|
I think I disagree that the message of the movie is even about politics, specifically. All the fine details of ridiculous succession by combat, or solving systemic oppression with a YMCA, none of that needs to be perfect cause it's just window dressing. What, would the movie have been better if the challenges were made in the form of lengthy Articles of No Confidence, submitted before a Wakanda Senate, Star Wars style? The core of the movie to me, instead of bureaucracy, is about culture and how we should treat our families. Not how governments can best enact foreign and domestic policy. The Wakandan Royal Family is the part of the family that Got Theirs and not only doesn't see a need to help their suffering cousins - they will actively gently caress you over and sever ties if you aren't acting respectable or you're getting involved with the wrong crowd. So the message of the movie isn't about a specific political ideology that should be enacted by governmental bodies. It's about a way of living that needs to be taken up by the people. Black communities need to support each other instead of each person trying to make it big on their own. Nothing deeper than that.
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
i am the bird posted:I agree that family is an important theme here but family is also the smallest political unit and is often an analogy for larger political systems, including the ideas of Pan Africanism presented in the film. Stating that blackness is a global community is an inherently political statement. Yeah, you're certainly right. It's all political ideology in the end. I just view it more on a smaller scale. More on the "how should I treat my family and community" level, less "how should I proceed if I ever find myself acting as a CIA agent in Rwanda".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:It's my interpretation. The basic plot of Black Panther is the same as the Iron Man movies and Thor 1: some usurper takes control of the hero's fortune and power and casts him out, and the hero has to rise up to defend his status. Innocent lives are only incidentally threatened, like how in Thor he only had lives to save when that metal golem started shooting up the town for no reason other than that Thor was in it, or in Iron Man 2 where Vanko decides he wants to shoot up a crowd for some reason I can't recall. Most of your questions I feel have pretty clear answers, but this one's a little more interesting. If W'Kabi's anything to go by, the answer is... no, they don't really care about non-Wakandan blacks and caring for the downtrodden and social reform. It's more about building the glory of the Wakandan empire and not hiding and acting meek when they feel they should be the ones in charge.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:Bucky, for instance. But Bucky was practically family to Steve!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2018 15:58
|
|
|
i am the bird posted:In Black Panther, there is a character who was ripped from the life he could’ve had to instead develop as an adult in a violent, militaristic community. Due to that upbringing, he was targeted by an intelligence agency for an imperialist superpower, then trained and brainwashed to be a killer. The organization exploited the character’s feelings of isolation, abandonment, fear, oppression, and pain. He caused the deaths of untold numbers — including the dad of a superhero who sought swift, violent revenge — and is directly responsible for global instability. He would’ve continued down this path of destruction if not for another superhero with whom he shared an intimate connection. The superhero, in an expression of love and empathy and knowing that the character was not intrinsically an unjust murderer but instead a victim of violence and oppression himself, risked his political and military authority to save the character. Through Wakandan technology and ritual and restorative justice, the character experienced rehabilitation and will now, in all likelihood, be a great force for good in the world. lol It would have been pretty funny if they would have directly drawn this parallel by including Bucky in the movie itself, perhaps even being given the kind of compassionate, restorative treatment that Killmonger never got in the same situation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
McCloud posted:My question is, what is the goal of the outreach program he starrs in the US? Is it to better the lives of black kids? If so, isn't that increadibly ineffective? Like, the thing that's holding black folks down isn't a lack of education, it's a systemic and continuous effort made by society to hamstring and handicap black people. Starting a new school for black kids will not affect this systemic effort. The more I read this thread the more I get the impression that no one here has any idea what community organizing actually is or how change happens. Just giving services to black kids doesn't dismantle the system on its own, fair enough. But that's not the end game. Even Wakanda doesn't have the resources the bring down and rebuild the entire world's political and economic machine. You gotta get the community involved. But to do that you first gotta empower them Get them the things they need so they're not in a crisis - proper healthcare, legal aid, quality education, childcare. All of these things are the things that are available in a community center. And in the process of attaining those things, you must address the systemic and structural problems that are holding your community back. Get better representation in your government, your police force, change racist laws, get translators for ESL communities, all in the service of achieving concrete goals that will improve people's lives on a day to day level. It's an outreach center because the goal is to reach out into the community and get the entire committee to get engaged, the same way Erik changed T'Challa. Like the little kid at the end who was inspired by T'Challa on the playground. You need to totally change people's mindsets on what is possible. Once you have a large scale, unified movement, then you can start to get poo poo done. Is this blaming oppressed people for being oppressed? I argue that it's not - it's telling them that the story they have been told that they are powerless is a lie, and it's time to reclaim their power.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:While working alongside a member of an organisation that has done more than its fair share to maintain that horrifying system. You know, a lot of the issues with the movie can be reconciled in one way or another, but... but, yeah. Yeah. I gotta agree with you on this. I just don't see how there's any reason they needed to have a CIA agent as one of the heroes. That alone throws such a wrench into any but the most cynical readings of the movie.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
