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 don't know if it was game changingly awesome, but it was certainly a well consrructed Marvel film that managed to touch on much bigger and broader themes. It was a good origin movie with an interesting moral premise. I would have liked some more character development for some characters and the big clash at the end just wasn't keeping me as entertained (whether that's superhero fatigue setting in or a change in my taste for visually choreography I'm unsure) but it was still an enjoyable ride and up there with some of my favourite origin movies such as Thor 1 and Spider-Man: Homecoming.
I'll be interested to see where they take the character post Infinity War.
Well, if the rest of the film is on par with Spider-Man Homecoming or Wonder Woman, bad CGI is forgivable. I really hope BP lives up to the hype.
I also find that it depends what they do with the bad cgi. Babylon 5 and The Last Starfighter had the most dated CGI around, but the space battles were usually well-paced and dramatic. Even stop motion is fun to watch when it is well used.
From what I hear this is a good movie precisely because they allowed themselves to indulge in grand narrative and mythology instead of being unnecessarily "post" these things. Considering that those are big reasons people like superheroes that seems like a smart decision.
Why do things need to be game changing etc - especially when the really popular compuer games are all the same be they FPS, football or racing games - graphics really the only thing thats changed in decades.
Trailer looks good and looking forward to seeing it next week.
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Mr Morden wrote: Why do things need to be game changing etc - especially when the really popular compuer games are all the same be they FPS, football or racing games - graphics really the only thing thats changed in decades.
Trailer looks good and looking forward to seeing it next week.
They don't. The Ancient Greeks had all the major plot conflicts figured out 2.5K+ years ago, and we still use them all today. If this does indulge in "myth" then the basics are even older. It is how you do it that matters.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
2018/02/14 23:22:41
Subject: Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers soon...?)
"Game changing" in the context of being a blockbuster from a major studio with an almost-all black cast, set in Africa and with nearly all the characters being African.
The last two films that spring to mind are The Lion King (African characters and setting, mostly-white cast) and District 9 and Chappie (D9, IIRC, managed an all-African cast, but a significant proportion were white South Africans))
2018/02/15 23:02:02
Subject: Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers soon...?)
AndrewGPaul wrote: "Game changing" in the context of being a blockbuster from a major studio with an almost-all black cast, set in Africa and with nearly all the characters being African.
The last two films that spring to mind are The Lion King (African characters and setting, mostly-white cast) and District 9 and Chappie (D9, IIRC, managed an all-African cast, but a significant proportion were white South Africans))
And more importantly, showing that all black cast as Africans of a prosperous nation rather than a third world, war torn back-water hole in the ground.
To make it simple, I'll put everything in spoilers as it's easier that way.
Spoiler:
Ok, so, saw it. I'll try to avoid dipping too far into spoilers but suffice to say I quite enjoyed this film. Certainly worth the wait.
I was afraid this movie would be accused of what one of my fav MCU films, Iron Man 2, is always accused of - just a stepping stone to the Avengers with too much time setting up other characters/stories/movies without leaving time to deal with its own. Of course I knew such thinking was foolish - no way the critics of the Western world were ever going to genuinely criticise this film lest they be labelled white supremacist Alt-Right Trumppers, but they didn't go the "It's Wakanda, here's a few people from the comics and they have some lines, but we're setting up the Soul Stone instead!" route, so that's good.
One thing this movie is not is the second coming of Black Jesus. This isn't the greatest Marvel movie since Avengers/Winter Soldier. It is competent, slickly made, well directed (with a few exceptions), gorgeous to look at, filled with fantastic performances (Shuri and M'Baku are standouts). It is not some iconic cultural touchstone which will bring new meaning to the lives of black people everywhere.
Boseman follows up on his excellent debut in Civil War with an understated performance that sells the conflict of being a king, but lost without his father. I don't quite buy the "You killed our uncle... my whole world is crumbling!" thing as that didn't ring true, but the rest of it did. He was perhaps too understated at points. I'm not expecting Stark levels of swagger, nor Rogers level of rigid-jaw speechifying, but there were times where it felt like he let the world around him move too passively, and often without saying anything.
Shrui was awesome. More of her, as soon as possible please.
