NEW BLACK PANTHER COMIC BOOK - Ridley's Believe it or Not!

[KIP LEWIS]

The issues isn't how Ewing wrote Tchalla or Foreman drawing him in action. The issue is how he designed him. The whole second season was lacking compared to Rocaforts beautifully drawn first season.
This:


Compared to this:

I would except that... The only problem is that the artists would need to get on board with it which is where the problem has always arisen. One artist you get a detailed habit, like Rocafort, Marquez, or Acuna, then the next you get this:



For cosmic stuff the difference was night and day.

Travel did fine on the mk knights mini, but cosmic os not his forte

No argument from me, brother Ezyo.

Guess a matter of taste here, because I'm not actually a fan of Rocaforts' design of the mask.  But that might be because I'm not a big fan of his art on the book.  (And I like the other guy's art even less.)

But I think your point would be more fair, if you compare action shot to action shot or face shot to face shot.  I think a lot of artists would favor the less detailed mask in a full body action shot over a talking-head shot.

[CvilleWakandan]

Throw the whole issue out, its trash. Leave Coarea Tchalla without him memory. It's better that way.

Sad part is he used one of our ideas to do it.

[MindofShadow]

Throw the whole issue out, its trash. Leave Coarea Tchalla without him memory. It's better that way.

Sad part is he used one of our ideas to do it.

dude is such a garbage writer. It is painful

painfully slow, takes a cool character and makes him some doubtful, whiney, "i don't want it" Jon Snow like bitch about the throne, uses a lot of words without saying a GD thing, and keeps ruining potential cool plots for other writers.

Dudes a complete hack

[supreme illuminati]

Throw the whole issue out, its trash. Leave Coarea Tchalla without him memory. It's better that way.

Sad part is he used one of our ideas to do it.

dude is such a garbage writer. It is painful

painfully slow, takes a cool character and makes him some doubtful, whiney, "i don't want it" Jon Snow like bitch about the throne, uses a lot of words without saying a GD thing, and keeps ruining potential cool plots for other writers.

Dudes a complete hack

CO-MF'IN-SIGN

[Ture]

I just read this month's Black Panthers' titles. I liked the covers especially the variants.





I would really like to know why Coates so heavily favors T'Challa and by extension Waknda's deconstruction. The Black Panther isn't even rendered aesthetically pleasing. While the use historical Afrakans designations is appreciated, it kind of gets lost in the narrative. Why didn't Coates make this a tale set in the distant future and make Wakanda the beneficent Trans Galactic Federation? Why not a Black Panther 3099?

Star Wars is dying and its ghost is killing Black Panther via translocation to the Coatesverse.





Like mentioned above Okorafor's Afrakan cultural references nuance the story but are overshadowed by the incessant need to point out that the women run this show. Following in Coates footsteps of depicting Wakanda as an average or trouble society is a major failing. Two writers both lacking the incentive to champion Black Panther and Wakanda in any substantial and meaningful way.

I do like how the spirit heads follow and converse with Shuri. This is something T'Challa too should the ability to do.

I think they both fail to grasp the importance of  Black Panther, his supporting characters and Wakanda representing the pinnacle of Afrakan and its diaspora's cultural autonomy.

[supreme illuminati]

I just read this month's Black Panthers' titles. I liked the covers especially the variants.





I would really like to know why Coates so heavily favors T'Challa and by extension Waknda's deconstruction. The Black Panther isn't even rendered aesthetically pleasing. While the use historical Afrakans designations is appreciated, it kind of gets lost in the narrative. Why didn't Coates make this a tale set in the distant future and make Wakanda the beneficent Trans Galactic Federation? Why not a Black Panther 3099?

Star Wars is dying and its ghost is killing Black Panther via translocation to the Coatesverse.





Like mentioned above Okorafor's Afrakan cultural references nuance the story but are overshadowed by the incessant need to point out that the women run this show. Following in Coates footsteps of depicting Wakanda as an average or trouble society is a major failing. Two writers both lacking the incentive to champion Black Panther and Wakanda in any substantial and meaningful way.

I do like how the spirit heads follow and converse with Shuri. This is something T'Challa too should the ability to do.

I think they both fail to grasp the importance of  Black Panther, his supporting characters and Wakanda representing the pinnacle of Afrakan and its diaspora's cultural autonomy.

I do not understand how a brutha as brilliant and truly Afrakan as you are, Ndugu Ture, can stand reading these ultimate expressions of dreck being vomited upon our favorite Wakandans with any form of regularity. I have long abandoned and thrown over these subpar scribes, and would never go back to them for any blandishment or inducement that even the greatest powers in Existence could conjure.

[MindofShadow]

Star Wars is dying and its ghost is killing Black Panther via translocation to the Coatesverse.

