Spoilers Black Panther grade and discussion thread

[Hugo Rune]

Ah, but he interfered in the fight. And clearly while people found that to be abhorrent, no one brought it up when he was king, or even tried to bring him to justice for that, which means that it could not have been contrary to Wakanda law in that situation.

How's about the fact that he was clearly a mercenary, assassin and general murder-type person?

English law allows for the prosecution of any British Subject for committing a murder anywhere in the world, where the victim does not themselves need to be a British Subject

Perhaps Wakanda has similar laws? He can challenge for the Crown, so he must be a "Subject".

Hugo - or, you know, it's a comic book film and they can make up any shit they want.

 

[crookeddy]

Ok, so I keep seeing posts about the movie being great because of gender neutrality, and representation of Africans. I don't watch comic book movies for that. If you strip all that out, and pretend every single person in the movie is a middle aged white man is there anything good left?

 

[Nyotarules]

Ok, so I keep seeing posts about the movie being great because of gender neutrality, and representation of Africans. I don't watch comic book movies for that. If you strip all that out, and pretend every single person in the movie is a middle aged white man is there anything good left?

You get Iron man without Colonel Rhodes and I enjoyed those movies

 

[JaseTheAce]

I gave this a solid "A".
I've been very critical of Marvel movies post Avengers. Most of them are the same damn movie with each one getting away with stuff that gets DC movies crucified (thousands dying in GotG2 while StarLord turns into Pac-Man). But I digress. I loved Black Panther for several reasons. First was that this is the most coherent film that Marvel has made. The villain had clear motivations and like any good villain, thought he was doing the right thing.

Every actor gave this film their all. You could tell that each performer really loved working on this movie and it showed. The comedy was appropriate to the situation and I didn't find myself wondering where other Marvel superheroes were during the events of the film.

I'm actually glad that Michael B Jordan won't be around for a sequel as I think he'd make a great John Stewart Green Lantern.

 

[Kirk Prime]

1. When did anyone say they were going to lock him up?

Toward the end of the movie after Killmonger was with T'Challa and T'Challa offered to heal him, Killmonger refused because he didn't want to spend his life locked up.

2. Killing Zuri was at the very least a legal gray area. He was not participating in the challenge, though he did interrupt it.

Exactly. When Killmonger was king, no one even mentioned, even behind his back, that he committed a crime. We saw people upset that he was going to colonize the world, but no one even brought up the death of Zuri. That tells me that it was a justifiable homicide under those circumstances.

Not by OUR standards, but by Wakanda law.

3. Destroying the garden of the heart-shaped herb was definitely not respecting Wakandan law or tradition and it was strenously objected to, and only done under threat of physical force.

He was the king, and while it was indeed disrespectful, and objected to, that was on traditional grounds, not legal grounds. Had this been illegal, they would have spoken up, and it would have been the rights of the people to refuse their king. Think of it this way. Until 1940, no President ever served a third term. It wasn't illegal, but all previous presidents respected George Washington's precedent to step down after 2 terms. FDR didn't do that, and became the first president to serve a third term (and began a 4th). It was only later that they passed a Constitutional Amendment to limit the presidency to two terms. I view the garden the same way. Just because other kings respected the tradition doesn't mean it was a legal requirement for them to do so. Killmonger was a jerk, but that's not illegal.

4. Refusing to continue the challenge but not relinquishing the throne when it became clear that T'Challa wasn't dead is clearly illegal under the rules presented to us regarding the challenge.

We are dealing with an unprecedented area of law, and not one that should be punishable by incarceration. I would argue that the challenge doesn't allow for one of the participants to receive outside help, and T'Challa got that help by being rescued by the mountain tribe and later cured by his family.

I think when he threw T'Challa off the cliff, the challenge was over and if anything, this was a new challenge by T'Challa. I would say that T'Challa's challenge was legal, and Killmonger accepted later, but at the time T'Challa re-emerged, this new challenge was not accepted.

Killmonger was the lawful king being presented with a challenge at that point, not the challenger. Yes, T'Challa won that second challenge fair and square, but Killmonger, while defeated, committed no crime.

5. His actions were clearly designed to create a global state of war and revolution with Wakanda at the center with no regard for Wakandan tradition or the Wakandan way of life and very little indication that he even cared if anything happened to Wakanda in retaliation. Just because they may not have a specific law that says 'don't do that' doesn't mean that isn't grounds for prosecution. Treason covers lots of different possible actions.

Disagreeing with someone does not mean that person committed a crime. What you call treason, others would call moving Wakanda into a new era. He certainly had the support of a good portion of the people. And yes, not having a specific law on the books does in fact mean there are no grounds for prosecution. One cannot commit a crime that is not a crime at the time the action is committed.

How's about the fact that he was clearly a mercenary, assassin and general murder-type person?

