off by the multiverse concept; because as long as the writing is good, I do recognize these as distinct characters.
It is like looking for your real earth, like finding true love or the holy grail. It can be fun, how much work love, and creativity is poured into the project.
@@gangofheroes Well there is many people across the multiverse that calls themselves Spider-Man but isnt even Peter Parker? Like into the spider-verse
There’s also an element of cowardice involved. When writers and directors know they’re dealing with multiversal concepts, they feel empowered to make radical changes while hiding behind it and claiming it’s no big deal because they’re not touching “the original character”.
I wouldn't quite call it cowardice, but that's because I think it's more likely that the multiverse provides writers with a device to explain all the changes they're ORDERED to make, or the agenda they're told they have to promote.
I don’t mind it if it’s done well. I really liked Spider-Man. But I don’t want to see it overused as a gimmick to get them out of a corner the writers put them in.
I haven't watched any superhero movie since the first Doctor Strange (I wanted to quit with a good one), but to me this idea actually sounds fun!
Also: many people hate the M-She-U; what's wrong with nostalgia then? Lots of people would love to see the Hulk being mindless again and all other famous superheroes also in their own traditional role again, instead of...you know: dead 'n stuff.
Spider-Man was just fan service
@@IBTU Better Fan Service, than woke politics and bad writing 🤷♂️.
@@IBTU So? What's wrong with giving people something they enjoy? And I thought the story was coherent. The other Spidermen weren't brought in just because. They had a purpose and archs.
@@MarcelNL I do not know. I fear things that I like being remade in the current year. I can't stop thinking about how Hollywood will just spit all over the original characters and turn then into depressed or idiots or depressed idiots. All to elevate their shinning new characters.
Did you notice that Loki, MoM and NWH have different multiverse rules?
So obvious. It cannot be repaired. MCU Phase 4 will be so convoluted it won't bring such impact as Infinity Saga.
Loki can be anything? Woman, Old dude, Alligator...
Every Wanda Maximoff is a Scarlet Witch who had kids with Vision and all share the same body (actress)
Every Peter Parker is a Spiderman, although they have different bodies and different lives.
Adding Into the Spiderverse: Every Spiderman can be: another Peter Parker with same body (MoM) or anything: Miles Morales, Gwen Stacy, a korean girl from the future, a noir detective from the past, a pig (Loki)
What's funny is that Loki recon the multiverse that was established in the first doctor strange movie
Probably because marvel writers don't know how to right. Thus end up, having continuity errors.
@@ulaznar thats what multiverse means though
A trend I've definitely noticed with the use of the multiverse, particularly in mainstream movies, is that a lot of writers just kinda dip their toes in it without trying to fully understand or explore it - and as a result their stories often don't hold up to any scrutiny (both NWH and MoM being prime examples).
It's an incredibly abstract concept with limitless implications that too many creators try to just gloss over; I'm pretty sure the only movie I've seen where it really felt like they actually _got it_ is Everything Everywhere All at Once
Even though I love NWH, there is so much you could nitpick about the way the multiverse stuff worked in that movie. Very little of it makes sense if you think about it too much.
The problem with the multiverse device is that nothing matters anymore. Consequence is gone. Sacrifice is meaningless.
That's a mistake based on assumption of arbitrary rules.
Have you watched the ws anderson resident evil movies? The continuity is so screwed up that it might as well be a multiverse. In a movie/series/book/game the author decides what happens he does not need a reason for anything he can just do it, the point is if the viewer belives it matters through continuity, not having "clones" replace dead people, ect.
@@Dr.Harvey To what are you referring when you cite "that." I mean, what is the mistake you're citing?
@@cobbler88 about absence of consequences in good multiverse story.
@@Dr.Harvey Ah. It IS the niggling problem. There really is no gravity to anything when you can just call "redo!" at every whim.
There are some really great multiverse-stories.
Michael Moorcock is probably the guy who brought the idea of multiversal heroes into popular fiction. Sailor on the Seas of Fate, his Elric story, is definitely worth a read, in which Elric meets other, parallel versions of the Eternal Champion (himself). The Star Trek original series dealt with the concept in an interesting way with evil versions of the Enterprize crew, and The Next Generation had a great multiversal story with Yesterday's Enterprise. The TV show Fringe also dealt with the multiverse in a pretty enjoyable way, for the most part.
In comics, Jonathon Hickman's Incursions storyline, which lead into his Secret War event, is probably the best it's been done in modern comics. There are real stakes in these stories, and real consequences for the alternate folks that don't make it. Grant Morrison's 'Multiversity' series of books is pretty great, too.
So we know it can be done and done well, with real stakes. That said, the way Marvel is going about it just isn't that great. First of all, other versions of you would still look like you, for the most part - you from Parallel Earth #616 wouldn't look like Andrew Garfield. Building a story centered around the multiverse should be better thought out than having a character who can hop over to Earth #2 to discover a world where we all evolved from dinosaurs or whatever.
