The death of killmonger was a bad move.
Cause I want to see more michael b jordan.
Cause it would be great to keep him around like a Loki for t’challa to bounce off.
Cause cousins should be good to one another : (
Cause I want to see 2 black panthers fighting together.
Cause I’m feeling it.
10 Likes
Cause his Black Panther outfit was better than T’Challa’s.
It even had spots damnit!
2 Likes
I think we might be able to make a distinction to help break down the idea. They are not acolonial in that they do have a concept of colonialism. They’ve presumable had spies in the world for generations. I think we could make the case that they are non-colonial in that they know of it, have culturally reacted to it but have not been directly affected by it. They are aware of what makes Wakanda different and though they have not been affected by it maintain a resentment against it. That resentment is actually part of Killmonger’s jam about them knowing messed up stuff is going on but have failed to act on it. Taking a “as long as it isn’t happening to us” approach. Killmonger was just like y’all really need to expand your idea of “us”.
1 Like
Turns out the part where M’Baku mentions Hanuman has been bleeped out in the Indian version of the movie.
3 Likes
Having this conversation on another group brought up an interesting point that I hadn’t considered due to some time. Winter Solider’s point was more than just “whelp, they’re Nazis.” It was at least trying to communicate that fascist ideas can be dressed up to wide public acceptance without much effort. All it takes is a label change.
Basically, America is a lot more fascist-leaning than any of us want to admit.
It seems to mirror the Illuminati scene from the comics referenced in the show.
Anyway, I really enjoyed the conversations and I look forward to more as we read and discuss!
1 Like
This reading isn’t exactly without it’s problems either. Just really basically (in a movie that directly addresses colonialism) you have the leader of a wealthy, technologically advanced nation establishing a kind of unofficial embassy on already occupied territory through land development. Which is to say nothing of how urban development directly impacts the surrounding area’s value, etc. At best the politics of the ending are complicated.
7 Likes
As someone who was raised Hindu, the Hanuman name drop did feel a little inappropriate to me. It’s something I find common in a lot of media, like Final Fantasy’s Shiva or basically all of Temple of Doom, where non-Hindus don’t seem to realize that the Hindu pantheon is actively worshipped by almost a billion people. This isn’t something like Thor or Zeus where the religion is effectively dead and mythologized, but is actually a belief system taken seriously by a whole lot of people. It’s especially a shame that for a movie that implicitly bills itself as “woke” would not consider how this would play, but I suppose we all have our blind spots.
EDIT: There’s a great thread on Twitter that explains how a Hindu god could plausibly be part of Jabari culture. Perhaps I spoke a bit out of ignorance here.
10 Likes
Killmonger’s problem, and one of the reasons he’s such a compelling antagonist, is that while he identified the problems of modern and historic oppression with a depth and specificity far beyond what T’Challa has considered (at least at the beginning of the film), his solution is also bad. Someone in the other thread linked to this Adam Serwer piece, and it speaks to precisely that issue.
Killmonger’s answer to the deep seeded damage done by colonialism and imperialism is more imperialism, only this time pointing in another direction (as Serwer notes, Killmonger literally says “the sun will never set on the Wakandan empire”). His is also a solution that works by adopting the language of the existing power system, except he’s using the active language of oppression rather the passive language of promised assimilation.
I think this is why the ending is a little messy. Because once it rejects the Killmonger approach, the film doesn’t have a definitive answer for the question it ends up asking: What does “good” intervention on this sort of large international scale even look like? That’s, at least in part, because there is no good tidy answer to that. “Learn STEM” is a weak solution, but “learn STEM, except with vibranium” is Wakanda’s primary advantage over other nations within the text of the film.
1 Like
Walker’s points about the limitations of the text are changing a lot of my thoughts on the film. I left the film eager for my thoughts to be pushed in new directions, and this was great in doing that. The below post is largely a relic of my initial opinion, so I’m keen to hear pushback if folks have it.
This is mostly in response to something Klepek mentioned twice regarding the CIA. I’d say that while the film doesn’t make a big point about it, I do think Black Panther does at least comment on the CIA and the United States’ complicity in colonial relationships. Everett Ross, CIA agent, being called a ‘coloniser’ isn’t just speaking to his whiteness, it is speaking to his job. Zacny did push back and mentioned Ross’ comments (about ‘the playbook for destabilisation’) towards the end, but there’s a few moments where Ross emphasises Killmonger as a product of the United States and its military complex.
