|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Feb 27, 2018 15:00:55 GMT
So does DC-Fan think Nakia is T'Challa's sister? That's kind of weird.
|
|
|
|
Post by Archelaus on Feb 27, 2018 17:58:44 GMT
You know what, I was planning on seeing A United Kingdom later on next month. Thanks for the recommendation (although you could do it without bashing Black Panther).
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Feb 27, 2018 18:12:47 GMT
Yes, A UNITED KINGDOM was pretty good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Feb 27, 2018 20:31:51 GMT
You know what, I was planning on seeing A United Kingdom later on next month. Thanks for the recommendation (although you could do it without bashing Black Panther). No, he couldn’t. He pathological. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 27, 2018 23:40:22 GMT
So does DC-Fan think Nakia is T'Challa's sister? That's kind of weird. He probably thinks all Black people look the same. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Feb 27, 2018 23:40:35 GMT
It was also pointed out that them fighting for the role of King of Wakanda and title of Black Panther was something that was a part of the Black Panther comic lore. T'Challa became King of Wakanda after beating someone in combat for the title. Erik Killmonger became the new King of Wakanda after beating T'Challa just like he did in the movie. This was (conveniently) ignored though so that he could continue to specifically put down the movie instead of the comic which the movie was faithful too. Hypocritical considering he put down Spider-man Homecoming for certain reasons that involved not being accurate to the comic. I've never read a Black Panther comic. Then you have no right to complain. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Feb 28, 2018 2:50:06 GMT
I've never read a Black Panther comic. Then you have no right to complain. Amen. Death to shitbird tourists. |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Feb 28, 2018 2:53:21 GMT
I'm surprised no one brought up coming to America!
Which is easily one of the best Eddie Murphy movies!
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 28, 2018 6:56:36 GMT
I've never read a Black Panther comic. And it's invalid to compare Black Panther to Spider-Man. Spider-Man is 1 of the 4 most iconic superheroes (along with Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman) in American comics history so Spider-Man's history from the comics is well-known. But hardly anyone knows Black Panther's history from the comics. And what on earth would it matter if Black Panther isn't as famous? Just because he isn't as well known means they shouldn't be faithful to the comic? They're making an Aquaman and Shazam movie, they aren't famous like Batman or Superman either. Would you want them to start messing up the lore of those characters for the movie though? No you'd probably want it to be like the comic. Deadpool is a prime example, he isn't famous but look at how people lost their shit with the butchering they did with him for X-men Origins Wolverine then compare to how the Deadpool movie was received were they actually we're faithful to the comic. That nobody knows Black Panthers history means it's more important to make sure they retell his story accurately in the movie. It's usually better to stay true to the comics, but not always and especially not when it becomes outdated and makes no sense at all. For example, this is an image from a 1940s issue of Action Comics: www.supermanhomepage.com/images/phonebooth/1940s-PhoneBooth.jpg. Obviously, it doesn't make any sense to put this in a movie now in the 21st century because public phone booths are basically obsolete. Just like it wouldn't make any sense to have Man of Steel show Lois Lane typing an article for the Daily Planet on a typewriter because typewriters are now as obsolete as rotary telephones, Polaroid cameras, audio and video cassette tapes, and the knobs on car doors for rowing the window up and down. Those things are outdated so it wouldn't make any sense to show them in the movies now just because they were in the comics. Same with the mortal combat in Black Panther. That scene would be fine if this movie was made when Julius Caesar was alive and gladiators routinely fought in the Coliseum. But now in the 21st century, civilization has advanced beyond such barbaric and savage traditions so it makes no sense at all, especially for a nation that's supposed to be technologically advanced, to still choose a King by such barbaric and savage traditions. Now if Black Panther wanted to keep that barbaric and savage tradition in the movie, then I wouldn't have a problem with it as long as they make it clear that Wakanda isn't a technologically advanced nation at all but a primitive and technology-adverse nation. Because technologically advanced nations wouldn't resort to such barbaric and savage rituals to choose a King. But if they want Wakanda to be technologically advanced, then they shouldn't resort to such a barbaric and savage ritual to choose a King. They can't have it both ways. Either Wakanda