Black Panther Movie

[Charles Scholz]

Black Panther Poster

[Aberzombie]

Teaser Trailer.

Although it's pretty damned long and chock full for a "teaser". Loved seeing Andy Serkis again. He's one of my favorite actors.

[Bjørn Røyrvik]

Well, that looked pretty promising.

[Hama]

Looks pretty cool. That was killmonger right? And maybe a glimpse of Man-ape.

[Aberzombie]

Not sure, but I think so. I recall articles saying both villains would be in the movie.

Black Panther is one of those characters I've never collected, so I'm not truly up to snuff on who's who among his enemies. The only one I know for sure is Klaw (future version of Serkis' character), since he used to show up in so many other books.

I kind of hope they don't actually go the full Klaw route in this movie, and just leave him as a bit character for expostion, introductions, and such. With two other BP enemies (possibly) featured prominently, villain overload could hurt the movie.

[Rosgakori]

Yes, the villains are Klaw, Erik Killmonger and M'baku the Man-Ape. I've never really believed in villain overload, it just has to be done right. Batman Begins has three villains for three parts of the movie. I don't think that M'Baku will be a prominent foe, more of a "he is bad guy, but not the villain of this movie". Klaw and Killmonger are the villanous duo. And it is a good combo. Killmonger wants to bring back the isolationist politic and kick out all non-Wakandians, and Klaw wants to plunder it's riches. That is a fun combination.

And I really, really like how this looks. The afrofuturistic look really nails Wakanda, I love seeing references and styles from various African tribes and cultures. And the cast, holy hell the cast. This will be a milestone for superhero movies, and I can't wait for February.

[Evil Overlord]

Whatever it takes to defeat the good guys works for me!

[MMCJawa]

Rosgakori wrote:

Yes, the villains are Klaw, Erik Killmonger and M'baku the Man-Ape. I've never really believed in villain overload, it just has to be done right. Batman Begins has three villains for three parts of the movie. I don't think that M'Baku will be a prominent foe, more of a "he is bad guy, but not the villain of this movie". Klaw and Killmonger are the villanous duo. And it is a good combo. Killmonger wants to bring back the isolationist politic and kick out all non-Wakandians, and Klaw wants to plunder it's riches. That is a fun combination.

And I really, really like how this looks. The afrofuturistic look really nails Wakanda, I love seeing references and styles from various African tribes and cultures. And the cast, holy hell the cast. This will be a milestone for superhero movies, and I can't wait for February.

I thought I heard somewhere that M'baku is in infinity wars, so he may mostly be set up as a future villain. Mordo was in Dr. Strange after all but didn't figure in as a villain. Crossbones was a henchman in Winter Soldier but got a more prominent (if brief) role in Civil War

So far the Marvel movies have done a decent job of balancing there villains. GotG after all has three sets of villains, one of which (Ego) really has nothing to do with the other villains. Generally, very few of the MCU villains have felt awkwardly shoe-horned in or poorly developed, like say Spiderman 3 or Amazing Spiderman 2. The only movies I can think of that maybe falls into that category is Iron Man 2 with Justin Hammer and maybe the first GotG movie with Korvath.

[Hama]

Korvath?

[Delightful]

Regardless of whether this film is good or bad I can at least take confront in the fact that around half the Black people working in Hollywood got a good paycheck by being in it.

[Set]

Hama wrote:

Korvath?

Korath the Pursuer, IIRC, although I'm not sure if they even mentioned his name outside of the credits.

He was the dude Star-Lord fought off to get the orb in the first sequence of the movie (who asked for his name, and looked unimpressed when he replied 'Star-Lord'), and later fought and beat to death near the end. Played by an actor (Djimon Hounsoo?) far too good for such a small role, IMO.

Not to be mistaken for Korvac, a much more cosmic threat. :)

[Vidmaster7]

I really didn't feel he looked like Korath at all. Isn't korath blue? Didn't know that was who he was till after I saw it.

