Black Panther

For posts related to a specific film -- beware of spoilers o ye who dareth enter!
Mentaculus
Posts: 215
3438 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:17 am

Re: Black Panther

Post by Mentaculus »

PendejoJorge I in many ways sympathize with your point, but I'm mostly on the other side of this particular fence.
PendejoJorge wrote:While Black Panther may lampshade pan-Africanism and globalization, that's ultimately not what the film is about - it's about an African dude who wears a cat suit and beats the shit out of criminals who seek to harm his homeland. I think it's a bit disingenuous to paint that film as being anything beyond a schlocky action movie, as is the case with any other superhero film.

Indeed that is a one reading of Black Panther. But superhero films, IMO, fall into the same nebulous genre definition as film noir, western, jidai geki, wuxia, et al., providing a (base, simple) storytelling and narrative foundation that can be utilized for creative improvisation. Genre films are often remarkable vehicles for artistic sophistication and sociopolitical subtextual messages - hiding in plain sight, as it were, because the expectation to do so is often nonexistent. And the reaction to Black Panther is one of this expectation, I think.
PendejoJorge wrote:People are giving a far grander reaction to this film than other black films that are far more nuanced and actually focus on socio-political issues, which goes to show that nuance is meaningless when it comes to public reaction.

And this is the rub. Yes, it would be wonderful if the world can have the same jaw-dropping, revealing viewing I once did of Med Hondo's Sarraounia; or have exposure to the works of Mambéty, Sembène, and Safi Faye; or recent work like that of Kunle Afolayan. But Black Panther gets massive screenings in Chicago - Afolayan does not. I don't think this is an issue of nuance as it is exposure. The public would respond in turn if modern theatrical distribution better accommodated them.

On the subject of exposure, I find it extremely telling that Black Panther has broken box office records in Africa, where national and local films also thrive. It is an Event, and I don't think it's because the audiences bristle at nuance or want to see "an African dude who wears a cat suit and beats the shit out of criminals who seek to harm his homeland." It probably has more to do with "an African dude who wears a cat suit and beats the shit out of criminals who seek to harm his homeland." It's touching something vital to Now that cannot be ignored by theorists or critics simply because of the costumes it wears.

Writing this made me think of my screening of Med Hondo's Sarraounia, which was over a decade ago and stays with me to this day. I was also reminded of it leaving the screening of Black Panther I went to. I'll say that for me, both films reframe unknown and latent biases towards film construction and character - what has been depicted in film art up until now. Or, it may not seem odd to you and me, but this may be the first time a film shows a black woman speaking fluent Korean. Or, Michael B. Jordan's entrance to the throne room as a clear homage to Spike Lee's dolly shots, which in itself is a powerkeg of subtext.

All of that said, I try to be careful with assuming that Disney (or any company) only cares about sameness and monotony and a lack of creative identity. And that "mass" and "popular" audiences have a broad negative caricature. It may be true at times but as a catch-all I consider it a blinder.

Perhaps this whole thing is better framed by A Certain Tendency of the Hollywood Cinema, where the author argues that Hollywood films have an "interest center" (for cape films, beating shit up, blowing up planets, cool costumes) and a "moral center" (for Black Panther, issues of non-interference vs. interference, and therefore maintaining a safe way of national life /identity vs. risk of exposure to violence). The trick is, the two centers are often contradictory if not hypocritical, and therefore these films (according to author Ray) are noncommittal to either center, and are therefore shallow. So Black Panther, like many superhero films before, can be read as supporting moral non-violence through physical violence, which is disingenuous and reeks of sameness. Which is what I think you're getting at.

Velvet Crowe
Posts: 156
2601 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:26 pm

Re: Black Panther

Post by Velvet Crowe »

You make a good point about superheroes being akin to film noir and such, but it wasn't really a point I was disagreeing with. After all, I did write a bit about how comics handled such topics. I, at no point, disregarded these films for being about superheroes. I did the opposite, actually.

The thing is though, these superhero films are just shallow. If these themes ever crop up in these films it's always extremely superficial. My main issue with superhero films, as I've stated, is that they're far less risque than their comic counterparts and most of the films feel very samey. What I meant by this is not that I feel that the morality is self-contradictory (I honestly don't think this is the case - after all, one could argue that use of force can be justified to maintain peace) but because the actual films themselves feel very similar to one another more often than not.

