Black Panther Appreciation 2020

[Steel Inquisitor]

Uh it kinda is relevant Because your trying to claim that characters who combined publication history (3 of then T'Chaka, Shuri, and Kasper, hell through in Azzari and killmonger just to humor you) don't even match up to the time Jane was Thor, somehow hold enough legitimacy to take over the mantle in the MCU and become the new faces for the franchise, is ridiculous. To leap frog the title holder over the guise of its a mantle to pass on, when realistically people care the most about T'Challa it's about his rule and how he changes Wakanda forever and for the better and exploring his story. And yeah dick took over the mantle of Batman, you don't see anyone calling for him to take over on the movie side despite it being a mantle. Why is T'Challa the exception?

I'm not "claiming" anything, that's a fact in the comics. That's how legacy characters work, which Black panther is - T'Challa is a legacy himself! Killmonger was temporarily BP in Priest comics.



The timing argument is a distraction, characters aren't given credit for being legacies for how long they wore the cape all they need is to wear the cape. T'Challa is a huge draw for the BP franchise, yes, but that doesn't invalidate the BP as a mantle itself. All Marvel needs to do is replace T'Challa as the next Black panther in a movie and that's all they need to placate the legacy for the franchise, in context of why they need to do it - because the actor playing T'Challa passed and Marvel's going to be on eggshells for years doing anything with T'Challa now. People cared about T;Challa because he had movies about him, just like any other character they'll be able to do that with his successor. It is Wakanda Forever, not T'Challa forever. T'Challa is a huge presence in the frnahciee but the comics are more then just him sitting in a room, it's a broad tapestry they've barely started mining and they've done a good job setting things up with Wakanda for the first movie. Dick's not getting that because circumstances in the movies haven't called for it yet, and the DCEU is still years from catching up to the MCU in legacy heroes. And they technically did pass the mantle to Robin in Nolan's movies. T'Challa's the exception because Boseman isn't here to play the character, that caught everyone off guard.

[Ezyo1000]

I'm not "claiming" anything, that's a fact in the comics. That's how legacy characters work, which Black panther is - T'Challa is a legacy himself! Killmonger was temporarily BP in Priest comics.



The timing argument is a distraction, characters aren't given credit for being legacies for how long they wore the cape all they need is to wear the cape. T'Challa is a huge draw for the BP franchise, yes, but that doesn't invalidate the BP as a mantle itself. All Marvel needs to do is replace T'Challa as the next Black panther in a movie and that's all they need to placate the legacy for the franchise, in context of why they need to do it - because the actor playing T'Challa passed and Marvel's going to be on eggshells for years doing anything with T'Challa now. People cared about T;Challa because he had movies about him, just like any other character they'll be able to do that with his successor. It is Wakanda Forever, not T'Challa forever. T'Challa is a huge presence in the frnahciee but the comics are more then just him sitting in a room, it's a broad tapestry they've barely started mining and they've done a good job setting things up with Wakanda for the first movie. Dick's not getting that because circumstances in the movies haven't called for it yet, and the DCEU is still years from catching up to the MCU in legacy heroes. And they technically did pass the mantle to Robin in Nolan's movies. T'Challa's the exception because Boseman isn't here to play the character, that caught everyone off guard.

well Isht in that case Ross must be a BP too he wore the habit in Priest run... Except they would not be considered legacies for the simple reason that Erik took the HSH and died Essentially, so he didn't technically become BP, same goes for Kasper.

Abd yeah it Kinda does. The Black Panther franchise is centered around T'Challa. This isn't the Green latern corps or the Iron fist. T'Challa IS the Black Panther. The franchise is set around him and his rule. Before him Wakanda was isolated and kept to itself.

T'Challa is the one who opened Wakanda to the world and we see what happens when Wakanda enters the big stage as another super power. And no people didn't care about T'Challa Because there are movie's about him, that's incredibly ignorant to say, they care about him because he has been around since the 60s, he was the first actually black hero with super powers and the antithesis to Western views and stereotypes of Africa and African Americans, he represents hope and a what could be, he is a powerful representation for poc.

