|
|
Post by judgejosephdredd on Feb 19, 2018 6:42:46 GMT
Yawn, find new material loser.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Feb 19, 2018 7:10:55 GMT
Yawn, find new material loser. Why? His regularly scheduled tantrums after an inevitable MCU success are beyond entertaining. They're nearly pornographic. |
|
|
|
Post by Grabthar's Hammer on Feb 19, 2018 8:35:12 GMT
Holy shit! Black Panther is an awful piece of crap. The movie is basically left-wing political propaganda that panders to SJWs. The villain's motivation is "Our people have always been oppressed so now it's time we took advantage of these superior weapons and become the oppressors". And the scene of the Wakandan woman killing people in the casino with her spear was just ridiculous. Where were the security guards? It's a casino so there should be plenty of heavily-armed security guards. How does someone walk into a casino with a spear and stab a bunch of people and and she doesn't get shot by an security guard? WTF? And the CIA agent participating in a coup to overthrow the rightful King of Wakanda (who won the throne by combat) and install T'Challa as the King. Shouldn't he call Langley first to find out if that's something POTUS wants before he participates in a coup to overthrow the King of a foreign nation? And apparently Wakanda doesn't respect American laws or airspace since they just fly their aircraft over an American city anytime they want. Rating: 1 out of 10Dang DC-Fan. I truly didn't think you were going to hate it this much. I was surprised to find that there weren't nearly as many jokes, especially immature ones, as some other MCU films. The jokes were few and far between, and were actually quite funny in the moment. In my opinion, the humor felt like the humor in Wonder Woman. I do disagree strongly with you about the "rightful King of Wakanda (who won the throne by combat)". The rules of the challenge were that T'Challa had to yield or die. He did neither. The thing I have a serious gripe with (and I hope you change your opinion and at least have a problem with this instead) is the fact that the Wakandan people have always obeyed the Wakandan ways, but even though Killmonger hadn't truly bested T'Challa in battle and won the challenge, they just all of a sudden turned against T'Challa anyways? That seemed really out of character of the Wakandan people, regardless of how they felt about Killmonger's plans. It seems like if they wanted Wakanda to go the way that Killmonger wanted, they would've tried to overthrow their way of life years ago. Anyways, I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it. I seriously hope MCU makes a movie you find gratifying one of these days. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 9:51:53 GMT
Holy shit! Black Panther is an awful piece of crap. The movie is basically left-wing political propaganda that panders to SJWs. The villain's motivation is "Our people have always been oppressed so now it's time we took advantage of these superior weapons and become the oppressors". And the scene of the Wakandan woman killing people in the casino with her spear was just ridiculous. Where were the security guards? It's a casino so there should be plenty of heavily-armed security guards. How does someone walk into a casino with a spear and stab a bunch of people and and she doesn't get shot by an security guard? WTF? And the CIA agent participating in a coup to overthrow the rightful King of Wakanda (who won the throne by combat) and install T'Challa as the King. Shouldn't he call Langley first to find out if that's something POTUS wants before he participates in a coup to overthrow the King of a foreign nation? And apparently Wakanda doesn't respect American laws or airspace since they just fly their aircraft over an American city anytime they want. Rating: 1 out of 10Dang DC-Fan. I truly didn't think you were going to hate it this much. I was surprised to find that there weren't nearly as many jokes, especially immature ones, as some other MCU films. The jokes were few and far between, and were actually quite funny in the moment. In my opinion, the humor felt like the humor in Wonder Woman. I do disagree strongly with you about the "rightful King of Wakanda (who won the throne by combat)". The rules of the challenge were that T'Challa had to yield or die. He did neither. The thing I have a serious gripe with (and I hope you change your opinion and at least have a problem with this instead) is the fact that the Wakandan people have always obeyed the Wakandan ways, but even though Killmonger hadn't truly bested T'Challa in battle and won the challenge, they just all of a sudden turned against T'Challa anyways? When Killmonger threw T'Challa off the waterfall, everyone assumed that T'Challa was dead. They didn't look for his dead body but for all intents and purposes, T'Challa was dead and the challenge was over. What if they tried to find his body and couldn't find it? Are they not allowed to crown a new King without finding the dead body? So they would have no King if the body is never found?