There is an almost dialectical implication to the evolution of ideas between N’Jobu (Killmonger’s father) and his son. N’Jobu sees oppression in the world and feels Wakanda could be an ally to the oppressed through vibranium weapons. Killmonger is ‘radicalised’ (a very politically loaded term – I’m not sure how I feel about the film’s usage) and pursues this too, but his end-game is not just liberation, it is also imperial (@Fanshawe’s link is a great call for an analysis that leans into this).
Killmonger brings to mind Vladislav Zubok’s use of ‘revolutionary-imperial paradigm’, a combination of pragmatic imperialism and messianic revolutionary beliefs, to describe the foreign policy of the Soviet Union after 1945. In his opening address to his council, Killmonger explicitly positions himself in this context, speaking of liberation for the oppressed under Wakandan rule.
When we compare N’Jobu and his son, it is hard to overlook Ross and Killmonger both emphasising Killmonger’s origins as being in the U.S. military. Killmonger has the wide-eyed idealism of a utopian and the crushing fist of a JSOC commando. While the film does not say much about America’s foreign policy in the twenty-first century, the film’s villain being a member of its extended special forces family does feel like a subtextual statement in addition to the film’s explicit recognition of the CIA being a colonialist and destabilising force in Africa.
I’m not sure if Killmonger’s villainy is supposed to be the film’s easy ‘out’ of engaging with his ideas. There is evidently some textual engagement, as the film explores a dialectic of policy between T’Challa and Killmonger, but I, like others in the thread, want to see what comes next. Is it enough for the radical’s victory to be a moderately better policy? What would a revolutionary (but not imperial) change look like? Would Marvel ever let that happen on the big screen?
11 Likes
I’ve had a couple more days to marinate on the movie, the response to this movie reminds me of the response to Man of Steel in a couple ways. I think both movies are very much about the process of becoming heroes, which necessarily involves mis-steps and blunders that demonstrate the mis-use of power that has been granted to them. Both movies also involve conflict with long-lost compatriots who have been radicalized by what they consider a decadent culture that has lost its way, and both heroes find themselves forced into decisions that will come to define their ethics from that point forward.
It has been said by the principals involved in the film, but at the onset, T’Challa is a sort of villain in his own right: inheriting the mantle of Black Panther through heredity, and enjoying considerable advantages over almost anyone who dared invoke the ritual combat that would end his family’s reign. Wakanda itself is similarly compromised; it is a nation that enjoys wealth and stability, not because of any ideological or ethical superiority, but because it has cornered the market on a very rare and valuable metal. It is only by rejecting the isolationist and mercantile instincts of his forebearers, telling them “You were wrong”, that he transcends the title of Black Panther and actually becomes the hero.
Like Man of Steel, Black Panther ends leaving you wanting; the titular hero has hit their ethical bottom, absorbed the necessary lessons and bounced back, but the question of whether the hero has genuinely absorbed those lessons or not is left tantalizingly open. Part of the reason for that is mechanical; 2 hour run-times and the inevitability of sequels mean that you can’t put everything into one film. But there’s another part of the superhero power fantasy that has been problematic for a while–the story generally needs to return to the current status quo in order for the power aspect to have any relevance to readers. This is what drove Alan Moore off superhero books, the inability to transcend the status quo and describe revolutionary possibilities. Personally, I think that takes super heros a bit too seriously, but that could also be because I’m a decadent asshole. At any rate, if and when they make a sequel, I hope they start picking at the idea of a hereditary monarchy like TNC has been doing on his run on the book.
2 Likes
Well that’s fair then lol
I was initially frustrated by the crew’s criticisms of the film’s ending, because after seeing it twice I felt something I’ve never really felt about a Marvel movie: I was optimistic. Not about the MCU but just in general. I felt good, I felt hopeful.
I think this is because, unlike the other Marvel movies, the conflict in Black Panther is something real. No aliens, no gods, no magic. Just our awful history we’re still trying to come to terms with. Heck even the Captain America films don’t deal with Nazis directly, it’s all Hydra, who are basically magic super Nazis.
I felt similar to the way I felt after seeing Fury Road, a realization that ‘oh, THIS is what action movies can be. They don’t have to be campy, they can have craft and weight to them.’ It’s weird that I’ve watched all these films about heroes but never once thought the world would feel like a better place with them in it. All these imagined villains who, at best are placeholders for much more complex issues, but are typically foils for the hero’s own self interest. Black Panther feels like the first movie that takes place in the same world we live in, acknowledging all of it and then saying, “now, what if?”
But seeing the points spelled out here I agree, it is half-assed and typical in a way that gives the story some closure but doesn’t really address the problem. I’m curious what a better ending would look like on film.