He isn't just done nameless face person in a mask, who can be replaced by any person and it will be successful. That what people aren't getting. Removing T'Challa from the franchise will be a huge mistake and it's not going to be even close to as successful as the first movie or as much as they hope. If T'Challa is removed, your removing the history and importance of the movie. The importance isn't Wakanda. It's the man, T'Challa the face of the franchise, the leader of the place. A good man with a good heart who is also a good King.

I find it funny that you think that T'Challa is just a Huge presence In the franchise. Everything revolves around him. Infact in most of publication history the comics actually take place outside of Wakanda. So again people Care about T'Challa the man. And everyone and Wakanda revolve around him

Wakanda is only interesting because of T'Challa and what he has done during his reign. The movie isn't based around Wakanda. It's based around T'Challa. Same with the comics.

Oh and the Nolan Robin thing? Him swinging into the bar cave is hardly what I would call a passing of the mantle since by your own words, passing the mantle means a character "Puts on the cape" so to speak, and Nolan Robin didn't do that.

[Blind Wedjat]

I'm not "claiming" anything, that's a fact in the comics. That's how legacy characters work, which Black panther is - T'Challa is a legacy himself! Killmonger was temporarily BP in Priest comics.



The timing argument is a distraction, characters aren't given credit for being legacies for how long they wore the cape all they need is to wear the cape. T'Challa is a huge draw for the BP franchise, yes, but that doesn't invalidate the BP as a mantle itself. All Marvel needs to do is replace T'Challa as the next Black panther in a movie and that's all they need to placate the legacy for the franchise, in context of why they need to do it - because the actor playing T'Challa passed and Marvel's going to be on eggshells for years doing anything with T'Challa now. People cared about T;Challa because he had movies about him, just like any other character they'll be able to do that with his successor. It is Wakanda Forever, not T'Challa forever. T'Challa is a huge presence in the frnahciee but the comics are more then just him sitting in a room, it's a broad tapestry they've barely started mining and they've done a good job setting things up with Wakanda for the first movie. Dick's not getting that because circumstances in the movies haven't called for it yet, and the DCEU is still years from catching up to the MCU in legacy heroes. And they technically did pass the mantle to Robin in Nolan's movies. T'Challa's the exception because Boseman isn't here to play the character, that caught everyone off guard.

Everything you have said here is still wrong. No one is denying that canonically the Black Panther mantle is something that is passed down. But you are also seriously overstating how much that fact is actually emphasised in the comics.

Killmonger was only Black Panther for like three issues. Three issues! He is not popularly known as Black Panther, even is he was one. Most people don't even know this about him.

Every other person that has been Black Panther before T'Challa and Shuri have just been their predecessors, not T'Challa's replacements as you suggested. Almost none of them have been explored as characters. They're just points to enrich the lore.

You are the same person that suggested T'Challa has been replaced "many times" when he's only truly been replaced sufficiently once by Shuri, which is why she is the only good argument you actually have and you should be using. Even at that it was temporarily, not permanent, and both of them shared the mantle before she was killed and resurrected.

"People cared about T;Challa because he had movies about him, just like any other character they'll be able to do that with his successor." This is not a guaranteed fact. None of the supporting characters in the film have the deep source material history T'Challa does, so you are again wrong. This is not to say the characters can't be given good history in the film, but assuming everyone will want or like it is premature right now.

"T'Challa is a huge presence in the frnahciee but the comics are more then just him." If this is true, then why are the successful comic books about his supporting cast? Every attempt in the comics was short-lived, got cancelled and they were all attempted less than three years ago. None of them have been as successful as Miles Morales, Kamala Khan and Ironheart: actually legacy characters that mean something to people. These characters don't have legacy. T'Challa has legacy. He's had his own comic for decades.