It was common sense to assume that T'Challa was dead. So for all intents and purposes the challenge was over and Killmonger was crowned King and actually went through the coronation ritual. So Killmonger was in fact the rightful King, having won the crown in combat.
Let's also not forget that if not for Forest Whitaker's interference, Killmonger would've chopped off T'Challa's head. The rules call for 1-on-1 combat so if they're going by the letter of the rules, then Forest Whitaker's interference to save T'Challa should mean that T'Challa yields (T'Challa's man throws in the towel on behalf of T'Challa). So by the letter of the rules, T'Challa did yield and thus Killmogner did win the challenge and was the rightful King.
As for the people turning against T'Challa, they supported the rightful winner of the challenge as required by Wakandan law. Their loyalty is supposed to be to the throne, not to T'Challa. It's no different than Generals and Admirals in the US armed forces. They follow orders from POTUS. Doesn't matter if they voted for a different candidate. Doesn't matter if POTUS is Democrat or Republican. Doesn't matter if OTUS is Donald Trump and they may hate Trump. But they still have to follow Trump's orders because Trump is POTUS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grabthar's Hammer on Feb 19, 2018 10:31:05 GMT
I have pressed backspace like ten times after responding to this and dealing with it going back a page and deleting my entire friggin' response lol
Anyways.. this will be so much less refined then all my responses because I just don't care anymore lol.
Is it true that they should have assumed T'Challa's death once thrown over a waterfall? Yes. Was it completely stupid when you consider the entire outcome of the battle crowned a king of an entire nation? Yes. If we're talking about common sense, then it should have been common sense for them to, at the very least, seek out a body. Killmonger wasn't the rightful ruler of Wakanda. T'Challa needed to yield or die and he did neither.
What I believe to be stupidity in the plot was the fact that an entire nation's ruler depended on the outcome of this battle and they don't even confirm his death? Also, Killmonger, an obviously intelligent operative with a knowledge of Wakandan rituals, wouldn't be smart enough to obviously kill his opponent in front of everybody instead of just throwing him over a waterfall, leaving his death uncertain? That's not common sense.
You are right in the sense that the army's loyalty is to the king of Wakanda, but once T'Challa revealed himself to be alive, then the challenge was ongoing. They tried to overthrow the rightful king. That's what I find to be ridiculous about the movie.
I feel like we agree about the ridiculousness of parts of the movie, just on different parts lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Feb 19, 2018 10:41:07 GMT
The most ridiculous thing to me was theyre tradition of having battles to nominate a king. For a technologically advanced nation, it really makes them look primitive and as Klau says, savage (not in the good way). This doesnt really help African causes, as the films basically saying that if Africans do utilise their natural resources and become technologically accustomed as the west, they will still be savages at heart unable to let go of outdated practices and rituals. May be that was the point in the film, as T'Challa seems progressive by the end of the story, I dont know.
|
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Feb 19, 2018 12:10:44 GMT
The most ridiculous thing to me was theyre tradition of having battles to nominate a king. For a technologically advanced nation, it really makes them look primitive and as Klau says, savage (not in the good way). This doesnt really help African causes, as the films basically saying that if Africans do utilise their natural resources and become technologically accustomed as the west, they will still be savages at heart unable to let go of outdated practices and rituals. May be that was the point in the film, as T'Challa seems progressive by the end of the story, I dont know. Rather than a battle to become King, it is more a opportunity to challenge the choice of King...not necessarily one that is taken with every new King (the lack of challenge and reaction when the throne is challenged, implies that it is a rare occurance). Though I do get what you mean. It may have been the first time there ever was a challenge...a tradition not expected to be taken up. On the other hand, it is less archaic in that they also have the chance to contest the choice of King, which doesn't happen with European Royalty for instance where you just accept someone from the same bloodline, without challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by outrider127 on Feb 19, 2018 14:32:43 GMT
One thing I don't get--Wakanda is criticized by many for being isolationist and keeping Vibranium for their own selfish interests, and not sharing it with other African countries--but have they SEEN other African countries??
