Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I liked it, it was good, not great.

I saw two problems:

1 - They put a lot of work into making Erik a complex villain but... his name is KILLMONGER (yes I know that's his name in the comics) and his 2 acts as king are to burn down the sacred herb garden and launch a plan to blow up New York, London and Hong Kong (?? what did they do??).

2 - We're supposed to like and admire Wakanda as an enlightened advanced society but... you become king by winning a spear fight.

Now imagine if instead of plotting 9-11 x 100 Erik has instead announced plans to overthrow the neighboring dictator and drive out the evil corporation that was polluting the land (note you'd have to establish both). Now we in the audience might be nodding and saying "that Killmonger fellow has a point". Make it clear there's no easy answer.

And if, instead of winning the throne by a spear fight, instead make Erik the rightful heir (ie his father was the older brother so he should have gotten the crown) and he gets the throne by persuading the council of elders that he's right. Then you can have a big fight as T'Chala loses patience, but it makes Wakanda a lot more likable than a country where you settle rulership by spear fight.

Saw it last night. I enjoyed it a lot. My biggest problem with it is that they killed Andy Serkis. Give the poor guy a break, he's becoming worse than Sean Bean as a walking spoiler. I loved every minute he was onscreen.

"I made it rain!"

I was thinking that the challenge for kingship would ordinarily be a purely symbolic thing that only served as a rubber stamp for whoever had already been decided upon (presumably all those tribal leaders had already agreed T'Challa would be king in the previous days' council meetings). I'm not sure how that squares with the fight against the champion of the mountain tribe, though. Do they always put up a fighter so the TV coverage of the ceremony is more entertaining, or were they seriously challenging for the throne, in which case I agree with Kid_Kyoto.

If they'd combined both scenes at that location into one - had Killmonger appear there unannounced and amush T'Challa, then I think it would have worked better - Killmonger becomes ruler because he's descended from the royal family and because he's kicked the only other candidate off a cliff, rather than having T'Challa agree to get kicked off the cliff.

Although it's basically a symptom of the "default authoritarian" thing that a lot of films go in for; Someone is "destined" to lead by virtue of heredity. Star Wars does it, Lord of the Rings does it (although it was at least written when that wasn't such a discredited idea), and even other Marvel films do it (the Thor films and Iron Man, for example).

I did certainly watch the spear fight wondering why it hadn't resulted in tyranny far earlier. The mountain people challenge was definitely for real; otherwise he wouldn't have saved T'Challa for sparing him.

I suppose that since it is an isolated society, there's not really the social support to issue a challenge. It's highly unlikely that any of the 4 main tribes would issue a challenge, and the mountain tribe seems pretty happy in isolation and primarily act because T'Chanka sought to break that isolation and got killed in the process. They've probably not had the opportunity before.

Erik being both an outsider with any ties to the people and customs that also is of royal decent and can legally make a challenge is certainly why the system fails when it does. It's certainly a flawed system of determining leadership, but I can understand it being allowed to exist on purely symbolic terms without issue in an isolated society.

 LunarSol wrote:

Erik being both an outsider with any ties to the people and customs that also is of royal decent and can legally make a challenge is certainly why the system fails when it does. It's certainly a flawed system of determining leadership, but I can understand it being allowed to exist on purely symbolic terms without issue in an isolated society.

Maybe the challenge was legal, maybe not. However, he challenged with the backing of one of the Houses and T'Challa accepted, thereby making it "legal" or at least accepted.

had T'Challa not accepted, what then?

 kronk wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Erik being both an outsider with any ties to the people and customs that also is of royal decent and can legally make a challenge is certainly why the system fails when it does. It's certainly a flawed system of determining leadership, but I can understand it being allowed to exist on purely symbolic terms without issue in an isolated society.

Maybe the challenge was legal, maybe not. However, he challenged with the backing of one of the Houses and T'Challa accepted, thereby making it "legal" or at least accepted.

had T'Challa not accepted, what then?

IN a proper banana republic (or Great Britain before Cromwell) they would have just disappeared Killmonger into a prison Richard II style and then progromed whatever clan that was.

Thats why I like this one better as a Shakespeare Conscience of the King type play, and when it goes comic book I'm meh.

Yeah, I think the idea is, that it was complete BS for Killmonger to do that.... Up until T'Challa accepted the challenge. He essentially had no legal backing and, if he did, he was a week or two late.

But, there was enough wibbliness to cast doubt. That plus what is essentially T'Challa's arrogance (or is it hubris? I don't really know the difference between the two myself), in accepting the challenge that paved the way.