English law allows for the prosecution of any British Subject for committing a murder anywhere in the world, where the victim does not themselves need to be a British Subject

Perhaps Wakanda has similar laws? He can challenge for the Crown, so he must be a "Subject".

We certainly don't know that. If that were the case, logically, he would not have been able to challenge for the throne in the first place. He is definitely a Wakandan citizen. We have seen that when it comes to Wakandan law and Wakandan tradition, Wakandan people kill with no issue. Revenge for example, is justifiable reason to kill. Challenging for the throne? You can kill.

We have seen Killmonger kill people to retrieve vibranium--property of Wakanda.

And then he returned to Wakanda having killed someone who was a criminal IN Wakanda.

He was not charged with a crime. So while yes, he would be guilty of crimes in America, he was not guilty of anything in Wakanda, so his incarceration would only make sense if T'Challa wanted to extradite him to the US, which he certainly did not have to do.

Ok, so I keep seeing posts about the movie being great because of gender neutrality, and representation of Africans. I don't watch comic book movies for that. If you strip all that out, and pretend every single person in the movie is a middle aged white man is there anything good left?

In my opinion, yes. I don't see comic book movies for the color of the people in those movies. I'm someone who loathes political correctness. It's a massive pet peeve when writers change a classic character's race or gender. I feel that decision is racist on their part because it says that they can't create a popular character of whatever race/gender they want so they need to change things around. So if you change Batman's race, it's a message that a popular character of that race can't be created.

Now imagine if they recast Black Panther with a white man in the lead, changing nothing else. The same people that get angry when they are called out for race changing would be up in arms crying racism.

But Black Panther proves the point I've been saying for years that if you want a character of a certain race, create one. I thought this movie was really good and it had nothing to do with the race of the characters. There was no political correctness in the casting of Black Panther. He was a hero that happens to be black.

If this movie starred middle aged white men, it would have still been good because the story was good. And Killmonger would still be not guilty of any crimes against Wakanda law.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Toward the end of the movie after Killmonger was with T'Challa and T'Challa offered to heal him, Killmonger refused because he didn't want to spend his life locked up.

So, no one. Killmonger has no clue what they would or wouldn't do with him. He's literally only been in the country a few days and THIS SITUATION HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.

Exactly. When Killmonger was king, no one even mentioned, even behind his back, that he committed a crime. We saw people upset that he was going to colonize the world, but no one even brought up the death of Zuri. That tells me that it was a justifiable homicide under those circumstances.

Not by OUR standards, but by Wakanda law.

That tells us nothing beyond the fact that people were shell-shocked in an unprecedented situation, and also the movie didn't really focus on many people in the first place. Maybe it was legal. Maybe it wasn't. Maybe the average Wakandan doesn't even know for sure if it was legal or not because they've never seen it happen before. There is no real evidence available.

He was the king, and while it was indeed disrespectful, and objected to, that was on traditional grounds, not legal grounds. Had this been illegal, they would have spoken up, and it would have been the rights of the people to refuse their king.

They did speak up, and he physically intimidated them into doing it anyway. That they didn't use legal language says nothing about the legality of the situation. They weren't lawyers.

We are dealing with an unprecedented area of law, and not one that should be punishable by incarceration. I would argue that the challenge doesn't allow for one of the participants to receive outside help, and T'Challa got that help by being rescued by the mountain tribe and later cured by his family.

I think when he threw T'Challa off the cliff, the challenge was over and if anything, this was a new challenge by T'Challa. I would say that T'Challa's challenge was legal, and Killmonger accepted later, but at the time T'Challa re-emerged, this new challenge was not accepted.

Killmonger was the lawful king being presented with a challenge at that point, not the challenger. Yes, T'Challa won that second challenge fair and square, but Killmonger, while defeated, committed no crime.

Pure BS. The challenge rules clearly state 'the challenge only ends by death or by yield'. There is no wiggle room. T'Challa never died. It was Killmonger's own stupid fault that he threw him down a waterfall instead of just breaking his neck and ensuring his legitimacy. As for whether it merits jail or not, that's entirely up to Wakandan tradition and you have absolutely no way of knowing from this movie one way or the other. Personally, based on the other Wakandan challenge traditions, I'd say the traditional punishment, if there is such a thing, is probably death.

Disagreeing with someone does not mean that person committed a crime. What you call treason, others would call moving Wakanda into a new era. He certainly had the support of a good portion of the people. And yes, not having a specific law on the books does in fact mean there are no grounds for prosecution. One cannot commit a crime that is not a crime at the time the action is committed.

You miss the point. A specific crime does not have to be spelled out in detail in the lawbooks to be prosecutable. It's entirely possible the Wakandan definition of treason includes the exact sort of behavior Killmonger exhibited (involving Wakanda in foreign strife, undermining Wakanda's neutrality/defenses, etc).