McCloud posted:
Think about it like an abusive relationship. The abuser should be the one who has to change; but you can't make them, and they're not going to. You can only change yourself. Yeah, it's unfair, but it's the only power you have available to make your life better. If you're waiting for them to racists to stop being racist and fix things for you you're gonna be waiting forever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
Seedge posted:Calling out an abuser has certainly resulted in big change so far when people do it! Sure, this time, but there's been a far too many times where that hasn't been the case. Where people have been shamed or intimidated into shutting up. One person isn't enough for this. You need to build a movement. And ideally, you want to build up a community movement with some momentum before you try a risky push like this. That way, win or fail, you can keep your other projects going. But... it is just a movie, and they don't have to go the safe, boring, procedural way. They certainly could have had something in the movie where T'Challa starts a #metoo-esque movement for racism, with person after person publicly calling out racist abusers. That could have had a real impact.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
garycoleisgod posted:But if you want change, what are the other options? As I said, we all know the outreach center ain't gonna do poo poo. This is wildly dismissive to the thousands of PoC, LGBT and labor activists that are doing organizational work right now around the world with real results. The wheel turns slowly but we do get things done, even with non-violent tactics.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:America has had two violent revolutions, the outcomes of which are remembered pretty fondly. Most modern countries were founded by extremists of some sort or another. I feel like you're forgetting one... something about, like, panthers or something? I don't know, it's not springing to mind.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 04:23
|
|
|
garycoleisgod posted:This is what I was trying to say but better written and more concise. Ok but what does that actually look like at a practical level? T'Challa picks up a phone and yells "Legalize communism, dude!!" into it? What actual action do you want him to take?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:There’s a wide breadth of possible options between “outreach center” and “kill all white people and bow to me,” and any of those would have been better than what got. Supplying advanced arms to rebels - what could go wrong? I'm sure those weapons will never be stolen by the government and turned against the people they are meant to protect.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Mazzagatti2Hotty posted:The villain of Black Panther is indifference. And it's one that both T'challa and Killmonger in their ideological struggle ultimately defeat. T'challa has to grow up to realize that isolationism is the wrong path, and he couldn't have done it without Erik. 100%. Thank you for saying this so well. This is why, to me, it doesn't matter to me that T'Challa may or may not be following the best route to social change. He's doing something, and doing it in good faith. Spend some time trying to get anything done and you'll learn pretty quick that the terrifically high disengagement rate may well be your biggest enemy. Just getting people doing anything is a victory. After that, they can volunteer for Campaign Zero, totally sell out and do election work, decide that violent revolution isn't ridiculous at all and start going to antifa meetups, whatever. As long as they're doing something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:As I've pointed out, this is just the basic sleight-of-hand used to justify the movie's reactionary politics. "We understand your grievances, but what you are doing is nevertheless wrong.." Personally I agree with the film that Killmonger's brand of imperialism is wrong, but I don't feel like they earn it. It really feels like they're making him into a strawman to prove their point if that's what you mean.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 19:23
|
|
|
pospysyl posted:The movie's core argument is: "Violent imperialism: bad. Cultural and economic imperialism: very good." Taking over nations by using covert paramilitaries would be wrong, but buying up foreign property and using it to disseminate propaganda, thereby displacing local culture is correct. You might actually find this argument persuasive and reasonable, but you shouldn't. Good to know that oppressive structural racism is actually just "local culture" and it would be insensitive to attempt to change it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:I really don't think that's what was being referred to. the implication is that Wakanda's outreach efforts would cause the cultures of black communities worldwide to be essentially overwritten by Wakandan culture, which I... can possibly see, but I don't think the movie really gives us enough to judge on? Ok, I see what he was saying then, but I don't think the film showed that. Centers like that only work if assimilate to the locals and their culture. Weren't T'Challa and Shuri wearing Western clothing in the final scene? And the building, it could have been a wild SciFi fantasy Wakanda complex, but it was typical American architecture. What little evidence there was supports the opposite reading.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Again, this just shows why people keep talking about Killmonger even when they reject what he represents: it helps implicitly justify T'Challa without the burden of actually explicating what he stands for. I still say that this is not a movie about foreign policy. All of that is tertiary. This is a movie written, produced, and directed by Americans for an American audience. It's about Black liberation culture in America and the divide between different tactics - including isolationism, i.e. "got mine"-ism. T'Challa, by the end, stands for lifting up your brothers and sisters in your community by sharing what you've got in order to help empower them to collectively fight against structural & systemic oppression. This can include violence, especially to defend your home and family, but even then, it is tragic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