is a technologically advanced nation (in which case they shouldn't have such a barbaric and savage ritual to choose a King) or Wakanda still chooses their King by this barbaric and savage ritual (in which case Wakanda can't be technologically advanced because technologically advanced nations have better methods of choosing a leader than resorting to such a barbaric and savage ritual). This is a major reason why I rated Black Panther a 1/10 - because it makes no sense at all for a supposedly technologically advanced nation in the 21st century to choose their King by barbaric and savage and medieval methods. As for Spider-Man, in the comics Peter's motivation for being a super-hero was because he felt responsible for Uncle Ben's death because he could've used his powers to stop the guy who later killed Uncle Ben. That motivation doesn't become outdated or change whether it's the 1960s or the 2010s. So that shouldn't have been changed from the comics. But SMH changed Peter's motivation for being a hero by turning Peter into just a show-off who's only goal is to try to impress Tony Stark. That's a shallow reason to become a superhero and really trashes the character of Spider-Man. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Feb 28, 2018 7:24:58 GMT
And what on earth would it matter if Black Panther isn't as famous? Just because he isn't as well known means they shouldn't be faithful to the comic? They're making an Aquaman and Shazam movie, they aren't famous like Batman or Superman either. Would you want them to start messing up the lore of those characters for the movie though? No you'd probably want it to be like the comic. Deadpool is a prime example, he isn't famous but look at how people lost their shit with the butchering they did with him for X-men Origins Wolverine then compare to how the Deadpool movie was received were they actually we're faithful to the comic. That nobody knows Black Panthers history means it's more important to make sure they retell his story accurately in the movie. It's usually better to stay true to the comics, but not always and especially not when it becomes outdated and makes no sense at all. For example, this is an image from a 1940s issue of Action Comics: www.supermanhomepage.com/images/phonebooth/1940s-PhoneBooth.jpg. Obviously, it doesn't make any sense to put this in a movie now in the 21st century because public phone booths are basically obsolete. Just like it wouldn't make any sense to have Man of Steel show Lois Lane typing an article for the Daily Planet on a typewriter because typewriters are now as obsolete as rotary telephones, Polaroid cameras, audio and video cassette tapes, and the knobs on car doors for rowing the window up and down. Those things are outdated so it wouldn't make any sense to show them in the movies now just because they were in the comics. Same with the mortal combat in Black Panther. That scene would be fine if this movie was made when Julius Caesar was alive and gladiators routinely fought in the Coliseum. But now in the 21st century, civilization has advanced beyond such barbaric and savage traditions so it makes no sense at all, especially for a nation that's supposed to be technologically advanced, to still choose a King by such barbaric and savage traditions. Now if Black Panther wanted to keep that barbaric and savage tradition in the movie, then I wouldn't have a problem with it as long as they make it clear that Wakanda isn't a technologically advanced nation at all but a primitive and technology-adverse nation. Because technologically advanced nations wouldn't resort to such barbaric and savage rituals to choose a King. But if they want Wakanda to be technologically advanced, then they shouldn't resort to such a barbaric and savage ritual to choose a King. They can't have it both ways. Either Wakanda is a technologically advanced nation (in which case they shouldn't have such a barbaric and savage ritual to choose a King) or Wakanda still chooses their King by this barbaric and savage ritual (in which case Wakanda can't be technologically advanced because technologically advanced nations have better methods of choosing a leader than resorting to such a barbaric and savage ritual). This is a major reason why I rated Black Panther a 1/10 - because it makes no sense at all for a supposedly technologically advanced nation in the 21st century to choose their King by barbaric and savage and medieval methods. As for Spider-Man, in the comics Peter's motivation for being a super-hero was because he felt responsible for Uncle Ben's death because he could've used his powers to stop the guy who later killed Uncle Ben. That motivation doesn't become outdated or change whether it's the 1960s or the 2010s. So that shouldn't have been changed from the comics. But SMH changed Peter's motivation for being a hero by turning Peter into just a show-off who's only goal is to try to impress Tony Stark. That's a shallow reason to become a superhero and really trashes the character of Spider-Man. But they can have it both ways. Do you know why? Because Black Panther is a work of fiction meant to entertain audiences and build profit for corporations. It’s not real life. You need to get a better grip on reality. Oh, and Black Panther beat Wonder Woman’s domestic today. Don’t cry, son. 🤯🤯🤯 |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Feb 28, 2018 8:29:00 GMT