 

[Hugo Rune]

And this is why we can't have nice things

 

[Captain Craig]

Grade: B+

Could go up on a rewatch, we'll see. Initial reaction below.
Middle and End Credit sequence, last one is of importance.

Another very solid outing from Marvel Studios. However, the overhype train is in full affect. I feel a year from now similar conversations like Wonder Woman will be going around. Why isn't this up for Best Picture? It's very, very well made film that I enjoyed. Hear me on this knee jerk reaction posters.

Pros:
Boseman - is captivating and fun to watch on screen. I really like his calm, cool and collected approach with interactions he has for 98% of the film.
Michael B Jordan - the scene stealer or owner in I'd say every scene he's featured. The character had a very realized arc that you couldn't miss. There was that one scene near the end that reminded me of Last of the Mohicans (also colonizers there) quote from Hawkeye before the Huron sachem "Magua would become that which has twisted him" when discussing Killmonger's desire to use Wakandan tech vs the world. Killmonger works as a fully realized character because you can sympathize with him, much like you might Magneto. Largely because the atrocities that shaped their upbringing can be related to in some way by any educated person.
Triple Threat - Okoye, Nakia and Shuri were all great! I'm sure I'll learn all their actual names in time, I know the Michonne actress is Okoye. I never felt Shuri was in danger cause Marvel plays the long game. The long game has Shuri becoming Black Panther at some point.
M'Baku - again, don't know the actor enough yet but was impressed. My understanding is in the comics he is actually one of T'Challa's top tier foes. Here they were more respected adversaries so I'll be curious to see where this relationship goes as it evolves.
Serkis - sad to see Klaw dead. I like the actor and had hoped to get him into some version of his comic looking villain suit. Best line, "Hey, I made it rain!"
Agent Ross - while not some outstanding performance you'll never forget what I like about it is how Ross is the surrogate for the audience. He's observing, learning and impressed with Wakanda, it's leaders and peoples at the same time we are learning of this great location within the MCU as well.
Support Cast: Basset and Whitaker deliver solid moments that add to full richness of the film. T'Chaka, for a dead man he had quite a few scenes and they were important.

Cons:
Near zero character growth for T'Challa in the film. He does gain insight into one aspect of his Fathers life that is central to the plot but is that truth actual growth? What does he gain from his near death experience? Is he any better a man, king, companion, brother, son beating Killmonger "supered" up than losing to him as "just" a man?

That Killmonger ultimately ended up in another Black Panther suit was meh. So the battle was between the hero and his "evil reflection" trope. His "need" to arm any militant black group lacks explanation. Where is his personal affront? All one needs is an understanding of history to empathize with how Africa and it's people were treated the last 400 years of recent history. Erik was born in America and therefore growing up in the 90s had access to the things that could make one rise out of the upbringing we saw him cast in with his dad. Joining the military is one such avenue but he stated he used that avenue just to train. Magneto as a Jew saw his ethnic brethren treated as horrible but he's not out to just kill every German because, well they are German. Killmonger led me to believe he just wanted to take down whitey in any form, eye for eye style regardless of any thing else. The film fails to adequately lay out where his personal ethnic hatred comes from.
At least they paid some homage to his actual comic look in the second act.

We know that the "magic" purple flower isn't all gone. Some fail safe is in place. I felt like I was getting my visual for "some men just want to watch the world burn" moment. That moment felt cheesy to me.

If the film can be up for any awards I think a number of technical ones are on the table. Unless the terrain is all cgi, which I didn't notice, then the sweeping scenery of Wakanda was majestic and beautiful. Worth your big screen dollar.

 

[Gryffindorian]

Grade: B+


Cons:
Near zero character growth for T'Challa in the film. He does gain insight into one aspect of his Fathers life that is central to the plot but is that truth actual growth? What does he gain from his near death experience? Is he any better a man, king, companion, brother, son beating Killmonger "supered" up than losing to him as "just" a man?

Not saying it's a flaw in the film, but I agree. Since this is an origin story of sorts, I would've like to see T'Challa go through a life-changing event that led him to be a better person. Usually, when "a hero falls," he/she learns a lesson (as in the first Thor movie) and thereby evolves into something greater. He was already hailed as a hero and a prince right from the beginning, so I didn't notice any further development.

 

[Kirk Prime]

So, no one. Killmonger has no clue what they would or wouldn't do with him. He's literally only been in the country a few days and THIS SITUATION HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.

Well, if we carried your logic, T'Challa would have said, "Killmonger, we're not locking you up. You'll be free to spend your days in Wakanda. You just can't challenge for the throne again." If you're interpretation is right, and the movie seems to contradict it, then my theory that Killmonger did not commit any crime against Wakanda law is on the money.

