|
tsob posted:Objecting to it is the same thing as objecting to the existence of vibranium. How exactly? Monarchies and the CIA are both bad organizations that historically have made the world a much worse place. Vibranium hasn’t made the world a worse place. Black Panther could have very, very easily ended with “and one thing my father dragged his rear end on was bringing democracy to Wakanda, because if anyone can just, like, beat me up and gain control of the entire country and our magic plants and super powerful science technology, doesn’t that seem like a terrible, completely idiotic system for an otherwise utopic society?” but like everything else in Black Panther, it’s just a barely surface level exploration of that before dropping into superficial Marvel shlock.
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:How exactly? "It's not realistic that it works like x " or "it's not realistic that it's good at y". So what? It's just a narrative convenience, so whether it's depicted realistically or not has no bearing on anything at the end of the day.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:45
|
|
|
My point is that it’s a narrative inconvenience. Wakanda being a monarchy with trial by combat rules in 2019 or whatever is literally the source of conflict for a movie and paints the technological futuristic utopia of Wakanda as a backwater hick-town. Like, imagine being a Wakandan, parking your flying hover car in your solar powered smart house and your free government issue nano-butler tells you that while you were at work the King’s long lost brother showed up and just whooped his muh-fuckin rear end and now we’re a fascist hellscape preparing for war! The implication that technological advancements wouldn’t also essentially force social and political evolution is just extremely weird on a level that no explanation is satisfying. You can’t paint Wakanda as “the future” but then the entire plot revolves around the completely arcane rules of tradition and succession that contrast quite vividly with the entire society they’ve presented.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:51
|
|
|
But you can and they did.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:How exactly? In a world where Donald Trump exists, monarchy sounds a lot less stupid than electing whoever lies the best and then giving them superpowers.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:58
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:My point is that it’s a narrative inconvenience. Wakanda being a monarchy with trial by combat rules in 2019 or whatever is literally the source of conflict for a movie and paints the technological futuristic utopia of Wakanda as a backwater hick-town. What you've just described is not a narrative inconvenience though, because it didn't inconvenience the narrative the writer wanted. At least so far as we know. It was the plot the writer wanted so far as we know. A narrative inconvenience would be something that prevented them from writing a thing they wanted to do because it would become impossible to write that idea for whatever reason if that narrative element existed. No, what you've described is a narrative convenience, because it existed to allow the plot the writer wanted. Which is fine. I would agree with your general point in the real world; Wakanda isn't real though. So it having odd rules is fine, because even if it wasn't a monarchy, then it'd be possible to write a story where an outsider takes authoritarian control of the entire government and burns the supply of heart shaped herb, before putting the country to war. It might be even less believable that they'd manage it, but that wouldn't stop it being possible.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 12:59
|
|
|
Part of the story was the Dora Milaje, and Okoye specifically, swearing allegiance to Killmonger because he was the king. Okoye would snap out of it when T'Challa reappeared, to the point that she arrested her husband, but it goes to show how restricting the governmental system in Wakanda is.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:05
|
|
|
My point is that “Technological Utopian Society” and “Tribal Monarchy” are incongruous. A society in which all decisions are made empirically by a single individual who is not subject to any checks and balances of any kind is bad! I really don’t know how the film could have communicated “this political system is extremely volatile and poorly equipped to deal with extremism” any more clearly than it already does. The lovely politics of Wakanda are the problem of the film. That’s even the reason so many people agree with Killmonger, because the politics of Wakanda ARE BAD! Jedit posted:In a world where Donald Trump exists, monarchy sounds a lot less stupid than electing whoever lies the best and then giving them superpowers. Donald Trump won because the Dems would rather surrender the reigns to a fascist than potentially make the world a better place for poor and sick people. Anyone who was paying attention in 2016 knows this is what happened.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:07
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In a world where Donald Trump exists, monarchy sounds a lot less stupid than electing whoever lies the best and then giving them superpowers. Absolutely incredible.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:10
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:My point is that “Technological Utopian Society” and “Tribal Monarchy” are incongruous. This is the basis for thousands of sci-fi and fantasy stories. If you substitute "tribal monarchy" for "regular monarchy or dictatorship," then it is the basis of 90% of sci-fi or fantasy premises.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:38