M'Baku. Talk about a scenestealer! Good ol' Dominic from Person of Interest came across as an incredibly intimidating fighter, a true leader with real issues with how his nation is run, and most of all an honourable leader. He hates the Panther tribe, wants nothing to do with the more advanced tribes of Wakanda, isn't involved in the collaborative running of Wakanda, and probably hates T'Challa personally... but he knows when it's time to do the right thing. Hope he gets to do some cool gak in Infinity War.
The two main girls, Lupita's character and whatsherface from TWD. They were very good. The love story was, much like a lot of this film, understated and brewed quietly underneath. It was more subtext in a lot of ways, which made its resolution (of sorts) more natural. Makes Natalie Portman look like an amateur obviously reading cue-cards from just off-camera. The Dora Milaje themselves were great, and seeing them kick ass was so cool.
Speaking of the fight scenes, they were a mixed bag. The first one in the jungle was incomprehensible. Nearly pitch black, with the main character wearing full black, fighting a bunch of darkly dressed black guys. You couldn't follow a fething thing. I feel sorry for the poor saps who saw this movie in 3D where that scene would'a been even darker. The final fight between Panther and Killmonger suffered in a similar fashion, heightened ever so much by obvious CGI. I always wanted to go back to Ross or the big fight between the armies...
... hmm... two people square off, whilst another flies a ship to stop something, whilst another group fight on land. This movie had a Star Wars ending. This was Return of the Jedi/Phantom Menace (minus Amidala's palace assault). Weird.
Car chase, the stuff in the underground casino, all the outdoors fight stuff, Ross in the ship - all excellent.
As far as movie comparisons, yeah, I was going to say Hamlet, but Lion King fits just as well as they're the same (in a manner of speaking). That's a good comparison to make. The Lion King comparison also fits with the music as well, which was richly different and had some great drum lines. The "It's black people, therefore hip-hop!" from the trailer is noticeably absent in the film. If it had broken into this during a fight it would have ripped you right out of the film.
So what about the villains, well here we have to enter into real spoiler territory.
Feth me! They killed Klaue! Such a waste of a character and an even more criminal waste of a terrific actor. He was having a blast in this, and was such a stylish villain. Very different to other MCU villains, and most of all clever! But no, killed in service to the MCU Human Torch Rehabilitation Program.
And Killmonger... well... greatest villain since Loki? I think not. I get what he's doing (but his whole POV has a serious problem which I'll get to in a second), and his not ideological motivations make sense, but that's about it. Better than Malekith, perhaps better than Ronan (only because they messed up Ronan IMO), but certainly no where near Loki or Vulture levels.
T'Challa's best friend was an interesting villain. I thought he'd remain loyal throughout and the final battle would be T'Challa v Killmonger with Friend v Klaue as a second fight. Nope. He did get to ride Rhino cavalry, so there's that.
So I mentioned in the spoiler bit that Killmonger's POV has a serious problem because it's a serious problem with the message this movie attempts to sell. It's not a message movie and it's certainly not a "White people = pure evil/Black people = paragons of endless unlimited virtue" film either. But this film lacks any form of introspection. There are 2 billion of my "brothers" out there, and all of them are struggling. So let's arm them with high tech weapons and take over the world. Everything that is wrong with Killmonger's "brothers" is the fault of the other. Nothing they have done is their own fault, everything that has ever happened to them is always the fault of the "colonisers". There isn't a moment where this film allows itself to even contemplate "Y'know, maybe we do a lot of this gak to ourselves!" or even "Yeah, but there's probably more dirt poor Asians out there than us blackfellas". Killmonger's view is "Black people = victims" and "All non-black people = oppressors that must be forcibly killed/enslaved". And that's dumb!
Still, good flick.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/16 12:43:24
Enjoyed it. Very pretty and loved all the characters and Michael B. Jordan was excellent. I thought it was easy to be sympathetic to the villain's outlook. I think an interesting comparison could be made to Thor Ragnarok on some overlying themes (Royalty, responsibility to your people, and the sins of the past).
I saw it a little bit ago. Still mulling it over for final thoughts.
Initially, really good. They managed to stay true to the characters/comics traditional themes.