That tells us nothing beyond the fact that people were shell-shocked in an unprecedented situation, and also the movie didn't really focus on many people in the first place. Maybe it was legal. Maybe it wasn't. Maybe the average Wakandan doesn't even know for sure if it was legal or not because they've never seen it happen before. There is no real evidence available.

So you're saying that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we have to assume something is criminal? Wakanda law doesn't seem the same as ours, but they do seem to be people of principle, and their citizens seem happy, which indicates that it is not a brutal North Korea like dictatorship. If someone commits a crime, people know about it. As you mention, what we saw was pretty unprecedented, which means that they didn't contemplate it. If they didn't contemplate it, then no crime has been committed.

Most civilized societies, and there's no reason to believe Wakanda is different, do not outlaw something and then punish someone who committed that act before the act was outlawed.

Pure BS. The challenge rules clearly state 'the challenge only ends by death or by yield'. There is no wiggle room. T'Challa never died. It was Killmonger's own stupid fault that he threw him down a waterfall instead of just breaking his neck and ensuring his legitimacy. As for whether it merits jail or not, that's entirely up to Wakandan tradition and you have absolutely no way of knowing from this movie one way or the other. Personally, based on the other Wakandan challenge traditions, I'd say the traditional punishment, if there is such a thing, is probably death..

The rules clearly imply that no outside interference is allowed either. For example, T'Challa couldn't get help from other warriors to gang up on Killmonger or vice versa. While the rule book isn't displayed, it was clearly meant to be a one on one fight, and T'Challa would have died but for the interference of others. T'Challa was the clear loser of that fight. Had there been any doubt, Killmonger would not have been anointed the new king, but he was. He went through the whole ceremony and procedure. He was the legit king at that point. T'Challa actually cheated to continue the challenge.

Killmonger did not usurp the throne. He won it. Fair and square. He even had a right to refuse T'Challa's challenge because T'Challa was only alive due to cheating, namely the help of his friends and family who saved his life.

At best, you are arguing for a disputed claim with each side having a fair argument. That argument was settled when the two fought again and T'Challa won. While that fight may not have been perfectly true to Wakandan tradition, it was still a fair fight under equal circumstances and T'Challa won. But that doesn't mean Killmonger committed a crime.

You miss the point. A specific crime does not have to be spelled out in detail in the lawbooks to be prosecutable. It's entirely possible the Wakandan definition of treason includes the exact sort of behavior Killmonger exhibited (involving Wakanda in foreign strife, undermining Wakanda's neutrality/defenses, etc).

Actually, a specific crime WOULD have to be spelled out in detail in law books to be prosecuted. That's kind of the point of having specific crimes and penalties. Otherwise, one can pick any act you do, call it a crime, and prosecute you for an action that was not illegal anywhere.

Killmonger did not commit and treasonous crime. He challenged for the throne and won. Legally. His actions as king were legal under Wakanda law where the king has very broad powers. Nothing he did while king could possibly have been illegal and no one objected under those grounds. Moral grounds? Yes. Legal grounds? No. Killmonger then faced a challenge for the throne and lost. Fine. But at least under Wakanda law, he's not guilty of anything.

 

[crookeddy]

Weekend actuals are in: $242,155,680 for Black Panther! I had some concerns that the MCU wouldn't have a lead hero once Iron Man and Captain America were gone. I am concerned no longer!

 

[Nyotarules]

Magneto as a Jew saw his ethnic brethren treated as horrible but he's not out to just kill every German because, well they are German.

No he just wanted to kill all humans and let mutants rule the world instead. His motives were not that different from Killmanger's. He wanted to replace a world of white supremacy with black supremacy.

 

[Noname Given]

Not saying it's a flaw in the film, but I agree. Since this is an origin story of sorts, I would've like to see T'Challa go through a life-changing event that led him to be a better person. Usually, when "a hero falls," he/she learns a lesson (as in the first Thor movie) and thereby evolves into something greater. He was already hailed as a hero and a prince right from the beginning, so I didn't notice any further development.

IDK - Loosing to Killmonger and finding out his father lied and ABANDONED (in an effort to protect teh status quo as he saw it) had a large effect on T'Challa's own 'worldview' (he very much idolized his father and thought the man was a paragon of virtue and had tried to model himself after his father completely). <-- The loss of the challenge (and the crown) combined with finding out the truth about his father caused some major change to, and growth of the character (IMO).

 

[Set Harth]

Since this is an origin story of sorts, I would've like to see T'Challa go through a life-changing event that led him to be a better person.

The thing is, we already got that kind of an arc in Civil War.

 

[gblews]

A+

Saw the movie twice, first time, on Sunday and again on Monday. I cannot recall the last time I paid to see a movie twice in the same week-end, maybe Star Wars back in the 70's. BP has instantly moved up to my all time favorite superhero film, over the Avengers, Spidey 2, Logan, Wonder Woman, and GoTG. Just a beautiful movie with a well acted and well told story. I absolutely loved it.