As for M'Baku, different situation I think.

Broadly speaking, the council had chosen T'Challa already, everything else was essentially a formality and tradition. - Like the equivalent of the "if anyone has any lawful reason...." during a wedding.


Nobody expects your estranged childhood ex-lover quoting some obscure medieval era bylaw that still has legal precedence to rock up and wreck the wedding.

I dont see it as hubris or arrogance. Tchalla knew who he was. He knew he had a claim. He wouldnt deny him his right.

My reading of it was that T'Challa felt bad about how Erik's situation had worked out, so he accepted the challenge out of a sense of responsibility/honor.

Alternately, he picked up the idiot ball because the plot needed to move forward so there could be an epic fight finale.

I can get behind both of ya’lls reasoning

 kronk wrote:
had T'Challa not accepted, what then?

Aside from the three women closest to him, everybody else seemed quite happy to go along with traditional protocol after the challenge, even going so far as to torch their magic purple plants whilst throwing around heavy weapons to anyone that fancied one.

Since, up until he accepted, it wasn't a legal challenge then presumably everyone would have also been cool that traditional protocol meant he wouldn't have to accept the challenge.

But in the end, the moral is still the same. We shouldn't look to our heroes for wisdom, guidance, patience and humanity. Our heroes should be the guy who can hit the other guy harder with a big stick.

 Lance845 wrote:
I dont see it as hubris or arrogance. Tchalla knew who he was. He knew he had a claim. He wouldnt deny him his right.

Sure, there's a bit of that I think. But the reading I got was. "I can take him and we can solve this whole mess easily."

 Compel wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
I dont see it as hubris or arrogance. Tchalla knew who he was. He knew he had a claim. He wouldnt deny him his right.

Sure, there's a bit of that I think. But the reading I got was. "I can take him and we can solve this whole mess easily."

Well even durring the fight he was all "just end this. We can fix this another way." He didnt WANT to fight him. It wasnt his goal to beat him down or humiliate him. But he also wouldnt back down from his responsibility to accept a challenge from someone who had claim. Tchalla pulled a ned stark. He followed his duty to his detriment.

might be of interest :

http://disinfo.com/2018/03/the-2010-black-panther-tv-show-you-probably-didnt-know-existed/

Just saw it so I can finally jump in here.

First, I enjoyed the movie a lot. Part of the reason was that is was very different from other settings we have seen before. Another reason, is because the movie had a lot of subtext to it, and I love that in a film. There were elements of the 'Sins of the Father", a "History of Violence", the "Cost of Appeasement", "Isolationism has Costs", and that is even beyond the obvious Black Power and Girl Power themes.

All that being said, most of these themes or ideas were only breifly touched on and nodded to as the film roared by it. It was up to the audience to put it together as much or as little as they wanted.

However, most of that subtlety was blown in the first post-credit sequence when T'challa speaks at the U.N. and put the themes of the movie front and center. So much for "subtext", now it is actual dialogue!

Like The Last Jedi this is a very 20(late Teens) film. It actually makes me want to go back and re-watch Wonder Woman and compare them a bit closer as they have some similar ideas in them beyond just the "Super Heroics" part.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:
might be of interest :

http://disinfo.com/2018/03/the-2010-black-panther-tv-show-you-probably-didnt-know-existed/

It was also on Netflix for a bit and I think was made by MTV (if it is the one I am thinking about). I really enjoyed it.

IIRC the episodes were like 10-20 minutes long and the animation style was very wierd.

EDIt: It was actually BET. I caught it on Netflix and you can find bits on Youtube. He was also good in Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes

BET- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0JnRjin-GA
A:EMH- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSl71d5iAZ8

 AduroT wrote:
My biggest complaint really is they Wouldn’t Leave Their Dang Masks On! They just flicked those suckers off and on every other shot.

This isn't something I noticed, but now I think I might have trouble not seeing that

Was the heart shaped herb in the comics purple? Someone in our theater yelled out "Purple Drank" which got a mix of laughs and groans.

Finally got around to seeing it, and after the varying disappointments I had with Homecoming, Ragnarok and Justice League, this is just what I needed. Quality and unique aesthetic and visuals, a very strong lead and equally excellent supporting cast, one of the better Marvel villains (actually, with Ego, Vulture, Hela and now Kilmonger, they've really been on a roll there recently) and a script that certainly has something to say... easily the best comic book movie since Wonder Woman.