It's usually better to stay true to the comics, but not always and especially not when it becomes outdated and makes no sense at all. The example you provide refers to technology, so of course it wouldn't make sense for a movie set in the modern day to have characters use decades old equipment. It's different with Black Panther though, if they want to fight to decide who becomes King then why not? They're fictional characters in a fictional land, they can have whatever rules they want. It doesn't matter if our civilisation has advanced. The movie wasn't about our civilisation, it's about a made up one. So they can have it both ways. They've got the most advanced nation on the planet, they fight to become King, they drink a purple flower and they worship a Panther God. It's not supposed to apply to our world. |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Feb 28, 2018 8:48:03 GMT
And what on earth would it matter if Black Panther isn't as famous? Just because he isn't as well known means they shouldn't be faithful to the comic? They're making an Aquaman and Shazam movie, they aren't famous like Batman or Superman either. Would you want them to start messing up the lore of those characters for the movie though? No you'd probably want it to be like the comic. Deadpool is a prime example, he isn't famous but look at how people lost their shit with the butchering they did with him for X-men Origins Wolverine then compare to how the Deadpool movie was received were they actually we're faithful to the comic. That nobody knows Black Panthers history means it's more important to make sure they retell his story accurately in the movie. It's usually better to stay true to the comics, but not always and especially not when it becomes outdated and makes no sense at all. How very true  DC-Fan's knowledge of comics is poor to say the least. In another thread he claimed Black Panther was named as such by the MCU because of the colour of his skin, yet DC's Black Lightning wasn't because black was the colour of his outfit (which was blue!) |
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Feb 28, 2018 17:13:51 GMT
Obviously, it doesn't make any sense to put this in a movie now in the 21st century because public phone booths are basically obsolete. Of course, public communication booths might be all the rage in a secret technologically advanced country that developed independently from the rest of the world. We know you hate BP because its success inflames your chronic butt-hurt. This sorry excuse of yours does little more than demonstrate a lack of imagination on your part. |
|
cricket
Sophomore
@cricket
Posts: 339
Likes: 226
 
|
Post by cricket on Feb 28, 2018 17:21:45 GMT
So, Black Panther beat Wonder Woman domestic take in 12 days? Wow! That must ...
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Mar 3, 2018 5:36:00 GMT
It's usually better to stay true to the comics, but not always and especially not when it becomes outdated and makes no sense at all. The example you provide refers to technology, so of course it wouldn't make sense for a movie set in the modern day to have characters use decades old equipment. It's different with Black Panther though, if they want to fight to decide who becomes King then why not? They're fictional characters in a fictional land, they can have whatever rules they want. It doesn't matter if our civilisation has advanced. The movie wasn't about our civilisation, it's about a made up one. So they can have it both ways. It isn't just technology. Wakanda is barbaric and savage because they still hold on to barbaric and savage rituals. You obviously still don't get the point so I'll make it simple to understand. A long, long time ago, it used to be the normal if someone was caught stealing, the punishment was that they get their hand chopped off. But civilized societies don't do that anymore because that's barbaric and savage. If Wakanda still punished thieves by chopping off their hand, then that would mean Wakanda is definitely not an advanced or civilized nation because advanced or civilized nations don't hold on to such barbaric and savage traditions. That's why Black Panther really is a movie deserving of a 1/10 rating. Because the writers can't figure out if Wakanda should be advanced or primitive. Wakanda has all this technology, but they still hold on to a barbaric and savage ritual of choosing a King by mortal combat (which no advanced or civilized nation today does) and their armies were still fighting with swords at the end of the movie. Klaue basically had a ray gun strapped to his wrist, yet the best weapons that a technologically advanced nation like Wakanda can come up with are primitive, medieval weapons? That doesn't make any sense at all and that's another reason why Black Panther deserves a 1/10 rating. |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Mar 3, 2018 6:23:59 GMT
