[LinearPhilosopher]

Saw the movie

Was an enjoyable action romp. Don't care much for the social aspect of the film (a sign of my privilege likely)

[QuickTidal]

This meme owns.

 BP-meme.png (47.9K)
Number of downloads: 2

[LinearPhilosopher]

QuickTidal, on 21 February 2018 - 05:36 PM, said:

This meme owns.

BP-meme.png

Shuri is from Marvel
Shuri is a princess
Marvel is Owned by Disney
Therefore Shuri is a Disney Princess.

The logic checks out

This post has been edited by LinearPhilosopher: 21 February 2018 - 05:51 PM

[Maark Abbott]

I haven't seen this yet, but I am told that if I don't like it for any reason at all, I am therefore a shitlord. Is this correct?

[Morgoth]

Maark Abbott, on 22 February 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

I haven't seen this yet, but I am told that if I don't like it for any reason at all, I am therefore a shitlord. Is this correct?

No, no one thinks that. You need to get out of your blogosphere and interact with actual people now and then.

This post has been edited by Morgoth: 22 February 2018 - 08:51 AM

[Maark Abbott]

Morgoth, on 22 February 2018 - 08:50 AM, said:

Maark Abbott, on 22 February 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

I haven't seen this yet, but I am told that if I don't like it for any reason at all, I am therefore a shitlord. Is this correct?

No, no one thinks that.

Well evidently not anyone here. But members of one of the writing groups I'm in on the 'Book have been decried as racists for saying they didn't enjoy it (the primary reason being that they felt it was just another superhero film).

Kids these days, I can't keep up with them.

[Cause]

Maark Abbott, on 22 February 2018 - 08:52 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 22 February 2018 - 08:50 AM, said:

Maark Abbott, on 22 February 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

I haven't seen this yet, but I am told that if I don't like it for any reason at all, I am therefore a shitlord. Is this correct?

No, no one thinks that.

Well evidently not anyone here. But members of one of the writing groups I'm in on the 'Book have been decried as racists for saying they didn't enjoy it (the primary reason being that they felt it was just another superhero film).

Kids these days, I can't keep up with them.

"Some pollution begs not the cloth, but the knife, this I understand"

It is just another super hero film. I think Stone Monkey hit it on the head for me (Though I must point out I am white). For a movie with an all black cast, telling the story of Africa it actually somehow makes it about the story of Black Americans. Understandable since that is the primary Hollywood audience and the source of the writing and direction etc. It seems odd to me though to have a country that was never colonized should call white people Colonizer. The prince of Wakanda (who admittedly lived his whole life in America) identifies with slaves on ships more than he does with the people of Wakanda or any person who lives in Africa today. They way the history of colonialism effects those living in Africa today is wholly different. Before you try to liberate black people in America and london you might want to liberate black people from Boko Haram (shown in the firt 5 min of the film perhaps), from genocide in the Sudan, from a dictatorship in Eritrea that conscripts people for life or from actual slavery in Linya today.

It reminds me of Bright on Netflix. It tackled an incredibly complex issue very shallowly. Its message about black rights or revolution or pride is drowned out by a Marvel super hero movie. As a marvel super hero movie I give it a thumbs up. As a movie tackling the deep issues I feel it didn't speak much.

That said it seemed to be received extremely positively from the black audience last night. Though funnily enough the one group who I sat next to and who loved it had American accents. People took pictured with the movie poster, people took pictures during the film and people shouted out during import parts. Not something that is usual behavior in movies here. So they seemed satisfied and perhaps that's all that matters. Though I think part of it is marketing hype. 7 years a slave for example did not receive such attention here and even as a white person I felt that movie hit me like a punch to the gut. Its not the first black movie, its not the first movie about black issues, its not eh first all black cast movie. So why its being received in the manner that it is does come across as strange to me.

Also on a separate note. Rhino cavalry is stupid!