The directing is often samey, virtually everyone is a quip machine or a setup for a joke (shit like this RUINED characters like Thor and Ultron), the soundtrack is mostly similar, it's always heavy on the CGI, the stakes always feel low, they're all tonally similar and paced the same, etc. If you watch all of these movies, there's a very similar structure to them as they always seem to hit the same story beats. There's rarely, if ever, any variation on how these films are structured. They're cookie cutter as hell and are always very safe. They feel manufactured. That's what makes these films so bland and uninteresting to me, especially as a comic fan. There is proof that Disney is known to stifle creative freedom, which is why I don't have much faith in their film line-up.

It's a far cry from how dynamic and interesting superhero stories can be in the comics. You'd never get something as crazy as Marvel Zombies or as morose as Kingdom Come put on film. Even the mainline comics do better what superhero films have tried to do - Annihilation is a far better story than both GotG films. Despite being action centered, the cast of the story was fascinating and the lore of cosmic Marvel is intriguing. Important characters died and the heroes dealt with extreme personal dielmmas, which made the plot feel like it had stakes. There were many different plotlines occurring around the same event which gave it a sense of scale. These are things that the Marvel movies fail horribly to capture, especially GotG which I think bastardized some elements of cosmic Marvel from the comics (notably, Drax and Ronan the Accuser).

While I'm not fond of these films, frankly, I couldn't give less of a shit if people are enjoying it or not... or whatever box office record it's breaking. I'm not the sort of person that bemoans "the death of cinema" or whatever non-sense when it comes to the popularity of these movies. Nor do I believe in demeaning others for enjoying something. In the case of Black Panther, I just find the political reaction to it to be asinine more than anything. It's one thing to enjoy a movie, it's another to pretend this is somehow some big groundbreaking achievement in race relations or means anything more than a movie with a black superhero being successful. If anything, I just see this as a corporation profiting on such inane political perspectives with these people being ironically oblivious to it. I mean, people are pushing this film as some litmus test to determine if people are racist, which is absurd.

Mentaculus
Posts: 215
3438 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 2:17 am

Re: Black Panther

Post by Mentaculus »

PendejoJorge wrote:The thing is though, these superhero films are just shallow. If these themes ever crop up in these films it's always extremely superficial. My main issue with superhero films, as I've stated, is that they're far less risque than their comic counterparts and most of the films feel very samey.

PendejoJorge wrote:After all, I did write a bit about how comics handled such topics. I, at no point, disregarded these films for being about superheroes. I did the opposite, actually.

Ah thanks for clarifying. I certainly understand but I will still politely disagree :) - we're not going to change each other's minds on this one but it is an important conversation to have about this present batch of ubiquitous, popular entertainment right now. I can't speak for the comics story variations (I stopped collecting comics long ago), so I wouldn't compare to the current source material, but nor do I think I should with the film versions. A film narrative has inherent limitations and possibilities, just as the comic medium does, and each should be judged based on what it presents and how given the circumstances of the medium. When I used to write script coverage it came as a shock just how samey nearly all narratives actually are - whether there are three or six or seven types is not really the point, other than there are very few core components, so for me the beauty is in the variation and creativity given these limitations.

Your beef with the quippiness of the stories is sound (I wanted to like Doctor Strange and Thor: Ragnorak more than I did for this reason), but the latter example is a kind of proof to me that Disney/Marvel are willing to take calculated risks. While stories can proliferate online and that's fine, I get hearsay from people working in the Business, and my takeaway is that these creative differences may come from lack of efficiency over auteristic uniqueness. But this is all hearsay so I can't make a value judgement on the final products on this info.
PendejoJorge wrote:In the case of Black Panther, I just find the political reaction to it to be asinine more than anything. It's one thing to enjoy a movie, it's another to pretend this is somehow some big groundbreaking achievement in race relations or means anything more than a movie with a black superhero being successful.

I could myself believe these proclamations of grandeur are overblown - but I also ask myself why this thread seems to be so pervasive. In art, a political or social statement does not necessarily have to be a major narrative theme, or even one that is realized to its fullest. A shot can be a political statement - production and sound design can shatter the status quo - a passing line of dialogue or character trait can be a revolution. I think I can see some examples in Black Panther. And if this film is moving people as it is, I'm going to consider that strong response to its credit, despite the other ways it also plays it safe.

Post Reply