Great cinematography. The sweeping shots of the Wakandan countryside were breathtaking. Same for the colorful costumes. The way the movie was shot gave a real feeling of "bigness" to the film.

The cast was superb. Chadwick Bozeman's ability to imbue BP with a definite air of regal bearing is the heart of who the BPI thought is. Everything else jumps off from this. Letitia Wright's Shuri just lights up the screen. My favorite bit was when BP walks into her lab and she greets him with a solemn, "My King...", which he immediately brushes off as what it is, playful sarcasm. Their chemistry is palpable.

I loved that the women in the movie all had purpose in the story. None of them were exclusively a lover, or wife, or mother. The Dora Milaje were terrific and one of the fim's highlights. Their precision, deadliness, integrity, strength, dignity (something all of the Wakandan characters possessed) made it all seem so real.

Special shout out to Lupita Nyong'o brought beauty, toughness, smarts, ingenuity, and femininity, to Nakia. Danai Gurira's powerful performance as Okoye was nothing less than what I expected after seeing her for so long as Michone in Walking Dead. Brilliant. The integrity she showed in turning down Nakia's emotional plea to join her in overthrowing Killmonger was something we could use in congress today.

But like most people who have seen the movie, Michael B. Jordan's performance and character really stood out for me. Killmonger is the best villain of any superhero movie I have ever seen. He was so well written, so well reasoned, that I found myself feeling slightly guilty for rooting for T'Challa over him. His desire for the Wakandan throne could easily have been based on a desire for revenge for the death of his father, but wanting to use it for the much larger purpose for what he saw as global liberation for his people was noble if misguided.

Casting Sterling K. Brown, one of the most charismatic, powerful actors working today, as N'Jobu helped to give Eric additional gravitas as it was not too difficult to see Killmonger as part of N'Jobu's lineage. The conflict between the "traditional" T'Challa and "militant" Killmonger was as well defined as the conflict between Cap and Tony Start in Civil War, and in a broad sense, was reminiscent of the philosophical differences between MLK and Malcolm X (before his enlightenment), back in the 60's. Very appropriate.

These differences were woven beautifully and naturally into one of the other major themes in the movie, Wakanda's history of being anti immigrant, insular and secretive, and little to no help to their neighbors or others around the world. Watching T'Challa's attitude evolve from his struggle with kilmonger (and likely, his feelings for Nakia), to understanding the important role Wakanda could play in bettering the lives of those less fortunate. That he started in Killmonger's native Oakland spoke volumes about where T'Challa was after meeting his cousin.

Wakanda Forever, indeed.!

 

[Gryffindorian]

The thing is, we already got that kind of an arc in Civil War.

I need to rewatch Civil War. While it gave a good introduction to T'Challa, I didn't think it was enough to advance his character.

 

[gblews]

Ok, so I keep seeing posts about the movie being great because of gender neutrality, and representation of Africans. I don't watch comic book movies for that. If you strip all that out, and pretend every single person in the movie is a middle aged white man is there anything good left?

This like asking; if Black Panther wasn't Black Panther, would it still be as great. The movie is the sum of it's parts and when you start to remove those parts, or swap those parts out for other parts, the movie becomes something else.

In my opinion, yes. I don't see comic book movies for the color of the people in those movies. I'm someone who loathes political correctness. It's a massive pet peeve when writers change a classic character's race or gender. I feel that decision is racist on their part because it says that they can't create a popular character of whatever race/gender they want so they need to change things around. So if you change Batman's race, it's a message that a popular character of that race can't be created.

Now imagine if they recast Black Panther with a white man in the lead, changing nothing else. The same people that get angry when they are called out for race changing would be up in arms crying racism.

But Black Panther proves the point I've been saying for years that if you want a character of a certain race, create one. I thought this movie was really good and it had nothing to do with the race of the characters. There was no political correctness in the casting of Black Panther. He was a hero that happens to be black.

If this movie starred middle aged white men, it would have still been good because the story was good. And Killmonger would still be not guilty of any crimes against Wakanda law.

This is like asking; if Black Panther wasn't Black Panther, would it still be as great? The movie is the sum of it's parts and when you start to remove those parts, or swap those parts out for other parts, the movie becomes something else.

When a character's race is an integral part of the story, as it is with BP, it becomes more difficult to change the character;s race and maintain the integrity of the character's story. This is true in the case of BP. If you were to change him to a white man with no other changes, BP suddenly morphs into a Tarzan-like figure, which would be a much less compelling story to the point of maybe being offensive.