[Hama]

Set wrote:

Hama wrote:

Korvath?

Korath the Pursuer, IIRC, although I'm not sure if they even mentioned his name outside of the credits.

He was the dude Star-Lord fought off to get the orb in the first sequence of the movie (who asked for his name, and looked unimpressed when he replied 'Star-Lord'), and later fought and beat to death near the end. Played by an actor (Djimon Hounsoo?) far too good for such a small role, IMO.

Not to be mistaken for Korvac, a much more cosmic threat. :)

Ah that guy. Unremarkable. And to think that Djimon took that role because his son wanted to be white because all the good guys in the movies are white...

[Aberzombie]

MMCJawa wrote:

So far the Marvel movies have done a decent job of balancing there villains. GotG after all has three sets of villains, one of which (Ego) really has nothing to do with the other villains. Generally, very few of the MCU villains have felt awkwardly shoe-horned in or poorly developed, like say Spiderman 3 or Amazing Spiderman 2. The only movies I can think of that maybe falls into that category is Iron Man 2 with Justin Hammer and maybe the first GotG movie with Korvath.

Indeed. When I think of poorly done overload on villains, I think of the third Toby Spider Man movie, as well as the Bat movies between Batman Returns and Batman Begins. Those probably had to do more with bad writing than and actual "too many villains" case.

My worry is that Marvel might finally slip up and have that combo of bad writing/too many villains. They've had a pretty good run with their movies since Iron Man, but to me that just increases the chance of a dud over time, especially as they get closer to the climax of what they've been building towards all these years with Infinity War.

Hopefully Kevin Feige has a solid follow-on plan.

[Aberzombie]

Rosgakori wrote:

And I really, really like how this looks. The afrofuturistic look really nails Wakanda......

This. What I saw looked good, and reminded me of what little I've seen of Wakanda from the comics.

[Hama]

Aberzombie wrote:

MMCJawa wrote:

So far the Marvel movies have done a decent job of balancing there villains. GotG after all has three sets of villains, one of which (Ego) really has nothing to do with the other villains. Generally, very few of the MCU villains have felt awkwardly shoe-horned in or poorly developed, like say Spiderman 3 or Amazing Spiderman 2. The only movies I can think of that maybe falls into that category is Iron Man 2 with Justin Hammer and maybe the first GotG movie with Korvath.

Indeed. When I think of poorly done overload on villains, I think of the third Toby Spider Man movie, as well as the Bat movies between Batman Returns and Batman Begins. Those probably had to do more with bad writing than and actual "too many villains" case.

My worry is that Marvel might finally slip up and have that combo of bad writing/too many villains. They've had a pretty good run with their movies since Iron Man, but to me that just increases the chance of a dud over time, especially as they get closer to the climax of what they've been building towards all these years with Infinity War.

Hopefully Kevin Feige has a solid follow-on plan.

Even if they make a dud after infinity war, it will still be some 18-1 in favor of good movies.

DC currently has 1-2. Which is not horribly bad, but to have 2 out of three movies be disappointments...

[KestrelZ]

How to kick things up a notch for Black Panther 2 - Team him up with the first Marvel movie success - Wesley Snipe's version of Blade.

[Hama]

Blade is not MCU. Neither is any of the spidermen except the current one, or the fantastic four. Or anything with a Marvel stamp that is not produced by Marvel Studios.

[thejeff]

KestrelZ wrote:

How to kick things up a notch for Black Panther 2 - Team him up with the first Marvel movie success - Wesley Snipe's version of Blade.

Nor is there any particular reason to team them except they're both black.

If you're going to do that, at least team him up with Luke Cage - they've worked together in comics.

[Aberzombie]

KestrelZ wrote:

How to kick things up a notch for Black Panther 2 - Team him up with the first Marvel movie success - Wesley Snipe's version of Blade.

