Originally Posted by
Blind Wedjat
I'm gonna argue that there was no real good reason why Bucky would have killed T'Chaka, even though there was evidence to suggest it.
The only thing the world knew about Wakanda was that it was an isolationist, Third-world country that had lost all of its tiny amount of Vibranium after it was stolen by Klaue and used up by Ultron. As far as the world was concerned, Wakanda was a backwards banana republic that didn't know what to do with the strongest metal on Earth, still operating under a monarchy, were arrogant enough to refuse aid and was inaccessible. T'Chaka was just beginning to crack the isolationist policy by sending Wakandan scientists to Lagos and supporting the Sokovia Accords. He wasn't important by any means. He wasn't vital in getting the Accords passed.
Why would anyone want to kill him?
Let us consider how the intelligence community should have handled this (keeping in mind Natasha had released SHIELD's files to the public). If Bucky was indeed the culprit, why would he want to kill T'Chaka? If he was acting as a lone wolf, why would he do it? He had no known history with Wakanda. If he was acting under Hydra, why would they do it? They knew nothing of Wakanda, nor was it a threat. The only reason Hydra would have wanted T'Chaka dead is if they knew what Wakanda possessed and if they saw that as a threat. We know they didn't (because nobody found out after the files were leaked).
There should have been doubt of motive. If the world intelligence community wasn't going to see that, then Wakanda should have. T'Challa should have, but he doesn't because the movie needed him to be angry. Which is fine, but I'm not going to act like that's how T'Challa acts in the comics. And I'm not going to act like the Russos or Markus and McFeely somehow get the character better than Coogler when at every opportunity they have had to present him as one of the smartest individuals in his universe, they have failed to do so again and again. I think T'Challa is a very well written character in both films (as I pride well written characters over comic book accurate characters), but if we're going to argue about which was more T'Challa or which was a better character, I'm seriously going to disagree with the answer being the one from Civil War. The only things I'd praise regarding the character in that are Chadwick's performance (which doesn't get enough praise for how nuanced it has been throughout) and how his fighting style was invented.
You want to talk about being accurate, where the hell were his enhanced senses in that film? Bucky literally vanished from him during their second fight when T'Challa should have been able to track him. Where was his advanced technology? If he was attempting to kill one of the most feared assassins in the world he should have been prepared. Where was his deductive reasoning? He only found out Zemo killed T'Chaka because he followed Iron Man to Serbia with the intention of killing Bucky (again).
Regarding Zemo, T'Chaka and 11 others were killed, but going with the film's dialogue he seemed to be the most important figure (as he was the intended target). He should have been given to Wakanda at the end of the film if T'Challa wasn't going to kill him. This probably didn't happen because the Russos nor Feige had any plans to turn Zemo into a Black Panther villain. And why should they, really? "He killed my father because he wanted the world's premier superhero team to fight each other!" is a pretty weak gripe to have with a villain from a storytelling perspective, and I'd argue such a disrespectful crime should be punished by death. And even if that's what Zemo wanted, I'd argue he would have wanted to die by his own hands.
But my larger point is that the MCU did not prepare for T'Challa's arrival properly. Too many things were taken away from his mythos. Klaue was his arch nemesis, but by taken away how he lost his arm and changing who killed T'Chaka and when, he's merely an annoyance. Which is why I think Coogler killed him off because he had been severely neutered by other writers. You would think given how many complain about how writers have been handling the mythos in comics lately more people would see this. Yet I seem to be the only one that does.
Which is why I can say that as an MCU fan the ending of the Infinity Saga is bittersweet, but as a BP fan I'm glad it's over. Because now, T'Challa can actually lead this universe, rather than follow, play second fiddle to others and make-do with what has been thrown his way.
I don't think the bolded is the way to think about this (though I understand it of course). The idea should always be thinking about what would make T'Challa a great character, not what can be used to one-up salty haters.
Regarding the first question, I've always asserted T'Challa is a warrior above everything else. It is the idea that he is a warrior that should frame every other facet of his being. Everything he has been taught has been applied to making him Wakanda's best warrior (and as a result, their chosen king because it is determined through combat). Yes, T'Challa is often more liberal than past BPs because he genuinely believes he can help make the world a better place, but he understands that there will always be threats and those with nefarious intentions. Thus he has to make that balance which leads to conflict.
Therefore T'Challa uses and understands how advanced technology works to be a better warrior and protector of Wakanda. He does not use it to compensate for what he may lack as a fighter (because he lacks almost nothing), as a thinker (because he's that smart) or as a leader. He uses it to complement his abilities instead.
I mean ask yourself, why is that T'Challa as an inventor hasn't stuck or gone anywhere significant, but him as an outsmarter, an excellent strategist, tactician and fighter has?
And cosign is all I have to say. Lol.