Marvel seems to be doing 2 things: Trying to up the ratings with older, more popular versions of characters, like Toby and Andrew. They also seem to be trying to build towards the Secret Wars storyline. They're just not doing a very good job of it.
Not necessarily the idea of them looking exactly like you just comes from what we think it would be like, but there is a possibility of having distinct features due to a number of universal differences.
@@gangofheroes Sure, there would be parallels where you had a scar, or maybe a version where you had red hair, or a version where you were overweight, or a version where you were a body-builder, a version of you with darker skin bc that earth's atmosphere is thinner, and on and on and on. But many, many versions would look just like you. Imagine all the possible worlds created just by crushing an ant or not crushing it, going left and not right, breaking up with a gf or not breaking up with her. Making different choices is at the heart of many good multiversal stories, so it makes more sense when other versions would be played by the same actor, when thinking about a film on the topic. Even the evil versions of the Enterprise looked like themselves. A version of you that's not mostly you is just another dude with the same name.
Thank you for saying this. Ppl think the multiverse is a terrible concept because their only point of reference for the multiverse is Marvel & DC, and because of the MCU success, now everyone is just copying what Marvel is doing. Micheal Moorcock made a great use of the concept, and there are many series like those by Stephen Baxter, Dark Tower, or Kill Six Billion Demons who do it correctly. Multiverses, like ANY scientific theory can be fantastic for fiction. I mean, ppl literally had very little issues with them back in the 70s-90s, with classic Marvel/DC.
This multiverse train of creative thought is ultimately unsustainable.
the multiverse is used as a tool to keep the story going and to keep all the loved characters back for new movies.
@@jmgonzales7701 yes, but I'd argue that those stories have no substance.
@@jmgonzales7701 it depends, if they are willing to really kill off the main character and they are not afraid to make it the most complex story in fiction while it all makes logical sense and is not a story where it is a bunch of copies of human / humanoid versions of the main character and their friends it could be amazing. but the people who use the multiverse format are mostly just trying to use it for a plot device instead of it just being and there is a big difference between them. only story I can think of which did it semi well is Homestuck. every other series fell flat on it face. the multiverse format literally has infinite potential but no one uses it. marvel is the biggest example of an utter failure in this area I can think of. they screwed themselves over in this genre back when they made spider man and the hulk, the entire world should be a hulk or a spider man or a sandman, but instead there are only a few, if they can't make the universe they honed in on for decades make sense, the multiverse story they are trying to cram in there is always going to be a stupid story.
@@jmgonzales7701 and that’s not a good thing.
@@blacklivesorblackvotes2985well that really depends. Alot of those characters are pop culture icons and they will always be used. If there was no multiverse then no more supes,batman, spiderman etc.
...this has been going on in comics, for DECADES! The fact that movies are doing it, shouldn't surprise anyone!
The multiverse concept has been around in the comics at least since the 1980's and likely earlier. It's a bit jaded to think that because we've had a few years of multiverse film content out there that all the stories possible have been told when then whole point of a multiverse is infinite possibilities. The problem isn't the multiverse as a plot device much like the problem with super hero films isn't the concept of super heroes being played out. If comic books can mine that well since the 1930's without running out of stories to tell, the film industry can as well. The problem lies with the lack of creativity coming out of Hollywood right now. It's writers and producers who lack the scope of vision to create films that push the boundaries they've set up for themselves. They're afraid to experiment or iterate on the billion dollar formula (beyond of course the ham-fisted injection of identity politics at every turn). There's decades of fresh, diverse material to be crafted out of the concept of super hero's within a multiverse, the comic book industry has proven this. Hollywood is just failing to read the blueprint that's already been laid out before them.
The multiverse idea goes back to at least 1972 with The Sailor on the Seas of Fate by Micheal Moorcock and it was most certainly done well there
Yes
@@Sigilstone17 farther back. The first use of Multiverse in fiction was “The Flash of Two Worlds” from the early 60’s where earth-1 flash and earth-2 flash meet.
I think the multiverse concept is a tool that's neither good nor bad. It just matters how it's used. I think it's mostly being used poorly but has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, audiences will already be tired of it by the time someone has the courage to do something really interesting with it.
Agreed
The problem is that the multiverse is a very unwieldy tool. Perhaps it can be used well, but only with an exceptional amount of skill. If we're comparing the multiverse to a tool, it's a lot less like scissors or even a chainsaw and a lot more like a fighter jet.
@@HSuper_Lee The way i see things is that multiverse stuff is treated more as a gimmick in mainstream media. It's not even a tool at this point.
I think that multiverse stories can be stronger and more poignant if they explore the themes and emotional consequences of the existence of multiverses. Maybe focus on the nihilism and the search of one's personal meaning in an existence where nothing matters because everything is happening at the same time. Maybe use the multiverse as a parable of one's reconciliation with his own past actions by comparing them with an alternate timeline where everything was different. In other words, use the multiverse as a way to explore our reality with it's pains and challenges instead of drifting away into pointless fantasy.