Nobody is saying you are completely wrong but you are overstating facts.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Everything you have said here is still wrong. No one is denying that canonically the Black Panther mantle is something that is passed down. But you are also seriously overstating how much that fact is actually emphasised in the comics.

That's all they've been doing. T'Chaka has never a Black Panther, folks, don't forget that tidbit I learnt in this thread.

Killmonger was only Black Panther for like three issues. Three issues! He is not popularly known as Black Panther, even is he was one. Most people don't even know this about him.

Every other person that has been Black Panther before T'Challa and Shuri have just been their predecessors, not T'Challa's replacements as you suggested. Almost none of them have been explored as characters. They're just points to enrich the lore.

But he was still a Black panther, officially. So what if it was three issues? "Even if," this is a fact from Priest's critically acclaimed run and he wrote the Deadpool issue Killmonger was in as BP, as well. Except every Panther before T'Challa isn't counted, either. This is literally what I've been told, so why am I being questioned about this and not them? I was including every Panther, before and after T'Challa. That's the legacy. They're not "points" they're facts used in stories to deepen the mythos, if they weren't real Panther's in Marvel canon, which they're not doing, they'd be meaningless in BP canon. They're characters who were real people in Marvel tightly wound to the Panther mantle.

You are the same person that suggested T'Challa has been replaced "many times" when he's only truly been replaced sufficiently once by Shuri, which is why she is the only good argument you actually have and you should be using. Even at that it was temporarily, not permanent, and both of them shared the mantle before she was killed and resurrected.

3 times is plenty. According to the comics they're all legitimate heirs to the mantle. Except Shuri has been argued not to be a true BP, either. Characters don't have to permenantly replace a super-hero to be an heir to the mantle of a super-hero.

"People cared about T;Challa because he had movies about him, just like any other character they'll be able to do that with his successor." This is not a guaranteed fact. None of the supporting characters in the film have the deep source material history T'Challa does, so you are again wrong. This is not to say the characters can't be given good history in the film, but assuming everyone will want or like it is premature right now.

That's what they're going to trying to do, that's why they're making the sequel now. They didn't cancel the movie franchise with Boseman's passing. That implies Marvel's incapable of doing anything good with those characters, which I disagree with. That's an opinion, not fact. WE don't know anything yet, maybe they'll succeed maybe they won't, so why are you hedging that they'll fail?

"T'Challa is a huge presence in the frnahciee but the comics are more then just him." If this is true, then why are the successful comic books about his supporting cast? Every attempt in the comics was short-lived, got cancelled and they were all attempted less than three years ago. None of them have been as successful as Miles Morales, Kamala Khan and Ironheart: actually legacy characters that mean something to people. These characters don't have legacy. T'Challa has legacy. He's had his own comic for decades.

Because the comics aren't just starring T'Challa in a room by himself, it has a large cast and an incredibly, vast mythology which the movies barely touched the depth of. And this isn't just comic books, this is about the MCU. Do you think the MCU is a failure? Are their films terrible? Did the previous BP movie disappoint you? Except every single one of those examples is doing what a successor to T'Challa will be trying to achieve, so its not impossible and the people making the movie are hardly untalented. It's not like the mythology has left them nothing to work with. Legacy characters meaning something to people requires giving them a chance to do it, so why is T'Challa's successor a failure before we've seen the first frame of the movie? We know nothing about what the next film is about or who the successor will be. Legacy characters must fight for their individual recognition in media but once they're picked up the mantle that's it. They're the new whatever now. And part of his legacy is being legacy himself as Black Panther because the legacy system is something which happens with the franchise, which keeps getting overshadowed by T'Challa. I love T'Chala, he's a wonderful character and I became a fan with Priest's run but he's not only important person in the franchise. The Black Panther being passed down through the generations is a thing, and so is T'Challa losing and gaining back the mantle from his successors. He's like Steve Rogers with Captain America in that respect.