If you change all the other characters to white, then you lose the weight behind a story of a black African country which has never been colonized and which has been disguised as a poor third world nation. Its different with most other Marvel characters, Tony Stark's race is not an integral part of his story. Steve Roger's race is not an integral part of his story, so yes, its easy to change the race of those characters.

I'm not saying "race is important", I'm saying that race can be important if it is an integral part of a character's story.

Grade: B+
Cons:
Near zero character growth for T'Challa in the film. He does gain insight into one aspect of his Fathers life that is central to the plot but is that truth actual growth? What does he gain from his near death experience? Is he any better a man, king, companion, brother, son beating Killmonger "supered" up than losing to him as "just" a man?

I saw some pretty significant growth in T'Challa. He came to realize that not all of Wakanda's once valuable and necessary, traditions still had any value or even justification. He came to the realization that Nakia, who was the first to approach him about this, was right about it being time for Wakanda to 'step out of the shadows' and use it's wealth, power, and resources to help others. Killmonger, in his own rather twisted way, had a similar message and influence on T'Challa, especially because Eric was willing to die for this belief.

That final scene with King T'Challa speaking to the UN was all about character growth.

That Killmonger ultimately ended up in another Black Panther suit was meh. So the battle was between the hero and his "evil reflection" trope. His "need" to arm any militant black group lacks explanation.

I thought the "explanation" was to spread arms through Wakanda's spy network, the War Dogs, who were scattered all over the world, and have them mount violent insurrections against respective governments.

Where is his personal affront? All one needs is an understanding of history to empathize with how Africa and it's people were treated the last 400 years of recent history. Erik was born in America and therefore growing up in the 90s had access to the things that could make one rise out of the upbringing we saw him cast in with his dad. Joining the military is one such avenue but he stated he used that avenue just to train. Magneto as a Jew saw his ethnic brethren treated as horrible but he's not out to just kill every German because, well they are German. Killmonger led me to believe he just wanted to take down whitey in any form, eye for eye style regardless of any thing else. The film fails to adequately lay out where his personal ethnic hatred comes from.

Just because Eric grew up in America in the '90's and didn't appear to be living in abject poverty in that flashback, by no means confirmed that he had access to the "things" he needed to be what he wanted to be. Just by the fact that he lived in Oakland in the '90's, a very impoverished place back then, is an indication that there may have been great limitations in his life. But besides all of that, he was black growing up in America where even the richest most privileged blacks are subject to some of the same racism as the poorest. This is likely where some of Eric's "personal ethnic hatred", as you call it, came from.

Magneto's beef was with Nazi's and Nazi sympathizers, not "Germans". Looking at things from Eric's standpoint, he experienced racism in America perpetrated by a white led government, no doubt he was aware of African history as well with invading, mostly white European governments, dominating African nations for the purpose of stealing natural resources and expanding their influence. Although blaming "whitey" for all of his problems, is usually a gross oversimplification, Killmonger still had a much wider scope of oppression than Magneto. And btw, I didn't get that Eric wanted to engage in random killing of white people, but limit it to that which was necessary to overthrow governments.

If the film can be up for any awards I think a number of technical ones are on the table. Unless the terrain is all cgi, which I didn't notice, then the sweeping scenery of Wakanda was majestic and beautiful. Worth your big screen dollar.

I think there is at least a possibility that Michael B. Jordan and Letitia Wright could receive Best Supporting actor noms from Oscars, Golden Globes, or SAG.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Black Panther - Review

GOOD:
Above all else, the principals owned their characters throughout the film, selling them as being more than what was merely hinted at in Captain America: Civil War, by having each feel as if they are disconnected from the world at large, with no actors slipping into natural behavior or using Western behavior / reactions when they are not supposed to have that as a cultural experience.

The joking was held to a bare minimum--which was fantastic, as this origin film (and the MCU in general) needs to drop the Power Rangers / Transformers kind of kiddie schlock that has hurt several of its entries (the Avengers movies, Guardians films & third Thor film). The film was dealing with--in its own way--some very serious issues centered on racial identity and its place in the world, or choices to either embrace it for personal enrichment, or use it as a literal weapon by calling an oppressed people to arms. Not the average MCU film by a long shot.

Another refreshing element was the depth, class and strengths of the film's sets of romantic relationships (T'Challa & Nakia / Okoye & W'Kabi), though troubled--and in one set, violent-- were still based on respect, instead of the 25 year trend of most TV and film relationships being as inherently dysfunctional as the entertainment industry would have you believe they are. It says much that W'Kabi was ready to slay all on behalf of Killmonger's attempted race war, but literally stopped in his tracks rather than fight or harm Okoye. Any other film would have had W'Kabi either pretend to stand down, then kill his one and only, or W'Kabi actually surrender, but Okoye cut him down in some last, petty act of revenge.