I'm hoping by the time they get around to a part 2 Marvel might finally have the rights to Fantastic Four back. I'd love to see a team-up between them and BP. It would be fitting.

[Ambrosia Slaad]

thejeff wrote:

KestrelZ wrote:

How to kick things up a notch for Black Panther 2 - Team him up with the first Marvel movie success - Wesley Snipe's version of Blade.

Nor is there any particular reason to team them except they're both black.

If you're going to do that, at least team him up with Luke Cage - they've worked together in comics.

I dunno. Angela Bassett is rocking the white hair in that trailer... makes me wish they could borrow Storm from Fox.

[CapeCodRPGer]

KestrelZ wrote:

How to kick things up a notch for Black Panther 2 - Team him up with the first Marvel movie success - Wesley Snipe's version of Blade.

I heard before Blade came out Snipes pitched Black Panther and they rejected it so He did Blade instead.

Be nice if Snipes has a cameo in this.

[Kalshane]

Marvel has the movie rights for Blade back. Might be fun easter egg just to have Snipes in costume somewhere in the background of a scene.

[Cole Deschain]

'You are a good man with a good heart... and it's hard for a good man to be a king.'

Sold.

[Charles Scholz]

So far the MCU has been been 90% true to the comics.
I just wish they would stay away from the dud story lines.

[Thomas Seitz]

Charles,

I dunno. Civil War wasn't a dud for me. Or Winter Soldier.

I also hope they might do a Blade cameo too. Just for giggles.

[Hama]

They take dud storylines and make them awesome

[Kalshane]

Yeah, I thought Civil War the movie did a much better job than Civil War the comic storyline. Though it helps that former was smaller and more self-contained (and also managed to avoid making Tony and Steve act like jerks.)

[thejeff]

Cole Deschain wrote:

'You are a good man with a good heart... and it's hard for a good man to be a king.'

Sold.

Yeah, that's been a big theme of the Black Panther comic lately - the tension between those two and between his role as hero and as king.

And from a different angle in the earlier Incursion storyline - There was a quote about the Black Swan being used to heroes, but this time she was dealing with kings.

[Charles Scholz]

Liked the Winter Soldier Comic, hated Civil War and Age of Ultron.
Haven't watched either movie because of the comics.

BTW - Not reading any of the Secret Empire Stupid Current Crossover Event.

[MMCJawa]

Charles Scholz wrote:

Liked the Winter Soldier Comic, hated Civil War and Age of Ultron.

Haven't watched either movie because of the comics.

BTW - Not reading any of the Secret Empire Stupid Current Crossover Event.

IIRC Age of Ultron basically only shares a name and antagonist with Age of Ultron.

Civil War shares ideas but that is about it with the comic.

[Marc Radle]

Yeah ... I haven't read any of those comics, but the movies, *especially* Civil War, were great!

I would put whatever dislike you have for the comics and *at LEAST* see Civil War - it's really fantasic

[Thomas Seitz]

Yeah Age of Ultron wasn't actually where Ultron WON like in the comics.
It was more "Hey let's build Ultron!"

MMJ is also correct, along with Marc, Civil War is pretty awesome comic book movie. Less so the comic.

[Hama]

Charles Scholz wrote:

Liked the Winter Soldier Comic, hated Civil War and Age of Ultron.

Haven't watched either movie because of the comics.

BTW - Not reading any of the Secret Empire Stupid Current Crossover Event.

You really should.

[Set]

The Civil War movie is great, the comic event, eh. I'd definitely recommend catching Civil War if it's available on Netflix or whatever.

The Age of Ultron movie was, IMO, a muddled mess, and not great. I didn't read the comic event (or even know it was a thing, before the movie was announced).

I'm loving this Black Panther teaser trailer, and hope it's as epic as it appears to be.

[ShinHakkaider]

Yeah, I have most of the big Avengers related events in singles and trades from the past 10-11 years or so. The only one I don't own because I truly, TRULY hated it was CIVIL WAR.