In a multiverse, same problem as time-travel: nothing really matters
Depends on type of multiverse, but yes in marvel one. But there are cool ones, they have just limitstions
you took the words out of my mouth
@@eksprolek2924 it's one thing if the story is setup as time travel or multiverse from the get-go, but to introduce it as a deus ex machina after a long saga is no bueno.
It depends on how well its done. You have to both plan it out really carefully and make sure that there are clear consequences to screwing around with stuff like this
Sadly, they really haven't done that very well. As, from what we have seen so far, aside from Multiverse of Madness's vague ending and NWH's plot there are no real consequences to this
Doctor who managed to make time travel interesting for most of its time on screen but they made strict rules to prevent bullshit from happening, that does including not being able to interact with a past incarnation but that only went out of the window recently
Multiverse to me screams "we're running out of bigger villains/world ending events to use".
Have you seen “Everything, Everywhere, All at Once”? It’s a movie that uses the plot device to great effect and VERY creatively
Exactly what I was going to say. Fantastic film.
One of the best movies of the year!
@@chrisfleitas615 THE best movie of the year
There's not really that much fresh-ness that could be done and can be done after that.
It's the best new multiverse film.
I am writing a story where characters travel to alternate realities. However, in this story, these devices are extremely limited in that they can only take you to a few specific universes, and they are completely different than ours. The first universe is one where humans progressed technologically at a much slower rate due to natural disasters. Basically, they are still hunters and gatherers.
The other universe is where humans progressed at a much faster rate and are much more technologically advanced.
The other universes are ones where earth is either uninhabitable or doesn't exist. That's it. It will not be characters meeting alternate versions of themselves, but alternate versions of humanity.
you are correct nobody would expect a Bond team up. but i’d definitely watch it
Have to conveniently slip in an in unison, "Bond...James Bond..." *fingers or guns point at each other*
@@notapplicable8957 have you ever seen the _first_ movie to bear the name "casino royale"?
@@notapplicable8957 as the theme song states "seven James Bonds at Casino Royale...."
They literally had two 007s in the last film. And why does James Bond have to be their BIRTH name? Makes perfect sense to create a fake identity for such an agent.
@@darthkek1953 no. We need some split universe, hole in time, quantum vortex type stuff
It’s basic economics: The more of something you have (Like having an unlimited number of the same character) the less valuable each character is. If spider person #1 dies there will be others to take their place. Ultimately, this is about laziness. It’s just easier to create the same character over and over again with a slightly different story. It makes the entire thing worthless…like having an unlimited supply of gold.
I enjoyed DC's Crisis On Infinite Earths. It was the first of its kind with regards to collapsing the multiverse. Deaths were actually impactful as well.
Edit: I should clarify that I was referring to the comics.
@Dustin Neely
Not sure I follow. Crisis completely streamlined DC's multi-verse problem and was able to keep that canon for more than 25 years. Not sure what more you could ask for in a cross over event.
crisis on infinite earths was basically a reset button because it was bullshit with multiverses. they reset it to one consistent timeline and moved on but unfortunaly they cannot help themselves and did multiverse bullshit again
Does this mean that we will finally get that long awaited Harry Potter vs Percy Jackson film?
Even though I enjoyed seeing the three Spider-Men team up, I think the multi verse idea is flawed. The studios do seem to be slowly realising the woke messaging is losing them money and bringing back legacy characters and actors is jumping on the member berry train.
How does "wokeness" tie into No Way Home?
@@RoddThunderheart They didn't say it did. They said "studios" to refer to Hollywood in general.
@@RoddThunderheart I didn't say wokeness ties into No Way Home, but the big studios in general seem to be slowly realising going down that path is losing them money.
unironically using the word woke is such a self report lmao
Time travel and multiverse is like a big cake you only eat for special occasions. But if you eat it all the time, it’s no longer special and you’ll get sick of it.
I've been waiting for Gunsmoke meets Bonanza for years.
Knight Rider/Airwolf.
A Team/Different Strokes.
@@radioflyer68911 It's so obvious...how did I not see it?
Street Hawk as well.
The Three Doctors worked in Doctor Who and was a concept both obvious and brilliant
The Three Spidermen, as you said, needed a crazy reason to meet
The Three Doctors do not come from a different universe though, just different time periods of the Doctors own timeline. The 3rd Doctor story Inferno however has the Doctor going to an alternate Earth with different Sgt. Benton, Liz Shaw and Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart.
There is a time and a place for multiverse stories, even cross-franchise stories. “Assimilated^2”, a crossover between Doctor Who and Star Trek TNG, was a story crafted using common threads that allowed the two to blend together (specifically, it was the 11th Doctor, with Rory and Amy, landing the TARDIS on the Enterprise’s holodeck sometime after Wolf-359, with the two groups teaming up to face an alliance between the Borg and Cybermen). It was written to play to the compatible elements, by writers who understood enough about both franchises to make the merger work.