MESSAGES:
The most sensitive issue of the film centered on the differing views of race and its place as a point of identify, and/or the need to use it--with ideological and physical force--as a liberating tool. I've seen endless reactions, articles and commentary from every conceivable side of the sociopolitical spectrum, all arguing tis, or claiming that about the messages in Black Panther, and unfortunately most are too into pushing their own agenda(s) instead of seeing the film for what it was. For example:

• Right Wingers (of every level) argue that the film is pushing a black nationalist platform, as if it was actually more about making Killmonger's various speeches about the state of (as he put it) "2 billion people who look like" him / revenge more forceful and attractive than anything coming from T'Challa. Others argue the film is selling some halcyonic fantasy of black kingdoms that "never were" (a deliberately sweeping, racist propaganda-bleeding statement),
• Left Wingers (of every level) have taken the film on their shoulders, trying to sell it as some sort of positive self-esteem-filled, messianic tale "black people" have been "waiting for." Its the same old reaction: the same thing was said about other black-themed productions, such as In the Heat of the Night in the 60s, the 70s with Roots, the 80s with Do the Right Thing, etc. Usually, it is self righteous, "caring" faction of white modern liberalism that appoints themselves to speak for others in such an assured manner, always telling black people when their "time has come" or what they should praise as some cultural breakthrough.

Both sides are--of course--wrong; the Right's neverending attempt to erase the fact that African kingdoms (of various sizes, areas of control, etc.) existed from one end of the continent to the other. Obviously, there was no Wakanda with the magical metal space rock fueling technological development, but African nations date back before standard recorded history. It did not all begin with the damnable colonialism, the Middle Passage or anything else concocted to continue to force feed the false idea of inferiority.

The Left is not much better, with many of their over-the-moon Black Panther praise sessions being nothing more than using the film (as the filmmakers did to a degree) to serve their thinly veiled rants about completely unrelated subjects (e.g. T'Challa's post credits UN scene being--in reality--all about the entertainment industry's obsession with DACA, Trump and the U.S. border wall). The message was supposed to be about (more than anything else) letting go of Killmonnger's divisive rhetoric that would turn historic tables on white populations, but the second the T'Challa speech moved past the greeting, it was all about the entertainment industry's obsession with/hatred of Trump. Misguided, topical soapboxes do not help the longevity of what is--at the end of it all--entertainment property. The race conflicts were the heart of the screenplay, and the focus should have remained there.

Black Panther succeeded because of its questioning a long-lived issue with many faces neither the Left or Right attempting to control the message (and basic entertainment value) understand, as it simply does not fit their ready-made, "this is not anything for black people to celebrate" / "get-the-enemy" narratives.

BAD:
The aforementioned shoehorning of anti-Trump agenda when that is was not the point of the story.

Marvel seems to be running thin on new origin story ideas, as this film was so patterned on Thor (2011), from the reveal of an isolated, mythical kingdom on the eve of destruction and/or a hostile takeover, along with said mythical kingdom's detachment (and dislike) of the outside world, to a "fallen" son (Killmonger/Loki) fighting the hero for the crown, right down to the hero being defeated and stripped of his powers, only to regain them (right at the most critical point of the conflict) and save the day. Like Dr. Strange was based so much on Iron Man's origin film template (which in turn, took more than anyone would admit from Nolan's Batman Begins), Black Panther and Thor could swap any number of characters and almost end up the same way, sans BP's racial identity framework.

NOTES:
Guessing everyone now knows about the final post credits scene involving Shuri, I can say that I suspected she would represent a different course for Wakanda, not only in her being less traditional than her brother, but she speaks about "white boys" in a sense free of insult or judgement. I will go ahead and predict Shuri will likely have some sort of relationship with you-know-who. That would be interesting.

GRADE:
B+.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Do people not find cold blooded murderers a bad thing anymore? I'm genuinely surprised at the empathy psycho Killmonger is creating. And at the talk of how complex he was. He literally dealt with every obstacle by killing and fighting. There wasn't a subtle bone in his self-inflicted scarred body.

Are people projecting so much onto him because they're simply desperate to love their villains more than the heroes for some twisted reason?

 

[Tribble puncher]

Black Panther - Review

GOOD:
Above all else, the principals owned their characters throughout the film, selling them as being more than what was merely hinted at in Captain America: Civil War, by having each feel as if they are disconnected from the world at large, with no actors slipping into natural behavior or using Western behavior / reactions when they are not supposed to have that as a cultural experience.

The joking was held to a bare minimum--which was fantastic, as this origin film (and the MCU in general) needs to drop the Power Rangers / Transformers kind of kiddie schlock that has hurt several of its entries (the Avengers movies, Guardians films & third Thor film). The film was dealing with--in its own way--some very serious issues centered on racial identity and its place in the world, or choices to either embrace it for personal enrichment, or use it as a literal weapon by calling an oppressed people to arms. Not the average MCU film by a long shot.