In my list of favorite Marvel Studios movies Captain America: Civil War and Captain America: The Winter Soldier are pretty much tied at first place. And for superhero movies, in general, they're both in the top five.

Captain America: Civil War is the perfect example of a conflict that's pretty big but not earth-shattering and HIGHLY personal. That fight at the end hurt my heart. You just kinda wanted them to stop fighting and talk but you understand why they were fighting and emotions behind it. My sister who hadn't even seen Winter Soldier talked to me after she'd seen Civil War and was like "Oh my God, I felt so bad for ****!!!"
That's a movie where I had my mind made up who I was rooting for at the beginning but by the end of it, I was still rooting for that guy but MAN if I didn't feel for the other side...

[Kirth Gersen]

I have read zero comic books, and know nothing except what I remember from previous films (if anything).

Gersen's Complete Marvel Universe Reviews:

Spoiler:

Iron man 1 was great, especially because it started off as a retelling of Wayland the Smith. Parts 2 and 3 pretty much sucked, except for the appearance of so much star talent (Mickey Rourke, Guy Pierce, and most especially Ben Kingsley --- the latter with a call-back to his earlier movie "Without a Clue" that I won't spoil). But one really wonders why plant sap turns people into fire-based supervillains, and why watching CGI robots fly around for seemingly 2 hours straight is interesting.

Captain America 1 was OK, but the BBEG fight was cheesy, cliche, and relied way too much on CGI. That said, Chris Evans is perfect for the role, and actually manages to get me invested in a character with what has to be the most spectacularly, ridiculously stooooopid name and gimmick ever dreamed of. That's no small feat, and I've come to admire Evans tremendously for pulling that off.

I spent most of Avengers 1 thinking that it was actually Thor 2, because if you haven't seen Thor 1 (like me), you'll be pretty lost (like I was). Also, it's not at all clear why Archery Guy is allowed to tag along with the actual superheroes; you don't find that out for several more movies.

Captain America 2 wasn't just a good superhero movie; it was a good "buddy movie" and a good movie overall. Action sequences were handled well, characters were seldom unnecessary or extraneous, and the actors' talents were all showcased -- it's immediately obvious that Marvel hired some actual directors. This was my hands-down favorite of the lot.

Avengers 2 was a whole mess of CGI and not much else. And Whedon can't direct CGI action to save his life, so it was doubly bad. The only saving grace here is that we finally get a little character development for Archery Guy and find out he's an Avenger because he actually understands normal people, and because he can give good pep talks.

Captain America 3 really should have been called Avengers 3, but never mind that. It had the same directors as CA2, and it shows: they manage to keep the CGI down to manageable levels instead of relying on it (and even then, the action sequences have a pretty good sense of scale and tempo and so on); they introduce new superheroes in a manner that allows the viewer to relate to them; they provide enough dialogue and character interaction to allow the plot to exist. It's also no small thing to put 10 superheroes on the screen simultaneously, all doing superhero things, and still have the audience able to follow the action and keep track of who's who.

And, yes, I'll freely admit I haven't seen Thor 1, Thor 2, Ant-Man (tied with "Captain America" for stupidest superhero name), Dr Strange (from the trailer: "Benedick Cumbersnatch remains typecast as Asberger-Man! And lots more CGI than ever before!"), or any of the outer space ones.

That said, back to the topic of the thread. I really, really feel like Marvel needs to throw a bone to people of color. There seem to be no Hispanic or Asian superheroes in the entire world/universe, despite the proportion of the world population who are Hispanic and (especially) Asian. The only two African-American Avengers have no superpowers, fly around in suits made by other people, and are basically just sidekicks for Iron Man and Captain America (respectively). That's... really bad. Then Civil War finally introduces an African superhero (played by the same guy who played James Brown in the biopic, but just go with it), with his own homemade costume and what seem to be actual superpowers. And they name him... Black Panther, like he's a leftover from a 1960s protest movement. I'm not the most PC guy on the planet, but Marvel seems like the Donald Trump of comics, from what they're showing us.