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In a world where Donald Trump exists, monarchy sounds a lot less stupid than electing whoever lies the best and then giving them superpowers. Master level troll, well done.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:39
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:This is the basis for thousands of sci-fi and fantasy stories. If you substitute "tribal monarchy" for "regular monarchy or dictatorship," then it is the basis of 90% of sci-fi or fantasy premises. It's not even the only one in the MCU. Thor is exactly the same, because Asgard is a monarchy despite being a magical/technological utopia too. Ragnarok even had the same issue of someone usurping authority, and using it to go to war since Hela plans to use Asgard to subjugate the other realms after she solidifies control by killing Thor. Loki almost did the same thing, and wanted to take control in the original film after Thor was banished. Loki seemingly just wants to enjoy the trappings of supreme power rather than to be a conqueror though, at least. Edit: The Inhumans prominently feature the royal family of that advanced technological society too. Including lots of stories about succession by violence since Black Bolt's brother wants his throne, and has taken it via force multiple times throughout the decades. Including in the recent television show, which is tangentially part of the MCU. If Namor or Doom ever do make it into the MCU (and there are apparently plans for both, so it's likely) then that's two more monarchical rulers of technologically advanced nations in the MCU. tsob fucked around with this message at 14:02 on May 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 13:51
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In a world where Donald Trump exists, monarchy sounds a lot less stupid than electing whoever lies the best and then giving them superpowers. Ok, so we’re all in agreement: only Doom shall rule. All jokes aside, it would be kind of awesome if who ever writes the Dr. Doom script makes a plausible argument for Doom-ocracy by juxtaposing Doom against the worst examples of the leaders of modern forms of government. All people are equal under Doom because everyone is equally unequal to Doom.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 14:22
|
|
|
Casnorf posted:Too bad, cause I was agreeing with ya ya dingus. Hahaha You gotta make it bite size and wrapped in bacon.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:How exactly? The political system in Wakanda has less in common with monarchy than Vibranium does with Aluminium. Maybe it would help to make up a name for it; ‘combat meritocracy’ or whatever. It doesn’t already have Duc a name because, as far as I know, it is not a thing that ever existed outside the pages of pulp fiction. I mean, I’d lay pretty good odds I could beat up QEIi, but that wouldn’t persuade the British army to swear loyalty to me..
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/roslyntalusan/status/1389264821875576835?s=19
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
This is the laziest thing ever.  Edit: The only LGBTQ+ character in it is Deadpool lmao
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:20
|
|
|
Desperado Bones posted:This is the laziest thing ever. I guess if you're stretching it one might be able to say that the Stormtrooper could be LGBTQ+. This reminds me of the empty poo poo that corps do in June where they just photoshop a rainbow into their twitter logo, then remove it at 12:01am on July 1st.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:My point is that it’s a narrative inconvenience. Wakanda being a monarchy with trial by combat rules in 2019 or whatever is literally the source of conflict for a movie and paints the technological futuristic utopia of Wakanda as a backwater hick-town. I kinda feel this. I think it would have worked a lot better, if we'd seen more of Wakanda outside of the regals first, so that we got the contrast. Then it would have felt like a jab at stuffy anachronistic monarchy, instead of seeming to venerate it or treat it as normal. I mean, the thing is, that IS what Monarchy is like, hugely anachronistic. Because it has to be. It is ONLY traditions. If it were to get with the times, it would outmode itself. There are six ravens at the Tower of London that are tended and raised by a royal Ravenmaster. When the Queen gives her speech in the house of lords, an MP is delivered to Buckingham Palace first, and 'held as a hostage' to ensure the Queens safe return. Like, there's all sorts of totally loving stupid poo poo. The stupid royal tradition being a brutal primal brawl is kind of unfortunate, but certainly a makes for a much cooler scene than like a joust. /Edit: Those funko pops... I mean, .... hmm. There's a part of me that's like, as a kid, I would have REALLY wanted a rainbow coloured version of my toys, because I loved rainbow coloured stuff. There's a part of me that feels like it can't ONLY be an LGBTQ+ thing, anyone can like rainbows! But then, no. It's very obviously an LGBTQ+ thing and it feels sort of icky for me to be suggesting otherwise, and Disney obviously realise this, and that's really kind of ugh. !Klams fucked around with this message at 15:37 on May 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:34
|
|
|
In the last movie, a guy turned up in Wakanda who literally no one who lives there had ever heard of, and because he had some previously unknown link the monarchy, and happened to be good at fighting on top of a waterfall, the country had no choice but to make him the king and absolute ruler later that afternoon. So yeah, they could use some constitutional reform.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:36
|
|
|
The boring and actual reason why so much media uses monarchies is that it makes it way easier to personalize the drama and raise the stakes of an inter-personal conflict. It's also why so many shows are made about the British Royal Family and historical dramas always focus on a royal family.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