It isn't just technology. Wakanda is barbaric and savage because they still hold on to barbaric and savage rituals. And? What's wrong with that? A fictional nation has a barbaric ritual in a superhero movie...what of it? But they don't do that... So you'd mean the comic writers as it was they who created the Black Panther and shaped the lore. The movie writers simply adapted what was in the comics. So your problem lies with the comics. Which again is exactly how it was in the comic which the movie is based upon. This is the same as Asgard in the Thor movies where they also have highly advanced technology but still fight with swords, again exactly as they do in the comic. They weren't the best though. They had advanced flying ships that looked like they came from Independence Day and the Black Panther suit. They didn't have those during the Medieval times nor do they have them now. |
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Mar 3, 2018 6:34:05 GMT
The example you provide refers to technology, so of course it wouldn't make sense for a movie set in the modern day to have characters use decades old equipment. It's different with Black Panther though, if they want to fight to decide who becomes King then why not? They're fictional characters in a fictional land, they can have whatever rules they want. It doesn't matter if our civilisation has advanced. The movie wasn't about our civilisation, it's about a made up one. So they can have it both ways. is a MCU movie. That's why Black Panther really is a movie deserving of a 1/10 rating. IKR? |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on Mar 3, 2018 10:35:06 GMT
The example you provide refers to technology, so of course it wouldn't make sense for a movie set in the modern day to have characters use decades old equipment. It's different with Black Panther though, if they want to fight to decide who becomes King then why not? They're fictional characters in a fictional land, they can have whatever rules they want. It doesn't matter if our civilisation has advanced. The movie wasn't about our civilisation, it's about a made up one. So they can have it both ways. It isn't just technology. Wakanda is barbaric and savage because they still hold on to barbaric and savage rituals. You obviously still don't get the point so I'll make it simple to understand. A long, long time ago, it used to be the normal if someone was caught stealing, the punishment was that they get their hand chopped off. But civilized societies don't do that anymore because that's barbaric and savage. If Wakanda still punished thieves by chopping off their hand, then that would mean Wakanda is definitely not an advanced or civilized nation because advanced or civilized nations don't hold on to such barbaric and savage traditions. That's why Black Panther really is a movie deserving of a 1/10 rating. Because the writers can't figure out if Wakanda should be advanced or primitive. Wakanda has all this technology, but they still hold on to a barbaric and savage ritual of choosing a King by mortal combat (which no advanced or civilized nation today does) and their armies were still fighting with swords at the end of the movie. Klaue basically had a ray gun strapped to his wrist, yet the best weapons that a technologically advanced nation like Wakanda can come up with are primitive, medieval weapons? That doesn't make any sense at all and that's another reason why Black Panther deserves a 1/10 rating. I mean we're talking about a piece of Africa that closed itself off from everyone. It's not unrealistic for them to continue traditions that may be questionable and outdated by our standards or whatever. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 3, 2018 13:18:27 GMT
The example you provide refers to technology, so of course it wouldn't make sense for a movie set in the modern day to have characters use decades old equipment. It's different with Black Panther though, if they want to fight to decide who becomes King then why not? They're fictional characters in a fictional land, they can have whatever rules they want. It doesn't matter if our civilisation has advanced. The movie wasn't about our civilisation, it's about a made up one. So they can have it both ways. It isn't just technology. Wakanda is barbaric and savage because they still hold on to barbaric and savage rituals. Because they have real mysticism and a real God telling them to do so. Pretty believable. |
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 3, 2018 13:19:39 GMT
It isn't just technology. Wakanda is barbaric and savage because they still hold on to barbaric and savage rituals. And? What's wrong with that? A fictional nation has a barbaric ritual in a superhero movie...what of it? He keeps ignoring that it's because their Panther God told them to do things that way, and we know their mysticism and God are real. It's no different from how the Amazons still have a Monarchy and stuff in WW because their Gods told them to be that way. |
|