Another refreshing element was the depth, class and strengths of the film's sets of romantic relationships (T'Challa & Nakia / Okoye & W'Kabi), though troubled--and in one set, violent-- were still based on respect, instead of the 25 year trend of most TV and film relationships being as inherently dysfunctional as the entertainment industry would have you believe they are. It says much that W'Kabi was ready to slay all on behalf of Killmonger's attempted race war, but literally stopped in his tracks rather than fight or harm Okoye. Any other film would have had W'Kabi either pretend to stand down, then kill his one and only, or W'Kabi actually surrender, but Okoye cut him down in some last, petty act of revenge.

MESSAGES:
The most sensitive issue of the film centered on the differing views of race and its place as a point of identify, and/or the need to use it--with ideological and physical force--as a liberating tool. I've seen endless reactions, articles and commentary from every conceivable side of the sociopolitical spectrum, all arguing tis, or claiming that about the messages in Black Panther, and unfortunately most are too into pushing their own agenda(s) instead of seeing the film for what it was. For example:

• Right Wingers (of every level) argue that the film is pushing a black nationalist platform, as if it was actually more about making Killmonger's various speeches about the state of (as he put it) "2 billion people who look like" him / revenge more forceful and attractive than anything coming from T'Challa. Others argue the film is selling some halcyonic fantasy of black kingdoms that "never were" (a deliberately sweeping, racist propaganda-bleeding statement),
• Left Wingers (of every level) have taken the film on their shoulders, trying to sell it as some sort of positive self-esteem-filled, messianic tale "black people" have been "waiting for." Its the same old reaction: the same thing was said about other black-themed productions, such as In the Heat of the Night in the 60s, the 70s with Roots, the 80s with Do the Right Thing, etc. Usually, it is self righteous, "caring" faction of white modern liberalism that appoints themselves to speak for others in such an assured manner, always telling black people when their "time has come" or what they should praise as some cultural breakthrough.

Both sides are--of course--wrong; the Right's neverending attempt to erase the fact that African kingdoms (of various sizes, areas of control, etc.) existed from one end of the continent to the other. Obviously, there was no Wakanda with the magical metal space rock fueling technological development, but African nations date back before standard recorded history. It did not all begin with the damnable colonialism, the Middle Passage or anything else concocted to continue to force feed the false idea of inferiority.

The Left is not much better, with many of their over-the-moon Black Panther praise sessions being nothing more than using the film (as the filmmakers did to a degree) to serve their thinly veiled rants about completely unrelated subjects (e.g. T'Challa's post credits UN scene being--in reality--all about the entertainment industry's obsession with DACA, Trump and the U.S. border wall). The message was supposed to be about (more than anything else) letting go of Killmonnger's divisive rhetoric that would turn historic tables on white populations, but the second the T'Challa speech moved past the greeting, it was all about the entertainment industry's obsession with/hatred of Trump. Misguided, topical soapboxes do not help the longevity of what is--at the end of it all--entertainment property. The race conflicts were the heart of the screenplay, and the focus should have remained there.

Black Panther succeeded because of its questioning a long-lived issue with many faces neither the Left or Right attempting to control the message (and basic entertainment value) understand, as it simply does not fit their ready-made, "this is not anything for black people to celebrate" / "get-the-enemy" narratives.

BAD:
The aforementioned shoehorning of anti-Trump agenda when that is was not the point of the story.

Marvel seems to be running thin on new origin story ideas, as this film was so patterned on Thor (2011), from the reveal of an isolated, mythical kingdom on the eve of destruction and/or a hostile takeover, along with said mythical kingdom's detachment (and dislike) of the outside world, to a "fallen" son (Killmonger/Loki) fighting the hero for the crown, right down to the hero being defeated and stripped of his powers, only to regain them (right at the most critical point of the conflict) and save the day. Like Dr. Strange was based so much on Iron Man's origin film template (which in turn, took more than anyone would admit from Nolan's Batman Begins), Black Panther and Thor could swap any number of characters and almost end up the same way, sans BP's racial identity framework.

NOTES:
Guessing everyone now knows about the final post credits scene involving Shuri, I can say that I suspected she would represent a different course for Wakanda, not only in her being less traditional than her brother, but she speaks about "white boys" in a sense free of insult or judgement. I will go ahead and predict Shuri will likely have some sort of relationship with you-know-who. That would be interesting.

GRADE:
B+.

Probably the review I most agree with, I'd give it a B because of the Formuliac Story telling, but it was still solid overall. But what you said about the Alt. Right and Alt. Left both missing the point of the film and why is I believe dead on accurate. I mean, I walked away from the movie with the message that We are stronger when we work together and help one another. Nothing more, nothing less.