This actually made me kind of excited for a marvel x men movie. What if marvel manages to produce an x men movie that isnt about blue lights in the sky or whirling metal but instead carries over the traditional themes of the segregated and oppressed? All the best xmen stories carry those themes and the xman movies so far fail to pay more than lip service to it.
This didnt feel like a phase one marvel movie and im excited to see captain marvel and phase 4 and where marvel decides to go next.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/16 22:34:26
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
2018/02/17 01:56:10
Subject: Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers!)
Hadn't thought of that actually. Ant-Man, as good as it was, felt like a Phase 1 film. You can make comparisons between it and Iron Man all you like, but putting those aside it still felt like a film that was only just within a developed cinematic world.
BP felt like it was part of something bigger from the word go.
Black Panther offers no mystical alternative to racism’s threat, or the helplessness engendered by the tragedy of slavery (the original sin of removing Africans from their real and imagined roots). Instead, the movie offers a panacea, a comic-book fantasy of black empowerment that exchanges the actual history of the ’60s Black Panthers for a superficial commercial remedy. Rather than any account of that hopeful, aggrieved, inspiring, yet violent and always controversial social-activist group, we get the story of a monarchy.
I know Armond White is considered a terrible reviewer, but that bit I quoted is on point.
I'm going to spoil some of my issues.
Spoiler:
1. The mass media celebration of Black Panther. He's literally a blaxpoitation character created during the 60's...there were several exploitative characters created at the time to draw in minority audiences. They were mostly stereotypes. Bad stereotypes. He's far from the worst of them, but it seems an odd thing to celebrate. Especially the whole "it's so important to have a black superhero film." Why? Superhero films are disposable popcorn flicks IMO. It seems disingenuous to celebrate both Wonder Woman and Black Panther as somehow being significant firsts. Seriously, black men have been leads of very successful films for decades now and there have been many "strong" women in films as well...even as the primary draw. It's getting praised as stunning and brave and I don't see it. I can see it for Moonlight, but not Black Panther.
2. The constant reduction of African culture to a single, generic entity. Africa is a vast continent with many different cultures, but I swear every time it is portrayed in a film it's treated as if sub Saharan Africa is some monolithic culture. Also, why is it that Wakandans are portrayed as still wearing traditional clothing at all times? Not so much a complaint as it's just strange to me that literally not a single nation I know of still wears traditional clothing except for ceremonial purposes.
3. The kill/subjugate all non blacks (mainly whites) goals of Killmonger are a bit sick. I know he's the "villain" but this is an uncomfortable reoccurring theme and for many, an actual fantasy. Especially if it's not treated in an entirely negative light.
4. Wakandans just chilling while not helping their neighbors. Well, not giving them a lot of help. Oh, and then there is the monarchy bit. Star Wars is routinely blasted for being elitist and focused on bloodlines of "nobility" and power. So is Game of Thrones. Again seems like an odd thing to celebrate.
5. IMO, Star Trek did more for black role models in Hollywood than the MCU and did it years ago. Geordi La Forge was the first black man depicted as a technical expert ASFAIK. Guinan wasn't showed frequently, but she was always wise to the point that Picard looked to her for advice. Worf, while a Klingon, was played by the wonderful Michael Dorn and was somehow able to have relationships on the show over and over with white women and ASFAIK no one complained or even noticed. It was okay to do so. Sisko was by the best character on any Star Trek, if only because he was the most fully realized as an actual human being. He was also unquestionably, the hero and the lead of a successful show that ran for seven seasons and is heralded by many as the best character on ST to this day. Let's not forget DS9 tackled racial issues as well with several episodes and did a great job with it. Jake Sisko didn't always receive the best character development, but ASFAIK he was one of the first black males depicted on TV as an artist (specifically a writer) and a talented one at that. The father-son dynamic was a key element in the show. Cassidy (Sisko's love interest) provided a good female civilian aspect to the show that had been rarely seen and their relationship was well written. I didn't care for Benjamin Sisko's dad (he was a bit xenophobic and emotional), but he always supported his son as Benjamin did Jake. And all of these characters somehow fit organically into the world setting.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
2018/02/17 21:59:19
Subject: Re:Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers!)