HISHE (How It Should Have Ended) keep pointing out how once Endgame had time-travel invented, they could use that to solve most problems since and after Endgame
But they also made arguments were time travel couldn't be used. Were the catchphrase, "that's not how time travel works".
Remember in Star Trek Voyager when Harry Kim died and they just replaced him with an alternate timeline version and never mentioned it again, good times
"...and then he woke up and realized it had all been a dream."
Same thing, different gimmick.
I wrote a short story for soundbooththeater called "Crossverse" about a dimension hopping researcher. Good fun, and one of the themes I explored was how the deaths of other versions of people might affect survivors. It's far too easy to cheapen life.
It is what happens if you have "clones" that are effectively the same. If have alternate versions you have to make them different from each other. Characters are not people just facades of people if you want the viewer to care you have to make them convincing.
@@Raximus3000 Exactly.
Honestly, the multiverse thing has been a major thing for comics with both Marvel and DC using it for decades...hell, it even came into play in Spider-Man TAS as a major thing.
4:22 It's what the fans wanted and it pulled in over a BILLION DOLLARS! So I see no desperation here. It's all fan service!
Dave,
Having read comic books since I was a child, I had a long-time appreciation for the multiverse, but it is a concept that has been abused. DC Comics introduced the concept in 1961 to explain how the Silver Age versions of The Flash/Green Lantern/etc. could co-exist with their Golden Age counterparts who had ceased publication in 1949. It worked because these the Gold and Silver Age Flashes (Jay Garrick and Barry Allen) were different characters with different origins and histories, but things became dicey when DC introduced Golden Age copies of Superman/Batman/Wonder Woman as those characters' publication histories remained uninterrupted.Then DC introduced more Earths as it absorbed characters from defunct companies like Fawcett, Quality, and Charlton, which made continuity convoluted to the point where the company collapsed its multiverse into a singular universe with the original 1985-6 Crisis on Infinite Earths.
It is a long and complicated topic as DC continuity has undergone several retcons and reboots since then, including the return of the multiverse in 2006. The concept of the multiverse is not inherently bad, but it comes down to execution. I even use a multiverse in my novel series, but try to keep it contained to two worlds to keep the story focus. You hit the nail on the head when you said that it's a manifestation of Hollywood's growing laziness and diminishing creativity,
The multiverse has been around for a very long time. The problem isn’t the multiverse. It’s Hollywood’s use of it. Both DC and Marvel have used it for decades and decades and are some of the best story arcs.
I wouldn't be surprised if the main villain of another whatever-number-of-phase-is-next was the multiverse itself and the main goal would be to "close the gap" and return everybody to their universe.
Weaponized Nostalgia
It is SO MUCH WORSE IN THE FLASH
It's not a bad concept, it just needs to be used sparingly and deliberately.
Amazing job!!
I feel there is a real horror element lost to the multiverse concept. Imagine a horrible alternate reality where the worse case scenarios happened? You end up in another reality where the heroes died and the vilians plans succeeded? I'd like more stories like that.
or the heroes became the villains. DC has done that one. More than once.
I think xeelee sequence had something like this with the galaxy size ring that was essentially a giant portal to another universe as well as a means to save all bayronic matter in that universe.
I thought Multiverse of Madness would be exactly that.
Strange facing off a world where things went wrong.
I remember that sucky Arrowverse crossover where they faced a NAZI ruled earth. The execution sucked, but the idea could work.
The Avengers or whoever facing an earth where Loki won.
Hell, even facing the consequences of messing up while winning in Endgame.
So much potential they haven't explored. Because of them, there is a timeline where Loki vanished and Hydra thinks Captain America is one of them. Because of them, there's a timeline where Thanos no longer exists (remember they killed a Thanos from another timeline).
I think focusing on different timelines rather than a multiverse per se would have kept everything more cohesive while maintaining the importance of consquence.
Tony had a dream where all the Avengers died. Explore that!
Yes, Loki is back! But how does that timeline's Odin feel about that?
I'm just blabbering by now, but you get the idea
@@rmhartman Good example. If I was Spider-Man and I got thrusted into a reality where I'm the bad guy, or I died, or the whole world has turned to shit, I'd be horrified to know such a reality exists and I'd be worried of anyone following me back to my reality. I feel if we got a good balance or stories like that the multiverse concept wouldn't be so controversial.
The animated Justice League series did something like that. Where the Flash died and the League became authoritarian figures. Was kinda neat to see the heroes in a darker light.
Multiverses have quickly become even more of a writing trap than time-travel.
Just as time travel has historically been used by bad writers to attempt to cover up for their own failings, multiverses now serve the same function, but with even more disasterous results.
Time tavel was bad enough, but multiverses have opened the door to a whole new level of incompetent writing.