4 Likes
I adored the majority of black panther, it was the most exciting and rejuvenated marvel film in years. However one facet of the films zietgeist has taken me aback; Micheal B Jordan’s performance was terrible! His delivery was incredibly flat and his performance all over the place, emphasised by the fact every other performance was so consistent and strong. Did anyone else think this? I remember feeling the same for his performance in Creed which was at times hilariously bad - which is pretty hard to pull off alongside Stalone. In particular I thought his dying line in Black Panther was so thought provoking and an surprising conclusion for a Marvel character , which often are so carefully white and inoffensive, but the delivery killed it dead. What did others think of his Killmonger? (I’ve never read the comics).
I saw Black Panther during the weekend of release and I’ve kept up to date. I was buoyed on by all the good reviews, granted we do live in hyperbolic times when things are either amazing or the worst thing ever, with little room to talk about the middle ground or any problematic nuance at it’s core. There was also a ground swell in which the larger converation seemed to be - you need to go into the cinema and support this - which I get, hey here’s a big blockbuster set in Africa with a largely black cast. That’s a cool thing. As somebody who still loves going to the cinema and appreciates the big screen this is a great thing, I don’t think there’s been such a drive to actually go to cinemas since Get Out came out, literally a year ago. At the same time, this is a movie made by a huge conglomerate that is steadily eating up the entire entertainment industry. It’s great that Star Wars and the Marvel movies are more progressive in outlook, more representative of the world in general but it’s still a big event designed to make money. And it’s that I’m always careful about addressing, as somebody who generally did love The Last Jedi.
I enjoyed Black Panther mostly as I have with most of the Marvel movies. I keep thinking that eventually these films will go downhill, but since Civil War every movie has mostly been solid. However, it doesn’t stop me feeling a little bit hollow about every release in general. I’d say Black Panther was on a similar level to Guardians 2 and Thor Ragnorak. It’s the same formula but the sum of it’s parts, it’s setting, it’s characters and conflict is quite a bit stronger than other movies of it’s ilk. I don’t think it’s a masterpiece in the way The Dark Knight is, I don’t think any of the Marvel movies are, I think some of the action scenes feel real hollow despite the initial conflict being so interesting. It’s like with Guardians 2, when the big end battle kind of dazzles you, like Peter Quill turns into Pacman to fight his father, as the gold people fly their space ships and everybody is flying around pew pewing each other. There’s a lot happening and it’s hard to follow or understand what is happening. Luckily Guardians stuck it’s landing and really landed on a suprisingly emotional downbeat ending. Black Panther has a fairly lacklustre action scene at the end but sticks the landing, with Killmonger’s final words. That shot looking up at the basketball hoop, looking up at the highrise into the sky where a Wakandan flying saucer might appear to give those kids below have their binary sunset moment.
These movies usually play out in a similar way, from Iron Man, Doctor Strange to Spiderman, the white male hero (usually with a big ego, but sometimes just a kid, or somebody with a respect to duty) uncovers a conspiracy, nobody believes him, the wider establishment beings to reject him just before he blows up the big conspiracy and gains validation that he was right all along ending in some big sky battle where things blow up. Despite T’Challa literally inheriting the power and mantle of Black Panther because of birthright, (which is kinda fucked, but hey I loved the Lion King too) I do think it was refreshing still to see a hero that has a lot of doubt over how he should lead, who wants to maintain the status quo because he doesn’t yet have the belief in himself that he is capable of introducing such a huge change - to take the risk to lead his people to step out into the world.
Then you have Killmonger, a really interesting villain (for once in these movies). I wish there was a bit more of him, but for what it’s worth the scene in which he, the boy and the man, speak to the father during the flower infusion dream was incredible - the cut from boy Killmonger talking to his father to a weepy adult listening was just… ah right in the gut. His final lines once the kind of lacklustre fight between Black Panthers plays it’s course, was also really strong. I see a lot of people saying that they would ally with Killmonger and believe in what he is trying to do, I’m not sure if I would go down that path, since it is prejoritavely spelt out that Killmonger is looking to literally take over the world and create his own imperial state - where one race will lord over another. You can believe in somebody’s starting point but maybe not the entire plan in general. Seems to be a bit of “I would have voted for Obama for a third time, if I could” in the outright devotion to Killmonger. It’s not the way!
At the same time, I think Marvel realised that all they needed to do in making a more valid villain is to give them some time to explain themselves, or to reveal their own perspective. Killmonger’s conflict and resolve comes from a very real place, where there is so much pathos to colour the character. I’m not sure if it’s a combination of Marvel actually putting more thought into this character as a villain for once or just realising screenwriting 101 - sometimes you should let the villain have their say.