Sinding Johansson posted:In what way? He's basically an African Tony Stark. The weapons, money and power are all for him to wield. Even if he follows through with the outreach, he will never eliminate the oppression that he himself embodies. Right, *he* won't. That's gonna be what the little kid playing basketball at the end does. He doesn't make just one center as a token gesture. Do they need T'Challa to face into the camera wink, and say, "And I'm just getting started?" Oh wait that literally happens
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:What is an outreach center? What will they do there? If you genuinely don't know, it's not exactly simple, and it's not a fault of the movie that it expects you to be familiar with the subject. Everything from policy advocacy, legal aid, direct action which can be in direct opposition of the government (including aiding more directly radical groups), grassroots campaign work, community forums, translation services and language classes, employment services, food banks & soup kitchens, the list is lengthy and is mostly determined by what the people need. If you have some interest in social change, take a look some time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 03:50
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:I’m familiar with actual outreach centers. My question is what the Wakandan outreach center will do that is distinct from many other organizations that already do the things you listed. Or is there no distinction? Is it simply another philanthropic organ like United way, Boys and Girls club, Salvation Army, etc? Maaaybe they'll give vibranium tech? Maybe? Good chance not, too, but otherwise, yeah, that's pretty much how I saw it. I mean it's specifically targeted to disenfranchised black communities, but there are plenty of organizations like that. Except he has endless funding. I suppose he could just as easily funnel resources into one of those pre-existing groups, except for the logistics of endorsing a real-world organization in a blockbuster film. And I guess he probably *wants* to make a public spectacle of it to create good PR for Wakanda, so the centers are doing some brand rehabilitation, too.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
Sinding Johansson posted:Uh, this doesn't parse at all. What specifically will the kid do?!Are you suggesting that the kid will learn all he can about vibranium then take power forcibly like Erik did? In a sense, I guess. As long as T'Challa's running the center - as you point out - the entire show is wrapped up in an oppressive monarchy, inextricably tainted by him. It's up to the next generation to take things over from him. Follow his example, but do it better and take things in a direction that T'Challa, with his vibranium-spoon upbringing, just wouldn't be able to imagine. Except since it's an outreach center it'd probably look less like a batshit crazy murder-his-girl-for-fun-Erik rampage and more like a hostile takeover or something else really boring. XboxPants fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Mar 3, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2018 08:30
|
|
|
temple posted:zizek is garbage Yeah, not a very hot take when it's the same reading that the production team is giving in official statements. (Erik is the hero, T'Challa is the villain, vibranium-spoon, etc)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2018 09:32
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The important thing is, of course, that Killmonger is working against the interests of the CIA and the West. The CIA is opposed to people like Killmonger. There was a much better movie about this, called The Spook Who Sat by the Door, where a man rained by the CIA uses the skills he was taught for the cause of black liberation. T'Challa's goals align with those of the global establishment. Ross's is bumbling and marginal precisely to distract from the fact that there's no real conflict between the CIA and T'Challa. Erik's ideals don't don't really matter to the CIA. He's been too heavily corrupted by their programming. Everything he does will end up following their methodology and furthering their interests in the end. Killmonger is the one aligned with the global establishment. Not in his mind, but in his actions. If giving every black citizen a machine gun was enough to end racism we could do that today. That's not a good plan. Without doing the hard work of building a united front first, people will get picked off one by one and the weapons will be collected by the governments, gangs, militias, or whoever is in charge in the area. edit: YOLOsubmarine posted:The ex CIA agent who is now a mercenary working against the goals of the actual CIA agent is actually representative of the CIA as an organization, whereas the actual CIA agent acting in a official CIA capacity in the movie does not represent the CIA, that’s just incidental. yes, this XboxPants fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Mar 5, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2018 23:00