I’m writing a story with a multiverse concept, except it’s not a cheap way to fix something I didn’t like, only as a world building tool. The characters sometimes face alternate versions of themselves but usually as as treat for that part of the story or it’s actually part of the plot, like introducing a new threat that was previously original to a different verse
When a character is killed off, even in a multiverse, the rest of the cast should be feeling emotions throughout. Yes, they literally exist on infinite planes of existence but the idea is they’re gone from their original home forever. Another copy taking their place is almost saying neither the writer nor the in-world characters gave a f***, like the Flash show
“It’s cool if he died, we’ve got another one” 👍
MCU has time travel. Same effect can be achieved with it, but for some reason time travel got "forgotten" after Endgame.
I highly recommend reading “The Gods Themselves” by Asimov. Very interesting way of introducing the concept of multiple universes existing alongside each other.
Did you watch Everything Everywhere All at Once?
@@rodycaz8984 yes. Great movie.
I believe that it was awarded either a Hugo or Nebula. I enjoyed it.
I loved that book, such a cool idea
Congrats on approaching your 200K sub count, Dave!
A breath of fresh air on the internet! Who woulda thought?😉
For me the multiverse theory plot line has A LOT to offer but people really can fuck it up especially those who don’t think about cause-and-effect(hack writers).
But it could be an amazing tool to use for a stand alone what-if type story.
I think the only way these kinds of things can work is if you cross over unrelated properties. No Batfleck vs Battinson, no Brandon Routh Superman v Jesse Eisenberg Luthor. It's much more interesting to see Batman wake up in New York during The Invasion in 2012 Avengers, or have Butcher (from The Boys) follow compound V to Bane, or even go beyond only dealing in comic book characters. The next person to roll a 5 or 8 gets stuck in Jumanji hunted by Kraven the Hunter; Blade the Daywalker gets stranded in the vampire world of Daybreakers; have Thomas Wayne come back as The Crow on the twentieth anniversary of his and his wife's murders only to come to odds with Batman, who he doesn't realize is his son.
At least this way, we can be invested in these new people and new events without undermining original characters and past events. The problem with multiverse and time travel stuff is that they were created to be redo buttons on stories and/or characters, which is why they never have stakes. You have to keep things permanent, repercussions and all, because it's supposed to mirror life, which is nothing but making decisions and dealing with whatever happens. You take that away, or make it so nothing sticks, and the stories and lives of these characters no longer matter because they can literally be replaced by a similar variant quickly and easily.
I think it plays into the constant need to lean into member berries. How better to do that than actually have the things you loved. Don't just try to get you to remember them... actually give you the thing you loved. Logical progression. Totally terrible but logical.
Marvel has been using the Multi verse plot device since 1971. Hardly a new concept and it's a fabulous device when properly employed.
Both the multiverse and time travel tropes have been ruined by Marvel.
But transformers wit Godzilla and Bruce Wayne as an agent of shield were my fav things as a child.
DC and Marvel have literally done comic crossovers before multiple times. They even co-owned an imprint called Amalgam Comics where DC and Marvel characters were combined into new characters.
Imagine if R2-DR and C3P0 were somehow in the Indiana Jones movies.
It works well for Doctor Who but even then, the show was sensible enough to restrict these stories to anniversaries and big celebrations.
the problem with the multiverse plot device is that it already got old a while ago.
Multiverse just allows for reboots and allows Marvel to throw things at the wall to see what sticks and then say all the bad movies to be alternate universes that are still canon and therefore must seen for continuity
This happens in comics all the time. Particularly in dc comics. I'd actually like to see all the batman actors meet one another.
Yep, you’re exactly right and like most iconic stories with franchises there is a right way to do it and a wrong way.
The Multiverse can be done completely well and establish consequences. As a long time comic book fan the concept has told a mass variety of exciting stories and confirms the facts that infinity means infinity. There are good examples of it being done well: Turtles Forever (The TMNT Crossover) , The Crisis Events in DC & The DC CW Shows, Into The Spiderverse, Spider-Man No Way Home , many comic events, books, lore: Star Wars, Ghostbusters, DC & Marvel especially, MCU Doctor Strange, & Everything Everywhere All At Once.
Dr.Strange in The Multiverse Of Madness was a pretty poor example that did establish but had a lack luster story that could’ve been fixed regardless of the multiverse’s use.
The real problem in current entertainment isn’t the multiverse or time travel, those are interesting story devices that can always work depending on the execution the real problem lack of care for storytelling, characterization and modern wokeness.
"So social issues I try to get
in in the background, or
underlying a plot, but never to
the point of letting interfere
with a story or hitting the
reader over the head.”
- Stan Lee
As the indefatigable 92-year-old
superhero conjurer and Marvel Comics
chairman emeritus sees it, fan backlash
up until this point hasn't so much been
spurred on by racism as much as
unyielding fealty to the source material.
"They're outraged not because of any
personal prejudice, Lee says. "They're
outraged because they hate to see any
change made on a series and characters
they had gotten familiar with. In Spider-
Man, when they got a new actor, that
bothered them, even though it was a
white actor. I don't think it had to do with
racial prejudice as much as they don't like
things changed."
