What's the appropriate next step for Black Panther?

[Vic Vega]

Well then yea I got nothing on why they arnt doing it then.

This time 6 years ago maybe they would have. But the idea that guys like RJD and Chris Evans were irreplaceable as Tony Stark and Steve Rogers is now commonly held. Same with Boseman.

But now Marvel Studios is into its replacement hero phase. Much like the Comics of the 90's.

There is a new Capt. America that isn't Steve Rodgers (played by C. Evans), a new Black Widow that isn't Nat Romanoff ( played by ScarJo) , and soon a new Thor and IronHeart Tony Stark's replacement is getting a TV show.

Now that replacing heroes is an option for the MCU ( and it took a while to get the MCU to this point where you can see in story the surviving characters in it wanting to take a break) they can use this option they didn't really have before to try to make the best of a really awful situation.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

People have different ways to acknowledge and honor the passing of someone else. And I think that’s what’s at play here.

People don’t grieve the same way, and we shouldn’t expect everyone to. And people honor the legacy of others’ in very different ways, as well.

[thwhtGuardian]

I think a play on Don Cheadle's line from Iron Man II would work, recast and then " Yes, I'm the Black Panther and I'm in charge of the Avengers now, let's move on."

[BlackClaw]

I think a play on Don Cheadle's line from Iron Man II would work, recast and then " Yes, I'm the Black Panther and I'm in charge of the Avengers now, let's move on."

Boy would I love to visit the universe where this happened. LOL!

[thwhtGuardian]

Boy would I love to visit the universe where this happened. LOL!

I really don't see why it wouldn't work.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I really don't see why it wouldn't work.

Same.

This is a damn information age. We can suspend disbelief about Thunder Gods, but not one actor replacing another who passed?

[j9ac9k]

Same.

This is a damn information age. We can suspend disbelief about Thunder Gods, but not one actor replacing another who passed?

This has nothing to do with suspension of disbelief. It's ultimately about money, but the studio has to take into account an audience's emotions if you want them to spend a billion dollars on something. And Boseman was beloved. If they're seen as mistreating Boseman's memory then it might just be seen as a cash grab and that will bring a lot of negativity. It's also just ill-advised to ignore Boseman's impact by being so dismissive in the movie. The movie's going to have baggage - why not use that to the film's advantage in terms of the story? Use the emotions that an audience is already going to have coming into it. What other story is the sequel going to tell that will have more impact on the audience?

From reading this thread, I think people's opinions seem to be dictated by how much they think Boseman means to the audience. Regardless, he obviously meant a lot to the people making the movie, so I can't imagine them just dismissing his absence with a line of dialogue.

[Nods]

This has nothing to do with suspension of disbelief. It's ultimately about money, but the studio has to take into account an audience's emotions if you want them to spend a billion dollars on something. And Boseman was beloved. If they're seen as mistreating Boseman's memory then it might just be seen as a cash grab and that will bring a lot of negativity. It's also just ill-advised to ignore Boseman's impact by being so dismissive in the movie. The movie's going to have baggage - why not use that to the film's advantage in terms of the story? Use the emotions that an audience is already going to have coming into it. What other story is the sequel going to tell that will have more impact on the audience?

From reading this thread, I think people's opinions seem to be dictated by how much they think Boseman means to the audience. Regardless, he obviously meant a lot to the people making the movie, so I can't imagine them just dismissing his absence with a line of dialogue.

Personally I think you should take the Blade Runner 2049 model and do a full science fiction noir in Wakanda. I think the best way to honor Boseman's legacy is to tell great stories that will age well and switch up the genres.

[thwhtGuardian]

This has nothing to do with suspension of disbelief. It's ultimately about money, but the studio has to take into account an audience's emotions if you want them to spend a billion dollars on something. And Boseman was beloved. If they're seen as mistreating Boseman's memory then it might just be seen as a cash grab and that will bring a lot of negativity. It's also just ill-advised to ignore Boseman's impact by being so dismissive in the movie. The movie's going to have baggage - why not use that to the film's advantage in terms of the story? Use the emotions that an audience is already going to have coming into it. What other story is the sequel going to tell that will have more impact on the audience?

From reading this thread, I think people's opinions seem to be dictated by how much they think Boseman means to the audience. Regardless, he obviously meant a lot to the people making the movie, so I can't imagine them just dismissing his absence with a line of dialogue.

I just don't see the baggage outweighing people wanting to see a good movie, especially as the opposite is one less role available for another talented black actor.

[j9ac9k]

I just don't see the baggage outweighing people wanting to see a good movie, especially as the opposite is one less role available for another talented black actor.

Good being a relative term - some would think trying to pass another actor in the role would make the movie not as good, while you seem to think the movie has to have T'Challa to be good. But the movie could potentially be good either way so sacrificing quality isn't really a consideration of whether or not to address his death. And there's nothing stopping anybody from giving said "talented black actor" another role besides T'Challa. Boseman won't be there so there's a vacuum for any number of actors regardless of what part they're playing.

[AnakinFlair]

Same.

This is a damn information age. We can suspend disbelief about Thunder Gods, but not one actor replacing another who passed?

It's circumstances. It's a different feeling to replace a still-loved actor who passed away after spending years secretly battling a terminal illness than it is to replace an actor who's agent got greedy.

[The Cool Thatguy]

It's circumstances. It's a different feeling to replace a still-loved actor who passed away after spending years secretly battling a terminal illness than it is to replace an actor who's agent got greedy.

Does anyone think that Marvel wouldn't try to be respectful, though?

I think recasting T'Challa would only add to his legacy, not erase it.