My only slight issues (that will probably go away with a rewatch) are the somewhat slow opening, and the fact that T'Challa himself was in the background rather than front and centre for significant periods of time. That said, the cast as a whole go a long way to making both those issues very bearable, Shuri, Klaue and Kilmonger especially.

Top notch stuff, and a very promising lead-in to Infinity War, where I'm very glad Wakanda seems to be playing a major part in.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2018/03/13/its-everything-black-athletes-are-celebrating-with-wakanda-forever-salutes-from-black-panther/?utm_term=.b5909b2d857a

The tennis star raved about the arrival of “Black Panther, and now other black athletes across the sports landscape have taken the film to heart by adopting the characters’ “Wakanda Forever” gesture, usually after a victory.

Yeah, it is a pretty cool salute. I want to do it, and I am white and nerdy!

Finally saw this yesterday.

It’s a pretty damned good film in my book.

Favourite character is Shuri. She’s just a laugh, and you can tell the actress is having a great time in the role.

Only real criticism was the big fight at the end. Whilst the focus pieces work nicely, I didn’t get an ‘oomph’ from the background scraps. Pretty minor complaint though.

 LunarSol wrote:

Erik being both an outsider with any ties to the people and customs that also is of royal decent and can legally make a challenge is certainly why the system fails when it does. It's certainly a flawed system of determining leadership, but I can understand it being allowed to exist on purely symbolic terms without issue in an isolated society.

As I understood it, from the coronation ceremony "Are there members of royal blood who want to challenge...", in coronation ceremony, tribes can challenge. Those of royal blood can always challenge.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:

However, most of that subtlety was blown in the first post-credit sequence when T'challa speaks at the U.N. and put the themes of the movie front and center. So much for "subtext", now it is actual dialogue!

Wakanda, heavily autocrat state with hereditary monarchy and apparently very little democracy...not really a dream partner for UN...

Just finally saw it with the wife, and we both loved it. Man, it had some beautiful women in it, too. Ever since Alien/Aliens, I've had a special place in my heart for the tough ladies, lol.

Although I felt really dumb that I didn't recognize the actress that plays Michonne.

Wakanda is a great angle, in that they are practically Asguardians in their tech, although a horribly adult part of me wondered how the heck all that tech got manufactured without exposing their secret. It's not like they do it all in-country.

I would love to have a scene in Infinity War where Tony just stares in stunned silence upon seeing Wakanda for the first time, and just kinda goes "Well....damn."

Black panther featured in avengers infinity war seems gimmicky. Its so new to mcu characters. No wonder its act on Thanos War was minimal.

Well, I gotta say...that was disappointing. My brother rented the film the other day and handed it off to me. I'd heard almost nothing but good about it.

That was a supremely mediocre film. Andy Serkis' character was the only memorable one for me in the whole film (and way more entertaining than his debut in, what, one of the Avengers films?). The constant boo-hoo political messages ruined what could have been a decent story. Overall, I'm not seeing the "great" people are espousing about this film. (full disclosure: I find most of the MCU films rather milque-toast, my favourite being perhaps Ant Man).

I finally watched it. Killing Serkis' and Jordan's characters was a mistake.

The fixation on African-American struggles instead of African problems was a bit hokey. America is not the center of the world nor African struggles.

Aside from that, I like that Black Panther isn't a sarcastic smart mouth like nearly every other MCU hero, the set design was good, the action was fine, the costumes were stunning, and overall it was a solid solo debut for BP.

I agree, they should not have killed Klau. They needed him to become so much more later on!

Eh, I found him rather annoying in this one myself.

 trexmeyer wrote:
America is not the center of the world nor African struggles.

I mean, that kinda seemed to be one of the main points that the film was making, along with the more general "you win by being better than those who would abuse you, but don't take any gak"/"actual-MLK(as opposed to the sanitised version used to browbeat black people who engage in direct action) had the right idea" sentiment.

I think the film is at its strongest when it's being an incredible afro-futurist sci-fi movie and the political aspects remain subtext, but given how the film is a "cultural moment" affair I can see why the filmmakers would want it to be explicit text every so often and I don't think it detracts from the film.

I do wish they hadn't snuffed Klau though, even if he did have to be moved out of the way for the film's actual and more nuanced adversary to take centre stage.

 Easy E wrote:
I agree, they should not have killed Klau. They needed him to become so much more later on!

Killing Klau allows him to come back in his energy/vibranium/sound form from a strange reaction caused by a toxic strain of vibranium he wasn’t aware he had. Easy to bring him around again.