[stone monkey]

I think Maark may be overstating his case somewhat. But there are some strains of that within the African American community. Especially towards black reviewers who critique the movie based on the problems it does have. It's not, by any means, a bad film. It's just not perfect. And I think that, because of its cultural importance, some, especially in the African American community, seem to have lost sight of that: it's important to them so it has to be perfect. I do think its cultural importance is undeniable, though; it might not be the first mass market movie with a predominently black cast, but it does seem to have a significance about it for the cultural landscape of representation moving forward (in much the same way that Wonder Woman does).

That said one interpretation I could arrive at is that in some ways the film itself can, if you're willing to take the step, be read as a critique of the African American community's imo somewhat complicated relationship with African-ness; as evinced by the relative popularity of Afrocentrism in the US as compared to elsewhere in the African Diaspora (there are, I think, pretty compelling reasons for that, though). I think Cause does have something of a point here: I'd argue part of the reason Killmonger is the villain of the piece is that he attempts to impose African American concerns onto actual Africans. And is unconcerned

Spoiler

especially in his action burning the grove where the Heart-Shaped Herb is grown; a giant red flag imo

with what that actually means for and to those Africans, who have concerns of their own outwith and mostly unconnected to his. One could argue that he has a very surface-level understanding of Wakanda itself and is willing to use his connection to it simply to further his own agenda - your interpretation of his agenda may vary; I would argue that what makes him, at least, an interesting villain is that he does actually have a point, but he goes about furthering it in entirely the wrong way. That is, he's only interested in what Wakanda means to him and how he can use it, and not what it means to the Wakandans themselves (which is part of his training, I guess).

As far as the "coloniser" thing goes, I give it a pass as a kind of sociopolitical and historical shorthand in the worldbuilding; the Wakandans probably saw plenty of colonising done to people outside their borders, and saw who did it, so it makes some sense that they'd see white people that way.

This post has been edited by stone monkey: 23 February 2018 - 01:34 AM

[Maark Abbott]

stone monkey, on 23 February 2018 - 01:28 AM, said:

I think Maark may be overstating his case somewhat.

Cut down to just this point, but no, one of my author friends quite literally stated that they'd said they didn't enjoy it and were called out as a racist for that. I'm not joking. I really wish I was. Her viewpoint was "Well, it's Marvel, so it was probably always going to be naff".

My post should be taken as a lampoon of that viewpoint however because it's patently ridiculous. A film can only be judged by its merits, after all. I think the kids these days are too focused on trying to "be woke" and as such you get this small minority of loons who will take any valid criticism/viewpoint and weaponise it against the original speaker.

I'm yet to see it so I can't really say anything as to the quality. Marvel tends to be good for me, but they have dropped some badduns here and there. I enjoyed Panther as a character in the last group film, though (was it Civil War?), so hopefully that carries over.

[Tsundoku]

Just saw it.

It was good, not great. I'd give it six or seven CGI rhinos out of ten.

It was the first Marvel movie where I sympathised with the "villain" more than the "hero" though. At least, to a point.

[Maark Abbott]

Tsundoku, on 23 February 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

Just saw it.

It was good, not great. I'd give it six or seven CGI rhinos out of ten.

It was the first Marvel movie where I sympathised with the "villain" more than the "hero" though. At least, to a point.

I actually just want to see this because someone mentioned Rhino Cavalry. That sounds stupid and awesome.

[Macros]

It's just stupid

[Morgoth]

I think it says something quite troubling about Marvel that Killmonger is their second best villain to date (behind Loki, I'd argue). In most areas of fiction he'd be rather weak, but here, because he has complex motivations and presents an interesting if flawed argument for the villainy of the movie's heroes, he becomes vastly more interesting than pretty much any other villain they've made.

[Maark Abbott]

Morgoth, on 23 February 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

I think it says something quite troubling about Marvel that Killmonger is their second best villain to date (behind Loki, I'd argue). In most areas of fiction he'd be rather weak, but here, because he has complex motivations and presents an interesting if flawed argument for the villainy of the movie's heroes, he becomes vastly more interesting than pretty much any other villain they've made.