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:20:38 GMT
I have pressed backspace like ten times after responding to this and dealing with it going back a page and deleting my entire friggin' response lol Anyways.. this will be so much less refined then all my responses because I just don't care anymore lol. Is it true that they should have assumed T'Challa's death once thrown over a waterfall? Yes. Was it completely stupid when you consider the entire outcome of the battle crowned a king of an entire nation? Yes. If we're talking about common sense, then it should have been common sense for them to, at the very least, seek out a body. Killmonger wasn't the rightful ruler of Wakanda. T'Challa needed to yield or die and he did neither. What I believe to be stupidity in the plot was the fact that an entire nation's ruler depended on the outcome of this battle and they don't even confirm his death? Also, Killmonger, an obviously intelligent operative with a knowledge of Wakandan rituals, wouldn't be smart enough to obviously kill his opponent in front of everybody instead of just throwing him over a waterfall, leaving his death uncertain? That's not common sense. You are right in the sense that the army's loyalty is to the king of Wakanda, but once T'Challa revealed himself to be alive, then the challenge was ongoing. They tried to overthrow the rightful king. That's what I find to be ridiculous about the movie. I agree that the movie was stupid that they didn't make an effort to find the body, but not stupid to assume he was dead and the challenge was over. But they should've at least made an effort to find the body so that they could give him a proper burial since he was the former King and deserved a proper burial.
But aside from whether or not they should've assumed he was dead, the fact that Forest Whitaker interfered when Killmonger was about to chop off T'Challa's head effectively ends the challenge and Killmonger is the winner of the challenge and rightful King. It's similar to the UFC. It's 1-on-1 combat until someone taps out. But if the ref feels that another fighter is in mortal danger or can't continue, then the ref can step in and stop the fight. Since Forest Whitaker interfered on behalf of T'Challa, that meant T'Challa could no longer continue and that's effectively the same thing as T'Challa tapping out.
So the challenge was over and Killmonger did win the challenge and was the rightful King. Which means that everything T'Challa's mother and sister did after Killmonger was coronated was treason against the rightful King. And what the CIA agent did was participate in an illegal coup against the rightful King of a foreign nation, which could've pulled the US into a war that POTUS might not have wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:27:42 GMT
The most ridiculous thing to me was theyre tradition of having battles to nominate a king. For a technologically advanced nation, it really makes them look primitive and as Klau says, savage (not in the good way). This doesnt really help African causes, as the films basically saying that if Africans do utilise their natural resources and become technologically accustomed as the west, they will still be savages at heart unable to let go of outdated practices and rituals. May be that was the point in the film, as T'Challa seems progressive by the end of the story, I dont know. Agreed. That was another point I was thinking while watching the movie. It's stupid that Wakanda is supposed a technologically advanced nation yet they still follow a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat to fulfill their bloodlust.