Floppychop posted:
Oh god, it's terrible. Wonder what "corporate ally" poo poo it's coming this year. Although I still have a laugh at the rainbow Doritos. Don't be cowards and keep the gay Doritos all year long. !Klams posted:
Yeah, I mean rainbows in toys is a silly but fun collector stuff but this is just lazy corporate poo poo. People have pointed out that they didn't even make the effort to release Funkos of canonically queer characters, or some actual representation.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:40
|
|
|
Comrade Fakename posted:In the last movie, a guy turned up in Wakanda who literally no one who lives there had ever heard of, and because he had some previously unknown link the monarchy, and happened to be good at fighting on top of a waterfall, the country had no choice but to make him the king and absolute ruler later that afternoon. In a way.... Marrying into a Royal Family is the same. Only, instead of being really good at fighting, you're really good at loving. Kind of. In a way. If you look at it super cross eyed.... I'm playing a weird amount of devils advocate today. Desperado Bones posted:Yeah, I mean rainbows in toys is a silly but fun collector stuff but this is just lazy corporate poo poo. People have pointed out that they didn't even make the effort to release Funkos of canonically queer characters, or some actual representation. It's so Disney, isn't it. Absolutely clean-as-a-snow-white-whistle morals. It's just that their morals are 'a moral obligation to the shareholders'. !Klams fucked around with this message at 15:43 on May 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 15:40
|
|
|
Comrade Fakename posted:In the last movie, a guy turned up in Wakanda who literally no one who lives there had ever heard of, and because he had some previously unknown link the monarchy, and happened to be good at fighting on top of a waterfall, the country had no choice but to make him the king and absolute ruler later that afternoon. Strange priests lying around in waterfalls distributing herbs is no basis for a system of government!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:06
|
|
|
tsob posted:It's not even the only one in the MCU. Thor is exactly the same, because Asgard is a monarchy despite being a magical/technological utopia too. Ragnarok even had the same issue of someone usurping authority, and using it to go to war since Hela plans to use Asgard to subjugate the other realms after she solidifies control by killing Thor. Loki almost did the same thing, and wanted to take control in the original film after Thor was banished. Loki seemingly just wants to enjoy the trappings of supreme power rather than to be a conqueror though, at least. yeah it's this the problem isn't whether monarchies are good, it's that the sudden need to argue that portraying monarchies as anything other than extremely negative sure did only seem to prop up when we needed a reason to poo poo on the good movie liked by and featuring black people I have never in my life seen people get so up in arms about depictions of political systems until Black Panther
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
Bleck posted:yeah it's this I do see the point, but I do think it matters less with Asgard because they're an alien civilisation you aren't supposed to identify with or thing about. Whereas the whole premise of Wakanda is 'What if the most advanced country in the world was African?' and making that country a monarchy pretty effectively sweeps the legs of that idea.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:21
|
|
|
What if the most advanced and enlightened country in the world was african? And they used spears and rhinos to fight and had deathmatches for right of rule and
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:25
|
|
|
The Captain America films and Black Panther films are political, which is why the politics of those films gets discussed a lot. Thor was a boring Shakespearean royal family drama analog that had no real political content. You said you give a poo poo what Coates says. Well he said in a 2015 Atlantic article: 'Wakanda is a contradiction. It is the most advanced nation on Earth existing under one of the most primitive forms of government on Earth'
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
Asgard was the most advanced society in the Nine Realms, but their army exclusively used swords and were decimated the very first time someone with a gun invaded. Maybe all of it is a subtle satire of the effectiveness of monarchy.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Whereas the whole premise of Wakanda is 'What if the most advanced country in the world was African?' and making that country a monarchy pretty effectively sweeps the legs of that idea. the movie also, despite how well people dance around it, directly shows the consequences of functioning as an absolute monarchy, it's kind of, like, the whole problem even M'Baku's character's whole deal is that he represents an entire chunk of Wakandan society that are considered villainous outcasts because they pissed off some king centuries before - that T'Challa ends their challenge by convincing him that it's more important for him to be there for his people than it is to uphold a tradition is what the Good Story business generally refers to as Foreshadowing Ravel posted:The Captain America films and Black Panther films are political, which is why the politics of those films gets discussed a lot. everything is political for example: saying "it's weird that an African monarchy would be advanced" while also saying "it's not weird that European (coded) monarchy would be so advanced" is a very political statement Ravel posted:You said you give a poo poo what Coates says. Well he said in a 2015 Atlantic article: 'Wakanda is a contradiction. It is the most advanced nation on Earth existing under one of the most primitive forms of government on Earth' and he's correct - if only Black Panther (the film) was, you know, almost entirely about the failings of those systems, or loving something, Bleck fucked around with this message at 16:33 on May 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:31