Will he be as convincing as Whiplash?

[Morgoth]

Maark Abbott, on 23 February 2018 - 08:22 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 23 February 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

I think it says something quite troubling about Marvel that Killmonger is their second best villain to date (behind Loki, I'd argue). In most areas of fiction he'd be rather weak, but here, because he has complex motivations and presents an interesting if flawed argument for the villainy of the movie's heroes, he becomes vastly more interesting than pretty much any other villain they've made.

Will he be as convincing as Whiplash?

Ah, the unsung hero of the early marvelverse! It's kind of a shame with Iron Man. Three excellent actors brought in to play in essence the same villain. In Iron Man you have Jeff Bridges, the industrialist wanting to sell weapons without moral interference. In Iron Man 2 you have Sam Rockwell, the industrialist wanting to sell weapons without moral interference, and in Iron Man 3 you have Guy Pearce, the industrialist wanting to sell weapons without moral interference.

[QuickTidal]

Morgoth, on 23 February 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

I think it says something quite troubling about Marvel that Killmonger is their second best villain to date (behind Loki, I'd argue). In most areas of fiction he'd be rather weak, but here, because he has complex motivations and presents an interesting if flawed argument for the villainy of the movie's heroes, he becomes vastly more interesting than pretty much any other villain they've made.

Yeah, Marvel has always had a villain problem. Until now (you're right) only Loki carried any kinds of weight as a villain, so Killmonger switches up a status quo that the MCU seems to unfortunately follow. I would add Ego to the list too though, as they fleshed him out pretty well.

But I'm hoping we get more Loki's and Kilkmongers in the future and less Obadiah Stane's.

[QuickTidal]

Also, For Amph Re: Accents in BP.

[amphibian]

QuickTidal, on 23 February 2018 - 01:26 PM, said:

Also, For Amph Re: Accents in BP.

This conveniently never mentions Forest bc his weird accents has been a thing forever.

Anyways, the discussion of centering the African American experience in Black Panther is more interesting to me. Yes, Killmonger was imposing his worldview upon Wakanda and it was absolutely an American vision.

But I do believe that there was a critique of how Americans deal with Afro centrism and Africa futurism in that much of what makes it African or meaningful is nearly immediately tossed aside to fuel a revenge or fantasy built upon rejecting the poison and pain of being a black American. The past is the past, but it's still shaping life today in a murderous and extractive way for black Americans. Going ho-tep in an exploitative and dismissive way to deal with the pain of being "lesser" is a thing many Americans do and there's even a Hindu version of that for Nepalis and Indians who live in the USA that I run into sometimes. It was refreshing to see how Killmonger saw Wakanda and what he did with it when he had power over it, even if the plan to arm revolution in Hong Kong, London, and NYC seemed poorly thought out or supported.

Killmonger also assaults and kills women, the same women who have the power to be king makers and who helped him obtain a key piece of the plan or item. T'challa, as dumb as his action kingship reign started off, listened to the women repeatedly and had their support when it was needed.

[stone monkey]

Maark Abbott, on 23 February 2018 - 07:10 AM, said:

stone monkey, on 23 February 2018 - 01:28 AM, said:

I think Maark may be overstating his case somewhat.

Cut down to just this point, but no, one of my author friends quite literally stated that they'd said they didn't enjoy it and were called out as a racist for that. I'm not joking. I really wish I was. Her viewpoint was "Well, it's Marvel, so it was probably always going to be naff".
My post should be taken as a lampoon of that viewpoint however because it's patently ridiculous.

A ton of issues around this film... Including a number of members of the alt-right doing their usual kind of nonsense and complaining on social media about physical attacks on white cinemagoers that didn't happen (with appropriated or faked photos to boot).

Poe's Law applies here, I think.

And as I've said before, if you think being a white person who thinks it's anything less than perfect is difficult, try being black and of the same persuasion.

[Slow Ben]

The 2 white actors in Black Panther also played Gollum and Bilbo Baggins.


I guess they are the two Tolkien white guys of the movie.