[Hama]

You really should watch ant man.

[Kirth Gersen]

Hama wrote:

You really should watch ant man.

IMDB says it has Michael Douglas. That's two strikes against it!

[Hama]

I liked him a lot in the movie. And they actually make fun of the name in universe. The movie also portrays a dad who would do anything for his daughter. And the girl is positively adorable. And I generaly harbor an intense dislike towards children, so take that as you will.

[TriOmegaZero]

No really. You should really watch it.

[Ambrosia Slaad]

Re: CA2: Winter Soldier & CA3: Civil War - That's the Russo Brothers. My hunch is that because they understand comedy so well (Community, Arrested Development), they understand the importance of character moments and timing. Whedon is quippy and often clever, but I don't think he has an instinctual gut-feeling for comedy.

Which is while I did enjoy Peyton Reed's Ant-Man, I still think an Edgar Wright Ant-Man would have been even better. (Trailers for his upcoming Baby Driver look really fun.)

[Kalshane]

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Then Civil War finally introduces an African superhero (played by the same guy who played James Brown in the biopic, but just go with it), with his own homemade costume and what seem to be actual superpowers. And they name him... Black Panther, like he's a leftover from a 1960s protest movement. I'm not the most PC guy on the planet, but Marvel seems like the Donald Trump of comics, from what they're showing us.

Black Panther the character precedes the Black Panther political movement (though not by much.)

I do agree Marvel could use more diversity in their movie division, though.

[Cole Deschain]

Kirth Gersen wrote:

** spoiler omitted **...

Re: The "Black Panther" name and your (not at all unreasonable) issues therewith...

T'Challa debuted in 1966 in Fantastic Four #52. Comic books being comic books, rebranding him simply hasn't happened (although they briefly called him Black Leopard because Marvel was afraid he'd become associated in the public mind with the Black Panther Party, which ALSO formally debuted under that name in 1966), because, while the name has some baggage, it's also the character's legal trademark identity- AND the way comic book fans know him.

At least his suit is black, and black panthers are an actual thing. Black Goliath (debuted under that unfortunate tag in 1975), DC's Black Lightning (debuted in 1977), and the DC/Hanna-Barbera Black Vulcan (1977-1978) had no excuse whatsoever.

[thejeff]

No offense Kirth, but that really sounds like "I don't like superheroes. I don't understand superheroes. Let me tell you what's wrong with superhero movies."

And frankly I think your approach was probably basically conventional Hollywood wisdom about superhero movies until Marvel ignored it and basically revamped the whole genre. That even the lesser known characters can work if you do them right. And that do them right means basically handle them seriously. Put people who know and like the genre in charge.

I mean, I never would have thought "Guardians of the Galaxy" could get made into a movie, much less a hit one. No one had ever heard of the title, it's got a talking raccoon and a tree as main characters (and you think Ant-man is silly?). Somehow, by the time it came out, "Marvel movie" was a solid enough reputation for people to give it a chance and that was enough for it to be a big hit.

Serious question: Can you explain to me why "Ant-Man" is any stupider than "Spider-Man" or even "Bat-Man" as a superhero name? Without it being just that those have had much more publicity for much longer so you'd accepted them before realizing they seemed stupid. (And by the way, none of those are anywhere in the running for stupidest superhero name, even if you leave out the true Z-list nobody remembers them characters.)

I think we've been over Archery Guy before. Suffice to say, he wasn't well used in the first movie, mostly because he was one of the two who didn't get his own movie to set him up and he got stuck in the mind-controlled role for most of it. And he mostly got lost in the shuffle in the even larger cast of A2. Would be cool if he got the chance to shine a bit. Hawkeye has potential. (Again, pre-Marvel movies, I never would have thought that.)

[captain yesterday]

Guardians of The Galaxy is more Star Wars then The Avengers.