“I wouldn't mind. if Peter Parker had originally been black. a Latino, an lndian or anything else. that he stay that way. But we originally made him white. I dont see any reason to change that. It has nothing to do with being anti-gay, or anti-black, or anti-Latino, or anything like that. Latino characters should stay Latino. The Black Panther should certainly not be Swiss. I just see no reason to change that which has already been established when it's so easy to add new characters. I say create new characters the way you want to.”
-Stan Lee
GROTH: How did you feel about communism
then?
KIRBY: Oh, communism! That was a burning
issue. It was an outrageous issue. To be termed a communist would damage your whole family, damage your whole world- your friends wouldn't talk to you. I'm talking about other people -because I wouldn't go near the stuff. Sure, I was against the reds. I became a witch hunter. My enemies were the commies -I called them commies. In fact, Granny Goodness was a commie, Doubleheader was a commie.
STAN'S SOAPBOX
“This month we're gonna yak about
something that has nothing to do with
our mags! Over the years we've re
ceived a zillion letters asking for the
Builpen's opinion about such diverse
subjects as Viet Nam, civil rights, the
war on poverty, and the upcoming elec
tion. We're fantasmagorically fiattered
that our opinion wouid matter to you,
but here's the hang-up: there ISN'T any
unanimous Bullpen opinion about any
thing. except possibly mother Iove and
apple pie! Take the election, for exam
ple. Soine of us are staunch Demo-
crats. and others dyed-in-the-wool
publicans. As for Yours Truly and a few
others, we prefer to judge the person,
rather than the party line. That's why
we seek to avoid editorializing about
controversial issues not because we
haven't our opinions, but rather be
cause we share the same diversity of
opinion as Americans everywhere. But.
we'd like to go on record about one
vital issue we believe that Man has
a divine destiny, and an awesome re
sponsibility the responsibility of
treating all who share this wondrous
world of ours with tolerance and re
spect judging each fellow human on
his own merit, regardless of race,
creed, or color. That we agree on
and we'll never rest until it, becomes
a fact, rather than just a cherished
dream. Excelsior, Smiley.”
GROTH: How did you feel about the Senate
Subcommittee Hearings? Did you think that
was a witch-hunt, or did you think there was
any validity to the public's concern?
KIRBY: I didn't feel one way or another about it. I was only hoping that it would come out well enough to continue comics, that it wouldn't
damage comics in anyway, so I could continue
Working. I was a young man. I was still growing out of the East Side. The only real politics I knew was that if a guy liked Hitler, I'd beat the stuffing out of him and that would be it.
GROTH: Were you very political?
KIRBY:I wasn't then. I was very concerned with comics. I'm political now. I knew this much - that everybody voted Democrat down my way. If you were poor, you voted Democrat and if you were rich you voted Republican.
STARLOG: We all noticed the lack of
women in the Star Wars trilogy. Are you go-
ing to bring more women in for future Star
Wars films?
LUCAS: Well, what of Princess Leia?
When you're making a war film, how are
you going to put women in it? Think of
other war films, think of The Longest Day,
those films. Well, it's your galaxy; I have to
go with the rest of the world. And still make
it believable. I'm not sure how many women
will be in the rest of the films; that's the kind
of thing that plots dictate. What would Star
Wars have been like if Han Solo had been a
woman?
“Still others picked up on Lucas's
Vietnam allegory, though Lucas, wary of politics, publicly disavowed any and all sociopolitical theories and quashed any speculation on the deeper meaning of his film. For Lucas, it was enough that Star Wars could be merely entertaining-and entirely the point.”
"Star Wars deals with the essential
problem: Is the machine going to
control humanity, or is the machine
going to serve humanity? Darth Vader
is a man taken over by a machine, he
becomes a machine, and the state
itself is a machine. There is no
humanity in the state. What runs the
world is economics and politics, and
they have nothing to do with
the spiritual life."
- Joseph Campbel
From "PW Interviews Joseph Campbell, by Chris Goodrich"
Publisher's Weekly (August 23, 1985, p.74-75)
Great storytelling is what’s important.
The Stories that aren’t political at all and are based on good writing, good characters , deeper lessons, morals and entertainment
as well as the stories that do have political elements but are more focused on an engaging story,a well thought out lesson or idea behind it and interesting characters are the stories that make great entertainment. As my film teacher taught me Art before politics, always. The story & characters comes first whether the politics are subtle, secondary or completely non existent.
The multiverse is literally their backdoor ,if they loose too much on betting on the wrong horse. 🐎
The "alternate timeline" thing is merely one of many types of multiverses that can exist. There's multiverses in which they don't share temporality, meaning every single universe has different worlds, different characters (not alternate versions of the same characters), different laws of physics, rules and principles, etc. If we focused more of "spacial type multiverses" instead of "temporal type multiverses", it'd make for many interesting stories. Imagine, you leave a universe with planets and galaxies to find yourself in a flat plane universe where it's like one endlessly expanding planet, where things like gravity don't exist or act differently. I love multiverses, idc what anyone says, but you only truly appreciate them when you read more than just the mainstream crap because they seldom use them correctly. When it's used as a wonderful exploration through the many layers of your fictional cosmology (which I love studying) you see it as more than a hapless tool for money. A good example is Micheal Moorcock's work, KSBD, Manifold Series, and many more.