Nobody is saying you are completely wrong but you are overstating facts.

That's exactly what they've been doing. Someone thought I was stanning for Shuri being the next BP when I only mentioned her because she was Black Panther once. I'm not overstating anything, but I do see people ignoring what's going on in the comics which is startling. Are you going to reply to them about their incorrect facts?

[Chesterfield]

He's only been replaced once by Shuri. T'Chaka is just his predecessor and Kasper was being used as a pawn. "Many times" is seriously a stretch.

Even by is own "logic" he uses the words, "many time" and then proceeds to drop only 3 names. Guy's not serious.

[Blind Wedjat]

The Black Panther franchise is centered around T'Challa. This isn't the Green latern corps or the Iron fist. T'Challa IS the Black Panther.

Even Iron Fist is a poor example of this. Everyone knows the Iron Fist is Danny Rand even if there have been Iron Fists before him. We don't get a new Iron Fist every year or after every run or season. Go to the Iron Fist thread and suggest that the Iron Fist is not Danny Rand and you'll be met with the same response.

Several characters in the Marvel Universe have inherited mantles from other people but it's just a part of their origin story, not some kind of cycle one character goes through to get to the next. Stephen Strange inherited the title of Sorcerer Supreme but everyone knows that his title even if other people have held it before. A better example will be the Ghost Riders or the White Tigers.

[Blind Wedjat]

That's all they've been doing. T'Chaka has never a Black Panther, folks, don't forget that tidbit I learnt in this thread.

Where is T'Chaka's comic book? Answer me that quickly. The entire point of T'Chaka's existence is to a part of T'Challa's origin story. No different than Uncle Ben and Thomas Wayne.

But he was still a Black panther, officially. So what if it was three issues? "Even if," this is a fact from Priest's critically acclaimed run and he wrote the Deadpool issue Killmonger was in as BP, as well. Except every Panther before T'Challa isn't counted, either. This is literally what I've been told, so why am I being questioned about this and not them? I was including every Panther, before and after T'Challa. That's the legacy. They're not "points" they're facts used in stories to deepen the mythos, if they weren't real Panther's in Marvel canon, which they're not doing, they'd be meaningless in BP canon. They're characters who were real people in Marvel tightly wound to the Panther mantle.

Temporarily killing someone and taking their costume (for what can be considered a few days or weeks) hardly counts as a substantial replacement. Your wording suggests that it was, which it wasn't. Killmonger also isn't recognised as a Black Panther anymore since that story was retconned. Maybe you actually don't know what you're talking about.

3 times is plenty. According to the comics they're all legitimate heirs to the mantle. Except Shuri has been argued not to be a true BP, either. Characters don't have to permenantly replace a super-hero to be an heir to the mantle of a super-hero.

Three times is not "plenty", and it hasn't been three times. Even if you want to count Killmonger as a part of it, it's only been twice. Kasper was not replacing T'Challa. He was being used by T'Challa to pretend that he was T'Challa. It was not a replacement. Shuri was a replacement, but your wording suggests it was permanent, which it wasn't. This isn't a case of Mar-Vell dying in the comics. T'Challa was temporarily indisposed and Shuri took up the mantle (without Bast's blessing) to defend her home. It was a matter of necessity. It wasn't passed down to her, though she eventually earned. T'Challa woke up soon after and both of them shared the mantle until Shuri was killed and resurrected. Now she's alive no longer as Black Panther but as Griot and princess of Wakanda while T'Challa is currently king of Wakanda, king of the dead and Black Panther.

It's a significant part of both of their history but it was not a permanent change. At best, Shuri's tenure last a few months or years.

That's what they're going to trying to do, that's why they're making the sequel now. They didn't cancel the movie franchise with Boseman's passing. That implies Marvel's incapable of doing anything good with those characters, which I disagree with. That's an opinion, not fact. WE don't know anything yet, maybe they'll succeed maybe they won't, so why are you hedging that they'll fail?