Ok, that's a good one lol

[Emperorjones]

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

[KIP LEWIS]

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

I wonder if he looks at it as a way to show the world that is, rather than show Wakanda as the world we want it to be.  He's missing the point that Wakanda is the goal, not the past.  Then again, I think that can be a problem. He point blank said, he doesn't accept the idea that an ideal society would have a King or Queen. He thinks the Monarchy is a flaw of the past.  And I think (he didn't say this), he has a problem with the religious elements of Wakanda. (Maybe he's like Rodenberry who thought human advancement would lead to a religion free society.)  So, the perhaps the reason he doesn't see Wakanda as the goal, because his "perfect society" looks nothing like Wakanda.  Maybe the idea of a spiritual, warrior society with royalty is undesirable.    But that's just my guessing.

[Ezyo]

I do not think Coates even knows where he is trying to go. I think he is honestly just trying to rewrite Wakandan history in a way that takes away the uniqueness and wonder of Wakanda and turn it into something he believes is more "realistic" which unfortunately hos idea of that is to make Wakanda more like the West

[MindofShadow]

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

I wonder if he looks at it as a way to show the world that is, rather than show Wakanda as the world we want it to be.  He's missing the point that Wakanda is the goal, not the past.  Then again, I think that can be a problem. He point blank said, he doesn't accept the idea that an ideal society would have a King or Queen. He thinks the Monarchy is a flaw of the past.  And I think (he didn't say this), he has a problem with the religious elements of Wakanda. (Maybe he's like Rodenberry who thought human advancement would lead to a religion free society.)  So, the perhaps the reason he doesn't see Wakanda as the goal, because his "perfect society" looks nothing like Wakanda.  Maybe the idea of a spiritual, warrior society with royalty is undesirable.    But that's just my guessing.

He isn't someone that has a goal in mind.

His entire thing is being pessimistic as hell.

In none of his writings has he shown any path to being better. It is always just "everything sucks and this is why." Which is fine for articles or history stuff but utterly sucks for comic book fiction.

He is depressed about his worldview so he pushes it on the character he is writing.

Dude has no alpha male gene at all and can't write an alpha male masculine character.

[MindofShadow]

Dude had a 100% clean slate to write any story he wanted. Hickman reset everything, vibranium was back, Wakanda was back on top, T'challa back as THE black panther and king.

Dude chose to write a "monarchy bad, rape camps, doras hate the throne, wakanda sucks, shuri is dead, tchalla is a mopey depressed bitch, tchalla doesn't want ot be king he wants to be a scientist" story

He got a second shot at writing another clean slate, wakanda in space storyline and the place is a freaking hell hole with slaves


He doesn't believe in black exceptionalism, even in make believe

[Emperorjones]

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

I wonder if he looks at it as a way to show the world that is, rather than show Wakanda as the world we want it to be.  He's missing the point that Wakanda is the goal, not the past.  Then again, I think that can be a problem. He point blank said, he doesn't accept the idea that an ideal society would have a King or Queen. He thinks the Monarchy is a flaw of the past.  And I think (he didn't say this), he has a problem with the religious elements of Wakanda. (Maybe he's like Rodenberry who thought human advancement would lead to a religion free society.)  So, the perhaps the reason he doesn't see Wakanda as the goal, because his "perfect society" looks nothing like Wakanda.  Maybe the idea of a spiritual, warrior society with royalty is undesirable.    But that's just my guessing.

That all well could be the case, and I thought the comparison to Roddenberry was intriguing. By The Next Generation, Roddenberry's utopian ideas just didn't make for good storytelling/television and Rick Berman and the writers who inherited Trek from him started going in another direction even before he passed. As for Coates, perhaps it is unfair for me to say since I've been an inconsistent reader of his run and have just refused to read large swaths of it, but does he actually have a vision at all? Ezyo is on to something that I suspect is where Coates is going, what he might consider normal or right, if not ideal.

Criticizing monarchies I have no problem with, especially in the real world. But in comics, even there, I think it should be done in a way that doesn't tear down the characters or craps on the Black Panther legacy, especially if you don't build them back up, that you just continue deconstructing. Which is unfortunate because it seems like Coates does have some ideas, just he doesn't execute them well because they have to go through his pessimistic lens, as MindofShadow pointed out.

[supreme illuminati]

I do not think Coates even knows where he is trying to go. I think he is honestly just trying to rewrite Wakandan history in a way that takes away the uniqueness and wonder of Wakanda and turn it into something he believes is more "realistic" which unfortunately hos idea of that is to make Wakanda more like the West

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

I wonder if he looks at it as a way to show the world that is, rather than show Wakanda as the world we want it to be.  He's missing the point that Wakanda is the goal, not the past.  Then again, I think that can be a problem. He point blank said, he doesn't accept the idea that an ideal society would have a King or Queen. He thinks the Monarchy is a flaw of the past.  And I think (he didn't say this), he has a problem with the religious elements of Wakanda. (Maybe he's like Rodenberry who thought human advancement would lead to a religion free society.)  So, the perhaps the reason he doesn't see Wakanda as the goal, because his "perfect society" looks nothing like Wakanda.  Maybe the idea of a spiritual, warrior society with royalty is undesirable.    But that's just my guessing.

