Black Panther: Wakanda Forever - Review Thread

Rotten Tomatoes: 86% (164 Reviews) (All Critics: 7.5 Avg. Rating, Top Critics: 7.1 Avg. Rating)

Metacritic: 69 (50 Reviews)

Reviews:

Variety (8/10):

> Watching “Wakanda Forever,” it’s almost unavoidable that we feel the absence of Boseman’s heroic dramatic center of gravity. The movie doesn’t have the classic comic-book pow of “Black Panther,” and it’s easily 20 minutes too long... Yet “Wakanda Forever” has a slow-burn emotional suspense. Once the film starts to gather steam, it doesn’t let up.

Deadline:

> So is this much-anticipated sequel going to help keep Wakanda on a “forever” path? It isn’t on the see-level of the first (what could be?), but it certainly whets my appetite for what comes next. In the meantime, Black Panther: Wakanda Forever proudly remembers with love and honor both Chadwick Boseman and T’Challa.

Slashfilm (7/10):

> Perhaps sensing that he had no other choice, Coogler packs "Wakanda Forever" to the gills. This is an overstuffed film, where you get the sense that the filmmaker added literally everything he could think of to the story. A go-for-broke approach that's both commendable and kind of exhausting — I definitely started to feel the film's 161-minute runtime, even amidst all the big action scenes.

IndieWire (B+):

> Weak action and forced MCU subplots keep "Wakanda Forever" from greatness, but its emotional undercurrents run deeper than any Marvel movie.

New York Post (4/4):

> Coogler’s film, at 2 hours 40 minutes, is a long one, but there is no dead air, the locales are stunning and the creativity on display is explosive. Checking the time at the end, I was pleasantly surprised by how late it was. That’s a credit to the director, who has a mastery of grand, portentous, earth-shaking moments that pull us toward the screen.

Entertainment Weekly (B+):

> And while a Black Panther without Boseman is undoubtedly nothing like the film's creators or any of its cast wanted it to be, the movie they've made feels like something unusually elegant and profound for the multiplex: a little bit of forever for the star who left too soon.

Independent (4/5):

> Coogler’s film is certainly not without the occasional dodgy bit of CGI – that is a prerequisite for belonging to the MCU, it seems. But there’s more than enough wit, beauty, and imagination to Wakanda Forever to outweigh its weaknesses.

Associated Press News (3/4):

> “Wakanda Forever” is overlong, a little unwieldy... But Coogler’s fluid command of mixing intimacy with spectacle remains gripping. He extends the rich detail and non-binary complexity that distinguished “Black Panther” in sometimes awkward but often thrilling ways. “Wakanda Forever,” grappling in the aftermath of loss, ultimately seeks something rare in the battle-ready superhero landscape: Peace.

Slant (2/4):

> Though its lugubrious and plodding narrative spins its wheels ahead of someone coming along to fill T’Challa’s shoes, Wakanda Forever does stand out for its depictions of grief.

The Guardian (6/10):

> Shaped around the loss of its original hero Chadwick Boseman, this take pays tribute to the late actor with fiery performances and great spectacle

ScreenCrush (6/10):

> For whatever its faults, this is not a superficial piece of bland escapist entertainment like so many big-budget movies. The early scenes are drenched in heartbreak and loss in a way that is very striking for a film of this size, and it’s refreshing to see a large-scale comic-book that is almost entirely driven by women. This movie has a lot on its mind — and perhaps too many characters.

CNET (9/10):

> Black Panther: Wakanda Forever manages the delicate balancing act of working beautifully as a sequel to the 2018 movie, a touching tribute to Chadwick Boseman's character and a complex, thrilling MCU adventure. Marvel might seem like a machine, but adventures like this are a touching reminder of the humanity at its core.

Chicago Sun-Times (3/4):

> “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” succeeds as a new adventure, and as a tribute to a wonderful actor who was taken from this world decades too soon.

Time (6/10):

> The sad reality is that the show must go on, and without him, it’s just more of the same. Our job is to pretend it’s enough.

The Seattle Times (3.5/4):

> There’s so much that “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” does right that it’s frustrating to blame it for the one flaw it can’t help. But you watch it wondering about the movie that never got made, the story that never got finished, the life cut short too soon. Maybe, in a few years, this franchise can make a truly fresh start; this movie efficiently and skillfully lays the groundwork for that. It takes time, as wise Wakandans remind us, to move on.

AV Club (3/4):

> And, ready or not, it passes the Black Panther’s torch. Is this massively ambitious, unfairly burdened sequel as good as Black Panther? Definitely not—and it probably could never have been. But in a mythology where death is more often used as a narrative device than a true measure of loss, Black Panther: Wakanda Forever magnifies the truth that the title character’s world will endure, even if he doesn’t—and there are at least as many lessons to extract from his absence.

IGN (7/10):

> Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is at its most effective when paying tribute to its fallen king, and strong performances from the returning cast keep it afloat through its occasionally choppy plot.

Rolling Stone (7/10):

> The movie isn’t always on such sure footing. But that’s almost appropriate: a messier movie trying to reckon with a messier range of feelings.

The Hollywood Reporter (8/10):

> It’s impossible for Wakanda Forever to match the breakthrough impact of its predecessor, but in terms of continuing the saga while paving the way for future installments, it’s amply satisfying.

The Telegraph (1/5):

> With murky and meaningless visual effects, Marvel's turgid sequel pales in comparison to the Chadwick Boseman original

Vanity Fair:

> There is much to be admired here, a care for craft and detail on a higher plane than other Marvel fare. Still, some will no doubt miss the tight focus and energy of Black Panther. This sequel is more scattered, a vast expansion with a hole at its center.

The Washington Post (5/10):

> Marvel sequel covers up its inability to move on by resorting to repetitive action sequences, maudlin emotion and an uninvolving, occasionally incoherent story

San Francisco Chronicle (2/4):

> As it stands, “Wakanda Forever” feels as lost and forlorn as the Wakandan people.

Austin Chronicle (3/5):

> The interpersonal storylines, the tackling of the connections between grief and rage and flight, are some of the deepest and most nuanced in the franchise's history.

Cast:

• Letitia Wright as Shuri

• Lupita Nyong'o as Nakia

• Danai Gurira as Okoye

• Winston Duke as M'Baku

• Dominique Thorne as Riri Williams / Ironheart

• Florence Kasumba as Ayo

• Michaela Coel as Aneka

• Tenoch Huerta as Namor

• Martin Freeman as Everett K. Ross

• Angela Bassett as Ramonda

Synopsis:

> Marvel Studios’ Black Panther: Wakanda Forever will continue to explore the incomparable world of Wakanda and all of the rich and varied characters introduced in the first film. Written and directed by Ryan Coogler, who was behind Black Panther, the film will be released on November 11, 2022.