I'm not saying they will fail. I'm not saying the movie is cancelled. I'm not saying they won't be able to do good with the characters. I'm saying that suggesting everyone will be on board with this is not a given. A lot of people already are not, even outside of this forum. A lot of people don't even want Letitia Wright near the film anymore. Nothing is guaranteed.

Because the comics aren't just starring T'Challa in a room by himself, it has a large cast and an incredibly, vast mythology which the movies barely touched the depth of. And this isn't just comic books, this is about the MCU. Do you think the MCU is a failure? Are their films terrible? Did the previous BP movie disappoint you? Except every single one of those examples is doing what a successor to T'Challa will be trying to achieve, so its not impossible and the people making the movie are hardly untalented. It's not like the mythology has left them nothing to work with. Legacy characters meaning something to people requires giving them a chance to do it, so why is T'Challa's successor a failure before we've seen the first frame of the movie? We know nothing about what the next film is about or who the successor will be. Legacy characters must fight for their individual recognition in media but once they're picked up the mantle that's it. They're the new whatever now. And part of his legacy is being legacy himself as Black Panther because the legacy system is something which happens with the franchise, which keeps getting overshadowed by T'Challa. I love T'Chala, he's a wonderful character and I became a fan with Priest's run but he's not only important person in the franchise. The Black Panther being passed down through the generations is a thing, and so is T'Challa losing and gaining back the mantle from his successors. He's like Steve Rogers with Captain America in that respect.

What are you even talking about here? You keep going back and forth with your arguments. You say it's Wakanda Forever, not T'Challa Forever, yet every single major comic has been called Black Panther instead, and regardless of its canonical use as a mantle, T'Challa is popularly known as the Black Panther (if you make me repeat this point for a fourth time, I'm not gonna keep debating with you). There has only been one comic called World of Wakanda which does not star T'Challa in it, but it wasn't a runaway success like Miles Morales, Jane Thor, or Falcon Cap. Again, Shuri is not Black Panther right now. No one else has been Black Panther after T'Challa aside from her. She actually has her own identity now in the comics as Griot.

"the legacy system is something which happens with the franchise, which keeps getting overshadowed by T'Challa." So you acknowledge that the legacy actually has never really mattered and it's always been about T'Challa. Do you see why your logic is flawed? It has always been about him and no one else. The idea of the Black Panther has always been a plot point and a part of his origin story, not some deep intricate storytelling device about multiple people sharing a mantle.

That's exactly what they've been doing. Someone thought I was stanning for Shuri being the next BP when I only mentioned her because she was Black Panther once. I'm not overstating anything, but I do see people ignoring what's going on in the comics which is startling. Are you going to reply to them about their incorrect facts?

What is going on in the comics? Right now Shuri is not a Black Panther. Right now T'Challa is Black Panther. The comics go against your very argument.

[Redjack]

The Black Panther is not a legacy character. The Black Panther is a character with an in-universe history of hereditary rulers passing the title on.

Ms. Marvel is a legacy character. When she was Thor, Jane Foster was a legacy character. Dane Whitman is a legacy character. Nadia Van Dyne is a legacy character. Etc.

[Blind Wedjat]

The Black Panther is not a legacy character. The Black Panther is a character with an in-universe history of hereditary rulers passing the title on.

Ms. Marvel is a legacy character. When she was Thor, Jane Foster was a legacy character. Dane Whitman is a legacy character. Nadia Van Dyne is a legacy character. Etc.

THANK YOU! Such a ridiculous sentiment.

[XPac]

The Black Panther is not a legacy character. The Black Panther is a character with an in-universe history of hereditary rulers passing the title on.

Ms. Marvel is a legacy character. When she was Thor, Jane Foster was a legacy character. Dane Whitman is a legacy character. Nadia Van Dyne is a legacy character. Etc.