This is something that Shakespeare always did in his plays, you’ve got Shylock merciless and imovable in his demand to request a pound of flesh, a straight up monster, but when he’s denied his irrational request, he takes the time to point the finger at all the people around him who see him as a villain simply because of his faith. A little bit of empathy goes a long way. It’s weird because it feels as if Marvel have maybe just realised this… They’ve done great in nailing the actual heroes of their movies, turns out they just needed to do the same thing with their villains. I mean they could make even more movies, if they made the villains into characters the audience at least would love to hate.
Despite the war rhinos, and the two CG spandex characters hitting each other as they fall to the centre of the earth, I do at least think that Black Panther is a Marvel movie that is actually about something. Something important. T’Challa is going to make a new science and learning centre to the impoverished streets of LA, that’s great! But is Disney going to do the same with just a fraction of what Black Panther did in it’s opening weekend. How much can this corporation selling progressive dreams through their fantastical films actually accelerate that in day to day society?
1 Like
Honestly, you might be alone in that. Jordan is getting a ton of rave reviews for his performance.
6 Likes
Besides the cameo in Civil War, this movie was my first real introduction to Wakanda and the world of Black Panther.
Maybe this is an overdose of watching Stellaris streams, but the government style of Wakana seems to be at odds with its technological-utopian ideology. It’s basically a hereditary monarchy, but with a twist of the leader being ultimately decided by ritual combat amoung the ruling class.
At first I thought the combat was just ceremonial, but nope, it’s how they really decide who’s in charge, and it’s a major plot point.
Is there a way for the council to legally depose a King if he’s a really good fighter but totally inept at leadership?
The movie implies the answer is no, besides outright revolt.
3 Likes
I really wanna start off by saying that this is probably the best MCU movie yet? Like I don’t wanna understate how good this is and how much I like it before I make one criticism, because I’ve seen a lot of white people criticising this film on shit they’d never bring up with any of the previous MCU movies that just so happened to be led by white people, what a strange coincidence.
Anyway, kinda sucked how they just killed off Linda with like no real time to consider it at all.
1 Like
I really loved this movie. I came out really high despite the movie not really transcending the genre, which I think is something most of the criticisms on the podcast really boiled down to. At the end of the day, it was a fucking awesome Marvel movie, but it was still a Marvel movie.
Killing Killmonger off was a major disappointment, but it did give him the most powerfully evocative moment in the movie with his ‘bury me in the ocean’ line. It was like they had saved up all the subtext to hit the audience in the face all at once.
I think the more ‘positive’ aspects of Killmonger’s personality have been overstated. He says he wants to help his repressed people, but when he sits on the throne he goes all in on tyranny. He’s a psychopath who gunned down his own girlfriend in a stand-off, who poisoned a museum curator. It’s been said a lot in the past year or so, but I’ll say it here ‘when people show you who they are, believe them’ and Killmonger shows who he is repeatedly.
Ross even explicitly says in his bit about the CIA playbook that Killmonger is trained to sow chaos, he isn’t a leader. He’s an authoritarian with a good line and an awww shucks grin. I think this was highlighted in the stand off between Okoye and W’Kabi. When he realises that she, the woman who adores him and the most honourable person he knows, will kill him for the good of Wakanda he looks around and sees the consequences of Killmonger’s colonial attitudes on his own society and stands down.
This has run really long so I’ll just mention a few highlights besides the really obvious ones:
-
Holy Shit, War Rhinos
-
Killmonger calling Ramonda ‘Auntie’ got a huge laugh from our South African audience. It felt so authentic.
-
I love how in a non-capitalistic system herders are depicted as equally valuable members of society as scientists.
-
Shuri’s lab was super cool.
4 Likes
Yeah, I think (at least I hope) that when people on Twitter say things like “Killmonger was right” it tends to be more of a snappy way of saying “Killmonger brought up some real problems that nobody else in the movie was doing anything meaningful about”.
As a person and as a leader he’s clearly a dictator with no understanding of loyalty who’ll gun down his girlfriend or loyal subordinates without a care, and his idea of helping his people has twisted over time into a revenge fantasy with a bad plan. That’s what makes him a good movie villain. He sees real problems and means well in his own mind, but has the wrong solutions and embodies the bad traits of the people he hates in the first place.
3 Likes
Can we talk about how W’Kabi could probably have been dissuaded from his rebellion with literally one sentence? “That’s the man who took Klaue from our custody.” He was denied a confrontation with the man who killed his parents by Killmonger, but no one talks in movies so it’s whatever.
1 Like