I don’t mind crossover stories if they’re done right. No Way Home was done right BIG TIME!!! Call it lucky. Call it desperate. I thought it was awesome!!!!
I thought, at least as far as the MCU goes, the multiverse idea was just a way to bring the Fox Marvel characters into the MCU universe.
I think that I can speak for just about everyone, I no longer care about any Marvel or DC movie. Marvel just won't stop and DC keep punching themselves in the dick. Enough already, have an original idea.
In that respect, you do speak for me... ;^)
It has actually already been used in Dr Who bringing back Rose TYlers dead father from a paralell universe.
I could see a new Stark that's rambunctious, still parties crazy, and such. Ending up in the formerly Downey world. Learning of the shoes he's now brought in to fill, where you intro a new actor, to make something of it. But, if they do the Kang / TimeShift stuff, expect Downey and Evans to return. As they're in his comic book plots. So are the F4, which are sorely needed.
DC comics milked the multiverse concept dry every few years with a new "Crisis" every decade or so.
The multi-verse concept is an entertaining idea, but I agree that it’s being utilized more as a plot device rather than part of an actual creative, storytelling motif. Let’s be frank other franchises have done the parallel dimensions multiple universe concepts before my favorite example is Stargate SG one. they dabbled in the Multiverse and several of its episodes across multiple seasons and it was entertaining but they never let it overstay. It’s welcome. They also did a great job of having it makes sense in universe. Marvel on the other hand, Jess uses contrived McGuffin’s or space magic, and Wala the Multiverse exists.
Into The Spiderverse , if we're sticking with Marvel, did it well too.
Spider Multiverse needed more Bully Maguire xD
To be fair, multiverse has been a thing in tv and movies for a very long time. Start Tek did it with the evil version of the crew, Star Trek TNG did it as well. There is also Into the Spiderverse. You has Sliders tv show that was a version of it too.
It is a plot device and it’s used as such in the comics whenever they wanna do foolishness.
Its a neat concept, that can make for interesting stories with competent writers, but it removes all stakes and consequences of stories of bad ones.
A theoretical multiversal threat is beyond the comprehension of most people. If one death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic, an infinite is incomprehensible. It ironically makes the stakes too low when they are so high.
There's a reason why Doctor Who didn't mess with the multiverse too often, it's too messy
Let's have a crossover between Transformers and The Fast and the Furious!
Transformers & GI Joe isn't far off! Hasbro owns them both and it is in the planning stages...
that would wierdly work
The Lego Movie had crossover characters from LOTR, DC, and Star Wars. No multiverse, just one kids toys scrambled together. But it still felt to me like a cheap gag.
When I heard all the buzz around all 3 Spidermen in the latest film, it sounded interesting but seeing it happen looked like a mistake and something that should never be. It somehow cheapened all of them and they came off as a bunch of Spider-Man toys in a sandbox. It’s just gotten silly now but I fear it’ll get worse before it gets better.
I'm sorry, what? You didn't have a blast seeing the three Peters interact and join forces? And how did it cheapen them?
(not antagonizing you, just curious)
@@owenogletree6374 No, and when they were all sitting around and getting emotional about their experiences, that made it even less interesting for me. Really not interested in seeing 3 Spidermen cry in group therapy.
"The best film in phase 4"
Not like there's a high bar.
I really enjoyed how The Rising of the Shield Hero handles the multiverse, especially in the light novel: heroes are being isekaied into other worlds, with waves of monsters, who are actually the result of a malevolent goddess smashing different universes together for her own amusement, and to feed on the chaos that it produces. It's a surprisingly fresh way to use this trope.
Well, in _Shield Hero_ there's very little inter-universe travel. There's the 'heroes' being summoned (and honestly, it was neat that they introduced alternate universes early in a seeming throwaway when all the heroes came from different versions of Japan), and there's where the realities actually interpenetrate.
That's not an original idea, that's the overall plot behind Elric of Melnibone
Now we need Eric Bana, Ed Norton, and Mark Ruffalo Hulks to multiverse themselves together using the same CGI effects of their respective movies
Norton and Ruffalo played the same version of the hulk
@@Spiderfisch good point
The only true multiverse crossover is The Jimmy Timmy Power Hour, thank you very much.
I wish these characters and stories would go the way of open source software where communities of fans could contribute to the development of beloved classic characters.
(Or I guess future generations will reap the benefit of ‘public domain’.)
Plucking superheroes out of their universe to serve in the multiverse can be subverted: remember that superhero is no longer in his home universe to save the day... so that universe will suffer whatever evil fate the superhero is no longer there to avert. Rinse and repeat a few times and you've got a collapsing multiverse with dire consequences, and a storyline completely different from the mere "gang together to save the multiverse" thing.... since the ganging together IS the problem.