I don't think you can exacty say it's a herditary title if you can technically win it in a fighting tournament, as Killmonger did.

In practice it's hereditary since the herb is poisonous to people outside their bloodline, but in THEORY it can be won rather than just passed down.

In the more meta sense, I do think Fiege seems to be setting up legacy characters for almost all the solo movie people. Thor and Captain America are locks. And I think we're getting legacy versions of Hawkeye, Black Widow, Ant-Man, and Hulk. Possibly even Captain Marvel even though she just debuted. So I don't think too many people would be that shocked if we got another Black Panther. Just saying.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Where is T'Chaka's comic book? Answer me that quickly. The entire point of T'Chaka's existence is to a part of T'Challa's origin story. No different than Uncle Ben and Thomas Wayne.

Continuity moves forward, what's going on in the present doesn't invalidate the past. This completely undermines the legacy system in super-hero comics as being a thing. You left out how T'Chaka was the Panther.

If Uncle Ben was Spider-man before he died and Peter took up the mantle he'd still be a Spider-man. Your focusing on the purposes of why T'Chaka is in the origins but ignoring vital facts about all the ways he changed T'Challa's life when he became king, like stepping into the mantle. Time continues in comics, just because something happened in the past didn't stop it from occurring. It's like saying Hector Ayala was never the White Tiger because he died and Angela del Toro took over. Hector dying in the past didn't stop him from being a White Tiger.

Temporarily killing someone and taking their costume (for what can be considered a few days or weeks) hardly counts as a substantial replacement. Your wording suggests that it was, which it wasn't. Killmonger also isn't recognised as a Black Panther anymore since that story was retconned. Maybe you actually don't know what you're talking about.

All my wording said was that Shuri became the Black Panther in the past, it's got nothing to do with the time length, that was your argument. The circumstances are besides the point because there are no "true" circumstances which solely dictate how a character joins a legacy. It's telling how the inaccuriaes about the legacies are ignored by others because this isn't about the facts is it? I'm not a regular here so I must be wrong.

Three times is not "plenty", and it hasn't been three times. Even if you want to count Killmonger as a part of it, it's only been twice. Kasper was not replacing T'Challa. He was being used by T'Challa to pretend that he was T'Challa. It was not a replacement. Shuri was a replacement, but your wording suggests it was permanent, which it wasn't. This isn't a case of Mar-Vell dying in the comics. T'Challa was temporarily indisposed and Shuri took up the mantle (without Bast's blessing) to defend her home. It was a matter of necessity. It wasn't passed down to her, though she eventually earned. T'Challa woke up soon after and both of them shared the mantle until Shuri was killed and resurrected. Now she's alive no longer as Black Panther but as Griot and princess of Wakanda while T'Challa is currently king of Wakanda, king of the dead and Black Panther.

Sure it is. T'Challa wasn't the BP when Kasper was in the costume, that was a plot point and he eventually was accepted as a successor by T'Challa before he left the mantle. That's a straw man about Shuri. Not every mantle has to have exact things occur to be accepted as legitimate, the details are a distraction from the real issue I was talking about - which is about what legacies are and that the Panther mantle is one of them.

It's a significant part of both of their history but it was not a permanent change. At best, Shuri's tenure last a few months or years.

Not every mantle change is permanent, many eventually go back to the most popular characters in their line. For Flash, it's Barry Allen, for Green Lantern it's Hal Jordan, for Black Panther it's T'Challa.



Does this scene mean nothing when it comes to legacies with BP?

There are three named modern BP's in the MCU: T'Chaka, T'Challa and Killmonger, do you deny this? There are many, many more implied BP's as spoken about in Wakanda's founding.

I'm not saying they will fail. I'm not saying the movie is cancelled. I'm not saying they won't be able to do good with the characters. I'm saying that suggesting everyone will be on board with this is not a given. A lot of people already are not, even outside of this forum. A lot of people don't even want Letitia Wright near the film anymore. Nothing is guaranteed.