|
|
|
Bleck posted:and he's correct - if only Black Panther (the film) was, you know, almost entirely about the failings of those systems, or loving something, So what you're saying is the film shows that monarchy is a poor system of government, and shows us explicitly in text. Which is what I said to begin with.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:36
|
|
|
Bleck posted:yeah it's this Once you realise things like this it's really hard to not notice it everywhere in media criticism. People use legitimate concerns as an immediate excuse to let out all the racism they've kept bottled up. I'm not saying that's the case in the thread right now, as a lot of people are reacting to the issue raised elsewhere, but it's incredibly pervasive. The other piece of media I am obsessed with right now, Invincible, has a prime example of this. The main love interest is a black, outwardly feminist, headstrong woman. She had a single moment that was poorly written which made her unlikeable in ONE SCENE and now I have to avoid the subreddit and the Facebook groups because they're filled with a nauseating deluge of racism and misogyny. This is a universe filled with literal genocidal psychopaths, abusive relationships and incredible atrocities but all the hate posts online are the black woman who mildly rejected the main character. Everyone says they liked her until "X" when it's obvious that they were looking for a justifiable non-racist reason to latch onto.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:39
|
|
|
Collapsing Farts posted:What if the most advanced and enlightened country in the world was african? And they used spears and rhinos to fight and had deathmatches for right of rule and The straw rooftop skyscrapers are pretty dumb. I want my afro-futurism to be inspired and out there, not lazily taking African stereotypes and amplifying them
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
Marsupial Ape posted:You gotta make it bite size and wrapped in bacon. Well, the movie references are kind of like bacon... And it only looks super long on mobile, haha. This ain't Twitter. Wait, should I post some thirst traps then? Sexy barracuda incomi
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
Ravel posted:So what you're saying is the film shows that monarchy is a poor system of government, and shows us explicitly in text. Which is what I said to begin with. yes, but please note that the topic began not with what you said, but with this live with fruit posted:The monarchy stuff is a black spot on the film so it'd be great if they just threw in a line about T'Challa breaking it up. this post and subsequent responses by the poster are not just saying "monarchies are not a good form of government in real life," which nobody disagrees with, but rather implying that the depiction of a fantastical monarchy is itself irresponsible and bad, a problem with the film, despite the text of the film explicitly criticizing the idea my problem is not with the idea that monarchies are, in fact, bad - it's with people looking for any excuse they can snatch up to denigrate the film BurritoJustice posted:Once you realise things like this it's really hard to not notice it everywhere in media criticism. People use legitimate concerns as an immediate excuse to let out all the racism they've kept bottled up. I'm not saying that's the case in the thread right now, as a lot of people are reacting to the issue raised elsewhere, but it's incredibly pervasive. yeah straight up this Bleck fucked around with this message at 16:48 on May 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:45
|
|
|
There are lots of problematic elements with the Black Panther source material and film. Plenty of Black Americans and Africans have pointed them out. Coates is unusual in that he even wrote a run of the comic which was very introspective about those elements. Is there bad faith criticism of the film from white people who have over-prioritised it in their heads? Undoubtedly, but that doesn't mean you can shout down the former because of your frustration with the latter.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
"the film is bad because it depicts a bad thing as bad" is not what I would call a good faith criticism
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
I mean if you're a spacefaring people that live close to indefinitely or until you get murdered it might not be a bad idea to just find one dude who's good at the job and let him keep it. that's not actually what happened in asgard but 'benevolent dictatorship' makes a lot more sense if the dictator in question doesn't die and remains incorruptible so his dickhead oldest kid or worst cousin doesn't slide in and ruin everything... both of which did happen in Thor eventually anyway
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
The film portrays it as cool and actually good, as long as T'challa is the leader. In fact at the end of the film we're right back to where they started. So is the film still portraying the utopian futuristic society as bad? If not, I think it can be fairly criticized without whipping out the 'you're only saying that because the king is black' nonsense.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
Bleck posted:"the film is bad because it depicts a bad thing as bad" is not what I would call a good faith criticism I didn't say the film was bad. And several people disputed that the film presents monarchy governance as bad.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2021 16:58
|
|