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:No, not that. That's where we disagree, then. Violent, uncoordinated conflict is going to do nothing but hurt the underclass and further cement the power of the ruling elite. It doesn't matter what the motivation of the guy who started the riot was once the military reappropriates their weapons. You guys don't know poo poo. How many of you know people that have gone through violent revolutions, hiding in bushes handing out grenades, having their fingernails pulled out as a child, watching everyone in your family die? It's not a good time, and "more weapons", no matter who you give them to, isn't enough to change the way the world turns. It just keeps it spinning in the same direction, and keeping things as they are is in the interest of the people who are currently in power - the CIA and power structure they represent.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:Irrespective of your views on the morality of violent revolutions, I’m not sure how you can come to the conclusion that what the establishment in America wants is black people being given superweapons and told to point them at white people. I wouldn't say that's the top choice, but it works. He's still playing their game, and as long as it's their game, they are going to win. They've written all the rules, they own the board, the referee is on the take. That's why it's so important that he has to stop using "CIA tactics". It doesn't even matter who kills who, the establishment wins just by virtue of a divided society. You think the Koch brothers care about a few thousand dead white people? Did you know the only time the US government bombed our own country was a black neighborhood that was getting too powerful? Imagine racial tension and violence at a high not seen since the civil war. Imagine the elections you could win from that, the products you could sell, the entire brands you could launch based on "family values". The only way to actually fight against the status quo is to bring disenfranchised people together and build power, like T'Challa did when he reached out to the Jabari - community organizing. This can include violence, too, as it did with them. But it can't only be violence. That doesn't change anything.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Yep, the reading is that Ross is acting out of self-determination but Kilmonger isn't. Like Bravestofthelamps pointed out, it's an attempt to get a progressive reading out of this deeply reactionary film. Yeah like I do admit I really have to bend over backwards to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one. It's way easier to see Killmonger as a strawman meant to paint the black lib movement as violent monsters, and the only salvation is to hope for benevolent liberal billionaire philanthropists. His loving name is Killmonger I mean come on. Snowman_McK posted:You think distributing magic superweapons to the oppressed people of countries right across the world would result in a few thousand dead people? Insert number.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 06:19
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Sorry to bring authorial intent into this, but what reading do you think was intended? I'm going back and forth even as I write this post. It's such a mess. I'm gonna say they were probably trying to paint Killmonger as the danger of going too dark side and being too obsessed with vengeance, taking down your enemies, etc, rather than supporting your family and community and building a power base than can subvert the underlying social values. They just did a really bad job of it. Did they really think people wouldn't side with Erik? Did they not realize they were making the entire black lib movement look like villains? Did they not realize they were making the CIA look like heroes? Did they not realize they needed to spend more time showing what T'Challa's proposed solution was? So many dropped balls. Erik really feels so sympathetic, and so convincing. I could totally believe the authors wanted him as the hero. But then he's a monster with a bad plan so 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 07:29
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Erik is, in terms of characterisation, really sympathetic, but in terms of film structure, is an out and out villain. He never appears in any scene without doing something awful or being unpleasant (the first half of the museum scene is the only exception), and the other characters only interact with him to try and stop him or aid him in harming the main character. It was like they searched for *villain* and replaced it with *sympathetic villain* without changing anything else. Hah, I had actually been thinking just the flip of that - that it almost felt as if there was an earlier draft where Erik was too obviously a straight-up tragic hero, and they just added "and then Killmonger kicks a puppy" to the end of every one of his scenes. But yeah. Very incongruent, like even they weren't sure what direction they were going.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:Black Panther is a fantasy. It's about a wondrous African sci-fi utopia. You say that as if something has been stolen from you. This is what temple has been getting at. The authors are under no obligation to create the movie you think would be ideal. Saying "it had potential to be a different movie!" can scarcely even be called criticism, it's just saying you personally wanted different things to happen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:This is another example of trying to argue "in the negative". "This movie is reactionary" and "it should have been revolutionary" are two different statements, though, and you're conflating them. Every story has the potential to be radical if you change the story to turn it into a radical one. If that's what you want, write some original stories. I'm coming into this thread to talk about the story as it has been presented, not some hypothetical potential movie. You've externalized Black Panther to the point where there is this idealized version of the film that, to you, tangibly exists, and you're critiquing that. Can we stick to the film that was actually released?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 00:14 |
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:You seem to be arguing against the idea of reading a movie, and are trying to turn my mockery of internalizing fantasy around without really knowing what internalizing or externalizing is. Ok in that case I have completely misunderstood you. When you said that the filmmakers had snuffed out the film's radical potential, I got the idea that you, you know, no longer felt the film had any potential for a radical reading.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2018 22:50
|
|