You're heavily implying that you are, and are denouncing any successor Marvel chooses before they have done anything. Yes, you are. That wasn't in dispute. Obviously, but when I bring that up it's bad for some reason. I'm one of them. Didn't say it was.

What are you even talking about here? You keep going back and forth with your arguments. You say it's Wakanda Forever, not T'Challa Forever, yet every single major comic has been called Black Panther instead, and regardless of its canonical use as a mantle, T'Challa is popularly known as the Black Panther (if you make me repeat this point for a fourth time, I'm not gonna keep debating with you). There has only been one comic called World of Wakanda which does not star T'Challa in it, but it wasn't a runaway success like Miles Morales, Jane Thor, or Falcon Cap. Again, Shuri is not Black Panther right now. No one else has been Black Panther after T'Challa aside from her. She actually has her own identity now in the comics as Griot.

I was acknowledging that the comic Black Panther has more going on then T'Challa, which should be obvious but it isn't. Because the comic is Black Panther and the world is Wakanda, those are inconsequential facts. Except all that about T'Challa I never disputed, that's a straw man. When I said Wakanda the reference was to the country, not comics with it in the title. That was the popular mantra for the movie, tellingly it didn't have T'Challa in it he is a huge part of Wakanda but Wakanda is more then T'Challa - it's a country, he has friends, family and enemies there. Shuri not being BP right now is beside the point, she was in the past she didn't stop being a former Panther when she gave up the title, she became part of its legacy. I disagree. Her being Griot didn't stop her being a legacy Panther.

"the legacy system is something which happens with the franchise, which keeps getting overshadowed by T'Challa." So you acknowledge that the legacy actually has never really mattered and it's always been about T'Challa. Do you see why your logic is flawed? It has always been about him and no one else. The idea of the Black Panther has always been a plot point and a part of his origin story, not some deep intricate storytelling device about multiple people sharing a mantle.

Sure it matters, some characters just don't get the popularity of others that doesn't erase their part of being legacies. Except when other people are protagonists in Black panther comics wearing the BP mantle, like Shuri. So why is acknowledging the legacy aspect of the mantle so controversial? Except when it is. T'Challa inheriting the BP mantle from his father is a literal plot point, without this T'Challa never becomes the Panther.

The idea that just because a star if a comic book is popular everyone who assumes the super-hero mantle they have is meaningless is baffling. This is how we got fandom wars over Hal Jordan vs Kyle Rayner, Kyle is the new guy so since he's not Hal he's nothing is wrong.

What is going on in the comics? Right now Shuri is not a Black Panther. Right now T'Challa is Black Panther. The comics go against your very argument.

No, it doesn't - Shuri not being the Black Panther now doesn't mean she was never a Black Panther, by that logic Matt Murdock was never Daredevil since Elektra is Daredevil right now. T'Challa was also a Daredevil legacy, and so was Danny Rand. This fact has gone unspoken, I take it many don't see T'Challa as a Daredevil legacy.



I don't even know why I'm being attacked like this, when I agree that they should have recast T'Challa and didn't want Shuri to inherit the mantle. It's mindbloggling how acknowledging the mantle passes to people before and after T'Challa is a controversial statement and that Marvel isn't the devil for being worried about angering people who would be upset by a recast. As though that wouldn't cause people to be upset, whatever their reasons. No win situation you'd think.

[XPac]

I think your underestimating the resonation of the first movie and overestimating what people will just be okay with just because it's Marvel. Same thing happened with the star wars movies which is why they opted to focus more on the TV side and taking a break on the movie side. Plus I don't think it's just up to them. I doubt either of them really think trying to move on so soon after Chad's passing is the right thing to do

People weren't okay with the Star Wars movies, because the Star Wars movies frankly weren't that good. And IF the next BP movie likewise ends up not being good, the same can and frankly SHOULD happen. But as of now at least, I think Coogler deserves the benefit of the doubt. He has an oscar winning billion dollar film on his MCU track record... if that doesn't earn him a bit of confidence I don't know what will.