He isn't someone that has a goal in mind.

His entire thing is being pessimistic as hell.

In none of his writings has he shown any path to being better. It is always just "everything sucks and this is why." Which is fine for articles or history stuff but utterly sucks for comic book fiction.

He is depressed about his worldview so he pushes it on the character he is writing.

Dude has no alpha male gene at all and can't write an alpha male masculine character.

THIS^^^!!!

[MindofShadow]

I'm with Supreme's point of view on this. I just can't stomach it. Even though the covers for a lot of the books look awesome and some of the artwork within has, I don't like the messages they are sending. And I wonder just who actually likes these books as stories? Perhaps the agendas they push are more important to them, but I wonder who is eagerly waiting each month for the next issue for purely entertainment reasons? (Granted not every story has to be for enjoyment, but still, how many of these stories are thrilling, suspenseful, and you can't wait to see what happens next? And as for any educational/informative aspects, how much do these stories even do that? Now, when it comes to indoctrination, that's another matter, but that's not necessarily education).

As for why they deconstruct T'Challa, I feel they feel that black heterosexual men are bad and 'problematic' or the 'real problem' and are in the conundrum of having to write a series that on the surface is supposed to center (one of the intersectionalists' favorite terms IMO) a black heterosexual male character. If they could fully do away with T'Challa and still sell books, they probably would. Then again, maybe the temptation to have T'Challa as a punching bag is just too strong. Punching T'Challa (as a proxy for straight black men) also could ingratiate them with white liberal/feminist bosses, colleagues, and friends.

Also, I think that Coates shows his limitations, despite his seemingly impressive knowledge of some history and African traditions (at least names for stuff) when it comes to political imagination. Perhaps his Wakanda is a stand-in for America or Europe, but instead of being real about it and exploring the history of colonialism and racism, he tries to be too smart-for his own-good and use Wakanda as the proxy for that to touch on in a safer way, or so he thinks. He knows his lane.

I wonder if he looks at it as a way to show the world that is, rather than show Wakanda as the world we want it to be.  He's missing the point that Wakanda is the goal, not the past.  Then again, I think that can be a problem. He point blank said, he doesn't accept the idea that an ideal society would have a King or Queen. He thinks the Monarchy is a flaw of the past.  And I think (he didn't say this), he has a problem with the religious elements of Wakanda. (Maybe he's like Rodenberry who thought human advancement would lead to a religion free society.)  So, the perhaps the reason he doesn't see Wakanda as the goal, because his "perfect society" looks nothing like Wakanda.  Maybe the idea of a spiritual, warrior society with royalty is undesirable.    But that's just my guessing.

That all well could be the case, and I thought the comparison to Roddenberry was intriguing. By The Next Generation, Roddenberry's utopian ideas just didn't make for good storytelling/television and Rick Berman and the writers who inherited Trek from him started going in another direction even before he passed. As for Coates, perhaps it is unfair for me to say since I've been an inconsistent reader of his run and have just refused to read large swaths of it, but does he actually have a vision at all? Ezyo is on to something that I suspect is where Coates is going, what he might consider normal or right, if not ideal.

Criticizing monarchies I have no problem with, especially in the real world. But in comics, even there, I think it should be done in a way that doesn't tear down the characters or craps on the Black Panther legacy, especially if you don't build them back up, that you just continue deconstructing. Which is unfortunate because it seems like Coates does have some ideas, just he doesn't execute them well because they have to go through his pessimistic lens, as MindofShadow pointed out.

You could have easily done a "monarchy bad" type of story with T'challa without making T'challa an incompetent depressed fool.

T'challa, after SW, realizes he is 30+ with no heir. His sister is mid twenties with no heir. T'challa himself has been gone from Wakanda for large amounts of time for various super hero stuff. He has almost died numerous times. Shuri has died before (just recently).

He himself could ahve realized Wakanda needs a back up plan in case him and shuri bite the dust or dissapear. He starts to change the government HIMSELF without being forced, as a contengency plan for the line of Bashenga ending.

You could even have him bringing in other blood relatives/cousins to prepare them to take over the throne if necessary. The tribal council is re-instituted with added powers and responsibilities.

You can show the differences (and similarities) to other marvel monarchs. Namor, Black bolt, Thor, Dracula, Doom, ect.

The barebones of a super hero story isn't f*cking hard. It is abotu challenging the hero and showing us WHY they are the hero and why we should love them and cheer for them. That's it.