I am reminded of the comic-book line known as "Ultimate Marvel." Began in 2000, the idea of Ultimate Marvel was to have a new version of the Marvel superheroes that ran parallel with the established Marvel continuity, known as Earth 616. The Ultimate Marvel was an attempt to invite new readers that would have been otherwise scared away from the decades of continuity from Earth 616.
Joe Quesada, who was then Editor-in-Chief of Marvel, said that Ultimate Marvel and the original Marvel would not meet in some sort of multiverse story crossover. He said that the two universes will not cross over as that would signify that Marvel had "officially run out of ideas". Guess what, when Ultimate Marvel characters started having cross-overs with the original Marvel characters, Ultimate Marvel quickly went down the tubes.
I don't mind the concept of a Multiverse mashup. As a viewer or reader you get to peek into those different universes and we've all had those what if this happened ideas. As long as it's not done to death which is exactly what they are doing right now then I'm okay with it. And just so you know the Millennium Falcon did Aid the USS Enterprise E at the Battle of sector 001 she is in the background
Funny you mention the Marvel and DC thing. In the comics there was an "Amalgam event" where the two had various heroes and villains merged from both sides to create a new character. For example, Batman and Wolverine were mashed together to create Logan Wayne who is the hero Dark Claw. To this the villain counter part is a combination of Joker and Sabertooth creating Hyena.
Marvel later on did a similar thing (called Warp world) where only Marvel characters got merged with other Marvel characters, and an example from that would be Soldier Supreme the fusion of Captian America and Doctor Strange.
I've never been too against the multiverse concept, but I've never been *for* it necessarily. I think it can be a very useful macguffin that leads to very interesting plots like some of the better executed instances of the Spider-verse. However, a lot of things just don't use the multiverse macguffin well enough, and it ends up just like you say. Nothing matters because there's always another universe where it did or didn't happen to fix oopsies. For me it works for No Way Home because these are three iterations of the character who, while they are VERY similar, we've come to be emotionally invested in each of them individually. This way the stakes still exist. If one Peter were to die, we'd feel that just as hard.
Personally I had my fill of parallel universes after Rick and Morty.
I wanna see Chris Evans play all of Fantastic Four's Johnny + Captain America + Jake from Not Another Teen Movie in the same film. I'd watch that for at least... 10 or 15 minutes. No I wouldn't pay for it but as mentioned I would give a little of my most precious asset (time).
They are however some limitations to the MCU Multiverse (like people not being able to live in another universe of their own, otherwise it will cause incursions). Probably done to prevent things like it seeming plausible variants could replace dead superheroes.
Let's have a crossover between Henry Cavil's Superman and Christopher Reev.....oh wait, nevermind.
oof
I wish.
*you would have to include the Nick Cage Superman as well as in an alternate universe that film actually exists...don't ask me how i know*
[Brandon Routh enters the chat]
@@Car1a Brandon Routh was then kicked out of the chat. He can stay as Ray Palmer.
i used to watch your stuff back in the day, and it was always entertaining but you've really grown up and gotten wiser, more balanced and concise, so propps man
Highly recommend "All the Myriad Ways" (short story) by Larry Niven for a take on the meaninglessness engendered by the multiverse concept.
I'd strongly recommend Larry Niven's sci-fi writing, generally. If you can find it online to read, look up "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" for a superhero-related analysis. =^[.]^=
I liked Spiderman: No Way Home quite a bit, but I wish they had found a better way to introduce the multiverse rather than having Dr. Strange look like a bumbling idiot.
To me one of the reasons I prefer Manga and european comics, since (so far and I hope it stays that way) they haven't treated their franchises that way.
If something important it means a lot more and has a bigger impact, while with american comics they can just undo it by using the "multiverse" thing.
Recently tried to get back on american comics and I just couldn't get into it, even though I liked lots of the topics and elements in it. Even within the same book the style would change drastically each chapter, which can make it hard to differentiate some characters especially when there are two or multiple characters that look the same. With Manga; it is usually the same artist doing all of the chapters with series that go one for many many books. If an artist is sick or passed away, they sometimes even train a new artist to draw in the same style to continue it. And once a series is over its over. And even if there is a continuation, they use different characters or use side stories with the existing characters.
Another thing I never liked when they created an entire family of characters with the same powers (Superman, Spiderman, Venom, etc).
I hate multiverses and time travel in movies, because they essentially allow for anything to happen and be explained away by "science" and techno babble.
Before they essentially use "because magic" as a basis for the story, they should put limitations on it from the get go, so these concepts allow for consequences and not just an easy way out of any problem for the protagonists.
Even manga has been doing this for decades. You create a fantastical concept, then you add pros and cons to it, so the public can understand the challenges the character goes through.
The multiverse concept worked just fine in Into the Spiderverse. It’s not the concept itself that’s a problem. It’s the execution.
They didn't run out of ideas. They wasted great ones and keep doing so.
It's like they don't want to learn from manga and anime.