Black Panther: Wakanda Forever
 

I'm really looking forward to it. I expect a jump in quality from the first Black Panther film.

Bless Chadwick Boseman. Story wise, I think this shakeup will be good for the franchise. I really don't know what to expect.

The movie is tainted by no real Black Panther. It's a real shame what happened to him.

I'm super curious as to what they are going to do with this one. Boseman was so good in the roll - he played a likable guy, a regal king, and a tactical badass.

I almost feel like maybe they should let it rest and give it a reboot in it's own "alternate Universe" or something rather than shoehorning strange events or material in to fit the continuity.

The notion of the Black Panther as a mantle rather than a character is built into the lore, in the comics T'Challa is at at least the ninteenth Black Panther, the movie also makes it explicitly clear he's just one in a long line of Black Panthers. Replacing him should not be that hard in theory.

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-YkhruCP-2...c42/RCO008.jpg

Yeah yeah. But I'd imagine most/all of the comic book ones lasted more than the equivalent of ONE film.

That and even general audiences nowadays know that the Black Panther moves across time with different panthers.

So I think when someone says "I wonder how they will proceed" it's more about how they will address it, in-story - the absence of T'Challa, etc.

Not to mention the in-story irony of him dying so soon after he just got un-snapped.

https://thedirect.com/article/marvel...martin-freeman

Seems like Martin Freeman ain't too confident about Ryan Coogler's ideas.

Que him being canceled for daring to doubt BLACK OPPRESSED MAN!

I'd love to see M'baku as the next Black Panther. Not really feeling Shuri as a character or actor, to be honest. Nothing against her as a person, but I don't buy her as The Black Panther that I want to see.

Sub-Mariner to debut in this, played by Tenoch Huerta

https://www.murphysmultiverse.com/re...erta-as-namor/

I wonder if he'll be the villian. Sub-Mariner is such an asshole, 90% he's more the villain than anything else. He's like Aquaman but in permanent asshole mode.

Also a good point. What a legacy! He was Black Panther for like 5 minutes. And during that, hm... he failed (or rather, refused) to avenge his father, lost the throne to someone who almost destroyed the world, failed to protect Vision's stone from Thanos, then for an encore vanished from then until the last 5% of Endgame.

I'm wondering if they will have his character be in some kind of limbo the entire film, and not actually dead, that way they still have an 'in' to bring him back in a future movie. Maybe they weren't ready to do that just yet, but want to keep the option there.

I like seeing how creative they can get to continue this story without the central and most important character... but I really don't think they can salvage this the way they think they can without recasting the part.

Yeah. This is an example by natural cause as to how Marvel is too tied to their continuity at this point. Yet the continuity is what has made this whole thing a series of "event films" and let's face it - the continuity has given some of the Marvel flicks a bigger box office than they otherwise would've had without it.

I wonder if the multiverse concept is going to be their way out for certain recasts and other returns.

i've said it many times, superhero movies should've taken the classic james bond route of casting a different actor, continuing the "continuity" not worrying about slight differences in tone or if certain smaller things don't fit 100%. new actor and it's a soft reboot but still the things that they already made movies of " happened".

Kevin Feige used to say that Iron Man was like James Bond - that the character would go on.

But Kevin Feige says a lot of things in the moment and passes them off as if they are by design. During the Iron Man special features years ago who talked about the scene where Iron Man boosts a punch at the Iron Monger on the rooftop. Feige described it as a "Marvel Moment" and explained that every Marvel film will have a great visual moment like that. It couldn't have been more obvious that people thought that was a cool thing in the first movie and Feige came in and branded it after the fact as a "special thing" that was done by edict of their brand.

We all love Kevin Feige, but if you follow him long enough you begin to realize that he's often full of $#!( and chases the zeitgeist - exactly how he went overboard on Captain Marvel being "stronger than an infinity stone" and countless other examples. The point? People are drugged by Marvel "events" and overlook a lot of the nonsense that could lead to the bottom dropping out of the entire thing.

Naw, for some reason these movie fans were eager for characters to die and stay dead. It never made sense to me, these are characters that have faced countless villains countless times, why would they want them to be killed off unless it was comic book related thing. Then they cheered when Superman died in BVS as if he was really gonna stay dead and as if nobody knew he was gonna come back in JL. It was stupid, but that's what the fans wanted after all.

So going the route of Iron Man and whoever just living on via numerous actors would have pissed off the fanbase that insisted on character deaths and 'lasting consequences'.

IMO all the MCU movies have consequences that lead one into the other, especially the entire premise of Civil War, but people don't care about collateral damage, they want character deaths. They pointed more to Superman killing Zod and Superman himself dying rather than the destruction of Metropolis which was what BVS centered itself on.

The thing is, MCU fans should already be braced for such a thing. All the way since getting like back to back to back new Hulk actors, right at the start of the MCU. Or Rhodey? Now suddenly it's a problem?

I mean, by all means let's definitely get all the mileage we can out of each actor that we can until they, A) Age out of the part (and, hey, Ruffalo himself is looking about 80 years old lately), B) Don't want to play the part anymore, or, C) Die. And then it's time to recast. I'll always say this, but the idea of throwing the character into the casket with the actor playing them because the actor dies is INSANE to me, particularly in something like the MCU. It doesn't do anything to preserve T'Challa's "legacy"... it stunts it and makes it something much smaller than it should have been (also, whether or not there have been a bunch of Black Panthers in the past 60 years of the comics or whatever... is showing T'Challa is so easily and quickly replaceable really helping their overall goal here?). And yeah, again, no one is even asking, "Is this what Chadwick really would have wanted?" Like, they don't even want to talk about it. There's just this general vibe of "We know what's best for Chadwick and T'Challa's legacy" despite, you know, everything.

Maybe their solution will be that there is a bunch of Black Panthers at once (I just can't imagine them positioning Shuri as simply his replacement... nobody is going to go for that except out of a sense of guilt). Meh.