Basically, a "Might Makes Right" rule. Anyone can become the leader simply by killing the former leader in battle - like how the Klingons decide who leads the High Council.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 19, 2018 17:30:34 GMT
I have pressed backspace like ten times after responding to this and dealing with it going back a page and deleting my entire friggin' response lol Anyways.. this will be so much less refined then all my responses because I just don't care anymore lol. Is it true that they should have assumed T'Challa's death once thrown over a waterfall? Yes. Was it completely stupid when you consider the entire outcome of the battle crowned a king of an entire nation? Yes. If we're talking about common sense, then it should have been common sense for them to, at the very least, seek out a body. Killmonger wasn't the rightful ruler of Wakanda. T'Challa needed to yield or die and he did neither. What I believe to be stupidity in the plot was the fact that an entire nation's ruler depended on the outcome of this battle and they don't even confirm his death? Also, Killmonger, an obviously intelligent operative with a knowledge of Wakandan rituals, wouldn't be smart enough to obviously kill his opponent in front of everybody instead of just throwing him over a waterfall, leaving his death uncertain? That's not common sense. You are right in the sense that the army's loyalty is to the king of Wakanda, but once T'Challa revealed himself to be alive, then the challenge was ongoing. They tried to overthrow the rightful king. That's what I find to be ridiculous about the movie. I agree that the movie was stupid that they didn't make an effort to find the body, but not stupid to assume he was dead and the challenge was over. But they should've at least made an effort to find the body so that they could give him a proper burial since he was the former King and deserved a proper burial. If this had been Wonder Woman and someone did this to Hippolyta or Diana and no one looked for her body, you'd be fine with it. We don't know everything about Wakandan traditions. Given he was going to have them killed, it's self-preservation. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 19, 2018 17:31:02 GMT
The most ridiculous thing to me was theyre tradition of having battles to nominate a king. For a technologically advanced nation, it really makes them look primitive and as Klau says, savage (not in the good way). This doesnt really help African causes, as the films basically saying that if Africans do utilise their natural resources and become technologically accustomed as the west, they will still be savages at heart unable to let go of outdated practices and rituals. May be that was the point in the film, as T'Challa seems progressive by the end of the story, I dont know. Agreed. That was another point I was thinking while watching the movie. It's stupid that Wakanda is supposed a technologically advanced nation yet they still follow a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat. If this was WW and this was the Amazon way, you wouldn't be complaining. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:33:05 GMT
The most ridiculous thing to me was theyre tradition of having battles to nominate a king. For a technologically advanced nation, it really makes them look primitive and as Klau says, savage (not in the good way). This doesnt really help African causes, as the films basically saying that if Africans do utilise their natural resources and become technologically accustomed as the west, they will still be savages at heart unable to let go of outdated practices and rituals. May be that was the point in the film, as T'Challa seems progressive by the end of the story, I dont know. Rather than a battle to become King, it is more a opportunity to challenge the choice of King On the other hand, it is less archaic in that they also have the chance to contest the choice of King, which doesn't happen with European Royalty for instance where you just accept someone from the same bloodline, without challenge. It's an opportunity to become King by killing the former King, similar to how Klingons decide who leads the High Council. Unlike European royalty, which has an established line of succession which results in a peaceful transition of power, Wakandan (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) still follows a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat to fulfill their bloodlust. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 19, 2018 17:38:47 GMT
Rather than a battle to become King, it is more a opportunity to challenge the choice of King On the other hand, it is less archaic in that they also have the chance to contest the choice of King, which doesn't happen with European Royalty for instance where you just accept someone from the same bloodline, without challenge. Unlike European royalty, which has an established line of succession which results in a peaceful transition of power, Unless a Usurper kills the Royals and takes the Throne, which happened a LOT... |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:40:25 GMT
I agree that the movie was stupid that they didn't make an effort to find the body, but not stupid to assume he was dead and the challenge was over. But they should've at least made an effort to find the body so that they could give him a proper burial since he was the former King and deserved a proper burial. If this had been Wonder Woman and someone did this to Hippolyta or Diana and no one looked for her body, you'd be fine with it. The Amazons would never do that to Hippolyta or Diana because the Amazons don't have the same bloodlust and medieval and barbaric traditions that Wakanda (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) has. the fact that Forest Whitaker interfered when Killmonger was about to chop off T'Challa's head effectively ends the challenge and Killmonger is the winner of the challenge and rightful King. We don't know everything about Wakandan traditions. We do know that the Wakandan people have such a huge bloodlust that they still follow a medieval and barbaric tradition in which anyone can become King simply by killing the former King, similar to how Klingons decide who leads the High Council. Which means that everything T'Challa's mother and sister did after Killmonger was coronated was treason against the rightful King. Given he was going to have them killed, it's self-preservation. Killmonger gave no such order for them to be executed. In fact, Killmonger might enjoyed having T'Challa's mother and sister be his servants. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:41:40 GMT