[XPac]

I gotta say as a Sam & Rhodey fan.....y'all digging deep with those vibranium claws, lol!

<Ouch!>

I have issues with MCU War Machine... but I absolutely think Sam is cool. Yeah, he didn't shine to the same degree that Steve did but it wasn't his movie. He was supporting cast and written that way. But I think when Sam is actually a title character, it will be a different story.

[Blind Wedjat]

You're heavily implying that you are, and are denouncing any successor Marvel chooses before they have done anything. Yes, you are. That wasn't in dispute. Obviously, but when I bring that up it's bad for some reason. I'm one of them. Didn't say it was.

Nah, I'm not gonna let someone come in here and put words in my mouth. If you had actually been in this thread from the time Chadwick Boseman had passed (which you were not--at least actively), you'd know I was one of the few people who was against a recast for the very same reasons Marvel isn't recasting, with many of my own reasons as well. So don't come and assert that I'm denouncing anything when I haven't been doing that for months.

My issue with you is that you have made several incorrect statements and instead of acknowledging that you were incorrect, you have moved your goalpost to fit your argument.

You said T'Challa has been replaced "many times". He has only been replaced TWICE. That is not "many times". And again, one of them hardly counts as an effective replacement. A replacement like this in comics is Kyle Rayner replacing Hal Jordan. Killmonger did not replace T'Challa like that. Secondly, Shuri was initially T'Challa's successor, but then they both shared the mantle. I repeat: they. both. shared. the. mantle. That means it stopped being a replacement. T'Challa didn't retire or die. He was still the Black Panther when Shuri was also Black Panther until she died.

Secondly, you used Kasper Cole as an example of another replacement, which he was not. He was a pawn in T'Challa and Hunter's schemes, and T'Challa was still Black Panther at the time.

Third, you're trying to equate T'Chaka to be more than he has been in the comics and the MCU. T'Chaka has never been used as a character outside of retelling T'Challa's origin story. I've asked you to point out an example, and you've failed to do that. Where is his comic book? Where are his major appearances outside of a Black Panther story flashback? T'Chaka is not original Green Lantern Alan Scott, original Blue Beetle Ted Kord, or original Flash Jay Garrick. He was not the first character to be Black Panther, to have major publication history as Black Panther, to be in a team setting as the Black Panther. He's just the former king of Wakanda and T'Challa's father that dies to set up his origin. That has always been the capacity he has been used in across all media. You are the one overstating it and therefore labelling T'Challa as a legacy character in the same vein that Miles Morales and Kamala Khan are, which he is not.

A character inheriting an in-universe mantle does not make them a legacy character. T'Chaka does not have a publication legacy. T'Challa does, and that's what makes Shuri a legacy character (which can be argued that she isn't anymore since she forged her own identity unlike Miles Morales and Kamala Khan). It's like calling Doctor Strange or Iron Fist legacy characters. None of the previous holders of those mantles have an actual, real world legacy. They have in-universe legacies.

[Blind Wedjat]

Literally from the Iron Fist thread:

For research purposes: do you consider Danny Rand a legacy character in the same vein as Miles Morales, Kamala Khan, Jane Thor, Kyle Rayner, Captain Marvel, etc.?

No, because Danny was the first Iron Fist we ever saw in real-world chronology. The others you mentioned are late-comers to their name-sake's mythos, Danny was the character that started it all.

Captain Britain:

For research purposes: do you consider Brian Braddock a legacy character in the same vein as Miles Morales, Kamala Khan, Jane Thor, Kyle Rayner, Captain Marvel, etc.?

No, because Brian Braddock was the first Captain Britain we ever saw in real-world chronology. The others you mentioned are late-comers to their name-sake's mythos, Brian was the character that started it all.

Do you see the point I'm trying to make?