Black Panther offers no mystical alternative to racism’s threat, or the helplessness engendered by the tragedy of slavery (the original sin of removing Africans from their real and imagined roots). Instead, the movie offers a panacea, a comic-book fantasy of black empowerment that exchanges the actual history of the ’60s Black Panthers for a superficial commercial remedy. Rather than any account of that hopeful, aggrieved, inspiring, yet violent and always controversial social-activist group, we get the story of a monarchy.
I know Armond White is considered a terrible reviewer, but that bit I quoted is on point.
No, its not. Given that he was somehow expecting the film to be about the political group that formed after and independently of the comic, he's entirely off point. It's exactly like expecting a Spider man movie to actually be about that French guy that climbs buildings, rather than the super hero.
There are no exchanges taking place, and not offering some 'mystic alternative' to racism is a good thing- there isn't any way to do that which isn't patronizing and trivializing to actual problems.
As for your own issues, there's more to representation than just Star Trek, and having a literal handful doesn't mean 'stop.' It's also been a generation since DS9 was on the air (a generation when the usual role was still 'criminal' or 'first to die')- giving kids an opening when someone important is like them is a huge formative moment, 'disposable popcorn' in your view or not.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/18 18:34:12
Efficiency is the highest virtue.
2018/02/17 23:03:47
Subject: Re:Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers!)
It felt like a great film buried in a good enough film. They played it it way too safe. Well, except for in the one area where comic book movies used to play it safe. Anyway, it was a decent Marvel film with some great characters and themes that were underutilized.
Warning: some SPOILERS always trying to ice skate uphill.
...
....
.....
Kill monger was the most interesting and the most important character in the film. Imagine if they had shown him growing up in Oakland intercut with T'Challa growing up in Wakanda. Imagine if they had explored the oppressed escaping by becoming the tool of the colonizer, the oppressor. I wish we could have seen more of T'Challa as king and Killmonger as king. There was so much to mine in his character and his contrast with T'Challa and the film left it all in the ground. All for the sake of some extended go-hum action scenes.
Revenge motivated many of the characters, but somehow kept dancing out of the spotlight. BP and KM are both defined by how they avenge the deaths of their fathers and try to live up to them. However, this contrast does not feature in how the characters face each other--the fight scenes are decided merely by physical prowess rather than by the character of the characters.
The film also established two great villains and then murdered them both. What the hell, Marvel? Don't kill your next Loki and Magneto! What were you thinking? Why didn't you play it safe?
There was no "No Man's Land" in this film to really drive home the feels. The closest we get to that comes from the villain.
Anyway, the characters were interesting, the humor funny, and the story engrossing. It was a good film, but not a great film.
PS: Loved all the white kids in the audience with NWA shirts.
PPS: the after-credits sequence was bloodless and boring.
Black Panther offers no mystical alternative to racism’s threat, or the helplessness engendered by the tragedy of slavery (the original sin of removing Africans from their real and imagined roots). Instead, the movie offers a panacea, a comic-book fantasy of black empowerment that exchanges the actual history of the ’60s Black Panthers for a superficial commercial remedy. Rather than any account of that hopeful, aggrieved, inspiring, yet violent and always controversial social-activist group, we get the story of a monarchy.
I know Armond White is considered a terrible reviewer, but that bit I quoted is on point.
No, its not. Given that he was somehow expecting the film to be about the political group that formed after and independently of the comic, he's entirely off point. It's exactly like expecting a Spider man movie to actually be about that French guy that climbs buildings, rather than the super hero.
Calling it entirely off point seems a bit forgiving to me. Someone is borderline idiotic if they walked into the theater expecting something related to the BPP. The Trailers alone, not to mention the last movie the character was in, should be a pretty clear indication these things are not related.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/02/17 23:35:48
Armond White is the patron saint of 4chan movie reviewers. That should tell you all you really need to know about how far up his own ass he is when it comes to his film reviews.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2018/02/18 19:07:20
Subject: Black Panther - Movie Discussion (Warning! Spoilers!)
I always wonder what Armond White is thinking when he reviews movies. He constantly seems disappointed that the movies were not telling the story he thought they should tell.
Well, it looks like there is a good chance that Black Panther will break a few records. I wonder if it will be able to sustain that momentum.
I am looking forward to to seeing it again on IMAX.