Agreed. That was another point I was thinking while watching the movie. It's stupid that Wakanda is supposed a technologically advanced nation yet they still follow a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat. If this was WW and this was the Amazon way, you wouldn't be complaining. It's not the Amazon way. The Amazons don't have the same bloodlust and medieval and barbaric traditions that Wakanda (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) has. |
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Feb 19, 2018 17:42:47 GMT
Rather than a battle to become King, it is more a opportunity to challenge the choice of King On the other hand, it is less archaic in that they also have the chance to contest the choice of King, which doesn't happen with European Royalty for instance where you just accept someone from the same bloodline, without challenge. It's an opportunity to become King by killing the former King, similar to how Klingons decide who leads the High Council. Unlike European royalty, which has an established line of succession which results in a peaceful transition of power, Wakandan (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) still follows a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat to fulfill their bloodlust. As someone else said the reaction of the other tribes implied a challenge was a rare occurrence. It's more of a tradition for all the tribes to recognize the prince as king. It's a Tradition. And to me it's no less esoteric or barbaric then using a "Holy Book" to make sure ones Oath is valid. Tell me again why Presidents have to swear touching a bible? It's because it's tradition to do so. Now it's a rare occurrence for a President not to use it. In the past there have been a few rare instances where it wasn't used. John Q Adams swore on a book of law. Teddy Roosevelt didn't swear on any book his first term. LBJ swore on a Roman Catholic missal. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:47:03 GMT
Unlike European royalty, which has an established line of succession which results in a peaceful transition of power, Unless a Usurper kills the Royals and takes the Throne, which happened a LOT... Actually, it hasn't happened since before Shakespeare. The last English King to die in battle was Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. That was in medieval times. Now they have a clearly-established line of succession (Prince Charles is 1st in line, Prince William is 2nd in line, Prince George is 3rd in line, etc.) that will result in a peaceful transition of the Crown and the throne.
Unlike Wakanda, supposedly a technologically advanced nation but still follows a medieval and barbaric tradition of royal succession by mortal combat in order to fulfill their bloodlust.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 19, 2018 17:56:26 GMT
It's an opportunity to become King by killing the former King, similar to how Klingons decide who leads the High Council. Unlike European royalty, which has an established line of succession which results in a peaceful transition of power, Wakandan (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) still follows a medieval and barbaric tradition of mortal combat to fulfill their bloodlust. As someone else said the reaction of the other tribes implied a challenge was a rare occurrence. It's more of a tradition for all the tribes to recognize the prince as king. It's a Tradition. And to me it's no less esoteric or barbaric then using a "Holy Book" to make sure ones Oath is valid. Tell me again why Presidents have to swear touching a bible? It's because it's tradition to do so. Now it's a rare occurrence for a President not to use it. In the past there have been a few rare instances where it wasn't used. John Q Adams swore on a book of law. Teddy Roosevelt didn't swear on any book his first term. LBJ swore on a Roman Catholic missal. The difference between swearing an oath on the Bible and royal succession by mortal combat is that 1 of those doesn't result in any blood being spilled or anyone being killed. Swearing an oath on the Bible isn't barbaric because it doesn't involve the spilling of blood or the taking of human life. Royal succession by mortal combat is barbaric and medieval because it's done to fulfill the bloodlust of the Wakandan people.
|
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 19, 2018 18:07:53 GMT
If this had been Wonder Woman and someone did this to Hippolyta or Diana and no one looked for her body, you'd be fine with it. The Amazons would never do that to Hippolyta or Diana because the Amazons don't have the same bloodlust and medieval and barbaric traditions that Wakanda (supposedly a technologically advanced nation) has. The Amazons are even more bloodthirst and barbaric, actually. We do know that the Wakandan people have such a huge bloodlust that they still follow a medieval and barbaric tradition in which anyone can become King simply by killing the former King Not anyone, just someone of Royal Blood or another recognize Leader in Wakanda. Killmonger gave no such order for them to be executed. You need to be spoonfed this badly? DC did a number on your brain. |
|
